Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

POZİTİF SAPMA ÖLÇEĞİNİN SOSYAL BAĞ TEORİSİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE DEVAMLILIĞININ TEST EDİLMESİ

Year 2020, Issue: 1 - 19th International Business Congress Special Issue, 22 - 39, 25.12.2020

Onur Ünlü

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.844585
Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Pozitif Sapma Davranışları ölçeğinin devamlılığını Hirschi’nin Sosyal
Bağ Teorisi’nden hareketle oluşturulan bir araştırma modeli ile test etmektir. Bu doğrultuda araştırma
kapsamı örgütsel bağlılığın, pozitif sapma üzerindeki etkileri ile sınırlandırılmıştır. Araştırmada nicel
araştırma yöntemlerinden anket tekniği kullanılmıştır. Araştırma Bursa, Türkiye’de yürütülmüştür.
Araştırma örneklemi 314 üniversite mezunu özel sektör çalışanından oluşmaktadır. Araştırma
sonucunda geliştirilen ölçeğin orijinal faktör yapısı bu araştırmada da elde edilmiştir. Bulgular her ne
kadar ölçeğin devamlılığını destekler nitelikte ise de pozitif sapma ölçeğinin örgüt dışı aidiyetler
boyutunun faktör analizi sürecinde çok sayıda ifade kaybetmesi, ilgili boyut üzerine daha fazla
araştırma yapılarak geliştirilmesi gerekliliğini ön plana çıkarmaktadır. Ayrıca elde edilen bulgular
Sosyal Bağ Teorisi’ni destekler niteliktedir. Bu kapsamda, örgütsel bağlılığın alt boyutu olan
duygusal bağlılığın tüm pozitif sapma alt boyutları üzerinde negatif etkileri olduğu sonucu ile;
normatif bağlılığın bireysel verimlilik ve örgüt dışı aidiyetler temelinde pozitif sapma üzerinde yine
negatif etkili olduğu; devam bağlılığının ise örgütün sürdürülebilir başarısı temelinde pozitif sapma
üzerinde pozitif etkili olduğu sonuçlarına ulaşılmıştır. Bu sonuçlar çalışanın örgütü ile güçlü
bağlarının örneğin bireysel verimliliği arttırmak gerekçesiyle bile olsa örgüt normlarından
uzaklaşmasını engellerken; diğer taraftan zayıf bağların çalışanların sürdürülebilir başarı elde
edilmesi için örgüt normlarından uzaklaşmasına vesile olabilir şeklinde yorumlanabilir.

