Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

The Moderating Role of International Activity on The Effect of Innovation and Risk Taking Tendency on The Firm Performance

Year 2020, Issue: 56, 37 - 64, 30.08.2020

Ferda Üstün , Ayşe İpek Koca Ballı

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.685403
Cited By: 1

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine whether international activity plays a moderating role in the relationship between the innovation and risk taking tendencies of firms and firm performance. The study was carried out on the companies in the list created by Istanbul Chamber of Industry (ISO): “Turkey’s secand 500 Industrial Enterprises 2016”. Within the scope of the research, 849 questionnaires obtained from companies were used. According to the results of the research, innovation and risk taking tendencies of enterprises have a positive effect on firm performance. However, it is seen that international activitieshas a moderating role on the effect of firms’ innovation and risk taking tendencies on the firm performance.

Keywords

Innovation, Risk Taking Firm Performance

References

  • Acedo, F. J., & Jones, M. V. (2007). Speed of internationalization and entrepreneurial cognition: Insights and a comparison between international new ventures, exporters and domestic firms. Journal of world Business, 42(3), 236-252.
  • Agmon, T., & Lessard, D. R. (1977). Investor recognition of corporate international diversification. The Journal of Finance, 32(4), 1049-1055.
  • Akalın, S. (1970). Yönetim ekonomisi. İzmir: Ege Üniv. İ.T.İ.A. Yayını.
  • Alpkan, L., Ergün, E., Bulut, Ç. ve Yılmaz, C. (2005). Şirket girişimciliğinin şirket performansına etkileri, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 6(2), 175-189.
  • Alsoy, M.(1998). Uluslararasılaşmayı Hedefleyen Firmaların İhracatı Geliştirme Süreci. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, D.E.Ü. İzmir.
  • Altuntaş, G., & Dömez, D. (2010). Girişimcilik yönelimi ve örgütsel performans ilişkisi: Çanakkale bölgesinde faaliyet gösteren otel işletmelerinde bir araştırma. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 39(1), 50-74.
  • Anderson, E., & Gatington, H. (1986). On the internationalization of firms: a critical analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3), 1-26.
  • Antoncic, B. (2007). Intrapreneurship: A comparative structural equation modeling study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(3), 309-325.
  • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R.D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and crosscultural validation, Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 495-527.
  • Araújo, J. F. (2009). The impact of internationalization on firm’s performance: a qualitative study of Portuguese SMEs (Doctoral dissertation). ISCTE Business School, Instituto Superior de Ciências do Trabalho e da Empresa, Portugal .
  • Azar, G. & Drogendijk, R. (2014). Psychic distance, innovation, and firm performance. Management International Review. 54(5), 581-613.
  • Banks, E. (2012). Risk culture: A practical guide to building and strengthening the fabric of risk management. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
  • Bausch, A., & Krist, M. (2007). The effect of context-related moderators on the internationalization-performance relationship: Evidence from meta-analysis. Management International Review, 47(3), 319-347.
  • Berry, H., Guillén, M. F., & Zhou, N. (2010). An institutional approach to cross-national distance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1460-1480.
  • Bilkey, W. J. ve Tesar, G. (1977). “The export behavior of smaller-sized Wisconsin manufacturing firms”. Journal of international business studies, 8(1), 93-98.
  • Bilton, C., & Cummings, S. (2009). Creative strategy: From innovation to sustainable advantage. NewJersey: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Brooks, D.W. (2010). Creating a risk management, in: J Fraser and B.J. Simkins (Eds) Enterprise risk management, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 87-96.
  • Buckley, P. J., Chen, L., Clegg, L. J., & Voss, H. (2016). Experience and FDI risk-taking: A microfoundational reconceptualization. Journal of International Management, 22(2), 131-146.
  • Buhner, C. H. (1987). Assessing international diversification of West German Corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 8, 25–37.
  • Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. S. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 515–524.
  • Carlsson, B. (2006). Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 35(1), 56–67.
  • Ceylan, C. (2001). Örgütler için esneklik performans modeli oluşturulması ve örgütlerin esneklik analizi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi. İstanbul.
  • Chen, S., & Tan, H. (2012). Region effects in the internationalization–performance relationship in Chinese firms. Journal of world business, 47(1), 73-80.
  • Cheng, X. (2009). The impacts of internationalization on performance of New Zealand firms. Doctoral dissertation, Auckland University of Technology, School of Business, Auckland.
  • Contractor, F., Kundu, S. & Hsu, C. (2003). A three-stage theory of international expansion: the link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 48-60.
  • Cortez, A. (2011). Winning at Risk: Strategies to go beyond basel. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Coviello, N. E. ve McAuley, A. (1999). Internationalisation and the smaller firm: A review of contemporary empirical research. Management International Review. 39(3), 223–256.
  • Czinkota, M. R. (1982). Export development strategies: US promotion policy. Praeger. Czinkota, M. R., Grossman, D. A., Javalgi, R. R. G., & Nugent, N. (2009). Foreign market entry mode of service firms: The case of US MBA programs. Journal of World Business, 44(3), 274-286.
  • Çavuşgil, S. T. (1980). On The Intcrnationalisation Proccss of Firais, European Research, Vol. 8, No. 6, November, 273-281.
  • Damanpour, F. (1991). The adoption of technological, administrative, and ancillary innovations: Impact of organizational factors. Journal of Management, 13(4), 675-688.
  • Denison, D. R. & Mishra, A. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization Science, 6(2), 204-223.
  • Deshpandé, R., Farley, J. U. & Webster, F. E. (1993). Corporate culture, customer orientation, and innovativeness in japanese firms: A quadrad analysis. Journal of Marketing. 57(1), 23-37.
  • Edwards, K. L., & Gordon, T. J. (1984). Characterization of innovations introduced on the US market in 1982. Futures Group; Reproduced by Ntis.
  • Elango, B. (2003). The effects of host country factors on the internationalization of the US reinsurance industry. Journal of Insurance Issues, 26(2), 93-113.
  • Eleren, A., & Soba, M. (2009). İşletmelerde çok boyutlu performans ölçümü ve uşak deri sektöründe bir uygulama. Uluslararası Davraz Kongresi, 24-27.
  • Elmacı, O. & Kurnaz N. (2004). Sürdürülebilir rekabet gücüne yönelik vizyon arayışlarında faaliyet tabanlı maliyetleme yaklaşımı. Sabancı Üniversitesi - Tüsiad Rekabet Forumu.
