RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION, ORGANIZATIONAL CYNICISM AND ORGANIZATIONAL DISSENT: AN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1, 16 - 47, 27.03.2017

Emine Gülsün Beldek

Öz

Organizational identification is an assertion of the employee’s property
of impression to his/her organization. The high levels of
organizational identification of employees’ bring back various positive
behavior variables. Otherwise, the low levels cause the unwanted
behavior variables in the organization. Organizational cynicism and
Organizational dissent are located in these attitudes and behaviors.
This study aims to measure the relationship of organizational
identification with other organizational negative behavioral varibles.
The sample of research consists of 161 people who are working for a
public corporation in Ankara as white-collar employees. The scales used
previously in other Turkish studies were used as measurement
techniques. Research, the data is collected by face to face discussion
and these data is analyzed by SPSS 22, by statistic methods like mean,
standard deviation and correlation. As a result of analysis, between
organizational identification and both organizational cynicism and
organizational dissent, there is a correlation which is established as
moderately and reverse direction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Identification, Organizational Identification, Cynicism, Organizational Cynicism, Dissent, Organizational Dissent

ÖRGÜTSEL ÖZDEŞLEŞMENİN ÖRGÜTSEL SİNİZM VE ÖRGÜTSEL MUHALEFET İLE İLİŞKİSİ: GÖRGÜL BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Örgütsel özdeşleşme, çalışanın örgütüne karşı hissettiği aidiyet
duygusunun bir ifadesidir. Çalışanların örgütsel özdeşleşme düzeylerinin
yüksek olması birçok olumlu tutum ve davranışlar üzerinde etkili
olurken düşük olması ise istenmeyen davranışların gelişmesine sebep
olmaktadır. Örgütsel sinizm ve örgütsel muhalefet bu tutum ve
davranışlar içerisinde yer almaktadır. Bu çalışma örgütsel özdeşleşmenin
diğer olumsuz davranış değişkenler ile ilişkisini ölçmeyi
amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmanın örneklemi, Ankara’da bulunan bir kurumda
memur kadrosu ile çalışan 161 kişiden meydana gelmektedir. Ölçme
teknikleri olarak daha önce başka türkçe çalışmalarda kullanılmış olan
ölçekler kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada veriler yüz yüze anket tekniği ile
toplanmış ve bu veriler SPSS 22 programına girilmiştir. Veriler;
ortalama, standart sapma, korelasyon vb. istatistiki teknikler ile
çözümlenmiştir. Analiz sonucunda ise örgütsel özdeşleşme ile hem
örgütsel sinizm hem örgütsel muhalefet ile arasında ortalama derecede ve
negatif taraflı korelasyon bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Özdeşleşme, Örgütsel Özdeşleşme, Sinizm, Örgütsel Sinizm, Örgütsel Muhalafet

Kaynakça

• Aksel, S.F. (2013). Relationship Between Workplace Democracy and Organizational Dissent Behavior. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Andersson, L. M. (1996). Employee cynicism: An examination using a contract violation framework. Human Relations, 49(11), 1395-1418.
• Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1), 20–39.
• Bartels, J. Organizational Identification And Communication: Employees’ Evaluations of Internal Communication And Its Effect On Identification At Different Organizational Levels, University of Twente, Thesis, 2006.
• Bedeian, A. G. (2007). Even if the Tower is ‘Ivory’, It isn’t White: Understanding the Consequences of Faculty Cynicism, Academy Of Management Learning & Education, 6, 9‐32.
• Brown, M. E. (1969). Identification and some conditions of organisational involvement, Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 346-355.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 8 (32).
• Cheney, G. (1983a). On the various and changing meanings of organizational membership: A field study of organizational identification. Communication Monographs, 50, 343–362.
• Cheney, G. (1983b). The Rhetoric of Identification and the Study of Organizational Communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 143-158.
• Cheney, G. and Tompkins, P.K. (1987). Coming to terms with organisational identification and commitment. Central States Speech Journal, 38, 1–15.
• Çakınberk, A., Derin, N., Demirel, E. T. (2011). Örgütsel özdeşleşmenin örgütsel bağlılıkla biçimlenmesi: malatya ve tunceli özel eğitim kurumları örneği. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3 (1), 89-121.
• Dean, J. W., Brandes P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Note Organizational Cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 341-352.
• Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M. and Harquail, C.V. (1994). Organisational images and member identification. Administration Science Quarterly, 39, 239–263.
• Edwards, M. R. (2005). Organizational identification: A conceptual and operational review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (4), 207–230.
• Eilerman, D. (2006). Conflict: Personal Dynamics and Choice. February 2006, from http://www.mediate.com/articles/eilermanD2.cfm
• Elsbach, K. D. (1999). An expanded model of organizational identification.. Research in Organizational Behavior, 21, 163–200.
• Erdost, E., Karacaoğlu, K. ve Reyhanoğlu, M. ( 2007 ). Örgütsel Sinizm Kavramı ve ilgili Ölçeklerin Türkiye’deki Bir Firmada Test Edilmesi. 15. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı (25 – 7 Mayıs), Sakarya Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Sakarya, 514 – 524.
• Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., & Nygren, H. T. (1970). Personal factors in organizational identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15 (2), 176–190.
• Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations: The socialidentity approach. LondonSage.
• Haslam, S. A., Eggins, R. A., & Reynolds, K. J. (2003). The Aspıre model: Actualizing social and personal identity resources to enhance organizational outcomes. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 76 (1), 83-113.
• Ingwar, I. N. (2014). Explorıng Relatıonshıps between Employees’ Locus of Control, Indıvıdualısm and Collectivism Orientatıon, and Upward Dissent Message Strategıes. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA.
• James, M. S. L. (2005). Antecedents and Consequences Of Cynicism In Organizations: An Examination Of The Potential Positive and Negative Effects On School Systems. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The Florida State University, USA.
• Johnson, J. L., & O'Leary‐Kelly, A. M. (2003). The effects of psychological contract breach and organizational cynicism: Not all social exchange violations are created equal. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5), 627-647.
• Kassing, J. W. (1997). Articulating, Antagonizing, and Displacing: A Model of Employee Dissent. Communication Studies, 48, 311-332.
• Kassing, J. W. (1998). Development and Validation of the Organizational Dissent Scale. Management Communication Quarterly, 2, 183-229.
• Kassing, J. W. (2000a). Exploring the relationship between workplace freedom of speech, organizational identification, and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 387–396.
• Kassing, J. W. (2000b). Investigating the relationship between superior–subordinate relationship quality and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 58–70.
• Kassing, J. W., & Armstrong, T. A. (2002). Someone’s Going to Hear About This: Examining the Association Between Dissent-Triggering Events and Employee’s Dissent Expressions. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 39-65.
• Kassing, J. W. & Avtgis, T. A. (1999). Examining the relationship between organizational dissent and aggressive communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 13(1), 100-115.
• Kassing, J. W. (2011). Stressing out about dissent: Examining the relationship between coping strategies and dissent expression. Communication Research Reports, 28(3), 225-234.
• Kassing, J. W. & Kava W. (2013). Assessing Disagreement Expressed to Management: Development of the Upward Dissent Scale. Communication Research Reports, 30(1), 46- 56.
• Kreiner, G. E., & Ashforth B. E. (2004). Evidence Toward An Expanded Model of Organizational Identification. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 25, 1- 27.
• Lee, S.M. (1971). An Empirical Analysis of Organizational Identification. The Academy of Management Journal, 14(2), 213–226.
• Lee, C.; Wu, C. & Lee, H. (2009). Factors that Influence Employees’ Organizational Identity After M&A: The Acquirer and Acquired Perspective. African Journal of Business Management, Vol.3(11), 695-704.
• Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. 1992. Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13: 103-123.
• Naus, A.J.A.M., (2007). Organizational Cynicism on The Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences of Employee Cynicism Toward The Employing Organization Dissertation of Doctorof Philosophy. Maastricht University. 15-24.
• Özdemir, M. (2010). Ankara İli Kamu Genel Liselerinde Görev Yapan Yönetici Ve Öğretmenlerin Örgütsel Muhalefete İlişkin Görüşleri. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
• Özler, D. E. & Atalay, C. G. (2011). A Research to Determine the Relationship Between Organizational Cynicism and Burnout Levels of Employees İn Health Sector. Business And Management Review, 1 (4), 26 – 38.
• Polat, M. (2009). Örgütsel Özdeşleşmenin Öncülleri ve Ardılları Üzerine Bir Saha Çalışması. Doktora Tezi, Uludağ Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Polat, M., Meydan, C.H., Tokmak, İ. (2010). Personel Güçlendirme-Örgütsel Sinizm İlişkisinde Örgütsel Özdeşleşmenin Aracılık Etkisi, 9. Ulusal İşletmecilik Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı, 6-7 Mayıs 2010, Zonguldak: Kara Elmas Üniversitesi. 542-547.
• Redding, W.C. (1985). Rocking boats, blowing whistles, and teaching speech communication. Communication Education, 34, 245-258.
• Riketta, M., & Van dick, R. (2005). Foci of attachment in organizations: A meta-analytic comparison of the strength and correlates of workgroup versus organizational identification and commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 490–510.
• Rousseau, D. M. (1998). Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 217–233. Schneider, B., Hall, D. T., Nygren, H.T. (1971). Self image and job characteristics as correlates of changing organisational identification. Human Relations, 24, 397–416.
• Tajfel, H. (1978 b). Social categorization, Social Identity and Social Comparison. Differantiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. ed. H. Tajfel, London, Academic Press, 61-76.
• Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-37). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Van Dick, R. (2001). Identification in organisational contexts: linking theory and research from social and organisation psychology. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(4), 265–283.
• Van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J., & Christ, O. (2004). The utility of a broader conceptualization of organizational identification: Which aspects really matter? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 171–191.
• Yıldız K. (2013). Örgütsel Bağlılık ile Örgütsel Sinizm ve Örgütsel Muhalefet arasındaki İlişki. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic , 8(6), 853-879.