Keywords

Pozitif Sapma , Ölçek Geliştirme Örgütsel Bağlılık

References

  • Abrams, D., Marques, J., Bown, N., & Dougill, M. (2002). Anti-Norm and ProNorm Deviance in the Bank and on the Campus: Two Experiments on Subjective Group Dynamics. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430202005002922
  • Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a General Strain Theory of Crime and Delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745- 9125.1992.tb01093.x
  • Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804618
  • Brief, A. P., Buttram, R. T., & Dukerich, J. M. (2001). Collective corruption in the corporate world: Toward a process model. In Groups at work: Theory and research. (pp. 471–499). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin. US: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
  • Clugston, M., Howell, J. P., & Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Does Cultural Socialization Predict Multiple Bases and Foci of Commitment? Journal of Management, 26(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600106
  • Cohen, A. K. (1965). The Sociology of the Deviant Act: Anomie Theory and Beyond. American Sociological Review, 30(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091770
  • Darley, J. M. (1995). Constructive and Destructive Obedience: A Taxonomy of Principal-Agent Relationships. Journal of Social Issues, 51(3), 125–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01338.x
  • Galperin, B. L. (2012). Exploring the Nomological Network of Workplace Deviance: Developing and Validating a Measure of Constructive Deviance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(12), 2988–3025. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00971.x
  • Gaulejac, D. V. (2013). İşletme Hastalığına Tutulmuş Toplum, (Çev. Ö. Erbek), Ayrıntı, İstanbul.
  • Graham, J. W. (1986). Principled organizational dissent: A theoretical essay. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 1–52.
  • Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 561–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.561
  • Grover, S. L. (1993). Lying, Deceit, and Subterfuge: A Model of Dishonesty in the Workplace. Organization Science, 4(3), 478–495. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2634955
  • Grover, S. L. (1997). Lying in organizations : theory, research, and future directions. In J. G. Robert A. Giacalone (Ed.), Antisocial behavior in organizations (pp. 68–84). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
  • Heckert, D., Morooka, H., & Heckert, A. (2019). Perched on a Pedestal in a Positive Deviance Profession. Deviant Behavior, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2019.1653430
  • Heckert, A. ve Ünlü, O. (2013) "Pozitif Sapma Davranışı: Yeni Bir Tanım Arayışı", 1. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı içinde (149- 152) 15/16 Kasım, Sakarya.
  • Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A Review of Scale Development Practices in the Study of Organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100509
  • Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Hollinger, R. C., & Clark, J. P. (1982). Formal and Informal Social Controls of Employee Deviance*. The Sociological Quarterly, 23(3), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1982.tb01016.x
  • Liao, H., Joshi, A., & Chuang, A. (2004). Sticking Out Like a Sore Thumb: Employee Dissimilarity and Deviance at Work*. Personnel Psychology, 57(4), 969–1000. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00012.x Mainemelis, C. (2010). Stealing Fire : Creative Deviance in the Evolution of New Ideas. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 558–578.
  • McClellan, S., & Beggan, J. K. (2017). The Stigma of Being Young on the Experience of Rate-Busting as Positive Deviance. Deviant Behavior, 38(9), 1059–1073. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1237836
  • Mertens, W., Recker, J., Kohlborn, T., & Kummer, T.-F. (2016). A Framework for the Study of Positive Deviance in Organizations. Deviant Behavior, 37(11), 1288–1307. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1174519
  • Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z
  • Meyerson, D. E., & Scully, M. A. (1995). Crossroads Tempered Radicalism and the Politics of Ambivalence and Change. Organization Science, 6(5), 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.5.585
  • Morrison, E. W. (2006). Doing the Job Well: An Investigation of Pro-Social Rule Breaking. Journal of Management, 32(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305277790
  • Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14(2), 224– 247.
  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective-Whistle Blowing. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 679–708. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080334
  • Nye, F. I. (1958). Family relationships and delinquent behavior. Family relationships and delinquent behavior. Oxford, England: John Wiley.
  • O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Griffin, R. W., & Glew, D. J. (1996). OrganızationMotivated Aggression: A Research Framework. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 225–253. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1996.9602161571
  • O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.492
  • Puffer, S. M. (1987). Prosocial behavior, noncompliant behavior, and work performance among commission salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), 615–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.615 Raelin, J. A. (1984). An Examination of Deviant/Adaptive Behaviors in the
  • Organizational Careers of Professionals. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 413–427. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4279662
  • Randall, D. M. (1987). Commitment and the Organization: The Organization Man Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 460–471. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4306561
  • Reckless, W. C. (1970). Containment theory. The Sociology of Crime and Delinquency, 287–300.
  • Reiss, A. J. (1951). Delinquency as the Failure of Personal and Social Controls. American Sociological Review, 16(2), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087693
  • Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A Typology of Deviant Workplace Behaviors: A Multidimensional Scaling Study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555–572. https://doi.org/10.5465/256693 Shoenberger, N., Heckert, A., & Heckert, D. (2012). Techniques of Neutralization
  • Theory and Positive Deviance. Deviant Behavior, 33(10), 774–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2012.707497
  • Shoenberger, N., Heckert, A., & Heckert, D. (2015). Labeling, Social Learning, and Positive Deviance: A Look at High Achieving Students. Deviant Behavior, 36(6), 474–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2014.944066
  • Sims, R. L. (2002). Ethical Rule Breaking by Employees: A Test of Social Bonding Theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 40(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020330801847
  • Spreitzer, G. M., & Sonenshein, S. (2004). Toward the construct definition of positive deviance. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 828–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764203260212
  • Staw, B. M., & Boettger, R. D. (1990). Task Revision: A Neglected Form of Work Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(3), 534–559. https://doi.org/10.5465/256580
  • Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089195
  • Tepper, B. J., Henle, C. A., Lambert, L. S., Giacalone, R. A., & Duffy, M. K. (2008). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organization deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology. Tepper, Bennett J.: J. Mack Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, US, 30302- 4014, btepper@gsu.edu: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.721
  • Ünlü O., (2015) Pozitif Sapma Davranışlarının Kavramsallaştırılması ve Bireyin Örgüte Yönelik Bağının Pozitif Sapma Davranışları Üzerindeki Etkisi: Öz Yeterliliğin Rolü, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kayseri, (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi).
  • Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Construct Redefinition, Measurement, and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 765–802. https://doi.org/10.5465/256600
  • Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and Voice Extra-Role Behaviors: Evidence of Construct and Predictive Validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.5465/256902
  • Vardi, Y., & Wiener, Y. (1996). Misbehavior in Organizations: A Motivational Framework. Organization Science, 7(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.2.151
  • Warren, D. E. (2003). Constructive and destructive deviance in organizations. Pozitif Sapma Ölçeğinin Sosyal Bağ Teorisi Çerçevesinde Devamlılığının Test Edilmesi 39 Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 622–632. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2003.10899440
  • Wolfzorn, M., Heckert, A., & Heckert, D. M. (2006). Positive deviance and social bond theory. Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology, 34(2), 107.