  • Erdem, B., Gökdeniz, A., & Met, Ö. (2011). Yenilikçilik ve işletme performansı ilişkisi: Antalya'da etkinlik gösteren 5 yıldızlı otel işletmeleri örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(2), 77-112.
  • Etemad, H. (2004). International entrepreneurship in small and medium size enterprises: orientation, environment and strategy. Edward Elgar Publishing. Chentelham, UK: Edward Edgar, pp.39-56.
  • Fatemi, A. M. (1984). Shareholder benefits from corporate international diversification. The Journal of Finance, 39(5), 1325-1344.
  • Fina, E., & Rugman, A. M. (1996). A test of internalization theory and internationalization theory: The Upjohn company. MIR: Management International Review, 199-213.
  • Fiş, A. M. (2009). Unlocking the relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and performance. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Sabancı Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
  • Fiş, A. M., & Çetindamar, D. (2007). Girişimcilik oryantasyonu, kurum içi girişimcilik ve bağlı ölçeklerin Türkçe’de geçerlemesi. Yönetim Organizasyon Kongresi, Sakarya, Mayıs.
  • Flynn, M., Dooley, L., O'sullivan, D., & Cormican, K. (2003). Idea management for organisational innovation. International Journal of innovation management, 7(4), 417-442.
  • Glaum, M. & Oesterle, M.J. (2007). 40 years of research on internationalization and firm performance: more questions than answers? Management International Review, 47, 307–317.
  • Grant, R. M., Jammine, A. P., & Thomas, H. (1988). Diversity, diversification, and profitability among British manufacturing companies, 1972–1984. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 771–801.
  • Grünig, R., & Morschett, D. (2012). Evaluating new production and sourcing locations. In Developing International Strategies (pp. 167-186). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • Güleş, H. K. & Bülbül, H. (2004). Yenilikçilik. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Günday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662-676.
  • Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link? The Journal of Marketing, 60 (2), 30-45.
  • Heye, D. (2006). Creativity and innovation: Two key characteristics of the successful 21st century information professional. Business information review, 23(4), 252-257.
  • Hızarcı, A. K. (2015). The mediation effect of innovation on the relationship between internationalization and firm performance. Master Thesis. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
  • Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Ireland, R. D. (1994). A mid-term theory of the interactive effects of international and product diversification on innovation and performance. Journal of Management,20(2), 297–326.
  • Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management journal, 40(4), 767-798.
  • Hsu, C. C., & Boggs, D. J. (2003). Internationalization and performance: Traditional measures and their decomposition. Multinational Business Review, 11(3), 23-50.
  • Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial marketing management, 36(5), 651-661.
  • Jiménez-Jiménez, D. and Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning and performance. Journal of Business Research. 64(4), 408-417.
  • Johanson, J., Mattson, L.-G..(1988). Internationalisation in industrial systems- a network approach . In: Hood, N.; & Vahlne ,J-E. ( Eds), Strategies in Global Competition , New York: Croom Helm., 287-314.
  • John, K., Litov, L. & Yeung, B. (2008) ‘Corporate governance and risk-taking’, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp.1679–1728.
  • Johnson, D. ve Turner, C. (2010). International business, themes and issues in the modern global economy. New York: Routledge.
  • Kafouros, M.I., Buckley, P.J., Sharp, J.A. & Wang, C. (2008). The role of internationalization in explaining innovation performance, Technovation, 28, 63-74.
  • Knight, G.A. & Çavuşgil, T.S. (1996). The born global firm: a challenge to traditional internationalization theory. Advances 177 in International Marketing, 8, 11-26.
  • Kobrin, S. J. (1991). An empirical analysis of the determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 17–37.
  • Kotabe, M. (1990). Corporate product policy and innovative behavior of European and Japanese multinationals: an empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing 54(2), 19–33.
  • Kotabe, M., Srinivasan, S. S. & Aulakh, P. S. 2002. Multinationality and firm performance: The moderating role of R&D and marketing capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), 79–97.
  • Lau, A. K. (2011). Supplier and customer involvement on new product performance: contextual factors and an empirical test from manufacturer perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111 (6), 910-942.
  • Lau, C. M., & Sholihin, M. (2005). Financial and nonfinancial performance measures: How do they affect job satisfaction?. The British Accounting Review, 37(4), 389-413.
  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6‐7), 565-586.
  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2004). International diversification and firm performance: The S-curve hypothesis. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 598-609.
  • Mansury, M. A. and Love, J. H. (2008). Innovation, Productivity and Growth in US Business Services: A Firm-level Analysis. Technovation. 28(1–2): 52–62.
  • Marhavilas, P. K., & Koulouriotis, D. E. (2012). Developing a new alternative risk assessment framework in the work sites by including a stochastic and a deterministic process: A case study for the Greek Public Electric Power Provider. Safety Science, 50(3), 448-462.
  • Mesa, A. O., & Ortega, S. M. S. (2007). El proceso exportador de las empresas manufactureras españolas: aplicación del análisis de supervivencia. Revista europea de dirección y economía de la empresa, 16(1), 89-98.
  • Michalisin, M. D., Karau, S. J., & Tangpong, C. (2004). The effects of performance and team cohesion on attribution: A longitudinal simulation. Journal of Business Research, 57(10), 1108-1115.
  • Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1984) Organizations: A quantum view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Mtigwe, B. (2005). The entrepreneurial firm internationalization process in the Southern African context: A comparative approach. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 11(5), 358-377.
  • Naktiyok, A., Karabey, C. N., & Güllüce, A. C. (2010). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: The Turkish case. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(4), 419-435.
  • Neely, A. (2002). Business performance measurement: Theory and practice. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
  • Neely, A., Filippini, P., Forza, C. & Hii, J. (2001). A framework for analyzing business performance, firm innovation and related contextual factors: Perceptions of managers and policy makers in two European Regions. Integrated Manufacturing Systems. 12(2), 114-124.
