KURUMSAL SÖYLEMİN RASYONEL TEMELLERİ: YENİ KURUMSAL KURAM BAĞLAMINDA RASYONALİTE TARTIŞMASI

Öz

Yeni kurumsal kuram, örgütsel analizde 1970’li yıllardan sonra ençok dikkat çeken tartışma alanlarından birisidir. Çalışma yeni kurumsalkuramın rasyonaliteyle ilişkisini ele almaktadır. Rasyonaliteyle törenselkonformizm arasındaki gerilim, yeni kurumsal kuramın paradoksal görünenkonularından biridir ve çalışma bu gerilimden hareketle kuramın rasyonaliteperspektifini incelemektedir. Kurumsallaşmanın açıklanmasında, kurumsalrasyonalite, kollektif rasyonalite ve bilişsel modellerin elverişli araçlar olarakkullanılabileceği görülmüştür. Devletlerin, meslek kuruluşlarının, bilimin,uluslarası oluşumlarla ortaya çıkan aktörlerin, rasyonaliteyi dışsal olarak inşaettikleri; rasyonelleşmiş çevrelerin eseri olan bir kültürün bunu desteklediğisonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu yüzden, konformist eğilimlerinden dolayı rasyonelokulun dışında tutulsa da aslında yeni kurumsal kuramın köklerinin rasyonelbir temele dayandığı görüşü savunulmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yeni kurumsal kuram, rasyonalite,eşbiçimlilik, konformizm

RATIONAL FOUNDATIONS OF INSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSE: A RATIONALITY DISCUSSION DEPENDING ON THE ASSUMPTIONS OF NEW INSTITUTIONAL THEORY

Abstract

New institutional theory has been one of the widely discussed fieldsin organizational analysis since 1970s. This study analyses the relationsbetween new institutional theory and rationality. The tension betweenrationality and ceremonial conformity is one of the paradoxical issues in newinstitutional theory and depending on this tension present study examines therationality perspective of new institutional theory. Institutional rationality,collective rationality and cognitive processes can be used as convenient toolsin explaining the institutionalization. It is concluded that rationality isexternally built by states, professions, science and some other macro-actorsemerging with international integrations; and it is also reinforced by a culturethat is an output of rationalized environments. That is why, even it ispositioned out the rational school due to its conformist disposition, it isasserted that the roots of new institutional theory build on rationalfoundations

Keywords

• New institutional theory, rationality, isomorphism, conformism

Kaynakça

1. ABELL, P. “The New Institutionalism and Rational Choice Theory”, W.Richard Scott - Soren Christensen (Ed.), The Institutional Construction of Organizations, Sage, London, s. 3-14, 1995.
2. ABRAHAMSON, E. “The Emergence and Prevalence of Employee Management Rhetorics: The Effects of Long Waves, Labor Unions, and Turnover, 1875 to 1992”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No.3, s. 491-533, 1997.
3. ALBROW, M.(1987), “The Application of the Weberian Concept of Rationalization to Contemporary Conditions” Whimster, Sam - Lash, Scott (Ed.), Max Weber: Rationality and Modernity, Allen and Unwin, London, 1987..
4. ALLES, M. F. ve CABREARA, R. V. “Reconciling institutional theory with organizational theories: How neoinstitutionalism resolve five paradoxes”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol.19, No.4, s.503-517, 2006.
5. BANKSTON, C. L. “Rationality, Choice, and the Religious Economy: Individual and Collective Rationality in Supply and Demand”, Review of Religious Research, Vol.45, No.2, s.155-171, 2003.
6. Barley, S. ve KUNDA, G. “Design and Devotion: Surges of Rational and Normative Ideologies of Control in Managerial Discourse”, Administrative Sciences Quarterly, Vol. 37, No.3, s. 363-399, 1992.
7. BOUDON, R. (1998), “Limitations of Rational Choice Theory”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol.104, No.3, s.817-828, 1998.
8. BRITO, C. M. (2001), “Towards An Instituttional Theory of The Dynamics of Industrial Networks”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol.16, No:3, s.150-166, 2001.

9. BROWN, R. “Consideration of the Origin of Herbert Simon’s Theory of “Saticficing” (1933-1947)”, Management Decision, Vol.42, No.10, s. 1240-1256, 2004.
10. BRUBAKER, R. The Limits of Rationality: An Essay on the Social and Moral Thought of Max Weber, George Allen & Unvin, London, 1984.
11. BRUNER, J. Acts of Meaning, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1990.
12. BRUIN, Anne D. ve FLINT-HARTLE, S. “A Bounded Rationality Framework for Propert Investment Behavior”, Journal of Propert Investment and Finance, Vol.21, No.3, s. 271-284, 2003.
13. Clegg, S. Power, Rule and Domination, Routledge & Kegan Paul, Boston, 1978.
14. COHEN, M. D., MARCH, J. G. ve OLSEN, J. P. “A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice”, Administrative Science Querterly, Vol.17, No.1, s.1-25, 1972.
15. CONLISK, J. “Why Bounded Rationality?”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol.34, No.2, s.669-700, 1996. Cottingham, J. Akılcılık, (Çev. Bülent Gözkan), Sarmal Yayınevi, İstanbul, 1995
16. DI MAGGIO, P. J. ve POWELL, W. W. “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48, No. 2, s.147-160, 1983.
17. DI MAGGIO, P. J. “Culture and Cognition”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.23: 263-287, 1997.
18. DI MAGGIO, P.J. ve POWELL, W. W. “Introduction”, Powell, Walter and DiMaggio, Paul. (Ed.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, s. 1-40, 1991. ELSTER, J. “Rationality, Morality and Collective Action”, Ethics, Vol.69, No.1, s. 136-155, 1985.
19. FEYERABEND, P. Akla Veda, (Çev. Ertuğrul Başer), Ayrıntı Yayınları, İstanbul, 1988.
20. FOUCAULT, M. Hapishanenin Doğuşu, (Çev. Mehmet Ali Kılıçbay), İmge Kitabevi, İstanbul 1992.
21. FOUCAULT, M. Büyük Kapatılma, (Çev. Ferda Keskin), Ayrıntı Yay., İstanbul, 2000.
22. GIBSON, M. “Rationality, Philosophy and Public Affairs”, Ethics, Vol. 6, No. 3, s. 193-225, 1977.
23. GIDDENS, A. Siyaset, Sosyoloji ve Toplumsal Teori, (Çev. Tuncay Birkan), Metis Yay., İstanbul, 2008.
24. HABERMAS, J. İletişimsel Eylem Kuramı, (Çev. Mustafa Tüzel), Kabalcı Yayınları, İstanbul, 2001.
25. HICKSON, D. J. “Decision-Making at the Top of Organizations”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.13, s.165-192, 1987.
26. HOLM, P. “The Dynamics of Institutionalization: Transformation Processes in Norwegian Fisheries”, Administrative Sciences Quarterly, Vol.40, No.3, s.398-422, 1995.
27. HORKHEIMER, Max ve ADORNO, T. W. Aydınlanmanın Diyalektiği, (Çev. E.Ülner ve E.Ö.Karadoğan), Kabalcı Yayınevi, İstanbul, 2010. HORKHEIMER, M. Akıl Tutulması, (Çev. Orhan Koçak), Metis Yayınları, İstanbul, 1986.
28. Kalberg, S. (2005), Max Weber: Readings and Commentary on Modernity, Blackwell, Oxford, 2005.
29. KALBERG, S. “Max Weber’s Types of Rationality: Cornerstones for the Analysis of Rationalization Process in History”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol.85, No.5, s.1145-1179, 1980.