Derleme
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Dijital Çağda Kurumsal Yönetim ve Örgütsel Çeviklik Etkileşimi: Kavramsal Bir Değerlendirme

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 235 - 252, 27.12.2025

Öz

Bu çalışma, kurumsal yönetim ilkeleri ile örgütsel çeviklik arasındaki ilişkiyi kavramsal düzeyde incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Kurumsal yönetim şeffaflık, hesap verebilirlik, eşitlik ve sorumluluk gibi temel ilkeler aracılığıyla işletmelerde güvene dayalı bir yönetişim yapısı oluştururken; örgütsel çeviklik, değişen çevre koşullarına hızlı ve etkili biçimde uyum sağlama yeteneği olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Literatürde bu iki kavram genellikle ayrı başlıklar altında ele alınsa da, son yıllarda artan belirsizlik ortamı ve dijitalleşme baskısı, iyi yönetişim uygulamaları ile çevik organizasyon yapılarının birbirini tamamladığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu bağlamda, çalışma hem kurumsal yönetim hem de çeviklik literatürüne teorik katkı sunmakta, aralarındaki olası etkileşimi açıklayan ilkeleri ve kavramsal ilişkileri tartışmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • Ahmad, J., Nilwana, A., & Ramadhan, M. R. (2020). Good corporate governance model and organizational agility: Study of regional water companies. Public Administration, 62(5), 2441–2451.
  • Aktan, C. C. (2013). Kurumsal şirket yönetimi. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 150–161.
  • Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
  • Ararat, M. & Uğur, M. (2003). Corporate governance in Turkey: An overview and some policy recommendations. Corporate Governance, 3(1), 2003, 55-78. https://doi.org/10.1108/14720700310459863
  • Arnold, V. (2018). The changing technological environment and the future of behavioural research in accounting. Accounting & Finance, 58(2), 315-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12218
  • Atzori, M. (2015). Blockchain technology and decentralized governance: Is the state still necessary? Available at https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2709713
  • Bhimani, A., & Willcocks, L. (2014). Digitisation, ‘Big Data’ and the transformation of accounting information. Accounting and Business Research, 44(4), 469–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2014.910051
  • Brennan, N.M., Subramaniam, N., Chris J. & van Staden, C. J. (2019). Corporate governance implications of disruptive technology: An overview, The British Accounting Review, 51(6), 100860, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.100860
  • Breu, K., Hemingway, C. J., Strathern, M., & Bridger, D. (2002). Workforce agility: The new employee strategy for the knowledge economy. Journal of Information Technology, 17(1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02683960110132070
  • Byström, H. (2019). Blockchains, Real-time Accounting, and the Future of Credit Risk Modeling, Ledger, 4. https://doi.org/10.5195/ledger.2019.100
  • Demirbaş, M., & Uyar, S. (2006). Kurumsal yönetim ilkeleri ve denetim komitesi. Güncel Yayıncılık.
  • Denning, S. (2018). The ten stages of the agile transformation journey. Strategy and Leadership, 47(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-11-2018-0109
  • Dyer, L., & Shafer, R. A. (2003). Dynamic organizations: Achieving marketplace and organizational agility with people. In R. Peterson & E. Mannix (Eds.), Leading and managing people in the dynamic organization (pp. 1–57). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Evans, G. L. (2017). Disruptive technology and the board: The tip of the iceberg. Economics and Business Review, 3(1), 205-223. https://doi.org/10.18559/ebr.2017.1.11
  • Gans, J. (2016). The disruption dilemma. MIT press.
  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. In R. I. Tricker (Ed.), Corporate Governance (pp. 77–132). Gower.
  • Jørgensen, F., Boer, H. (2008). Asymmetric Adaptability of Team Designs: Change and Back Again. In: Burton, R., Eriksen, B., Håkonsson, D., Knudsen, T., Snow, C. (eds) Designing Organizations. Information and Organization Design Series, vol 7. Springer.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77776-4_6
  • Kane, G., Phillips, N., Copulsky, J.R., & Andrus, G.R. (2019). The technology fallacy: People are the real key to digital transformation. Research-Technology Management, 62(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2019.1661079
  • Kuruppu, S.C. & Lodhia, S. (2019). Disruption and transformation: The organisational evolution of an NGO. The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, 51(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.03.003
  • Lehn, K. (2018). Corporate governance, Agility, and survival. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 25(1), 65-72, https://doi.org/10.1080/13571516.2017.1396661
  • Lehn, K. (2019). Corporate governance and corporate agility. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3485307
  • Leoni, G. & Parker, L.D. (2019). Governance and control of sharing economy platforms: Hosting on Airbnb. The British Accounting Review, 51(6), 100814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2018.12.001
  • Moll, J. & Yigitbasioglu, O. (2019). The role of internet-related technologies in shaping the work of accountants: New directions for accounting research. The British Accounting Review, 51(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.04.002
  • OECD (2004). OECD Principles of Corporate Govarnance. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2004/05/oecd-principles-of-corporate-governance-2004_g1gh44a5/9789264015999-en.pdf
  • Roberts, J., McNulty, T., & Stiles, P. (2005). Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the non-executive director: Creating accountability in the boardroom. British Journal of Management, 16(Special Issue), S5–S26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00444.x
  • Salanova, M., Lorente, L., Chambel, M. J., & Martínez, I. M. (2011). Linking transformational leadership to nurses’ extra‐role performance: The mediating role of self‐efficacy and work engagement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(10), 2256-2266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05652.x
  • Saldanha, T.J.V., Mithas, S. & Krishnan, M.S. (2017). Leveraging customer involvement for fueling innovation: The role of relational and analytical information processing capabilities. MIS Quarterly, 41(1):367-396. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26629647
  • Sharifi, H. & Zhang, Z. (1999) A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organizations: An introduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 62, 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00217-5
  • Tallon, P.P. & Pinsonneault, A. (2011). Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: Insights from a mediation model. MIS Quarterly, 35, 463-486. https://doi.org/10.2307/23044052
  • Teece, D.J. (2007) explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1319-1350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  • Vasarhelyi, M. A., Kogan, A. & Tuttle, B.M. (2015). Big data in accounting: An overview. Accounting Horizons, 29(2), 381-396. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51071
  • Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28, 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
  • Yermack, D. (2017). Corporate governance and blockchains. Review of Finance, 21(1), 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfw074
  • Zengin, A.N. & Altıok Yılmaz, A. (2017). Kurumsal yönetim ilkeleri ve standartları. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(48). https://doi.org/10.17719/jisr.2017.1541
  • Zhang, J., Yang, X., & Appelbaum, D. (2015). Toward effective big data analysis in continuous auditing. Accounting Horizons, 29, 469-476. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51070

