The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support on Work Engagement and Perceived Political Behavior Through Organizational Cynicism and Identification

Öz

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationships among organizational support, cynicism, identification, work engagement and political behavior perceptions. The effect of perceived organizational support on organizational identification through the mediating role of organizational cynicism was investigated and also the effect of perceived organizational support on work engagement and political behavior perceptions via organizational identification was addressed. First, a literature review was carried out with respect to the studies associating the aforementioned variables. Later in light of the literature review a research model was developed and hypotheses were formulated. Data were gathered through a survey conducted on 218 bank employees operating in Aksaray province. After statistical analyses, it was observed that the effect of organizational support on work engagement is partially mediated by organizational identification and the effect of organizational support on political behavior perceptions is fully mediated by organizational identification. Furthermore, it was observed that the effect of organizational support on organizational identification is partially mediated by organizational cynicism.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Perceived Organizational Support,Organizational Cynicism,Organizational Identification,Work Engagement,Political Behavior Perceptions

Örgütsel Sinizm ve Özdeşleşme Bağlamında Algılanan Örgütsel Desteğin İşe Bağlanma ve Politik Davranış Algısına Etkisi

Öz

Bu araştırmada örgütsel destek, sinizm, özdeşleşme, işe bağlanma ve politik davranış algısı arasındaki ilişkiler ele alınmıştır. Araştırmada örgütsel desteğin sinizm aracılığıyla özdeşleşme üzerindeki etkisi ve örgütsel desteğin özdeşleşme aracılığıyla işe bağlanma ile politik davranış algısı üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiştir. Araştırmada öncelikle değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiyi ele alan araştırmalar incelenmiş ve bu doğrultuda araştırma modeli ve hipotezler oluşturulmuştur. Araştırma verileri Aksaray ilindeki 218 banka çalışanından anket tekniğiyle elde edilmiştir. Gerekli istatistiksel analizler yapıldıktan sonra örgütsel desteğin işe bağlanmaya etkisinde özdeşleşmenin kısmi aracı; politik davranış algısına etkisinde ise tam aracı rol üstlendiği gözlenmiştir. Ayrıca analizler sonucunda örgütsel desteğin özdeşleşmeye etkisinde örgütsel sinizmin de kısmi aracı rol üstlendiği görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Algılanan Örgütsel Destek,Örgütsel Sinizm,Örgütsel Özdeşleşme,İşe Bağlanma,Politik Davranış Algısı

Kaynakça

1. Akdoğan, A. ve Demirtaş, Ö. (2014). “Etik Liderlik Davranışlarının Etik İklim Üzerindeki Etkisi: Örgütsel Politik Algılamaların Aracı Rolü”. AKÜ İİBF Dergisi, XVI (1), 107-123.
2. Andersson, L. (1996). “Employee Cynicism: An Examination Using a Contract Violation Framework”. Human Relations, 49, 1395-1418.
3. Andersson, L.M. ve Bateman, T.S. (1997). “Cynicism in the Workplace: Some Causes and Effects”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 449-463.
4. Andrews, M.C. ve Kacmar, K.M. (2001). “Discriminating among Organizational Politics, Justice and Support”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 347-366.
5. Armstrong-Stassen, M. ve Ursel, N.D. (2009). “Perceived Organizational Support, Career Satisfaction and The Retention of Older Workers”. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 201-220.
6. Aselage, J. ve Eisenberger, R. (2003). “Perceived Organizational Support and Psychological Contracts: A Theo-retical Integration”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 491-509.
7. Ashforth, B.E. ve Mael, F. (1989). “Social Identity Theory and the Organization”. The Academy of Manage-ment Review, 14(1) 20-39.
8. Bakker, A.B., Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter M.P. ve Taris, T.W. (2008). “Work Engagement: An Emerging Concept in Occupatinal Health Psychology”. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187-200.

9. Baran, B.E., Shanock, L.R. ve Miller, L.R. (2012). “Advancing Organizational Support Theory into the Twenty-First Century World of Work”. Journal of Business Psychology, 27, 123-147.
10. Barbars, A. (2016). “Interaction Between Organizational Culture and Work Engagement in The Information and Communication Technology Sector in Latvia”. Journal of Business Management, 12, 84-100.
11. Baron, R.M. ve Kenny, D.A. (1986).“The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research Conceptual, Strategic and Statistical Considerations”. Journal of Personality and Social Psycho-logy, 51(6), 1173-1182.
12. Basar, U. ve Filizöz, B. (2015). “Can Ethical Leaders Heal The Wounds? An Empirical Research”. Eurasian Jour-nal of Business and Economics, 8(15), 199-218.
