BIST 100 Endeksindeki Şirketlerin İnsan Kaynakları Birimi İsimlendirmeleri Üzerine Bir İçerik Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, BIST 100 şirketlerinde insan kaynakları birimlerinin nasıl isimlendirildiğini incelemek ve bu isimlendirmelerin insan kaynakları yönetimi anlayışındaki dönüşümü nasıl yansıttığını ortaya koymaktır. Araştırma nitel araştırma desenine dayalı olarak yürütülmüş ve içerik analizi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada örneklem seçimine gidilmemiş, BIST 100 endeksinde yer alan tüm şirketler araştırma kapsamına dahil edilmiştir. Veriler, şirketlerin resmî web siteleri, faaliyet raporları ve organizasyon şemalarından doküman incelemesi yoluyla elde edilmiştir. Analiz sürecinde tümevarımsal yaklaşım benimsenmiş; insan kaynakları birim isimleri kodlanarak tematik kategoriler altında sınıflandırılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları, geleneksel insan kaynakları söyleminin hâlen baskın olduğunu göstermektedir. Özellikle “İnsan Kaynakları” ve “Personel Yönetimi” gibi klasik ifadelerin yoğun biçimde kullanıldığı belirlenmiştir. Bununla birlikte “İnsan ve Kültür”, “Yetenek Yönetimi”, “Kurumsal Gelişim”, “Çalışan Deneyimi”, “Dönüşüm” ve “Sürdürülebilirlik” gibi daha stratejik ve çağdaş yönetim anlayışını yansıtan kavramların da giderek daha görünür hâle geldiği tespit edilmiştir. Sektörel bulgular, teknoloji ve mali kuruluşlar sektörlerinde stratejik ve dönüşüm odaklı söylemlerin daha güçlü olduğunu ortaya koyarken; imalat ve ulaştırma sektörlerinde geleneksel söylemin baskınlığını sürdürdüğünü göstermektedir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, insan kaynakları birim isimlendirmelerinin örgütlerin kurumsal kimliklerini, yönetim anlayışlarını ve dönüşüm süreçlerini yansıtan söylemsel göstergeler olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi
• Kuramsal Söylem
• BIST100
• İçerik Analizi

A Content Analysis of the Naming of Human Resources Departments in BIST 100 Companies

Öz

This study aims to examine how human resources (HR) departments are named in BIST 100 companies and to reveal how these naming practices reflect the transformation in human resource management approaches. The research was designed based on a qualitative research framework and employed content analysis as the primary method. Instead of selecting a sample, all companies listed in the BIST 100 index were included in the study. Data were collected through document analysis of companies’ official websites, annual reports, and organizational charts. An inductive approach was adopted during the analysis process, and HR department names were coded and categorized under thematic groups. The findings indicate that traditional HR discourse remains dominant among BIST 100 companies. In particular, classical expressions such as “Human Resources” and “Personnel Management” are still widely used. However, concepts reflecting more strategic and contemporary management approaches, such as “People and Culture,” “Talent Management,” “Corporate Development,” “Employee Experience,” “Transformation,” and “Sustainability,” have become increasingly visible. Sectoral findings reveal that strategic and transformation-oriented HR discourses are more prominent in technology and financial sectors, whereas traditional discourse remains dominant in manufacturing and transportation sectors. Overall, the study demonstrates that HR department naming practices are not merely terminological preferences, but also discursive indicators reflecting organizations’ managerial approaches, corporate identities, and transformation processes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Human Resource Management
• Institutional Discource
• BIST100
• Content Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125-1149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700539002
2. Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2023). Armstrong's handbook of human resource management practice: A guide to the theory and practice of people management. Kogan Page Publishers.
3. Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding. Career Development International, 9(5), 501-517. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430410550754
4. Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic human resources management: Where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 32(6), 898–925. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306293668
5. Beer, M., Boselie, P., & Brewster, C. (2015). Back to the future: Implications for the field of HRM of the multistakeholder perspective proposed 30 years ago. Human Resource Management, 54(3), 427-438. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21726
6. Bondarouk, T., & Brewster, C. (2016). Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(21), 2652-2671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1232296
7. Borsa İstanbul. (2025). BIST 100 endeksi şirket listesi. https://www.borsaistanbul.com adresinden 10 Nisan 2026 tarihinde alınmıştır.
8. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

9. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
10. Cornelissen, J. (2020). Corporate communication: A guide to theory and practice (6th ed.). Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
11. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
12. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
13. Fairclough, N. (2023). Critical discourse analysis. In The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 11-22). Routledge.
14. Farndale, E., Brewster, C., Ligthart, P., & Poutsma, E. (2017). The effects of market economy type and foreign MNE subsidiaries on the convergence and divergence of HRM. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9), 1065-1086. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0094-8
15. Farndale, E., Scullion, H., & Sparrow, P. (2010). The role of the corporate HR function in global talent management. Journal of World Business, 54(2), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2009.09.012
16. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1998). Grounded theory. Strategien qualitativer Forschung (4th ed.). Huber.
17. Guest, D. E. (2017). Human resource management and employee well‐being: Towards a new analytic framework. Human Resource Management Journal, 27(1), 22-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12139
18. Jain, N., & Bhatt, P. (2015). Employment preferences of job applicants: unfolding employer branding determinants. Journal of Management Development, 34(6), 634-652. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-09-2013-0106
19. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage Publications.
20. Lengnick-Hall, M. L., Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Andrade, L. S., & Drake, B. (2009). Strategic human resource management: The evolution of the field. Human Resource Management Review, 19(2), 64-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.01.002
21. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
22. Marler, J. H., & Boudreau, J. W. (2017). An evidence-based review of HR Analytics. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1244699
23. Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. URN.
24. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. Sage Publications.
25. Mogalakwe, M. (2006). The use of documentary research methods in social research. African Sociological Review, 10(1), 221-230.
26. Nastase, C., Adomnitei, A., & Apetri, A. (2025). Strategic human resource management in the digital era: technology, transformation, and sustainable advantage. Merits, 5(4), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/merits5040023
27. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
28. Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635-652. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2004.14497617
29. Ren, S., Tang, G., & E. Jackson, S. (2018). Green human resource management research in emergence: A review and future directions. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35(3), 769-803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9532-1
30. Schwab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum.
31. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201
32. Strohmeier, S. (2020). Digital human resource management: A conceptual clarification. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 34(3), 345-365. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002220921131
33. Stone, D. L., Deadrick, D. L., Lukaszewski, K. M., & Johnson, R. (2015). The influence of technology on the future of human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 25(2), 216-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.002
34. Tursunbayeva, A., Di Lauro, S., & Pagliari, C. (2018). People analytics—A scoping review of conceptual boundaries and value propositions. International Journal of Information Management, 43, 224-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.08.002
35. Ulrich, D. (1996). Human resource champions: The next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Harvard Business Press.
36. Ulrich, D., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2015). Are we there yet? What's next for HR?. Human Resource Management Review, 25(2), 188-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.004
37. Vial, G. (2021). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Managing Digital Transformation, 13-66.