Corporate Governance and Organizational Agility Interaction in the Digital Age: A Conceptual Review

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 235 - 252, 27.12.2025

Öz

This study aims to conceptually examine the relationship between corporate governance principles and organizational agility. Corporate governance establishes a trust-based administrative structure within organizations through core principles such as transparency, accountability, fairness, and responsibility. Organizational agility, on the other hand, refers to the organization’s ability to rapidly and effectively adapt to changing environmental conditions. Although these two concepts have traditionally been addressed separately in the literature, increasing environmental uncertainty and the growing pressure of digitalization have revealed their complementary nature. In this context, the study provides a theoretical contribution to both the corporate governance and agility literature by exploring the underlying principles and conceptual linkages between them.

Kaynakça

  • Ahmad, J., Nilwana, A., & Ramadhan, M. R. (2020). Good corporate governance model and organizational agility: Study of regional water companies. Public Administration, 62(5), 2441–2451.
  • Aktan, C. C. (2013). Kurumsal şirket yönetimi. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 150–161.
  • Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
  • Ararat, M. & Uğur, M. (2003). Corporate governance in Turkey: An overview and some policy recommendations. Corporate Governance, 3(1), 2003, 55-78. https://doi.org/10.1108/14720700310459863
  • Arnold, V. (2018). The changing technological environment and the future of behavioural research in accounting. Accounting & Finance, 58(2), 315-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12218
  • Atzori, M. (2015). Blockchain technology and decentralized governance: Is the state still necessary? Available at https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2709713
  • Bhimani, A., & Willcocks, L. (2014). Digitisation, ‘Big Data’ and the transformation of accounting information. Accounting and Business Research, 44(4), 469–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2014.910051
  • Brennan, N.M., Subramaniam, N., Chris J. & van Staden, C. J. (2019). Corporate governance implications of disruptive technology: An overview, The British Accounting Review, 51(6), 100860, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.100860
  • Breu, K., Hemingway, C. J., Strathern, M., & Bridger, D. (2002). Workforce agility: The new employee strategy for the knowledge economy. Journal of Information Technology, 17(1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02683960110132070
  • Byström, H. (2019). Blockchains, Real-time Accounting, and the Future of Credit Risk Modeling, Ledger, 4. https://doi.org/10.5195/ledger.2019.100
  • Demirbaş, M., & Uyar, S. (2006). Kurumsal yönetim ilkeleri ve denetim komitesi. Güncel Yayıncılık.
  • Denning, S. (2018). The ten stages of the agile transformation journey. Strategy and Leadership, 47(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-11-2018-0109
  • Dyer, L., & Shafer, R. A. (2003). Dynamic organizations: Achieving marketplace and organizational agility with people. In R. Peterson & E. Mannix (Eds.), Leading and managing people in the dynamic organization (pp. 1–57). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Evans, G. L. (2017). Disruptive technology and the board: The tip of the iceberg. Economics and Business Review, 3(1), 205-223. https://doi.org/10.18559/ebr.2017.1.11
  • Gans, J. (2016). The disruption dilemma. MIT press.
  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. In R. I. Tricker (Ed.), Corporate Governance (pp. 77–132). Gower.
  • Jørgensen, F., Boer, H. (2008). Asymmetric Adaptability of Team Designs: Change and Back Again. In: Burton, R., Eriksen, B., Håkonsson, D., Knudsen, T., Snow, C. (eds) Designing Organizations. Information and Organization Design Series, vol 7. Springer.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77776-4_6
