Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

CORPORATE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONS FROM NETWORK PERSPECTIVE

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 335 - 338, 01.09.2018
https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910

Öz

Purpose- The aim of our study is to reveal the corporate structure of organizations from network perspective. It is targeted to establish decision criteria for the efficiency and priority of actions in line with analysis results.

Methodology- We use the document relationships between the all units of a professional organization with public institution status in 2016. The relations between these units are evaluated by network analysis. Integration, driving, driven and stability indicators are used to describe the dynamic character of the organizational structure.

Findings- According to the analysis results, two organizational units are defined as integrative, two are as driving and three of them as driven. Overall system stability is %56. This means that the system in focus is not under the threat of neither disorganization nor inertia.

Conclusion- With study findings, it is possible to follow the dynamic reflection of any topic on the system and apply the targets of the units in the most appropriate way to the institutional structure.

Kaynakça

  • Borgatti, S.P., Halgin, D.S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, p. 1-14. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0641
  • Egghea, L. (2009). Mathematical derivation of the impact factor distribution. Journal of Informetrics, vol. 3, p. 290–295.
  • Hanneman, R. A., Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network. CA: University of California. http://faculty.ucr.edu/hanneman/nettext
  • Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: an approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library and Information Science Research, vol.18, no.4, p. 323-342.
  • James, L. R., Jones, A. P. (1976). Organizational structure: a review of structural dimensions and their relationships with individual attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, vol. 16, p. 74-113.
  • Jo, H., Park, Y., Kim, S. E., Lee, H. (2016). Exploring the intellectual structure of nanoscience and nanotechnology: journal citation network analysis. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, vol.18, p. 167
  • Lei, D., Slocum, J. W. (2005). Strategic and organizational requirements for competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Executive, vol. 19, p. 31-45.
  • Linss V., Fried A. (2010). The ADVIAN® classification — a new classification approach for the rating of impact factors. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 77, p. 110–119.
  • Maoz, Z. (2011). Network of nations. The evolution, structure, and impact of international network, 1861-2001. USA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Marin, A., Wellman, B. (2014). Social network analysis: an introduction. In J. Scott, and P. J. Carrington, The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 11-25). Great Britain: SAGE.
  • Nelson, R. E. (2011). The strenght of strong ties: social networks and intergroup conflict in organizations. In M. Kilduff and A. V. Shipilov, Organizational Network Volume II (pp. 3-26). London: SAGE.
  • Pryke, S. (2012). Social network analysis in construction. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Wasserman, S., Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: method and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 335 - 338, 01.09.2018
https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910

