ÖRGÜTSEL YAŞ VE EYLEMSİZLİK ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN ÖRGÜTSEL EKOLOJİ, YENİ KURUMSALCILIK, KAYNAK BAĞIMLILIĞI VE SOSYAL AĞ YAKLAŞIMLARIYLA DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Author :  

Year-Number: 2018-19
Language : null
Konu :
Number of pages: 2460-2474
Mendeley EndNote Alıntı Yap

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, yaşlı örgütlerin, yüksek eylemsizlik düzeylerine karşın ölüm oranlarının neden yüksek olmadığını örgütsel ekoloji, yeni kurumsal kuram, sosyal ağ ve kaynak bağımlılığı kuramları çerçevesinde tartışmaktır. Bu çerçevede Ankara ilinde bulunan yirmi yedi ayrı işletmenin yöneticileriyle yarı yapılandırılmış mülakatlar gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu işletmelerden yirmi altı tanesi yirmi yıldan uzun bir süredir faaliyetlerine devam etmektedir. Yaşlılık öncesi durumun anlaşılabilmesi için ise yaşlılığa geçiş aşamasında bulunan, varlığını on beş yıldır sürdüren bir işletmenin yöneticisiyle yarı yapılandırılmış mülakat yapılmıştır. Mülakatlar, yöneticilerin iş yerlerinde bulunan ofislerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma örneklemi, amaçlı örnekleme türlerinden tipik durum örneklemesi ile seçilmiştir. Elde edilen veriler içerik analizi yöntemiyle değerlendirilmiştir. Veri analizi sonucunda on ayrı kod ve üç ayrı tema oluşturulmuştur. Belirlenen kodların beş tanesinin sosyal ağ kuramıyla, üç tanesinin yeni kurumsal kuramla ve iki tanesinin de kaynak bağımlılığı kuramıyla ilişkili olduğu görülmüştür. Araştırma bulguları yaşlı örgütlerin uzun yıllar içerisinde elde ettikleri sosyal sermaye birikimleriyle eylemsizlik sorunlarını aştığını göstermektedir.

Keywords

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to discuss why elderly organizations are not high mortality rates despite their high levels of inertia within the framework of organizational ecology, new institutionalism, social network, and resource dependence theories. In this framework, semi-structured interviews were conducted with the managers of twenty-seven separate companies located in Ankara province to resolve the research question. Twenty-six of these enterprises have been proceeding their activities for more than twenty years. To understand the pre-aging situation, a semi-structured interview was conducted with the manager of a company that has been in the transition phase to elderliness and has been in existence for fifteen years. Interviews were held in the central business offices of managers. The research sample was selected by typical case sampling from the purposeful sampling types. The obtained data were evaluated by content analysis method. Ten distinct codes and three separate themes were created as a result of the data analysis. It was found that five of the pre-determined codes were related to social network theory, three were related to new institutional theory, and two were related to resource dependency theory. The findings of the research show that older organizations have overcome problems of inertia through the accumulation of social capital that they have achieved over many years.

Keywords


  • Aldrich, H. E. & Pfeffer, J. (1976). “Environments of Organizations”, Annual Reviews of Sociology, 2:

  • Aldrich, H. E. & Pfeffer, J. (1976). “Environments of Organizations”, Annual Reviews of Sociology, 2: 79-105.

  • Amburgey, T. L. & Rao, H. (1996). “Organizational Ecology: Past, Present and Future Directions. Academy of Management Journal”, 39(5): 1265-1286.

  • Amiripour, P., Dossey, J. A. & Shahvarani, A. (2017). “Impact of Organizational Inertia and DynamicCapabilities on Educational Performance of the Charitable Societies and its Impact on MathematicalPerformance of Elementary At-Risk Students”, Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6(1): 37-49.

  • ATO. Ankara Ticaret Odası İnternet Sitesi. “1923-2005 Cumhuriyetten Günümüze Şirket İstatistikleri” http://www.atonet.org.tr

  • Audia, P. G., Freeman, J. H. & Reynolds, P. D. (2006). “Organizational Foundings in Community Context:Instruments Manufacturers and Their Interrelationship with Other Organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 51: 381-419.

  • Barley, S. R., & Tolbert, P. S. (1997). “Institutionalization and Structuration: Studying the Links Between Action and Institution”, Organization Studies, 18(1): 93-117.

  • Barnett, W. P. & Carroll, G. R. (1995). “Modeling Internal Organizational Change”, Annual Review of Sociology, 21: 217-236.

  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). “The Forms of Capital”. (Ed. Richard, Nice), Handbook of Theory of Research for The Sociology of Education, ss. 47-58, New York. Greewood Press.

  • Brittain, J. & Wholey, D. R. (1989). “Assessing Organizational Ecology as Sociological Theory: Comment on Young”, American Journal of Sociology, 95(2): 439-444.