IN THE FRAME OF THE SOCIAL BOND THEORY, TESTING THE CONTINUITY OF POSİTİVE DEVIANCE BEHAVIOR SCALE

Year 2020, Issue: 1 - 19th International Business Congress Special Issue, 22 - 39, 25.12.2020

Onur Ünlü

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.844585
Cited By: 2

Abstract

The aim of this study, is to test the continuity of newly developed scale of Positive
Deviance. In this regard, scope of the research determined in the frame of the relations among
organizational commitment, tenure and positive deviance. Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory constitutes
theoretical background of the research model. One of quantitative methods, survey technique has
been used. The research conducted at Bursa, TURKEY. Sample consist of 314 private sector
employees. According to the findings, factor structure which is obtained by exploratory factor
analysis (EFA) is consistent with original scale. Although the findings are supportive for the
continuity of the positive deviance scale; it nevertheless also highlights that one of the sub dimensions
of the scale; social ties had lost so many items during EFA. So according to the findings number of
items of social ties dimension need to be revised. Furthermore, findings mainly support the Theory.
As one of sub dimension of organizational commitment, affective commitment has negative effects
on all positive deviance sub dimensions. Besides normative commitment to the organization has also
negative effects on PD’s social ties and work-related pride. On the contrary, continuity commitment
has positive effect on PD’s sub-dimension of higher loyalties to the organization and/or society. 

Keywords

Positive Deviance , Scale Development Organizational Commitment.