  • Obrecht, J. J. (2004). Entrepreneurial capabilities: A resource-based systematic approach to international entrepreneurship, in L-P. Dana (Ed.) Handbook of research on international entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 248-264.
  • OECD ve Eurostat,. (2006). Oslo kılavuzu: Yenilik verilerinin toplanması ve yorumlanması için ilkeler. (3. Baskı), Tübitak, Şubat 2006.
  • Oesterle, M.-J. (1997). Time span until internationalization: Foreign market entry as a built-in mechanism of innovations. Management International Review, 37(2), 125–149.
  • Olmos, M.F. (2011). The determinants of internationalization: Evidence from the wine industry. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 33(3), 384 401.
  • Olson, E. M., Slater, S. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (2005). The performance implications of fit among business strategy, marketing organization structure, and strategic behavior. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 49-65.
  • Osterloh, M. & Frey, B. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms. Organization Science, 11(5), 538-550.
  • Ostroff C. & Schmitt, N. (1993). Configurations of organizational effectiveness and efficiencies. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1345-1361.
  • Önem, H. B. (2010). KOBİ’lerin finansal risk algı düzeyine yönelik bir araştırma: Isparta-Burdur illeri örneği. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Isparta.
  • Özen, Ü. ve Bingöl, M. (2007). İşletmelerde bilişim teknolojileri ve yenilikçilik: Erzurum, Erzincan ve Bayburt’taki Kobi’lerde bir araştırma. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 10(2), 399-417.
  • Özer, Ö. (2011). Kurumsal girişimcilik ve işletme performansı ilişkisi: dört ve beş yıldızlı otel işletmelerinde uygulama. Doktora Tezi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir.
  • Özkandemir, Ö. (2004). Küreselleşme sürecindeki KOBİ’lerde uluslararasılaşma ve performans. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Beykent Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
  • Pan, Y. & Tse, K. D. (2000). The hierarchical model of market entry modes. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 535-554.
  • Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S2), 95-117.
  • Rahman, S. U. & Budenillock, P. (2005). Soft TQM, hard TQM, and organisational performance relationships: An empirical investigation. Omega, 33(1), 73-83.
  • Reid, S. D. (1981). The decision-maker and export entry and expansion, Journal of International Business Studies, 12(2), 101-112.
  • Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (1999). The degree of internationalization and the value of the firm: theory and evidence. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 8(1), 189-196.
  • Root, F. R. (1987). Foreing merket entry strategies: New York. Lexington Mass.
  • Root, F.R. (1994). Entry strategies for international markets. San Fransisco: JosseyBass Publishers.
  • Rosa, E. (2003). The logical structure of the social amplification of risk framework (SARF): Metatheoretical foundations and policy implications, in The social amplification of risk. Pidgeon N. K., Kasperson, R.E. and P., Slovic (eds), pp. 47-79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
  • Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J. & Bausch, A. (2011). Is Innovation Always Beneficial? A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Innovation and Performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing. 26(4): 441-57.
  • Singh, D. A., & Gaur, A. S. (2013). Governance structure, innovation and internationalization: Evidence from India. Journal of International Management,19(3), 300-309.
  • Smart, D. & Conant, J. (1994). entrepreneurial orientation distinctive competencies and organizational performance, Journal of Applied Business, 10(3), 28-38.
  • Sökmen, A. G. (2006). Firma kaynakları, ihracat stratejileri ve uluslararasılaşma derecesi: Küçük ve orta boy işletmeler üzerine bir araştırma. Yüksek lisans tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.
  • Steensma, H.K., Marino, L., Weaver, K.M. & Dickson, P. (2000). The influence of national culture on the formation of technology alliances by entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 951–973.
  • Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management journal, 48(3), 450-463.
  • Şahin, E. (2006). Uluslararasılaşmanın firma finansal performansına etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • Tallman, S.B., Geringer, J. M. & Olsen, D. M. (2004). Contextual moderating effects and the relationship of firm-specific resources, strategy, structure and performance among Japanese multinational enterprises. Management International Review, 44, 107–29.
  • Tidd, J. & Bessant, J. (2014). Strategic innovation management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Üner, M. M. ve Karatepe, O. M. (1996). Hizmet pazarlaması sorunlarına franchising çözümleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, IIBF Dergisi, 14(2), 185-208.
  • Üstün, F. (2015). Örgütlerde sıkılık-esneklik boyutunun örgütsel güven, kurumsal girişimcilik ve firma performansına etkisi: Türkiye’nin öncü sanayi işletmeleri üzerine bir araştırma. Doktora tezi. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Adana.
  • Vertzberger, Y. Y. (1998). Risk taking and decision making: Foreign military intervention decisions. Kaliforniya: Stanford University Press.
  • Welch, L. S., & Luostarinen, R. (1988). Internationalization: evolution of a concept. Journal of general management, 14(2), 34-55.
  • West, M.A. & Wallace, M. (1991). Innovation in health care teams. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 303-315.
  • Willet, A. M. (1971). The economic theory of risk and insurance. New York: Huebner Foundation Studies Wiseman, R. M., & Bromiley, P. (1996). Toward a model of risk in declining organizations: An empirical examination of risk, performance and decline. Organization Science, 7(5), 524-543.
  • Wismiarsi, T. (2008). Internationalisation of firms: Relationship between firms characteristics, international market orientation and the degree of internationalisation. National Conference on Management Research, Makassar.
  • Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E. & Griffin, R.W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 293-321.
  • Wright, P., Ferris, S. P., Sarin, A., & Awasthi, V. (1996). Impact of corporate insider, blockholder, and institutional equity ownership on firm risk taking. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 441-458.
  • Xuemei, Y. (2011). Degree of ınternationalization and firm performance, evidence from China’s state-owned banks, 7th IEEE conference.
  • Yıldırım, M. H. (2007). Yurtdışına Yatırım Yapan Türk İşletmelerinde Örgüt Yapısı ve Karşılaşılan Sorunlar: İmalat Sektöründe Bir Araştırma, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Yu, M.G., Li, W.G. & Pan, H.B. (2013) ‘Managerial overconfidence and corporate risk-taking’, Journal of Financial Research, No. 1, pp.149–163.
  • Zahra, S., Ireland, R. & Hitt, M. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: international diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 925–950.