Öz

Amaç- Çalışmamızın amacı örgütlerin kurumsal yapısının ağ perspektifinden ortaya çıkarılmasıdır. Analiz sonuçları doğrultusunda eylemlerin etkinlik ve önceliği konusunda karar kriterlerinin oluşturulması hedeflenmektedir.
Yöntem- Çalışmamızda kamu kurumu niteliğindeki bir meslek örgütününün tüm birimleri arasındaki 2016 yılı evrak ilişkileri dikkate alınmıştır. Birimler arasındaki bu ilişkiler ağ analizi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Örgütsel yapının dinamik karakterini tanımlamak için bütünleşme, harekete geçiricilik, harekete geçicilik ve istikrar göstergeleri kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular- Analiz sonuçlarına göre örgütsel birimlerden ikisi bütünleştirici, ikisi harekete geçirici ve üçü harekete geçici olarak tanımlanmıştır. Bütün sistemin istikrarı ise %56 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Bu durum, sistemin ne çözülme ne de atalet tehlikesi altında olduğunu göstermektedir.
Sonuç- Çalışma bulguları ile birlikte, herhangi bir konunun sistem üzerindeki dinamik yansımasını takip etmek ve birim amaçlarının kurumsal yapıya en uygun şekilde uygulanabilmesi mümkün olabilmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Borgatti, S.P., Halgin, D.S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, p. 1-14. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0641
  • Egghea, L. (2009). Mathematical derivation of the impact factor distribution. Journal of Informetrics, vol. 3, p. 290–295.
  • Hanneman, R. A., Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network. CA: University of California. http://faculty.ucr.edu/hanneman/nettext
  • Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: an approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library and Information Science Research, vol.18, no.4, p. 323-342.
  • James, L. R., Jones, A. P. (1976). Organizational structure: a review of structural dimensions and their relationships with individual attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, vol. 16, p. 74-113.
  • Jo, H., Park, Y., Kim, S. E., Lee, H. (2016). Exploring the intellectual structure of nanoscience and nanotechnology: journal citation network analysis. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, vol.18, p. 167
  • Lei, D., Slocum, J. W. (2005). Strategic and organizational requirements for competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Executive, vol. 19, p. 31-45.
  • Linss V., Fried A. (2010). The ADVIAN® classification — a new classification approach for the rating of impact factors. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 77, p. 110–119.
  • Maoz, Z. (2011). Network of nations. The evolution, structure, and impact of international network, 1861-2001. USA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Marin, A., Wellman, B. (2014). Social network analysis: an introduction. In J. Scott, and P. J. Carrington, The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 11-25). Great Britain: SAGE.
  • Nelson, R. E. (2011). The strenght of strong ties: social networks and intergroup conflict in organizations. In M. Kilduff and A. V. Shipilov, Organizational Network Volume II (pp. 3-26). London: SAGE.
  • Pryke, S. (2012). Social network analysis in construction. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Wasserman, S., Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: method and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toplam 13 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Cigdem Baskici 0000-0003-0712-1481

Yavuz Ercil 0000-0003-2016-7329

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Eylül 2018
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2018 Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Baskici, C., & Ercil, Y. (2018). ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ. PressAcademia Procedia, 7(1), 335-338. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910
AMA Baskici C, Ercil Y. ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ. PAP. Eylül 2018;7(1):335-338. doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910
Chicago Baskici, Cigdem, ve Yavuz Ercil. “ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ”. PressAcademia Procedia 7, sy. 1 (Eylül 2018): 335-38. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910.
EndNote Baskici C, Ercil Y (01 Eylül 2018) ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ. PressAcademia Procedia 7 1 335–338.
IEEE C. Baskici ve Y. Ercil, “ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ”, PAP, c. 7, sy. 1, ss. 335–338, 2018, doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910.
ISNAD Baskici, Cigdem - Ercil, Yavuz. “ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ”. PressAcademia Procedia 7/1 (Eylül 2018), 335-338. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910.
JAMA Baskici C, Ercil Y. ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ. PAP. 2018;7:335–338.
MLA Baskici, Cigdem ve Yavuz Ercil. “ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ”. PressAcademia Procedia, c. 7, sy. 1, 2018, ss. 335-8, doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.910.
Vancouver Baskici C, Ercil Y. ÖRGÜTLERİN AĞ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KURUMSAL YAPI ANALİZİ. PAP. 2018;7(1):335-8.

PressAcademia Procedia (PAP) publishes proceedings of conferences, seminars and symposiums. PressAcademia Procedia aims to provide a source for academic researchers, practitioners and policy makers in the area of social and behavioral sciences, and engineering.

PressAcademia Procedia invites academic conferences for publishing their proceedings with a review of editorial board. Since PressAcademia Procedia is an double blind peer-reviewed open-access book, the manuscripts presented in the conferences can easily be reached by numerous researchers. Hence, PressAcademia Procedia increases the value of your conference for your participants. 

PressAcademia Procedia provides an ISBN for each Conference Proceeding Book and a DOI number for each manuscript published in this book.

PressAcademia Procedia is currently indexed by DRJI, J-Gate, International Scientific Indexing, ISRA, Root Indexing, SOBIAD, Scope, EuroPub, Journal Factor Indexing and InfoBase Indexing. 

Please contact to procedia@pressacademia.org for your conference proceedings.