ÇATIŞMADAN KAYNAKLANAN YARATICILIK GİRİŞİMCİLİĞİ NASIL ETKİLER? PLANLI DAVRANIŞ TEORİSİ TEMELİNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, çatışmadan kaynaklanan yaratıcılığın girişimcilik eğilimi ve girişimcilik davranışı üzerindeki etkisini Planlı Davranış Teorisi (PDT) çerçevesinde incelemektir. Araştırma nicel yöntemle yürütülmüş, girişimcilik eğitimi almış 441 üniversite öğrencisinden anket yoluyla veri toplanmıştır. Modelde kişisel tutum, algılanan davranışsal kontrol, sosyal norm, çatışmadan kaynaklanan yaratıcılık, girişimcilik eğilimi ve girişimcilik davranışı değişkenleri yer almış, veriler Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi (YEM) ile analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, kişisel tutum ve algılanan davranışsal kontrolün girişimcilik eğilimini pozitif yönde etkilediğini, sosyal normun ise anlamlı bir etkisinin bulunmadığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca çatışmadan kaynaklanan yaratıcılığın hem girişimcilik eğilimini hem de girişimcilik davranışını güçlü ve pozitif yönde etkilediği belirlenmiştir. Çalışma, çatışmayı yalnızca olumsuz bir olgu olarak değil, girişimciliği destekleyen yaratıcı bir kaynak olarak ele alarak Planlı Davranış Teorisi literatürüne özgün bir katkı sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çatışmadan kaynaklanan yaratıcılık
• Planlı Davranış Teorisi
• girişimcilik eğitimi
• girişimcilik eğilimi
• yapısal eşitlik modellemesi

Destekleyen Kurum

Gümüşhane Üniversitesi

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma, Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Rektörlüğü Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etik Kurulu tarafından 27 Mart 2024 tarihli toplantıda (Toplantı No: 2024/3) onaylanmıştır.

HOW DOES CREATIVITY ARISING FROM CONFLICT AFFECT ENTREPRENEURSHIP? A RESEARCH BASED ON THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOUR

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine the effect of conflict-induced creativity on entrepreneurial tendency and entrepreneurial behaviour within the framework of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). The research was conducted using quantitative methods, with data collected via a questionnaire from 441 university students who had been trained in entrepreneurship. The model included the variables of personal attitude, perceived behavioural control, social norm, conflict-induced creativity, entrepreneurial tendency and entrepreneurial behaviour, and the data were analysed using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The findings indicate that personal attitude and perceived behavioural control have a positive effect on entrepreneurial inclination, whilst social norm has no significant effect. Furthermore, it was determined that conflict-induced creativity has a strong and positive effect on both entrepreneurial inclination and entrepreneurial behaviour. By treating conflict not merely as a negative phenomenon but as a creative resource that supports entrepreneurship, the study makes an original contribution to the literature on the Theory of Planned Behaviour.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Conflict-induced creativity
• Theory of Planned Behaviour
• entrepreneurship education
• entrepreneurial tendency
• structural equation modelling

Destekleyen Kurum

Gumushane Unıversity

Etik Beyan

This study was approved by the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Gumushane University Rectorate at the meeting dated March 27, 2024 (Meeting No: 2024/3).

Kaynakça

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
2. Amabile, T. M. (1993). What does a theory of creativity require?. Psychological Inquiry, 4(3), 179-181. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0403_2
3. Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of management journal, 39(1), 123-148.
4. Audretsch, D. (2006). Entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth. Edward Elgar Publishing.
5. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
6. Baum, J. R., Locke, E. A., and Smith, K. G. (2017). A multidimensional model of venture growth. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 292-303. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069456
7. Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
8. De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1191–1201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1191

9. De Dreu, C. K., & Gelfand, M. J. (2007). Workplace Aggression and Conflict: Constructs, Commonalities, and Challenges for Future Inquiry: Jana L. Raver and Julian Barling. In The Psychology of Conflict and Conflict Management in Organizations (pp. 227-260). Psychology Press.
10. Dick-Sagoe, C., Lee, K. Y., Boakye, A. O., Mpuangnan, K. N., Asare-Nuamah, P., & Dick-Sagoe, A. D. (2023). Facilitators of tertiary students’ entrepreneurial intentions: Insights for Lesotho’s national entrepreneurship policy. Heliyon, 9(6), Article e17511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17511
11. Ekici, E., & Turan, M. (2017). Üniversite öğrencilerinin girişimcilik eğilimi: planlanmış davranışlar teorisi ve girişimcilik eğitiminin rolü. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 26(1), 201-215.
12. Fayolle, A., Liñán, F., & Moriano, J. A. (2014). Beyond entrepreneurial intentions: values and motivations in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 10(4), 679-689. DOI 10.1007/s11365-014-0306-7
13. Goncalo, J. A., & Staw, B. M. (2006). Individualism–collectivism and group creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(1), 96-109. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.11.003
14. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2022). Multivariate data analysis (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
15. Hamidi, D. Y., Wennberg, K., & Berglund, H. (2008). Creativity in entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 304–320. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000810871691
16. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
17. Ireland, R. D., & Webb, J. W. (2007). Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating competitive advantage through streams of innovation. Business Horizons, 50(1), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2006.06.002
18. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 256-282. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393638
19. Kautonen, T., Van Gelderen, M., & Fink, M. (2015). Robustness of the theory of planned behavior in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(3), 655-674. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12056
20. Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0
21. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.003
22. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and cross–cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593-617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x
23. Liñán, F., & Fayolle, A. (2015). A systematic literature review on entrepreneurial intentions: Citation, thematic analyses, and research agenda. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(4), 907–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-015-0356-5
24. Moriano, J. A., Gorgievski, M., Laguna, M., Stephan, U., & Zarafshani, K. (2012). A cross-cultural approach to understanding entrepreneurial intention. Journal of career development, 39(2), 162-185. doi: 10.1177/0894845310384481
25. Özsungur, F., & Bekar, F. (2025). Navigating stress with creativity: The moderating role of conflict-induced creativity on job satisfaction among entrepreneurs. Work, 82(4), 1156-1171. https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815251353750,
26. Schlaegel, C., & Koenig, M. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: A meta–analytic test and integration of competing models. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 291-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12087
27. Song, M., Dyer, B., & Thieme, R. J. (2006). Conflict management and innovation performance: An integrated contingency perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing science, 34(3), 341-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070306286705
28. Toklu, İ. T. (2018). Üniversite öğrencilerinin girişimcilik niyetini ne etkiler? doğu karadeniz bölgesinde bir araştırma. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(4), 1081-1100.
29. Zampetakis, L. A., Gotsi, M., Andriopoulos, C., & Moustakis, V. (2011). Creativity and entrepreneurial intention in young people: Empirical insights from business school students. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 12(3), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.5367/ijei.2011.0037
30. Zhang, P., Wang, D. D., & Owen, C. L. (2015). A study of entrepreneurial intention of university students. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 5(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2014-0004