İnovasyon ve Risk Alma Eğiliminin İşletme Performansına Etkisinde Uluslararası Faaliyette Bulunmanın Düzenleyici Rolü

Year 2020, Issue: 56, 37 - 64, 30.08.2020

Ferda Üstün , Ayşe İpek Koca Ballı

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.685403
Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, işletmelerin inovasyon ve risk alma eğilimlerinin işletme performansı ile ilişkisinde uluslararası faaliyette bulunmanın düzenleyici bir rol üstlenip üstlenmediğini belirlemektir. Araştırma, İstanbul Sanayi Odasının (İSO) “Türkiye’nin ikinci 500 Büyük Sanayi Kuruluşu” 2016 listesinde yer alan işletmeler üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında işletmelerden elde edilen 849 anket kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre işletmelerin inovasyon ve risk alma eğilimleri işletme performansı üzerinde olumlu bir etkiye sahiptir. Bununla birlikte işletmelerin inovasyon eğilimleri ve risk alma davranışlarının işletme performansına etkisinde uluslararası olmanın, düzenleyici bir etkiye sahip olduğu görülmüştür.

Keywords

İnovasyon Risk Alma İşletme Performansı Uluslararası Faaliyet

References

  • Acedo, F. J., & Jones, M. V. (2007). Speed of internationalization and entrepreneurial cognition: Insights and a comparison between international new ventures, exporters and domestic firms. Journal of world Business, 42(3), 236-252.
  • Agmon, T., & Lessard, D. R. (1977). Investor recognition of corporate international diversification. The Journal of Finance, 32(4), 1049-1055.
  • Akalın, S. (1970). Yönetim ekonomisi. İzmir: Ege Üniv. İ.T.İ.A. Yayını.
  • Alpkan, L., Ergün, E., Bulut, Ç. ve Yılmaz, C. (2005). Şirket girişimciliğinin şirket performansına etkileri, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 6(2), 175-189.
  • Alsoy, M.(1998). Uluslararasılaşmayı Hedefleyen Firmaların İhracatı Geliştirme Süreci. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, D.E.Ü. İzmir.
  • Altuntaş, G., & Dömez, D. (2010). Girişimcilik yönelimi ve örgütsel performans ilişkisi: Çanakkale bölgesinde faaliyet gösteren otel işletmelerinde bir araştırma. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 39(1), 50-74.
  • Anderson, E., & Gatington, H. (1986). On the internationalization of firms: a critical analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3), 1-26.
  • Antoncic, B. (2007). Intrapreneurship: A comparative structural equation modeling study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(3), 309-325.
  • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R.D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and crosscultural validation, Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 495-527.
  • Araújo, J. F. (2009). The impact of internationalization on firm’s performance: a qualitative study of Portuguese SMEs (Doctoral dissertation). ISCTE Business School, Instituto Superior de Ciências do Trabalho e da Empresa, Portugal .
  • Azar, G. & Drogendijk, R. (2014). Psychic distance, innovation, and firm performance. Management International Review. 54(5), 581-613.
  • Banks, E. (2012). Risk culture: A practical guide to building and strengthening the fabric of risk management. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
  • Bausch, A., & Krist, M. (2007). The effect of context-related moderators on the internationalization-performance relationship: Evidence from meta-analysis. Management International Review, 47(3), 319-347.
  • Berry, H., Guillén, M. F., & Zhou, N. (2010). An institutional approach to cross-national distance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1460-1480.
  • Bilkey, W. J. ve Tesar, G. (1977). “The export behavior of smaller-sized Wisconsin manufacturing firms”. Journal of international business studies, 8(1), 93-98.
  • Bilton, C., & Cummings, S. (2009). Creative strategy: From innovation to sustainable advantage. NewJersey: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Brooks, D.W. (2010). Creating a risk management, in: J Fraser and B.J. Simkins (Eds) Enterprise risk management, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 87-96.
  • Buckley, P. J., Chen, L., Clegg, L. J., & Voss, H. (2016). Experience and FDI risk-taking: A microfoundational reconceptualization. Journal of International Management, 22(2), 131-146.
  • Buhner, C. H. (1987). Assessing international diversification of West German Corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 8, 25–37.
  • Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. S. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 515–524.
  • Carlsson, B. (2006). Internationalization of innovation systems: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 35(1), 56–67.
  • Ceylan, C. (2001). Örgütler için esneklik performans modeli oluşturulması ve örgütlerin esneklik analizi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi. İstanbul.
  • Chen, S., & Tan, H. (2012). Region effects in the internationalization–performance relationship in Chinese firms. Journal of world business, 47(1), 73-80.
  • Cheng, X. (2009). The impacts of internationalization on performance of New Zealand firms. Doctoral dissertation, Auckland University of Technology, School of Business, Auckland.
  • Contractor, F., Kundu, S. & Hsu, C. (2003). A three-stage theory of international expansion: the link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 48-60.
