SOSYAL AĞ’DA GÜÇLÜ BAĞLAR GELİŞTİRME VE İLİŞKİSEL PSİKOLOJİK SÖZLEŞME İLİŞKİSİ AKADEMİSYENLER ÜZERİNE BİR ÇALIŞMA

Yıl 2018, , 1 - 23, 13.06.2018

Yavuz Korkmazyürek

https://doi.org/10.29131/uiibd.380035

Öz

Çalışmanın
amacı, sosyal ağlar içinde bireyin cinsiyet farklılığına göre güçlü bağlar
geliştirme potansiyeli ve bu potansiyelin bireylerin ilişkisel psikolojik
sözleşmeleri ile olan ilişkisini araştırmaktır. Çalışmanın örneklemi,
üniversitede 8 akademisyenin oluşturduğu bir bölümdür. Yöntem açısından karışık
metot (nicel ve nitel) uygulanan bu çalışmada veriler anket ve mülakat yoluyla
toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde SPSS 23 programı, sosyal ağda güçlü bağlar
ve ilişkisel psikolojik sözleşme ilişkini araştırmak için kullanılmış bunun
yanında QDA Miner programında frekans ve içerik analizi yapılmış ve son olarak
yakın zamanlarda nitel çalışmalarda sıklıkla kullanılan NodeXL programından,
sosyal ağ ilişkilerini görselleştirmek ve ağ yoğunluğunu matematiksel olarak
ortaya koymak için yararlanılmıştır. Ayrıca mülakat soruları ile
katılımcıların, değişkenlerin alt boyutlarının birbirleri ile olan ilişkilerine
yönelik düşünceleri keşfedilmeye çalışılmış ve yapılan kodlama sonucu “Grupta
Sinerji” olarak adlandırılan yeni bir tema açığa çıkarılmıştır. Ayrıca, Sosyal
Ağ’da Güçlü Bağlar ile İlişkisel Psikolojik Sözleşmenin cinsiyete göre anlamlı
farklılık gösterdiği bulunmuş fakat araştırma hipotezi doğrulanamamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cinsiyet, Sosyal ağ, Psikolojik sözleşme