  • Burt, R. S. (2004). “Structural Holes and Good Ideas”, The American Journal of Sociology, 110(2): 349-399.Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Pegem Akademi, Ankara.

  • Campbell, D. T. (1965). “Variation and Selective Retention in Socio Cultural Evolution”. (Ed. HerbertBarringer, George Blanksten ve Raymond Mack), Social Change in Developing Areas: A Reinterpretation of Evolutionary Theory, ss. 19-49.Cambridge, Mass: Schenkman.

  • Carroll, G. R. (1984). “Organizational Ecology”, Annual Review of Sociology, 10: 71-93.

  • Carroll, G. R. & Hannan, M. T. (1989). “Density Dependence in the Evolution of Populations of Newspaper Organizations”, American Sociological Review, 54(4): 524-541.

  • Carroll, G. R. & Hannan, M. T. (2000). “Why Corporate Demography Matters: Policy Implications of Organizational Diversity”, California Management Review, 42(3): 148-163.

  • Casciaro, T. & Piskorski, M. J. (2005). “Power Imbalance, Mutual Dependence, and Constraint Absorption: A Closer Look at Resource Dependence Theory”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 167-199.

  • Cheung, S. N. S. (1998). “The Transaction Costs Paradigm: 1998 Presidential Address Western Economic Association”, Economic Inquiry, 36(4): 514-521.

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). “Social Capital in Creation of Human Capital”, The American Journal of Sociology, 94: 95-120.

  • Davis, G. F. & Cobb, A. J. (2009). “Resource Dependence Theory: Past and Future”, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 28: 2-31.

  • Davis, G. F & Powell, W. W. (1992). “Organization-Environment Relations”. (Ed. Marvin D. Dunnette,Leaetta M. Hough), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ss. 316-375, Palo Alto, Consulting Psychologist Press.

  • Deephouse, D. L. (1996). “Does Isomorphism Legitimate”, Academy of Management Journal, 39(4): 1024- 1039.

  • Deephouse, D. L. & Carter, S. M. (2005). “An Exemination of Differences Between Organizational Legitimacy and Organizational Reputation”, Journal of Management Studies, 42(2): 329-360.

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. (Ed. W. W. Powell, P. J. DiMaggio), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, ss. 1-38. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields”, American Sociological Review, 48(2): 147-160.

  • Emerson, R. M. (1962). “Power Dependence Relations”, American Sociological Review, 27(1): 31-41.

  • Fligstein, N. (1996). “Markets as Politics: A Political-Cultural Approach to Market Institutions”, American Sociological Review, 61(4): 656-673

  • Freeman, J., Carroll, G. R. & Hannan, M. T. (1983). “The Liability of Newness: Age Dependence in Organizational Death Rates”, American Sociological Review, 48(5): 692-710.

  • Freeman, J. & Hannan M. T. (1983). “Niche Width and the Dynamics of Organizational Populations”, American Journal of Sociology, 88(6): 1116-1145.

  • Friedland, R., & Alfrod, R. R. (1991). “Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practives, and InstitutionalContradictions”, (Ed. W. W. Powell, P. J. DiMaggio), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, ss. 232-262. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  • Fussel, H., Rexrode, J. H., Kennan, W. R. & Hazleton, V. (2006). “The Relationship Between Social Capital,Transaction Costs, and Organizational Outcomes: A Case Study”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 11(2): 148-161.

  • Gargiulo, M. & Benassi, M. (2000). “Trapped in Your Own Net? Network Cohesion, Structural Holes and the Adaptation of Social Capital”, Organization Science, 11(2): 183-196.

  • Granovetter, M. (1973). “The Strenght of Weak Ties”, The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6): 1360- 1380.

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness”, The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3): 481-510.

  • Granovetter, M. (1992). “Economic Institutions as Social Constructions: A Framework for Analysis”, Acta Sociologica, 35: 3-11.

  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). “Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing Together the old and the New Institutionalism”, Academy of Management Review, 21(4): 1022-1054.

  • Godkin, L. & Allcorn, S. (2008). “Overcoming Organizational Inertia: A Tripartite Model for Achieving Strategic Organizational Change”, Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 8(1): 82.

  • Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J. (1977). “The Population Ecology of Organizations”, American Journal of Sociology, 82(5): 926-964.

  • Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J. (1984). “Structural Inertia and Organizational Change”, American Sociological Review, 49(2): 149-164.

  • Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J. (1988). “The Ecology of Organizational Mortality: American Labor Unions, 1836-1985”, Amercan Journal of Sociology, 94(1): 25-52.

  • Hannan, M. T., Pólos, L., & Carroll, G. (2002). Structural Inertia and Organizational Change Revisited: Architecture, Culture and Cascading Change. I. Research Paper 1732.

  • Hannan, M. T., Pólos, L., & Carroll, G. R. (2002). Structural Inertia and Organizational Change Revisited II: Complexity, Opacity, and Change. Research Paper, 1733.