  • Cortez, A. (2011). Winning at Risk: Strategies to go beyond basel. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Coviello, N. E. ve McAuley, A. (1999). Internationalisation and the smaller firm: A review of contemporary empirical research. Management International Review. 39(3), 223–256.
  • Czinkota, M. R. (1982). Export development strategies: US promotion policy. Praeger. Czinkota, M. R., Grossman, D. A., Javalgi, R. R. G., & Nugent, N. (2009). Foreign market entry mode of service firms: The case of US MBA programs. Journal of World Business, 44(3), 274-286.
  • Çavuşgil, S. T. (1980). On The Intcrnationalisation Proccss of Firais, European Research, Vol. 8, No. 6, November, 273-281.
  • Damanpour, F. (1991). The adoption of technological, administrative, and ancillary innovations: Impact of organizational factors. Journal of Management, 13(4), 675-688.
  • Denison, D. R. & Mishra, A. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization Science, 6(2), 204-223.
  • Deshpandé, R., Farley, J. U. & Webster, F. E. (1993). Corporate culture, customer orientation, and innovativeness in japanese firms: A quadrad analysis. Journal of Marketing. 57(1), 23-37.
  • Edwards, K. L., & Gordon, T. J. (1984). Characterization of innovations introduced on the US market in 1982. Futures Group; Reproduced by Ntis.
  • Elango, B. (2003). The effects of host country factors on the internationalization of the US reinsurance industry. Journal of Insurance Issues, 26(2), 93-113.
  • Eleren, A., & Soba, M. (2009). İşletmelerde çok boyutlu performans ölçümü ve uşak deri sektöründe bir uygulama. Uluslararası Davraz Kongresi, 24-27.
  • Elmacı, O. & Kurnaz N. (2004). Sürdürülebilir rekabet gücüne yönelik vizyon arayışlarında faaliyet tabanlı maliyetleme yaklaşımı. Sabancı Üniversitesi - Tüsiad Rekabet Forumu.
  • Erdem, B., Gökdeniz, A., & Met, Ö. (2011). Yenilikçilik ve işletme performansı ilişkisi: Antalya'da etkinlik gösteren 5 yıldızlı otel işletmeleri örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(2), 77-112.
  • Etemad, H. (2004). International entrepreneurship in small and medium size enterprises: orientation, environment and strategy. Edward Elgar Publishing. Chentelham, UK: Edward Edgar, pp.39-56.
  • Fatemi, A. M. (1984). Shareholder benefits from corporate international diversification. The Journal of Finance, 39(5), 1325-1344.
  • Fina, E., & Rugman, A. M. (1996). A test of internalization theory and internationalization theory: The Upjohn company. MIR: Management International Review, 199-213.
  • Fiş, A. M. (2009). Unlocking the relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and performance. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Sabancı Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
  • Fiş, A. M., & Çetindamar, D. (2007). Girişimcilik oryantasyonu, kurum içi girişimcilik ve bağlı ölçeklerin Türkçe’de geçerlemesi. Yönetim Organizasyon Kongresi, Sakarya, Mayıs.
  • Flynn, M., Dooley, L., O'sullivan, D., & Cormican, K. (2003). Idea management for organisational innovation. International Journal of innovation management, 7(4), 417-442.
  • Glaum, M. & Oesterle, M.J. (2007). 40 years of research on internationalization and firm performance: more questions than answers? Management International Review, 47, 307–317.
  • Grant, R. M., Jammine, A. P., & Thomas, H. (1988). Diversity, diversification, and profitability among British manufacturing companies, 1972–1984. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 771–801.
  • Grünig, R., & Morschett, D. (2012). Evaluating new production and sourcing locations. In Developing International Strategies (pp. 167-186). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • Güleş, H. K. & Bülbül, H. (2004). Yenilikçilik. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Günday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662-676.
  • Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link? The Journal of Marketing, 60 (2), 30-45.
  • Heye, D. (2006). Creativity and innovation: Two key characteristics of the successful 21st century information professional. Business information review, 23(4), 252-257.
  • Hızarcı, A. K. (2015). The mediation effect of innovation on the relationship between internationalization and firm performance. Master Thesis. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
  • Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Ireland, R. D. (1994). A mid-term theory of the interactive effects of international and product diversification on innovation and performance. Journal of Management,20(2), 297–326.
  • Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management journal, 40(4), 767-798.
  • Hsu, C. C., & Boggs, D. J. (2003). Internationalization and performance: Traditional measures and their decomposition. Multinational Business Review, 11(3), 23-50.
  • Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial marketing management, 36(5), 651-661.
  • Jiménez-Jiménez, D. and Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning and performance. Journal of Business Research. 64(4), 408-417.
  • Johanson, J., Mattson, L.-G..(1988). Internationalisation in industrial systems- a network approach . In: Hood, N.; & Vahlne ,J-E. ( Eds), Strategies in Global Competition , New York: Croom Helm., 287-314.
  • John, K., Litov, L. & Yeung, B. (2008) ‘Corporate governance and risk-taking’, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp.1679–1728.