13. Başar, U. ve Basım, N. (2015). “Effects of Organizational Identification on Job Satisfaction: Moderating Role of Organizational Politics”. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 22(2), 663-683.
14. Başar, U., Alan, H., Topçu, M.K. ve Aksoy, S. (2015). “Örgütsel Politika Algısının Ardılları Üzerine Görgül Bir Araştırma”[Bildiri]. 3. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi, 6-7 Kasım 2015, (ss. 650-655), Tokat: Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi.
15. Bayram, N. (2013). Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş: Amos Uygulamaları. Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi.
16. Bedeian, A. (2007). “Even if the Tower is ‘Ivory’, It isn’t white: Understanding the Consequences of Faculty Cynicism”. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(1), 9-32.
17. Biggs, A., Brough, P. ve Barbour, J.P. (2014). “Relationships of İndividual and Organizational Support With Engagement: Examining Various Types of Causality in a Three-Wave Study”. Work & Stress, 28(3), 236-254.
18. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
19. Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R., Dean, J. W. (1999), “Does Organizational Cynicism Matter?: Employee and Su-pervisor Perspectives on Work Outcomes”, 36th Annual Meeting of the Eastern Academy of Manage-ment, Philadelphia PA., 1-34.
20. Brandes, P.M. (1997). Organizational Cynicism: Its Nature, Antecedents and Consequences. (Doktora Tezi). Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma.
21. Buchanan, B. (1974). “Building Organizational Commitment: The Socialization of Managers in Work Organiza-tions”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(4), 533-546.
22. Bukhari, I. ve Kamal, A. (2015). “Relationship between Perceived Organizational Politics and Its Negative Outcomes: Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support”. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Re-search, 30, 271-288.
23. Byrne, Z.S. ve Hochwarter, W.A. (2008). “Perceived Organizational Support and Performance: Relationships across Levels of Organizational Cynicism”. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(1), 54-72.
24. Caesens, G. ve Stinglhamber, F. (2014).“The Relationship Between Perceived Organizational Support and Work Engagement: The Role of Self-Efficacy and Its Outcomes”. Revue Européenne de Psychologie App-liquée, 64, 259-267.
25. Cheung, M.F.Y. ve Law, M.C.C. (2008). “Relationships of Organizational Justice and Organizational Identifica-tion: The Mediating Effects of Perceived Organizational Support in Hong Kong”. Asia Pacific Business Re-view, 14, 213-231.
26. Chiaburu, D.S., Peng, A.C., Oh, I., Banks, G.C. ve Lomeli, L.C. (2013). “Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Organizational Cynicism: A Meta-Analysis”. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83, 181-197.
27. Cho, J. ve Treadway, D.C. (2016). “Organizational Identification and Perceived Organizational Support As Mediators of the Procedural Justice–Citizenship Behaviour Relationship: A Cross-Cultural Constructive Replication”. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(5), 631-653.
28. Chughtai, A.A. ve Buckley, F. (2009). “Linking Trust in The Principal to School Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Organizational Identification and Work Engagement”. International Journal of Educational Manage-ment, 23, 574-589.
29. Cropanzano, R., Howes, J.C. Grandey, A.A. ve Toth, P. (1997). “The Relationship of Organizational Politics and Support to Work Behaviors, Attitudes, and Stress”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 159-180.
30. Çakınberk, A., Derin, N. ve Demirel, E.T. (2011). “Örgütsel Özdeşleşmenin Örgütsel Bağlılıkla Biçimlenmesi: Malatya ve Tunceli Özel Eğitim Kurumları Örneği”. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 89-121.
31. Çelik, A. ve Findik, M. (2012). “The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support on Organizational Identifica-tion”. International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engine-ering, 6(8), 2089-2094.
32. Dawley, D., Houghton, J.D. ve Bucklew, N.S. (2010). “Perceived Organizational Support and Turnover Inten-tion: The Mediating Effects of Personal Sacrifice and Job Fit”. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(3), 238-257.
33. Dean, J.W., Brandes, P. ve Dharwadkar, R. (1998). “Organizational Cynicism”. Academy of Management Re-view, 23(2), 341-352.
34. Demistas, O., Hannah, S.T., Gok, K., Arslan, A. ve Capar, N. (2015). “The Moderated Influence of Ethical Lea-dership, Via Meaningful Work, on Followers’ Engagement, Organizational Identification, and Envy”. Jour-nal of Business Ethics, 1-17.
35. Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M., ve Harquail, C.V. (1994). “Organizational Images and Member Identification”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 239-263.