  • Hannan, M. T., Laszlo, P., & Carroll, G. R. (2002). Structural Inertia and Organizational Change Revisited III: The Evolution of Organizational Inertia. Research Paper 1734.

  • Heide, J. B. (1994). “Interorganizational Governance in Marketing Channels”, Journal of Marketing, 58: 71-Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C. & Collins, B. J. (2009). “Resource Dependence Theory: A Review”, Journal of Management, 35(6): 1404-1427.

  • Huang, H. C., Lai, M. C., Lin, L. H., & Chen, C. T. (2013). “Overcoming Organizational Inertia toStrengthen Business Model Innovation: An Open Innovation Perspective”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(6): 977-1002.

  • Iacovou, C. L. (1994). “Interorganizational Systems as an Uncertainty Reduction Strategy: A ResourceDependence Perspective”, 22nd Anual Conference of Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, Halifax, June

  • Jepperson, R. L. (1991). “Institutions, Institutional Effects, and Institutionalism”, (Ed. W. W. Powell, P. J.DiMaggio), The New institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, ss. 143-163. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  • Kelly, D., & Amburgey, T. L. (1991). “Organizational Inertia and Momentum: A Dynamic Model of Strategic Change”, Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 591-612.

  • Leblebici, D. N. (2005). “Küresel Değişim Baskısına Karşı Türk Bürokrasisindeki Yapısal UyumÇabalarının Yapısal Atalet Kavramı Açısından Değerlendirilmesi”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 6(1), 1-14.

  • Le Mens, G., Hannan, M. T., & Pólos, L. (2015). “Age-Related Structural Inertia: A Distance-Based Approach. Organization Science”, 26(3), 756-773.

  • Lv, Z., Liu, Q., & Wang, P. (2012). “Literatures Review on Transaction Costs Measurement Advances”, Asian Social Science, 8(12): 1911-2025.

  • March, J. G. (1981). “Footnotes to Organizational Change”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4): 563-Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony”, The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2): 340-363.

  • Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage”, Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242-266.

  • Oliver, C. (1991). “Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes”, Academy of Management Review, 16(1):Ouchi, W. G. (1980). “Markets, Bureaucracies and Clans”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 129-141.

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, S. R. (1978). “An External Perspective on Organizations”, The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective, ss. 1-61. Harper & Row, Publishers, New York.

  • Rao, H., Davis, G. F. & Ward, A. (2000). “Embeddedness, Social Identity and Mobility; Why Firms Leavethe NASDAQ and Join the New York Stock Exchange”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 268-292.

  • Salancik, G. R. & Pfeffer, J. (1977). “Who Gets Power and How They Hold on to It: A Strategic Contingency Model of Power”, Organizational Dynamics, 5(3): 3-21.

  • Scott, R. W. (1987). “The Adolescence of Institutional Theory”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(4):Simon, H. A. (1955). “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1):Singh, P. J., Power, D. & Chuong, S. C. (2011). “A Resource Dependence Theory Perspective of ISO 9000 in Managing Organizational Environment”, Journal of Operations Management, 29: 49-64.

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). “Social Structure and Organizations”, Hand Book of Organizations, ss. 142-193. Chicago: Rand McNally.

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). “Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches”, The Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571-610.

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action, Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. Mc Graw- Hill Book Company.

  • Tolbert, P. S. & Zucker, L. G. (1983). “Institutional Sources of Change in the Formal Structure ofOrganizations: The Diffusion of Civil Service Reform, 1880-1935”, Administrative Science of Quarterly, 28(1): 22-39.

  • Ulrich, D. & Barney, J. B. (1984). “Perspectives in Organizations: Resource Dependence, Efficiency, and Population”, The Academy of Management Review, 9(3): 471-481.

  • Uzzi, B. (1999). “Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Financing”, American Sociological Review, 64(4): 481-505.

  • Walker, G., Kogut, B. & Shan. W. (1997). Social Capital, Structural Holes and the Formation of an Industry Network. Organization Science, 8(2): 109-125.

  • Williamson, O. E. (1981). The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach. “The American Journal of Sociology”, 87(3): 548-577.

  • Witteloostuijn, A. (1998). “Bridging Behavioral and Economic Theories of Decline: Organizational Inertia, Strategic Competition, and Chronic Failure”, Management Science, 44(4), 501-519.

  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.

  • Zucker, L. G. (1987). “Institutional Theories of Organization”, Annual Review of Sociology, 13: 443- 464.

  • Zucker, L. G. (1983). Organizations as Institutions, (Ed. S. B. Bacharach), Research in the Sociology of Organizations: ss. 1-47. Greenwich CT: Jai Press.

  • Zucker, L. G. (1977). “The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence”, American Sociological Review, 42(5): 726-743.

                                                                                                                                                                                                        
  • Article Statistics