  • Johnson, D. ve Turner, C. (2010). International business, themes and issues in the modern global economy. New York: Routledge.
  • Kafouros, M.I., Buckley, P.J., Sharp, J.A. & Wang, C. (2008). The role of internationalization in explaining innovation performance, Technovation, 28, 63-74.
  • Knight, G.A. & Çavuşgil, T.S. (1996). The born global firm: a challenge to traditional internationalization theory. Advances 177 in International Marketing, 8, 11-26.
  • Kobrin, S. J. (1991). An empirical analysis of the determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 17–37.
  • Kotabe, M. (1990). Corporate product policy and innovative behavior of European and Japanese multinationals: an empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing 54(2), 19–33.
  • Kotabe, M., Srinivasan, S. S. & Aulakh, P. S. 2002. Multinationality and firm performance: The moderating role of R&D and marketing capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), 79–97.
  • Lau, A. K. (2011). Supplier and customer involvement on new product performance: contextual factors and an empirical test from manufacturer perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111 (6), 910-942.
  • Lau, C. M., & Sholihin, M. (2005). Financial and nonfinancial performance measures: How do they affect job satisfaction?. The British Accounting Review, 37(4), 389-413.
  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6‐7), 565-586.
  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2004). International diversification and firm performance: The S-curve hypothesis. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 598-609.
  • Mansury, M. A. and Love, J. H. (2008). Innovation, Productivity and Growth in US Business Services: A Firm-level Analysis. Technovation. 28(1–2): 52–62.
  • Marhavilas, P. K., & Koulouriotis, D. E. (2012). Developing a new alternative risk assessment framework in the work sites by including a stochastic and a deterministic process: A case study for the Greek Public Electric Power Provider. Safety Science, 50(3), 448-462.
  • Mesa, A. O., & Ortega, S. M. S. (2007). El proceso exportador de las empresas manufactureras españolas: aplicación del análisis de supervivencia. Revista europea de dirección y economía de la empresa, 16(1), 89-98.
  • Michalisin, M. D., Karau, S. J., & Tangpong, C. (2004). The effects of performance and team cohesion on attribution: A longitudinal simulation. Journal of Business Research, 57(10), 1108-1115.
  • Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1984) Organizations: A quantum view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Mtigwe, B. (2005). The entrepreneurial firm internationalization process in the Southern African context: A comparative approach. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 11(5), 358-377.
  • Naktiyok, A., Karabey, C. N., & Güllüce, A. C. (2010). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: The Turkish case. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(4), 419-435.
  • Neely, A. (2002). Business performance measurement: Theory and practice. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
  • Neely, A., Filippini, P., Forza, C. & Hii, J. (2001). A framework for analyzing business performance, firm innovation and related contextual factors: Perceptions of managers and policy makers in two European Regions. Integrated Manufacturing Systems. 12(2), 114-124.
  • Obrecht, J. J. (2004). Entrepreneurial capabilities: A resource-based systematic approach to international entrepreneurship, in L-P. Dana (Ed.) Handbook of research on international entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 248-264.
  • OECD ve Eurostat,. (2006). Oslo kılavuzu: Yenilik verilerinin toplanması ve yorumlanması için ilkeler. (3. Baskı), Tübitak, Şubat 2006.
  • Oesterle, M.-J. (1997). Time span until internationalization: Foreign market entry as a built-in mechanism of innovations. Management International Review, 37(2), 125–149.
  • Olmos, M.F. (2011). The determinants of internationalization: Evidence from the wine industry. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 33(3), 384 401.
  • Olson, E. M., Slater, S. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (2005). The performance implications of fit among business strategy, marketing organization structure, and strategic behavior. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 49-65.
  • Osterloh, M. & Frey, B. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms. Organization Science, 11(5), 538-550.
  • Ostroff C. & Schmitt, N. (1993). Configurations of organizational effectiveness and efficiencies. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1345-1361.
  • Önem, H. B. (2010). KOBİ’lerin finansal risk algı düzeyine yönelik bir araştırma: Isparta-Burdur illeri örneği. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Isparta.
  • Özen, Ü. ve Bingöl, M. (2007). İşletmelerde bilişim teknolojileri ve yenilikçilik: Erzurum, Erzincan ve Bayburt’taki Kobi’lerde bir araştırma. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 10(2), 399-417.
  • Özer, Ö. (2011). Kurumsal girişimcilik ve işletme performansı ilişkisi: dört ve beş yıldızlı otel işletmelerinde uygulama. Doktora Tezi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir.
