KAOSUN ÖRGÜTSEL DEĞİŞİM ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ: PROFESYONEL FUTBOL KULÜPLERİ ÜZERİNE BİR ÇALIŞMA

Öz

Kaos ve örgütsel değişim kavramları arasındaki ilişki çoğu zaman tek bir sonuca karşılık gelmeyebilir. Kaos kavramı sosyal yaşamda olumsuz anlamda kullanılsa da, hem sosyal bilimlerde hem de pozitif bilimlerde olumsuz bir durumdan fazlasını, değişimi de ifade etmektedir. Bu noktada, bu çalışmanın da amacı, kaosun Türkiye profesyonel futbol kulüplerinde gerçekleştirilmeye çalışılan değişimleri nasıl etkilediğini ve uzun vadede doğurduğu sonuçları incelemektir. Bu amaç ile değişim süreçlerinin iç dinamikleri de ortaya çıkarılarak, kaosun bu süreçleri nasıl şekillendirdiği incelenmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu kapsamda, 4 farklı futbol liginde görev alan 14 üst düzey kulüp yöneticisi ile derinlemesine görüşme gerçekleştirilmiştir. Derinlemesine görüşmeler; yarı yapılandırılmış olarak oluşturulmuş ve literatür ile futbol kulüplerinin genel durumundan beslenerek oluşturulan sorularla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma deseni olarak fenomenoloji yönteminin seçildiği çalışmada, toplanan veriler içerik analizi yöntemi ile incelenmiştir. Araştırma bulguları, kaosun futbol kulüplerinin statik yapılarından çıkmasını ve böylece örgütsel değişime uygun ortamın oluşmasını sağladığını ancak buna rağmen, kulüp iç ve dış etkenlerinin bu gerçekleşen değişimlerin faydalı olmasını engellediğini göstermektedir. Bulgular, profesyonel kulüplerin aşırı esnek örgütsel yapılarının kaos veya düzensizlik karşısında sistematik hareket edip düzeni sağlayacak mekanizmalara sahip olmadığına işaret etmektedir. Sonuç olarak, kulüplerin temel problemlerine çözüm bulmadan gerçekleştirmeye çalıştıkları değişimler uzun vadede daha büyük sorunları ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Ayrıca, araştırmaya katılan kulüp yöneticilerinin kişisel sebepleri değişimlerde örgütsel hedeflerden daha önemli bir rol oynamıştır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Değişim; Futbol Kulüpleri; Kaos; Stratejik Yönetim

THE EFFECT OF CHAOS ON ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE: A STUDY ON THE TURKISH PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL CLUBS

Öz

The relationship between the concepts of chaos and organizational change may not lead to one outcome most of the time. Although the concept of chaos is used to refer to negative outcomes in social life, it also expresses more than a negative state and expresses change both in social sciences and positive sciences. In this respect, this research aimed to probe the effect of chaos on organizational change and the consequences these changes create in the long term within Turkish professional football clubs. The study also aimed to obtain information regarding the inner mechanisms of clubs and find out how chaotic, non-linear processes impact the organizational changes in professional clubs. In this regard, 14 executives of Professional Football Clubs from 4 different leagues were interviewed. The interviews were semi-structural and the questions were formed by taking the literature and the general states of the clubs into consideration. Phenomenology was chosen as the design of the research and the data collected were analyzed with content analysis method. The themes were generated using thematic coding. Research findings show that chaotic moves and actions help football clubs to get out of their static structure and enable changes in organizations. The results also show that chaos enables football clubs to initiate change, yet, due to the internal and external issues affecting the clubs, changes end up causing more problems in the short term. The study concludes that change initiatives of football clubs not only lead to inefficiency of changes but also reveal detrimental outcomes, without resolving the fundamental problems of the organizations. Additionally, it was also found that individual drives of executives have more importance than organization goals for initiating change in sport clubs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Change; Chaos; Football Clubs; Strategic Management

Kaynakça

1. Hannan M, Freeman J. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review 1984; 49(2):149-164.
2. Montalvo C. What triggers change and innovation? Technovation 2006; 26(3): 312–323.
3. Kiel LD. Managing Chaos and Complexity in Government: A New Paradigm for Managing Change, Innovation, and Organizational Renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 1994. p.1-246.
4. Ford JD, Ford LW, D'Amelio A. Resistance to change: The rest of the story. Academy of Management Review 2008; 33(2): 362-377.
5. Buchanan D. Getting the story straight: Illusions and delusions in the organizational change process. Tamara Journal for Critical Organization Inquiry 2013; 2(4): 7-21.
6. Demers C. Organizational change theories: A synthesis. 1st ed. Alberta: Sage Publications; 2007. p. 115-222.
7. Farazmand A. Chaos and transformation theories: A theoretical analysis with implications for organization theory and public management. Public Organization Review 2003; 3(4): 339–372.
8. Cartwright TJ. Planning and Chaos Theory. Journal of the American Planning Association 1991; 57(1): 44–56.