Kaynakça

• Aselage, J., ve Eisenberger, R. (2003). “Perceived organizational support and psychological contracts. A Theoretical Integration”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 491–509.
• Argyris, C.P. (1960). Understanding organizational behavior, Homewood, IL. Dorsey Press.
• Burrell, G., ve Morgan, G (1979). Sociology paradigms and organizational analysis. Heineman Educational Books Ltd: London.
• Burt, R.S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. In R.I. Sutton & B.M. Staw (Eds), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 22. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 2000, pp. 345–423.
• Catalyst (2012). Why Diversity Matters. Catalyst, USA.
• Cheetham, G., ve Chivers, G. (2005). Professions, Competence and Informal Learning, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
• Coyle-Shapiro, J. ve Kessler, I. (2000). “Mutuality, stability and psychological contract breach. A longitudinal study”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Toronto, Canada, 04-09. Cross., R., Nohria, N ve Parker, A, (2002). Six myths about informal networks. MIT Sloan Management Review 2002, 67-75. Dabos, G.E. ve Rousseau, D.M. (2004). Mutuality and reciprocity in the psychological contracts of employees and employers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2004, 89, 52–72.
• Davis, L, E. ve Trist, E, L. (1972). Improving the quality of work life: Experience of the socio- technical approach. Background paper commissioned by the U. S. Department of Health, Education. and Welfare for the Work in America Project.
• De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., ve Batagelj, V. (2007). Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. New York: Cambridge University Press. Eraut, M. (2007). Learning from Other People in the Workplace, Oxford Review of Education. 33(4), 403-422.
• Freese, C. ve chalk, R. (1996). “Implications of differences in psychological contracts for HRM”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Pscyhology, 5 (4), 501-509.
• Gargiulo, M ve Benassi, M. (2000). “Traped in your own network. Cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital”, Organization Science, 11 (2): 183-196.
• Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A Network Theory Revisited. Sociological Theory, 201-233.
• Gulati, R. ve Gargulio, M. (1999). “Where do interorganizational networks come from?”. The American Journal of Sociology, 104 (5): 1439-1493.
• Gürbüz, S. ve Şahin F. (2015). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri (3.baskı). Ankara: Seçkin yayıncılık.
• Hackman J, R. ve Oldham G, R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (16): 250-279.
• Hansen, M.T. (1999). The search transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44 (1): 82-112.
• Harlan, Anne, ve Weiss, C.L. (1982). "Sex differences in factors affecting managerial career advancement." In P. A.Wallace (ed.). Women in the Workplace: 59-100. Boston: Auburn House.
• Hill, L.A. (2004). New manager development for the 21st Century, The Academy of Management Executive, 18(3), 121-126 Ho, V.T., Rousseau, D.M ve Levesque, L.L. (2006). Social networks and the psychological contract. Human Relations, Volume 59(4): 459–481.
• Ho, V.T. (2005). Social influence on evaluations of psychological contract fulfillment. Academy of Management Review, 1, 113–128.
• Ho, V.T. ve Levesque, L.L. (2005). With a little help from my friends (and substitutes): Social referents and influence in psychological contract fulfillment. Organization Science. 16, 275–89.
• Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly,37: 422–447.
• Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
• Krackhardt, D. (1990). "Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations." Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 342-369.
• Krackhardt, D ve Stern, R.N. (1988) Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 1988, 51, 123–40.
• Kotter, J. P. (1982). The general managers. New York: Free Press.
• Labovitz, S ve Fry L. (1975). "Inequities in the organizational experiences of women and men: Resources,vested interests, and discrimination," Social Forces,54: 365-381.
• Levin, Daniel Z ve Cross, Rob. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50 (11): 1477-1490.
• Lin, N.(1982). "Social resources and instrumental action." In P. V. Marsden and N. Lin. Social structure and network analysis: 131-145. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Lincoln, J.R ve Miller, J. (1979). Work and friendship ties in organizations: A comparative analysis of relational networks. Administrative Science Quarterly. 24: 181–99.
• Labovitz, S ve Fry L. (1975). "Inequities in the organizational experiences of women and men: Resources,vested interests, and discrimination, social forces. 54, 365-381.
• Marsick, V.J ve Watkins, K.E. (1997). Lessons from informal and incidental learning. Management learning: Integrating perspectives in theory and practice. Sage, London. 295-311.
• Miller, J. (1975). "Isolation in organizations: Alienation from authority, control and expressive relations," Administrative Science Quarterly, 20: 260-271.
• Monge, R.P ve Contractor, S.N. (2001). The new handbook of organizational communication:advances in theory, research and methods, Sage Pub.
• Oh, H., Chung, M.H ve Labianca, G. (2004).“Group social capital and group effectiveness”, Academy of Management Journal, 47(68), 860–875.
• O'Leary, Virginia, E ve Jeannette R.I. (1992). "Cracking the glass ceiling: Overcoming isolation and alienation," In U, Sekaran and F, Leong (eds,), Womanpower: Managing in times of demographic turbulence: 7-30, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Parkhe, A., Wasserman, S. ve Ralston, A.D. (2006). “New frontiers in network development”, Academy of Management Review, 31 (3): 560-568.
• Pfeffer, J ve Langton, N. (1993). The effect of wage dispersionon satisfaction, productivity, and working collaboratively:Evidence from college and university faculty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 382–407.
• Purvis, L.J. ve Cropley, M. (2003). “The psychological contracts of national health service nurses”, Journal of Nursing Management. 11: 107–120.
• Ragins, B, R ve Sundstrom E (1989). "Gender and power in organizations: A longitudinal perspective." Psychological Bulletin, 105: 51-88. Rangan, S. (2000). The problem of search and deliberation in economic action: When social networks really matter. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 813-828.
• Rice, R.E. ve Aydin, C. (1991). Attitudes toward new organizational technology: Network proximity as a mechanism for social information processing. Administrative Science Quarterly. 36: 219–44.
• Robinson, S.L. (1996).Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly. 41: 574–99. Robinson, S.L. ve Rousseau, D.M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 15: 245–59.
• Robinson, S.L., Kraatz, M.S ve Rousseau, D.M. (1994). Changing obligations and the psychological contract: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal. 37: 137–52.
• Rousseau, D.M. (1989). “Psychological and implied contracts in organizations”. Employee Rights and Responsibilities Journal. 2: 121-139.
• Rousseau, D.M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Rousseau, D.M. ve Tıjoriwala, S.A. (1998). “Assessing psychological contracts. Issues, alternatives and measures”, Journal of Organizational Behavior. 19: 679-695.
• Seibert, S.E., Kraimer, M.L. ve Liden, R.C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (2): 219-237.
• Selznick, P. (1949). Tva and the grass roots: A study in the sociology of formal organization. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles.
• Sozen, C., Basim, N ve Hazir K. (2009). Social network analysis in organizational studies. International Journal of Business in Management. 1 (1) : 1309-8047.
• Thomas, H.D. ve Anderson, N. (1998). “Changes in newcomers' psychological contracts during organizational socialization, A study of recruits entering the British Army,” Journal of Organizational Behavior. 19: 745-767.
• Topçu, M, K. ve Basım, N. (2015). Kobi’lerde çalışanların kişilik özelliklerinin örgütsel özdeşleşme ve işten ayrılma niyeti üzerine etkisinde psikolojik sözleşme algısının rolü. Turkish Studies. 10 (10): 861-886.
• Tichy, N. M ve Fombrun, C. (1979). Network analysis in organizational settings. Social Science Research. 19: 113-131.
• Tüzün, İ.K ve Çağlar, İ. (2008). Örgütsel özdeşleşme kavramı ve iletişim etkinliği ilişkisi. Journal of Yasar University. 3(9): 1011-1027 Uzzi, B ve Lanchester, R. (2004). Embeddedness and price formation in the corporate law Market. American Sociological Review, 69: 319-344.
• Van Duijn, M. A ve Vermunt, J. K. (2006). What is special about social network analysis methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 2- 6.