  • Özkandemir, Ö. (2004). Küreselleşme sürecindeki KOBİ’lerde uluslararasılaşma ve performans. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Beykent Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
  • Pan, Y. & Tse, K. D. (2000). The hierarchical model of market entry modes. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 535-554.
  • Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S2), 95-117.
  • Rahman, S. U. & Budenillock, P. (2005). Soft TQM, hard TQM, and organisational performance relationships: An empirical investigation. Omega, 33(1), 73-83.
  • Reid, S. D. (1981). The decision-maker and export entry and expansion, Journal of International Business Studies, 12(2), 101-112.
  • Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (1999). The degree of internationalization and the value of the firm: theory and evidence. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 8(1), 189-196.
  • Root, F. R. (1987). Foreing merket entry strategies: New York. Lexington Mass.
  • Root, F.R. (1994). Entry strategies for international markets. San Fransisco: JosseyBass Publishers.
  • Rosa, E. (2003). The logical structure of the social amplification of risk framework (SARF): Metatheoretical foundations and policy implications, in The social amplification of risk. Pidgeon N. K., Kasperson, R.E. and P., Slovic (eds), pp. 47-79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
  • Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J. & Bausch, A. (2011). Is Innovation Always Beneficial? A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Innovation and Performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing. 26(4): 441-57.
  • Singh, D. A., & Gaur, A. S. (2013). Governance structure, innovation and internationalization: Evidence from India. Journal of International Management,19(3), 300-309.
  • Smart, D. & Conant, J. (1994). entrepreneurial orientation distinctive competencies and organizational performance, Journal of Applied Business, 10(3), 28-38.
  • Sökmen, A. G. (2006). Firma kaynakları, ihracat stratejileri ve uluslararasılaşma derecesi: Küçük ve orta boy işletmeler üzerine bir araştırma. Yüksek lisans tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.
  • Steensma, H.K., Marino, L., Weaver, K.M. & Dickson, P. (2000). The influence of national culture on the formation of technology alliances by entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 951–973.
  • Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management journal, 48(3), 450-463.
  • Şahin, E. (2006). Uluslararasılaşmanın firma finansal performansına etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • Tallman, S.B., Geringer, J. M. & Olsen, D. M. (2004). Contextual moderating effects and the relationship of firm-specific resources, strategy, structure and performance among Japanese multinational enterprises. Management International Review, 44, 107–29.
  • Tidd, J. & Bessant, J. (2014). Strategic innovation management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Üner, M. M. ve Karatepe, O. M. (1996). Hizmet pazarlaması sorunlarına franchising çözümleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, IIBF Dergisi, 14(2), 185-208.
  • Üstün, F. (2015). Örgütlerde sıkılık-esneklik boyutunun örgütsel güven, kurumsal girişimcilik ve firma performansına etkisi: Türkiye’nin öncü sanayi işletmeleri üzerine bir araştırma. Doktora tezi. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Adana.
  • Vertzberger, Y. Y. (1998). Risk taking and decision making: Foreign military intervention decisions. Kaliforniya: Stanford University Press.
  • Welch, L. S., & Luostarinen, R. (1988). Internationalization: evolution of a concept. Journal of general management, 14(2), 34-55.
  • West, M.A. & Wallace, M. (1991). Innovation in health care teams. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 303-315.
  • Willet, A. M. (1971). The economic theory of risk and insurance. New York: Huebner Foundation Studies Wiseman, R. M., & Bromiley, P. (1996). Toward a model of risk in declining organizations: An empirical examination of risk, performance and decline. Organization Science, 7(5), 524-543.
  • Wismiarsi, T. (2008). Internationalisation of firms: Relationship between firms characteristics, international market orientation and the degree of internationalisation. National Conference on Management Research, Makassar.
  • Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E. & Griffin, R.W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 293-321.
  • Wright, P., Ferris, S. P., Sarin, A., & Awasthi, V. (1996). Impact of corporate insider, blockholder, and institutional equity ownership on firm risk taking. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 441-458.
  • Xuemei, Y. (2011). Degree of ınternationalization and firm performance, evidence from China’s state-owned banks, 7th IEEE conference.
  • Yıldırım, M. H. (2007). Yurtdışına Yatırım Yapan Türk İşletmelerinde Örgüt Yapısı ve Karşılaşılan Sorunlar: İmalat Sektöründe Bir Araştırma, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Yu, M.G., Li, W.G. & Pan, H.B. (2013) ‘Managerial overconfidence and corporate risk-taking’, Journal of Financial Research, No. 1, pp.149–163.
  • Zahra, S., Ireland, R. & Hitt, M. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: international diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 925–950.
There are 117 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Ferda Üstün 0000-0002-7397-8048