9. Griffiths DE, Hart W, Blair BG. Still Another Approach to Administration: Chaos Theory. Educational Administration Quarterly 1991; 27(3): 430–451.
10. Levy D. Chaos Theory and Strategy: Theory, Application, and Managerial Implications. Strategic Management Journal 1994; 15: 167–178.
11. Levy D. Applications and Limitations of Complexity Theory in Organization Theory and Strategy. Public Administration and Public Policy 2000; 79: 67-88.
12. Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM. The Art of Continuous Change: Linking Complexity Theory and Time-Paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 1997; 42(1): 1.
13. O’Brien D, Slack T. Deinstitutionalising the Amateur Ethic: An Empirical Examination of Change in a Rugby Union Football Club. Sport Management Review 1999: 2(1); 24–42.
14. Smith ACT. Complexity theory and change management in sport organizations. E:CO Special Double Issue 2004; 6(1-2); 70–79.
15. Girginov V, Sandanski I. Understanding the Changing Nature of Sports Organisations in Transforming Societies. Sport Management Review 2008; 11(1): 21–50.
16. Burnes B. Kurt Lewin and complexity theories: back to the future? Journal of Change Management 2004; 4(4): 309–325.
17. Pettigrew AM, Woodman RW, Cameron KS. Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal 2001:44(4);697-713.
18. Bamford DR, Forrester PL. Managing Planned and Emergent Change Within An Operations Management Environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 2003; 23(5): 546–564.
19. Burnes B. No such thing as … a “one best way” to manage organizational change. Management Decision 1996; 34(10): 11–18.
20. Cummings TG, Worley CG. Organization Development and Change. Designing Interventions. 9th ed. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-Western; 2009. p. 151-163.
21. Todnem R. Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management 2005; 5(4): 369–380.
22. Sturdy A, Grey C. Beneath and Beyond Organizational Change Management: Exploring Alternatives. Organization 2003; 10(4): 651–662.
23. Ven A, Poole MS. Alternative Approaches for Studying Organizational Change. Organization Studies 2005; 26(9): 1377-1404.
24. Orlikowski WJ, Yates J. It’s About Time: Temporal Structuring in Organizations. Organization Science 2002; 13(6): 684-700.
25. Wetzel R, Van Gorp L. Eighteen Shades of Grey? An Explorative Literature Review into The Theoretical Flavours of Organizational Change Research. Journal of Organizational Change Management 2014; 27(1): 115–146.
26. Skirstad B, Chelladurai P. For “Love” and Money: A Sports Club’s Innovative Response to Multiple Logics Theoretical Framework: Journal of Sport Management 2011; 25: 339–354.
27. Bloyce D, Smith A, Mead R, Morris J. ‘Playing The Game (plan)’: A Figurational Analysis of Organizational Change in Sports Development in England. European Sport Management Quarterly 2008; 8(4): 359-378.
28. Slack T, Hinings B. Understanding Change in National Sport Organizations: An Integration of Theoretical Perspectives. Journal of Sport Management 1992; 6(2): 114–132.
29. Stenling C. The Introduction of Drive-in Sport in Community Sport Organizations as an Example of Organizational (Non-) Change. Journal of Sport Management 2013; 27(6): 497–509.
30. Amis J, Slack T, Hinings C. The pace, sequence, and linearity of radical change. Academy of Management Journal 2004; 47(1): 15–39.
31. Mcbride N. Information Systems in Organizations. Info Systems J 2005; (15): 233–254.
32. Hayles, K. Instability and Narrative Order. In: Chaos and Order: Complex Dynamics in Literature and Science. The Employment of Chaos. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1991;100-125.
33. Stacey R. Emerging strategies for a chaotic environment. Long Range Planning 1996; 29(2): 182–189.
34. Şimşek H, Yıldırım A. [Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences]. Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Nitel Araştırma Desenleri ve Süreci. 10. Baskı. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık; 2011;50-87.
35. Berg BL, Lune H. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. 5th ed. Boston: Pearson; 2004; 21-60.
36. Grbich, C. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction. 2nd ed. London. SAGE; 2013;1-25.
37. Altun SA. [Chaos and Management]. Kaos ve Yönetim. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi 2001; 7(4): 451-469.
38. Sherry E, Shilbury D. Board Directors and Conflict of Interest: A Study of A Sport League. European Sport Management Quarterly 2009; 9(1): 47-62.
39. Tekel, S. [Complexity Theory in Management and Organization Sciences]. Yönetim ve Organizasyon Bilimi Açısından Karmaşıklık Teorisi. Journal of İstanbul Kültür University 2006; 2: 223–229.
40. Guimaraes T, Armstrong C. Empirically Testing the Impact of Change Management Effectiveness On Company Performance. European Journal of Innovation Management 1998; 1(2): 74–84.