A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention

Muhammed ZİNCİRLİ, (Fırat Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü, Elazığ, Türkiye)
Muhammed TURHAN (Fırat Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü, Elazığ, Türkiye)
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
2 1
Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 18 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 262 - 296 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.33437/ksusbd.849927 İndeks Tarihi: 23-10-2021

A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention

Öz:
The study aims to develop a model for the relationship between the current organizational structure, along with some variables, in universities, which are an educational organization, and the perceptions of academics' individual performance and turnover intention. While the population of research is composed of all universities carrying out educational activities in Turkey, the sample of research consists of a total of 37 universities selected by quota sampling method by taking into account certain criteria. Analyses were performed on the data obtained from a total of 1242 academics working at these universities. Following the analyses, it was determined that there was a positive interaction between the enabling organizational structure and the academics' perceptions of individual performance and other positive variables, and that a positive interaction existed between the coercive organizational structure and the academics' perceptions of the turnover intention and other negative variables. Moreover, it was found that the positive relationship of the coercive organizational structure with the turnover intention and other negative variables was stronger than the negative relationship of the enabling organizational structure. Based on these results, it was concluded that it is necessary, but not sufficient, to have an enabling organizational structure in order to increase the positive feelings, attitudes and behaviours of academics.
Anahtar Kelime:

Akademisyenlerin Örgütsel Yapı, Bireysel Performans ve İşten Ayrılma Niyeti Algılarına Yönelik Bir Mode

Öz:
Bu çalışmanın amacı; bir eğitim örgütü olan üniversitelerdeki mevcut örgütyapısıyla birlikte bazı değişkenlerin akademisyenlerin bireysel performansı veişten ayrılma niyeti algıları arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik bir model geliştirmektir.Araştırmanın evrenini, Türkiye’de eğitim öğretim faaliyetlerini yürüten tümüniversiteler, örneklemini ise belirli kriterlerin dikkate alındığı kota örneklemeyöntemi ile seçilen toplamda 37 üniversite oluşturmaktadır. Bu üniversitelerdegörev yapan toplam 1242 akademisyenden elde edilen veriler üzerinde analizleryapılmıştır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda; kolaylaştırıcı örgüt yapısı ileakademisyenlerin bireysel performans ve diğer olumlu değişkenlere dair algılarıarasında pozitif yönlü bir etkileşim olduğu, engelleyici örgüt yapısı ileakademisyenlerin işten ayrılma niyeti ve diğer olumsuz değişkenlere dair algılarıarasında pozitif yönlü bir etkileşim olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca engelleyiciörgüt yapısının işten ayrılma niyeti ve diğer olumsuz değişkenler ile pozitif yönlüilişkisinin, kolaylaştırıcı örgüt yapısının negatif yönlü ilişkisinden daha güçlüolduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlara dayalı olarak, akademisyenlerin olumluduygu, tutum ve davranışlarının artırılabilmesi için örgüt yapısının kolaylaştırıcıolmasının gerekli olduğu ama yeterli olmadığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Adler, P. and Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 61-89.
  • Allen, N. J. and Meyer, J. P., (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 252-276.
  • Alparslan, A.M. (2010). The ınteraction between organizational silence climate and employee silence behaviors: a research on mehmet akif ersoy university faculty members. [Unpublished Master Thesis]. Süleymen Demirel University.
  • Altıntaş, E. (2003). Stress management. Alfa Publications.
  • Antalyalı, L. Ö. (2008). Areas of Turkey university organizational effectiveness: a research on teaching. [Unpublished Doctorate Thesis]. Süleyman Demirel University.
  • Astin, A. W., and Scherrei, R. (1984). Maximizing leadership effectiveness. Jossey-Bass.
  • Aumann, K. A. (2007). Being a stranger in a strange land: the relationship between person-organizastion fit on work related and broad cultural value dimensions and outcomes related to expatriastes' success, Columbia University, PreQuest Information and Learning Company
  • Avcı, N. (2008). Analysis of the relationship between organizational learning, business attitudes and organizational deviation in hospitality business. [Unpublished Doctorate] Dokuz Eylül University.