  • Kane, G., Phillips, N., Copulsky, J.R., & Andrus, G.R. (2019). The technology fallacy: People are the real key to digital transformation. Research-Technology Management, 62(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2019.1661079
  • Kuruppu, S.C. & Lodhia, S. (2019). Disruption and transformation: The organisational evolution of an NGO. The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, 51(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.03.003
  • Lehn, K. (2018). Corporate governance, Agility, and survival. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 25(1), 65-72, https://doi.org/10.1080/13571516.2017.1396661
  • Lehn, K. (2019). Corporate governance and corporate agility. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3485307
  • Leoni, G. & Parker, L.D. (2019). Governance and control of sharing economy platforms: Hosting on Airbnb. The British Accounting Review, 51(6), 100814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2018.12.001
  • Moll, J. & Yigitbasioglu, O. (2019). The role of internet-related technologies in shaping the work of accountants: New directions for accounting research. The British Accounting Review, 51(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.04.002
  • OECD (2004). OECD Principles of Corporate Govarnance. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2004/05/oecd-principles-of-corporate-governance-2004_g1gh44a5/9789264015999-en.pdf
  • Roberts, J., McNulty, T., & Stiles, P. (2005). Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the non-executive director: Creating accountability in the boardroom. British Journal of Management, 16(Special Issue), S5–S26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00444.x
  • Salanova, M., Lorente, L., Chambel, M. J., & Martínez, I. M. (2011). Linking transformational leadership to nurses’ extra‐role performance: The mediating role of self‐efficacy and work engagement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(10), 2256-2266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05652.x
  • Saldanha, T.J.V., Mithas, S. & Krishnan, M.S. (2017). Leveraging customer involvement for fueling innovation: The role of relational and analytical information processing capabilities. MIS Quarterly, 41(1):367-396. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26629647
  • Sharifi, H. & Zhang, Z. (1999) A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organizations: An introduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 62, 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00217-5
  • Tallon, P.P. & Pinsonneault, A. (2011). Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: Insights from a mediation model. MIS Quarterly, 35, 463-486. https://doi.org/10.2307/23044052
  • Teece, D.J. (2007) explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1319-1350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  • Vasarhelyi, M. A., Kogan, A. & Tuttle, B.M. (2015). Big data in accounting: An overview. Accounting Horizons, 29(2), 381-396. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51071
  • Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28, 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
  • Yermack, D. (2017). Corporate governance and blockchains. Review of Finance, 21(1), 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfw074
  • Zengin, A.N. & Altıok Yılmaz, A. (2017). Kurumsal yönetim ilkeleri ve standartları. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(48). https://doi.org/10.17719/jisr.2017.1541
  • Zhang, J., Yang, X., & Appelbaum, D. (2015). Toward effective big data analysis in continuous auditing. Accounting Horizons, 29, 469-476. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51070
Toplam 35 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Kurumsal Yönetim
Bölüm Derleme
Yazarlar

Serap Demirler 0000-0002-6799-6469

Gönderilme Tarihi 26 Haziran 2025
Kabul Tarihi 3 Temmuz 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 27 Aralık 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Demirler, S. (2025). Dijital Çağda Kurumsal Yönetim ve Örgütsel Çeviklik Etkileşimi: Kavramsal Bir Değerlendirme. Sosyoekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(2), 235-252.