References

  • Abrams, D., Marques, J., Bown, N., & Dougill, M. (2002). Anti-Norm and ProNorm Deviance in the Bank and on the Campus: Two Experiments on Subjective Group Dynamics. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430202005002922
  • Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a General Strain Theory of Crime and Delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745- 9125.1992.tb01093.x
  • Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804618
  • Brief, A. P., Buttram, R. T., & Dukerich, J. M. (2001). Collective corruption in the corporate world: Toward a process model. In Groups at work: Theory and research. (pp. 471–499). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin. US: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
  • Clugston, M., Howell, J. P., & Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Does Cultural Socialization Predict Multiple Bases and Foci of Commitment? Journal of Management, 26(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600106
  • Cohen, A. K. (1965). The Sociology of the Deviant Act: Anomie Theory and Beyond. American Sociological Review, 30(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091770
  • Darley, J. M. (1995). Constructive and Destructive Obedience: A Taxonomy of Principal-Agent Relationships. Journal of Social Issues, 51(3), 125–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01338.x
  • Galperin, B. L. (2012). Exploring the Nomological Network of Workplace Deviance: Developing and Validating a Measure of Constructive Deviance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(12), 2988–3025. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00971.x
  • Gaulejac, D. V. (2013). İşletme Hastalığına Tutulmuş Toplum, (Çev. Ö. Erbek), Ayrıntı, İstanbul.
  • Graham, J. W. (1986). Principled organizational dissent: A theoretical essay. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 1–52.
  • Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 561–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.561
  • Grover, S. L. (1993). Lying, Deceit, and Subterfuge: A Model of Dishonesty in the Workplace. Organization Science, 4(3), 478–495. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2634955
  • Grover, S. L. (1997). Lying in organizations : theory, research, and future directions. In J. G. Robert A. Giacalone (Ed.), Antisocial behavior in organizations (pp. 68–84). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
  • Heckert, D., Morooka, H., & Heckert, A. (2019). Perched on a Pedestal in a Positive Deviance Profession. Deviant Behavior, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2019.1653430
  • Heckert, A. ve Ünlü, O. (2013) "Pozitif Sapma Davranışı: Yeni Bir Tanım Arayışı", 1. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı içinde (149- 152) 15/16 Kasım, Sakarya.
  • Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A Review of Scale Development Practices in the Study of Organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100509
  • Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Hollinger, R. C., & Clark, J. P. (1982). Formal and Informal Social Controls of Employee Deviance*. The Sociological Quarterly, 23(3), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1982.tb01016.x
  • Liao, H., Joshi, A., & Chuang, A. (2004). Sticking Out Like a Sore Thumb: Employee Dissimilarity and Deviance at Work*. Personnel Psychology, 57(4), 969–1000. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00012.x Mainemelis, C. (2010). Stealing Fire : Creative Deviance in the Evolution of New Ideas. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 558–578.
  • McClellan, S., & Beggan, J. K. (2017). The Stigma of Being Young on the Experience of Rate-Busting as Positive Deviance. Deviant Behavior, 38(9), 1059–1073. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1237836
  • Mertens, W., Recker, J., Kohlborn, T., & Kummer, T.-F. (2016). A Framework for the Study of Positive Deviance in Organizations. Deviant Behavior, 37(11), 1288–1307. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1174519
  • Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z
  • Meyerson, D. E., & Scully, M. A. (1995). Crossroads Tempered Radicalism and the Politics of Ambivalence and Change. Organization Science, 6(5), 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.5.585
  • Morrison, E. W. (2006). Doing the Job Well: An Investigation of Pro-Social Rule Breaking. Journal of Management, 32(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305277790
  • Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14(2), 224– 247.
  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective-Whistle Blowing. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 679–708. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080334
  • Nye, F. I. (1958). Family relationships and delinquent behavior. Family relationships and delinquent behavior. Oxford, England: John Wiley.
  • O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Griffin, R. W., & Glew, D. J. (1996). OrganızationMotivated Aggression: A Research Framework. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 225–253. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1996.9602161571
  • O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.492
  • Puffer, S. M. (1987). Prosocial behavior, noncompliant behavior, and work performance among commission salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), 615–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.615 Raelin, J. A. (1984). An Examination of Deviant/Adaptive Behaviors in the
  • Organizational Careers of Professionals. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 413–427. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4279662
  • Randall, D. M. (1987). Commitment and the Organization: The Organization Man Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 460–471. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4306561
  • Reckless, W. C. (1970). Containment theory. The Sociology of Crime and Delinquency, 287–300.
  • Reiss, A. J. (1951). Delinquency as the Failure of Personal and Social Controls. American Sociological Review, 16(2), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087693
  • Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A Typology of Deviant Workplace Behaviors: A Multidimensional Scaling Study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555–572. https://doi.org/10.5465/256693 Shoenberger, N., Heckert, A., & Heckert, D. (2012). Techniques of Neutralization
  • Theory and Positive Deviance. Deviant Behavior, 33(10), 774–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2012.707497
  • Shoenberger, N., Heckert, A., & Heckert, D. (2015). Labeling, Social Learning, and Positive Deviance: A Look at High Achieving Students. Deviant Behavior, 36(6), 474–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2014.944066
  • Sims, R. L. (2002). Ethical Rule Breaking by Employees: A Test of Social Bonding Theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 40(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020330801847
  • Spreitzer, G. M., & Sonenshein, S. (2004). Toward the construct definition of positive deviance. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 828–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764203260212
  • Staw, B. M., & Boettger, R. D. (1990). Task Revision: A Neglected Form of Work Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(3), 534–559. https://doi.org/10.5465/256580
  • Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089195
  • Tepper, B. J., Henle, C. A., Lambert, L. S., Giacalone, R. A., & Duffy, M. K. (2008). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organization deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology. Tepper, Bennett J.: J. Mack Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, US, 30302- 4014, btepper@gsu.edu: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.721
  • Ünlü O., (2015) Pozitif Sapma Davranışlarının Kavramsallaştırılması ve Bireyin Örgüte Yönelik Bağının Pozitif Sapma Davranışları Üzerindeki Etkisi: Öz Yeterliliğin Rolü, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kayseri, (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi).
  • Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Construct Redefinition, Measurement, and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 765–802. https://doi.org/10.5465/256600
  • Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and Voice Extra-Role Behaviors: Evidence of Construct and Predictive Validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.5465/256902
  • Vardi, Y., & Wiener, Y. (1996). Misbehavior in Organizations: A Motivational Framework. Organization Science, 7(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.2.151
  • Warren, D. E. (2003). Constructive and destructive deviance in organizations. Pozitif Sapma Ölçeğinin Sosyal Bağ Teorisi Çerçevesinde Devamlılığının Test Edilmesi 39 Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 622–632. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2003.10899440
  • Wolfzorn, M., Heckert, A., & Heckert, D. M. (2006). Positive deviance and social bond theory. Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology, 34(2), 107.
There are 49 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Onur Ünlü 0000-0001-8693-3108

Publication Date December 25, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Issue: 1 - 19th International Business Congress Special Issue

Cite

APA Ünlü, O. (2020). POZİTİF SAPMA ÖLÇEĞİNİN SOSYAL BAĞ TEORİSİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE DEVAMLILIĞININ TEST EDİLMESİ. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(1), 22-39. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.844585

Cited By

Pozitif Sapma Davranışının Öncüllerini ve Ardıllarını Belirlemeye Yönelik Nitel Bir Çalışma
Management and Political Sciences Review
https://doi.org/10.57082/mpsr.1331006
TÜRKİYE’DE SUÇLU DAVRANIŞ VE YAŞ İLİŞKİSİ: SUÇ TÜRLERİ ÜZERİNDEN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR ANALİZ
Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.1014228
 Download Cover Image

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.