Ayşe İpek Koca Ballı 0000-0001-7808-5807

Publication Date August 30, 2020
Acceptance Date May 14, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Issue: 56

Cite

APA Üstün, F., & Koca Ballı, A. İ. (2020). İnovasyon ve Risk Alma Eğiliminin İşletme Performansına Etkisinde Uluslararası Faaliyette Bulunmanın Düzenleyici Rolü. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(56), 37-64. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.685403

Cited By

YENİLİKÇİ ŞİRKETLERİN ORGANİZASYON YAPILARI PERSPEKTİFİNDEN YENİLİK PERFORMANSINA BAKIŞ
Giresun Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.46849/guiibd.1513863

Ethical Principles and Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences places great emphasis on publication ethics, which serve as a foundation for the impartial and reputable advancement of scientific knowledge. In this context, the journal adopts a publishing approach aligned with the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to preventing potential malpractice. The following ethical responsibilities, established based on COPE’s principles, are expected to be upheld by all stakeholders involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
Make decisions on submissions based on the quality and originality of the work, its alignment with the journal's aims and scope, and the reviewers’ evaluations, regardless of the authors' religion, language, race, ethnicity, political views, or gender.
Respond to information requests from readers, authors, and reviewers regarding the publication and evaluation processes.
Conduct all processes without compromising ethical standards and intellectual property rights.
Support freedom of thought and protect human and animal rights.
Ensure the peer review process adheres to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Take full responsibility for accepting, rejecting, or requesting changes to a manuscript and ensure that conflicts of interest among stakeholders do not influence these decisions.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Submitted works must be original. When utilizing other works, proper and complete citations and/or references must be provided.
A manuscript must not be under review by another journal simultaneously.
Individuals who have not contributed to the experimental design, implementation, data analysis, or interpretation should not be listed as authors.
If requested during the review process, datasets used in the manuscript must be provided to the editorial board.
If a significant error or mistake is discovered in the manuscript, the journal’s editorial office must be notified.
For studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant document must be submitted to the journal. Details regarding the ethical approval (name of the ethics committee, approval document number, and date) must be included in the manuscript.
Changes to authorship (e.g., adding or removing authors, altering the order of authors) cannot be proposed after the review process has commenced.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept review assignments only in areas where they have sufficient expertise.
Agree to review manuscripts in a timely and unbiased manner.
Ensure confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript and not disclose any information about it, during or after the review process, beyond what is already published.
Refrain from using information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit.
Notify the journal editor if plagiarism or other ethical violations are suspected in the manuscript.
Conduct reviews objectively and avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.
Use polite and constructive language during the review process and avoid personal comments.
Publication Policy
The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences is a free, open-access, peer-reviewed academic journal that has been in publication since 1981. The journal welcomes submissions in Turkish and English within the fields of economics, business administration, public finance, political science, public administration, and international relations.

No submission or publication fees are charged by the journal.
Every submitted manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process and similarity/plagiarism checks via iThenticate.
Submissions must be original and not previously published, accepted for publication, or under review elsewhere.
Articles published in the journal can be cited under the Open Access Policy and Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is given.
The journal is published three times a year, in April, August, and December. It includes original, high-quality, and scientifically supported research articles and reviews in its listed fields. Academic studies unrelated to these disciplines or their theoretical and empirical foundations are not accepted. The journal's languages are Turkish and English.

Submissions are first subject to a preliminary review for format and content. Manuscripts not meeting the journal's standards are rejected by the editorial board. Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the peer review stage.

Each submission is sent to at least two expert reviewers. If both reviews are favorable, the article is approved for publication. In cases where one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides based on the reviews or may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

Articles published in the journal are open access and can be cited under the Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is made.