36. Eisenberger R., Huntington R. Hutchison S. ve Sowa, D. (1986). “Perceived Organizational Support”. Journal of Applied Pschology, 71(3), 500-507.
37. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. ve Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). “Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Diligence, Commitment, and Innovation”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(1), 51-59.
38. Erkutlu, H. ve Chafra, J. (2016). “Impact of Behavioral Integrity on Organizational Identification: The Modera-ting Roles of Power Distance and Organizational Politics”. Management Research Review, 39(6), 672-691.
39. Ertürk, A. (2010). “Exploring Predictors of Organizational Identification: Moderating Role of Trust on The Associations Between Empowerment, Organizational Support and Identification”. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19(4), 409-441.
40. Eryeşil, K. ve Fındık, M. (2011). “Örgütsel Sinizm”. Aykut Bedük (Ed.), Örgüt Psikolojisi: Yeni Yaklaşımlar, Güncel Konular (ss. 97-118) içinde. Konya: Atlas Akademi.
41. Evans, N. ve Qureshi, M.A. (2013). “Organisational Politics: The Impact on Trust, Information and Knowledge Management and Organisational Performance”. European Conference on Information Management and Evaluation, 34-40.
42. Eyiusta, C.M. (2015). “İşgörenlerin Güçlendirme Algılarının Sorumluluk Üstlenme Davranışları Üzerindeki Etkisi: İşe Adanmışlık ve İş Tatmini Değişkenlerinin Aracılık Rolü”. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 43, 68-78.
43. Ferrer, J. (2005). “Employee Engagement: Is It Organisational Commitment Renamed?”. Working Paper Series, 1-13.
44. Ferris, G.R. ve King, T.R. (1991). “Politics in Human Resources Decisions: A Walk on the Dark Side”. Organiza-tional Dynamics, 20(2), 59-71.
45. Ferris, G.R., Fedor, D.B., Chachere, J.G. ve Pondy, L.R. (1989). “Myths and Politics in Organizational Con-texts”. Group & Organization Studies, 14(1), 83-103.
46. Gillet, N., Huart, I., Colombat, P. ve Fouquereau, E. (2013). “Perceived Organizational Support, Motivation, and Engagement Among Police Officers”. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 44(1), 46-55.
47. Gouldner, A.W. (1960). “The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement”. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178.
48. Gözükara, İ. ve Şimşek, Ö.F. (2016). “Role of Leadership in Employees’ Work Engagement: Organizational Identification and Job Autonomy”. International Journal of Business and Management, 11(1), 72-84.
49. Guarana, C.L.O. (2010). The Moderator effect of Organizational Identification on the relationship between Work Context and Workforce Engagement/Burnout. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Ohio: The Ohio State University.
50. Gupta, V., Agarwal, U.A ve Khatri, N. (2016). “The Relationships Between Perceived Organizational Support, Affective Commitment, Psychological Contract Breach, Organizational Citizenship Behaviour and Work Engagement”. Original Research: Empirical Research-Quantitative, 1-12.
51. Hall, D.T., Schneider, B. ve Harold, T.N. (1970). Personal Factors in Organizational Identification. Administra-tive Science Quarterly. 15(2): 176–190.
52. Harris, R.B., Harris, K.J. ve Harvey, P. (2007). “A Test of Competing Models of the Relationships Among Per-ceptions of Organizational Politics, Perceived Organizational Support and Individual Outcomes”. The Jo-urnal of Social Psychology, 147(6), 631-655.
53. Harris, R.B., Harris, K.J. ve Harvey, P. (2007). “A Test of Competing Models of the Relationships Among Per-ceptions of Organizational Politics, Perceived Organizational Support and Individual Outcomes”. The Jo-urnal of Social Psychology, 147(6), 631-655.
54. He, H., Pham, H.Q., Baruch, Y. ve Zhu, W. (2014). “Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Identification: Joint Moderating Effects of Employee Exchange Ideology and Employee Investment”. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(20), 2772-2795.
55. He, H., Zhu, W. ve Zheng, X. (2013). “Procedural Justice and Employee Engagement: Roles of Organizational Identification and Moral Identity Centrality”. Journal of Business Ethics, 122, 681-695.
56. Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, C., Perrewe, P.L. ve Johnson, D. (2003). Perceived Organizational Support as a Mediator of The Relationship Between Politics Perceptions and Work Outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 438-456.
57. İnce, A.R. (2016). “Algılanan Örgütsel Desteğin İşe Adanmışlık Üzerindeki Etkisinde Yönetici Desteğinin Aracı-lık Rolü”. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(57), 649-660.