  • Aypay, A. (2001). The relationship between organizational structures and faculty roles at colleges and universities (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Vanderbillt University: Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Aypay, A. (2003). The relationship between State and higher education: The case of Mulkiye college in Turkey. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies. 8(2), 109-135.
  • Aypay, A. (2006). The relationship between academic activity and organizational behavior in universities. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice,12(2), 175-198.
  • Bailey, K. (1994). Methods of social research (4th Ed.). NY: The Free Press.
  • Balcı, A. (2003). Organizational socialization theory, strategy and tactics. Pegem Publishing.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise Of Control. W. H.Freeman And Company.
  • Basım, H.N., and Şeşen, H. (2009). The mediating role of job satisfaction in the relationship between perception of organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior, 17. Management and Organization Congress Proceedings, Eskişehir, 21-23 May.
  • Başol, G., and Yalçın, B. (2009). The validity and reliability study of Meyer and Allen Three Dimensional Organizational Commitment Scale in educational organizations. International Balkan Educational and Science Congress Full Text Book, 2, 497- 507
  • Bayram, N. (2010). Introduction to structural equation modeling. Ezgi Publishing House.
  • Bergquist, W. H. (1992). The four cultures of the academy. Jossey Bass.
  • Bess, J.L. (1984). College and university organization: ınsights from the behavioral sciences. NYU Press.
  • Bhuian, S. N., Menguc, B., and Borsboom, R. (2005). Stressors and job outcomes in sales: A triphasic model versus a linear-quadratic-interactive model. Journal of Business Research, 58(2), 141-150.
  • Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: the cybernetics of academic organization. Jossey Bass.
  • Blau, P. M. (1973). The organization of academic work. John Wiley and Sons.
  • Breukelen J.W.M. Van. (1988). Job turnover: a review and a model (İn Dutch). Gedrag & Organisati E 1 (6), 37-65.
  • Brinsfield, C., T. (2009). Employee Silence: Investigation of Dimensionality, Development of Measures, and Examination of Related Factors, Dissertation, Ohio State University, USA.
  • Buluç, B. (2009). The Relationship Between Bureaucratic School Structure and Leadership Styles of School Principals in Primary Schools. Education and Science, 34(152), 71-86.
  • Cerit, Y. (2013). The Relationship Between Bureaucratic Structure of School and Professional Behaviors of Classroom Teachers. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 18(4), 497-521.
  • Childers, M. E. (1981). What is political about bureaucratic-collegial decision making? Review of Education, 5(1), 25-45.
  • Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., and Turner, L. A. (2015). Research methods, design, and analysis.(Çev. A.Aypay). Anı Publishing.
  • Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.), John Wiley& Sons.
  • Cole, J. C., Rabin, A. S., Smith, T. L., and Kaufman, A. S. (2004). Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychological assessment, 16(4), 360.
  • Cüceloğlu, D. (1994). Human and behavior. basic concepts of psychology. Remzi Bookstore.
  • Çakır, Ö. (2001). Work Commitment and Affecting Factors. Seçkin Publishing.
  • Çetin, F. (2011). The role of organizational commitment, job satisfaction, personality and organizational culture in explaining organizational citizenship behaviors. [Unpublished Doctorate Thesis]. Ankara University.
  • Daft, R. L. and Marcic, D. (2009). Understandingmanagement (6th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western College.
  • Deal, T.E., and Bolman, L.G. (1987). Reframing Organizations, SanFrancisco: Jossey Bass.
  • Dean, J. W., Brandes, P. and Rahi, D. (1998). Organizational cyncism. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 341-352.
  • Donders J. A. (1997). Short form of the WISC-III for clinical use. Psychol Assess, 9: 15-20.
  • Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., and Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of management studies, 40(6), 1359-1392.
  • Ergin, C. (1992). Application of burnout and Maslach burnout inventory in doctors and nurses. Scientific Studies of the 7th National Psychology Congress, Ankara.
  • Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W K. and Hoy, A. W (2004). Collective efficacy: theoretical development, empirical evidence, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 33 (3), 3-13.
  • Güven, O. (2002). A study to examine and analyze the effects of organizational attitudes on employee behavior. [Unpublished Doctorate Thesis]. Istanbul University.
