Bilişim Sektörü ve Yakın Alanlardaki Çalışanların; Hibrit, Uzaktan ve Yerinde Çalışma Modelleriyle İlgili Görüşlerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2024, , 123 - 139, 30.06.2024

Zeki Çıplak , Seyit Gazi Yıldız , Buket Doğan

https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1437637

Abstract

COVID-19 pandemisi ile özellikle bilişim teknolojileri alanında hibrit veya uzaktan çalışma modelleri birçok şirket tarafından benimsenmiştir. Öte yandan yerinde çalışma modeli de birçok şirket tarafından değerli bir model olarak kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışma modellerinin, göz ardı edilemez faydaları olduğu gibi, birçok açıdan olumsuz yönleri de bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, farklı çalışma modellerinin, şirket çalışanları ve yapılan işler üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi adına, çevrim içi katılım sağlanarak cevaplanacak şekilde bir anket hazırlanmıştır. 2022 yılının Kasım ve Aralık ayları ile 2023 yılının Ocak ayında gerçekleşen çevrim içi ankete, bilişim alanındaki çeşitli mesleklerden toplam 53 kullanıcı katılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları, önemli bir katılımcı kesiminin, hibrit veya uzaktan çalışma yöntemlerini tercih ettiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Teknolojik altyapı ve iletişimdeki eksikliklerin, söz konusu çalışma yöntemlerinin verimliliğini olumsuz etkilediği ve bu sorunların üstesinden gelinmesi için önlemler alınması gerektiği anlaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Hibrit Çalışma Modeli, Uzaktan Çalışma Modeli, Yerinde Çalışma Modeli

Evaluation of the Opinions of Employees in the Informatics Sector and Related Fields on Hybrid, Remote and On-site Working Models

Abstract

With the COVID-19 pandemic, hybrid or remote working models have been adopted by many companies, especially in the field of information technologies. On the other hand, on-site working model is also used by many companies as a valuable model. While these working models have benefits that cannot be ignored, they also have negative aspects in many respects. In this study, in order to examine the impact of different working models on company employees and the work performed, a survey was prepared to be answered by online participation. A total of 53 users from various professions in the field of IT and many other fields in contact with IT participated in the online survey, which took place in November and December 2022 and January 2023. The survey results reveal that a significant number of respondents prefer hybrid or remote working methods. It is understood that deficiencies in technological infrastructure and communication have a negative impact on the efficiency of these working methods and that measures need to be taken to overcome these problems.