58. İşcan, Ö.F. (2005). “Siyasal Arena Metaforu Olarak Örgütler ve Örgütsel Siyasetin Örgütsel Adalet Algısına Etkisi”. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 60(1), 149-171.
59. James M.S.L. (2005). Antecedents and Consequences Of Cynicism In Organizations: An Examination of the Potential Positive and Negative Effects on School Systems. (Doktora Tezi), USA: The Florida State Univer-sity.
60. Jin, M.H. ve McDonald, B. (2016). “Understanding Employee Engagement in the Public Sector: The Role of Immediate Supervisor, Perceived Organizational Support, and Learning Opportunities”. American Review of Public Administration, 1-23.
61. Johnson, J.L. ve 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.
62. Karacaoğlu, K. ve İnce, F. (2012). “Brandes, Dharwadkar ve Dean’in (1999) Örgütsel Sinizm Ölçeği Türkçe Formunun Geçerlilik ve Güvenilirlik Çalışması: Kayseri Organize Sanayi Bölgesi Örneği”. Business and Eco-nomics Research Journal, 3(2), 77-92.
63. Karanika-Murray, M., Duncan, N., Pontes, H.M. ve Griffiths, M.D. (2015). “Organizational Identification, Work Engagement and Job Satisfaction”. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(8), 1019-1033.
64. Karatepe, O.M. ve Aga, M. (2016). “The Effects of Organization Mission Fulfillment and Perceived Organizati-onal Support on Job Performance: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement”. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(3), 368-387.
65. Kasalak, G. ve Aksu, M.B. (2014). “The Relationship between Perceived Organizational Support and Organiza-tional Cynicism of Research Assistants”. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 125-133.
66. Kim, H.M. (2012). The Structural Relationships of Work Engagement With Its Antecedents and Consequences In The Korean Business Organization Context. (Doktora Tezi). Old Main: The Pennsylvania State Univer-sity, The Department of Adult Education, Instructional Systems, and Workforce Education and Develop-ment.
67. Kurtessis, J.N., Eisenberger, R., Ford, M.T., Buffardi, L.C., Stewart, K.A. ve Adis, C.S. (2015). “Perceived Orga-nizational Support: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of Organizational Support Theory”. Journal of Manage-ment, XX(X), 1-31.
68. Landells, E. ve Albrecht, S.L. (2013). “Organizational Political Climate: Shared Perceptions About the Building and Use of Power Bases”. Human Resource Management Review, 23, 357-365.
69. Lee, J. ve Peccei, R. (2011). “Discriminant Validity and Interaction Between Perceived Organizational Sup-port and Perceptions of Organizational Politics: A Temporal Analysis”. Journal of Occupational and Orga-nizational Psychology, 84, 686-702.
70. Leiter, M.P. ve Bakker, A.B. (2010). “Work Engagement: Introduction”. A. B. Bakker ve M. P. Leiter (Ed.), Work Engagament: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research (ss. 10-24) içinde. New York: Psychology Press.
71. Mael, F. ve 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.
72. Moideenkutty, U., Blau, G., Kumar, R. ve Nalakath, A. (2001). “Perceived Organisational Support as a Media-tor of the Relationship of Perceived Situational Factors to Affective Organisational Commitment”. App-lied Psychology: An International Review, 50(4), 615-634.
73. Nartgün, Ş.S. ve Kalay, M. (2014). “Öğretmenlerin Örgütsel Destek, Örgütsel Özdeşleşme ile Örgütsel Sinizm Düzeylerine İlişkin Görüşleri”. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(2), 1361-1376.
74. Ötken, A.B. ve Erben, G.S. (2010). “Investigating The Relationship Between Organizational Identification and Work Engagement and The Role of Supervisor Support”. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakül-tesi Dergisi, 12(2), 93-118.
75. Patchen, M. (1970). Participation, Achievement, and Involvement on the Job. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
76. Polat, M. ve Meydan C. H. (2010). “Örgütsel Özdeşleşmenin Sinizm ve İşten Ayrılma Niyeti İle İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma”. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 145-172.
77. Randall, M.L., Cropanzano, R., Bormann, C.A. ve Birjulin, A. (1999). “Organizational Politics and Organizational Support as Predictors of Work Attitudes, Job Performance and Organizational Citizenship Behavior”. Jo-urnal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 159-174.
78. Rich, B.L., Lepine, J.A. ve Crawford, E.R. (2010). “Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effects on Job Perfor-mance”. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
79. Saks, A.M. (2006). “Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement”. Journal of Managerial Psycho-logy, 21(7), 600-619.
80. Schaufeli, W. B., ve Bakker, A. B. (2004). “Job Demands, Job Resources and Their Relationship With Burnout and Engagement: A Multi-Sample Study”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293-315.
81. Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B. ve Salanova, M. (2006). “The Measurement of Work Engagement With a Short Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study”. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
82. Schaufeli, W.B., Martinez, I.M., Pinto, A.M., Salanova, M. ve Bakker, A.B. (2002). “Burnout and Engagement in Unıversıty Students: A Cross-National Study”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464-481.
83. Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V. ve Bakker, A.B. (2002). “The Measurement of Engagement and Burnout: A Two Sample Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach”. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.
84. Shantz, A., Alfes, K. ve Latham, G.P. (2016). “The Buffering Effect of Perceived Organizational Support on the Relationship between Work Engagement and Behavioral Outcomes”. Human Resource Management, 55(1), 25-38.
85. Shelton, M. (2013). Impact of Perceived Organizational Support on Cyber Security Practitioners’ Turnover Intentions. (Doktora Tezi). Minneapolis: Walden University, Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty.
86. Shen, Y., Jackson, T., Ding, C., Yuan, D., Zhao, L., Dou, Y. ve Zhang, Q. (2014). “Linking Perceived Organizatio-nal Support with Employee Work Outcomes in a Chinese Context: Organizational Identification as a Me-diator”. European Management Journal, 32, 406-412.
87. Shorbaji, R., Messarra, L. ve Karkoulian, S. (2011). “Core-Self Evaluation: Predictor of Employee Engagement”. The Business Review, 17(1), 276-283.
88. Sides, S.M. (2013). The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support and Perceived Organizational Politics on Teacher Commitment: An Analysis of Public and Non-Public Secondary Schools. (Doktora Tezi). Conway: University of Central Arkansas.
89. Sluss, D.M., Klimchak, M. ve Holmes, J.J. (2008). “Perceived Organizational Support as A Mediator Between Relational Exchange and Organizational Identification”. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 457-464.
90. Sökmen, A., Ekmekçioğlu, E.B. ve Çelik, K. (2015). “Algılanan Örgütsel Destek, Örgütsel Özdeşleşme ve Yöne-tici Etik Davranışı İlişkisi: Araştırma Görevlilerine Yönelik Araştırma”. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 125-144.
91. Taris, W. T. Schaufeli, W. B. ve Shimazu, A. (2010). “The Push and Pull of Work: The Differences Between Workaholism and Work Engagement”, Workaholism and Work Engagement, 39-53.
92. Tokgöz, N. (2011). “Örgütsel Sinisizm, Örgütsel Destek ve Örgütsel Adalet İlişkisi: Elektrik Dağıtım İşletmesi Çalışanları Örneği”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 6(2), 363-387.
93. Tokgöz, N. ve Yılmaz, H. (2008). “Örgütsel Sinisizm: Eskişehir ve Alanya’daki Otel İşletmelerinde Bir Uygula-ma”. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(2), 283-305.
94. Treadway, D. C., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., Ammeter, A. P. ve Buckley, M. R. (2004). “Leader Political Skill and Employee Reactions”. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(4), 493-513.
95. Turunç, Ö. ve Çelik, M. (2010). “Çalışanların Algıladıkları Örgütsel Destek ve İş Stresinin Örgütsel Özdeşleşme ve İş Performansına Etkisi”. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 17(2), 183-206.
96. Türkiye Bankalar Birliği. Türkiye’de Bankacılık Sistemi Seçilmiş Göstergelerin İllere ve Bölgelere Göre Dağılı-mı. Haziran 2016.
97. van Knippenberg, D., Dick, R.V. ve Tavares, S. (2007). “Social Identity and Social Exchange: Identification, Support and Withdrawal From the Job”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(3), 457-477.
98. Vigoda, E. ve Cohen, A. (2002). “Influence Tactics and Perceptions of Organizational Politics: A Longitudinal Study”. Journal of Business Research, 55, 311-324.
99. Wann-Yih, W. ve Htaik, S. (2011). “The Impacts of Perceived Organizational Support, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment on Job Performance in Hotel Industry”. The 11th International DSI and the 16th APDSI Joint Meeting, July 12-16 2011, Taiwan.
100. Zagenczyk, T.J., Gibney, R., Few, W.T. ve Scott, K.L. (2011). “Psychological Contracts and Organizational Iden-tification: The Mediating Effect of Perceived Organizational Support”. Journal of Labor Research, 32, 254-281.