  • Hoy, W. K. (2003). An analysis of enabling and mindful school structures. some theoretical, research and practical considerations. Journal Of Educational Adrninistration, 41(1), 87-108.
  • Hoy, W. K. and Sweetland, S. R. (2001). Designing better schools: the meaning and nature of enabling school structure. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 296-321.
  • Hoy, W. and Sweetland, S. (2000). School bureaucracies that work: enabling, not coercive. Journal Of School Leadership, 10(6), 525-541.
  • Işıkhan, V. (2004). Stress and ways of coping in working life. Sandal Publications.
  • Kalağan, G. and Güzeller, C. O. (2010). Investigation of teachers' organizational cynicism levels. Pamukkale University Journal of Education Faculty, 27, 23-97.
  • Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3). 341-349.
  • Karakuş, M. (2013). Emotional intelligence and negativefeelings: a gender specific moderated mediation model, Educational Studies, 39(1), 68-82.
  • Karakuş, M. and Çankaya, İ., H. (2012). Testing a model regarding psychological violence subjected by teachers. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty 42, 225-237
  • Karasar, N. (2005). Scientific research method. Nobel Publication Distribution.
  • Karip, E. (2005). Globalization and lisbon education 2010 targets. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 42, 195 209.
  • Kılıç, T. (2013). A model proposal regarding the ındividual and collective competence process, ıts determinants and results. [Unpublished Doctorate Thesis] Balıkesir University.
  • Kirkman, B.L. and Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy Of Management Journal, 42, 58-74.
  • Kraımer, M, L. (1997). Organizational goals and values: a socialization model. Human Resource Management Review, 7 (4), 425-447.
  • Krıstof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: an ıntegrative review of lt conceptualizations, measurement, and ımplications. Personnel Psychology, March, 49(1):1-49.
  • Manion, J. (2005). From management toleadership: practical strategies for health care leaders. Jossey-Bass.
  • Maslach, C. and Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experiencedburnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99-113
  • Mathis, R. L. and Jackson, J. H. (2008). Human Resource Management (12th edition). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
  • Mcguigan, L. and Hoy, W. K. (2006). Principal leadership: creating a culture of academic optimism to improve achievement for all students. Leadership And Policy İn Schools, 5(3), 203-229.
  • Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N.J (1991). A Three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1 (1), S. 61.
  • Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997).Commitment in the workplace. theory, research andapplication. Sage Publications
  • Morrison, E.W. and Milliken, F.J. (2003). Speaking up, remaining silent: the dynamics of voice and silence in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (6), 1353-1358.
  • Mumpower DL. (1964). The fallacy of the short form. J Clin Psychol, 20: 111- 113.
  • Naus, F. (2007). Organizational cynicism on the nature, antecedents, and consequences of employee cynicism toward the employing organization. universiteit Maastricht [Unpublished Doctoral Thesis]. Maastricht.
  • Oldham, G, R. and Hackman J. R. (1981). Relationship between organizations strtucture and employee reactions: comparing alternative frameworks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 66-83.
  • Öcal, H. and Aydın, O. (2009). Relationships between collective efficacy, selfefficacy and confusion perceptions and perceptions of success and expectations in sports teams. Journal of the Faculty of Letters, 26(2).
  • Öz, M. (2015). A field study on ıncreasing the efficiency of ınternal audit in universities. [Unpublished Master Thesis]. Selçuk University.
  • Özer, N. and Dönmez, B. (2013). Reassesıng the psychometrıc propertıes of the turkısh versıon of enablıng school structure scale. Pegem Journal of Education & Instruction, 3(4), 2013, 57-68.
  • Piasentin, K. A. (2007). How do employees conceptualize fit? Development of a multi dimensional measure of subjective person-organization fit. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Calgary.
  • Raykov, T. (1997). Scale reliability, cronbach's coefficient alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 329-353.
  • Riggs, M.L. Warka, J. Babasa,B., Betancourt, R. and Hooker, S. (1994). Development and validation of self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scales for job-related applications. Educational And Psychological Measurement, 54, 793-802.
  • Rusbelt, C. A., Farrell, D. and Rogers, M. (1988). Impact of exchange variables on exit, voice, loyalty and neglect: an ıntegrative model of responses to decline job satisfaction. Academy Of Management Journal, 31(3), 599- 627.