Keywords

Hybrid Working Model, Remote Working Model, On Site Working Model

References

• Aczel, B., Kovacs, M., van der Lippe, T. & Szaszi, B. (2021). Researchers working from home: Benefits and challenges. Plus One, 16(3), e0249127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249127
• Agazzi, A. E. (2020). Study of the usability of LinkedIn: A social media platform meant to connect employers and employees. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.03931.
• Alfanza, M. T. (2021). Telecommuting intensity in the context of COVID-19 Pandemic: Job performance and work-life balance. Economics and Business, 35(1), 107-116. https://doi.org/doi:10.2478/eb-2021-0007
• Apatsidis, I., Georgiou, K., Mittas, N., & Angelis, L. (2021). A study of remote and on-site ICT labor market demand using job offers from Stack Overflow. 2021 47th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA),
• Armstrong, R. L. (1987). The midpoint on a five-point Likert-type scale. Perceptual and motor skills, 64(2), 359-362.
• Bloom, N. (2021). Hybrid is the future of work. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR): Stanford, CA, USA.
• Bratianu, C. (2022). Knowmads as possible mutants of knowledge workers in the brave post-COVID World. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(3), 122-137.
• Çobanoğlu, T., & Akçay, M. (2022). Kurumsal haberleşme sistemi. Eskişehir Türk Dünyası Uygulama ve Araştırma Merkezi Bilişim Dergisi, 3(1), 11-17.
• Erickson, C. L., & Norlander, P. (2022). How the past of outsourcing and offshoring is the future of post‐pandemic remote work: A typology, a model and a review. Industrial Relations Journal, 53(1), 71-89.
• Evans, A. M., Meyers, M. C., De Calseyde, P. P. F. M. V., & Stavrova, O. (2022). Extroversion and conscientiousness predict deteriorating job outcomes during the COVID-19 transition to enforced remote work. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(3), 781-791. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211039092
• Farooq, R., & Sultana, A. (2022). The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on work from home and employee productivity. Measuring Business Excellence, 26(3), 308-325.
• Feng, Z., & Savani, K. (2020). Covid-19 created a gender gap in perceived work productivity and job satisfaction: Implications for dual-career parents working from home. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 38(7-8), 719-736.
• Fried, J., & Hansson, D. H. (2013). Remote: Office not required. Currency.
• Gratton, L. (2022). Redesigning work: How to transform your organization and make hybrid work for everyone. MIT Press.
• Güçlü, N., & Sotırofskı, K. (2006). Bilgi Yönetimi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(4), 351-373.
• Igomu, M. D. (2023). Hybrid work models and employee productivity in Hewlett-Packard (HP) Regional Office Abuja, Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Management Sciences Vol, 24(2b).
• Karaçınar, A., & Filizöz, B. (2024). Uzaktan çalışma modelinin (hibrit model) çalışan performansı üzerine etkisi. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 6(4), 1073-1089. https://doi.org/10.33712/mana.1394601
• Konovalova, V., Petrenko, B., & Aghgashyan, R. (2022). Choosing a hybrid work model and new challenges. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference “Smart Nations: Global Trends In The Digital Economy”.
• Lenka, R. M. (2021). Unique hybrid work model-The future of remote work. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(7), 2687-2697.
• Maritan, F. B., Soliani, R. D., Drumond, T. D. R., Satrapa, H. F. D. M., de Souza Oliveira, P. R., de Lima Junior, F. B., da Silva Nora, L. A. R., & de Oliveira, G. C. (2024). Cost analysis in the transition of projects to remote work during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(1), e04245-e04245.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. London: Sage Publication
• Neeley, T. (2021). Remote work revolution: Succeeding from anywhere. Harper Business New York.
• Pokojski, Z., Kister, A., & Lipowski, M. (2022). Remote work efficiency from the employers’ perspective-What’s next? Sustainability, 14(7), 4220. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4220
• Polat, Y. (2023). Covid-19 salgınının çalışma biçimine etkisi: Hibrit çalışma. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 23(2), 163-172. https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.1283133
• Razzetti, G. (2022). Remote, not distant: Design a company culture that will help you thrive in a hybrid workplace. Liberationist Press.
• Sachs, A., & Watson, J. (1969). Four years' experience at a specialised burns centre: The McIndoe Burns Centre 1965-68. The Lancet, 293(7597), 718-721.
• Shafi, M. A., Ng, S. L., Zulkipli, H., Hasim, M. A., & Yusoff, M. Z. (2023). The effect of work environment on employee productivity: A case study of manufacturing company. Journal of International Business, Economics and Entrepreneurship; 8(1). https://doi.org/10.24191/jibe.v8i1.24025.
• Tan, A., & Shahrill, M. (2015). Discovery year management: the four years experience. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2, 165-169.
• Vladzymyrskyy, A. V. (2005). Four years' experience of teleconsultations in daily clinical practice. Journal of Telemedicine & Telecare, 11(6).
• Wontorczyk, A., & Rożnowski, B. (2022). Remote, hybrid, and on-site work during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the consequences for stress and work engagement. International Journal of Environmental Research And Public Health, 19(4), 2400.
• Zhang, S., Moeckel, R., Moreno, A., Shuai, B., & Gao, J. (2020). A work-life conflict perspective on telework. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 141, 51-68.