  • Sabuncuoğlu, E. T. (2007). Examining the relationships between education, organizational commitment and the ıntention to leave. Ege Academic Perspective, 7(2), 621-636
  • Schyns, B. Torka, N. and Gössling, T. (2007). Turnover intention and preparedness for change. Career Development International, 12(7), 660- 679.
  • Smith, K.B. and Meier, K.J. (1994). Politics, bureaucrats and schools, public Administration Review, 54(4), 551-558
  • Smith GT, and McCarthy DM, Anderson KG. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychol Assess, 12, 102-111.
  • Spector, P. E. (1997). JobSatisfaction: application, assessment, causes, and consequences, Sage.
  • Sulu, S. (2010). The role of business attitudes in the relationship between organizational ınjustice and business behavior, [Unpublished Doctorate Thesis], Gebze Institute of Technology Institute of Social Sciences.
  • Sümer, N. (2000). Structural equation models: Basic concepts and sample applications. Turkish Psychology Articles, 3(6) 49-74.
  • Taşkıran, E. (2011). Interaction between leadership and organizational silence - The role of organizational justice. Beta publications.
  • Ulutaş, M., Kalkan, A. and Bozkurt, Çetinkaya, Ö. (2015). The effect of ındividual-organization fit on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Business, Power Industrial Relations and Human Resources Magazine, 17(1), 141-160
  • Vance, R.J., Brooks, S.M. and Tesluk P.E. (1995). Organizational Cynicism, cycinal cultures and organizational change efforts. Paper presented 10th Annual Conference of the Society for Industr, al and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
  • Vilela, B. B., Gonzalez, J. A. V. and Ferrin, P. F. (2008). Person- organization fit, ocb and performance appraisal: evidence from matched supervisorsalesperson data set in spanish context, Industrial Marketing Management.
  • Wasti, S. A. (2000). Meyer ve Allen üç boyutlu örgütsel bağlılık ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenirlilik analizi. 8. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildirileri, 401-410.
  • Yahyagil, Y. M. (2005). Birey ve organizasyon uyumu ve çalışanların iş tutumlarına etkisi. Öneri Journal, 6(24), 137-149.
  • Yücel, C. (1999). Bureaucracy and teachers' sense of power (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Virginia Polytechnic Lnstitute And State University-Virginia. [Umı Number: 3147768].
  • Zeynel, H. and Çarıkçı, H. (2015). The effect of professional motivation on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: an empirical study on academicians. Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 20(3), 217-248
APA ZİNCİRLİ M, TURHAN M (2021). A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. , 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
Chicago ZİNCİRLİ Muhammed,TURHAN MUHAMMED A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. (2021): 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
MLA ZİNCİRLİ Muhammed,TURHAN MUHAMMED A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. , 2021, ss.262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
AMA ZİNCİRLİ M,TURHAN M A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. . 2021; 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
Vancouver ZİNCİRLİ M,TURHAN M A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. . 2021; 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
IEEE ZİNCİRLİ M,TURHAN M "A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention." , ss.262 - 296, 2021. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
ISNAD ZİNCİRLİ, Muhammed - TURHAN, MUHAMMED. "A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention". (2021), 262-296. https://doi.org/10.33437/ksusbd.849927
APA ZİNCİRLİ M, TURHAN M (2021). A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18(1), 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
Chicago ZİNCİRLİ Muhammed,TURHAN MUHAMMED A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 18, no.1 (2021): 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
MLA ZİNCİRLİ Muhammed,TURHAN MUHAMMED A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, vol.18, no.1, 2021, ss.262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
AMA ZİNCİRLİ M,TURHAN M A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2021; 18(1): 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
Vancouver ZİNCİRLİ M,TURHAN M A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2021; 18(1): 262 - 296. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
IEEE ZİNCİRLİ M,TURHAN M "A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention." Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18, ss.262 - 296, 2021. 10.33437/ksusbd.849927
ISNAD ZİNCİRLİ, Muhammed - TURHAN, MUHAMMED. "A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure,Individual Performance and Turnover Intention". Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 18/1 (2021), 262-296. https://doi.org/10.33437/ksusbd.849927
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
17-04-2024 21:46

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları