Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

İŞ YAŞAMINDA STATÜ ENDİŞELERİ: GİG EKONOMİSİ ÇALIŞANLARI BAĞLAMINDA KEŞFEDİCİ BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Year 2024, Issue: 68, 99 - 105, 31.08.2024

Deniz Dirik , İnan Eryılmaz , Burak Özdoğan

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1376422

Abstract

Bu çalışma, gig ekonomisi mensubu 115 "freelancer" üzerinden statü endişelerini ve bu endişeyle ilişkilendirilen bir dizi değişkeni ele almaktadır. Geleneksel çalışma sistemlerinde ve toplumsal hafızada belirli fonksiyon üstlenen statüler, alternatif iş yapma biçimlerinin ortaya çıkmasıyla ortadan kalkmış olmasına karşın, statülerin sinyallediği kabuller süregelmektedir. Bu statülere eşlik eden anlamlar ve statüye sahip olmama endişesi, örgütsel davranış yazınının ihmal ettiği bir örüntü olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Yeni iş uygulamalarının statü endişesi bağlamında değerlendirilmesi iki amaç doğrultusunda gerçekleştirilmektedir: 1) örgütsel davranış alanında yaygın olarak benimsenen yorgun kavramlara farklı bir perspektif sunma ve değişim körlüğüne bir nota koyma, 2) devamlı dönüşen iş yaşamının giderek daha az sayıda değişmezleri kalmışken, statü endişesinin var olmaya devam ettiğine ve örgüt yaşamında ihmal edilmiş fakat ortak bir deneyim olduğuna kanıt getirme. Bu temel kabullerden yola çıkarak, çalışma, kimlik oluşumunun önemli bir bileşeni olan statü endişelerini ve gig ekonomisini bir arada inceleyen ilk akademik çalışma olma iddiasındadır.

Keywords

Statü endişesi Gig ekonomisi Freelance Stres İş tatmini.

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışmanın öncü bir sürümü Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi tarafından 3-5 Kasım 2022 tarihinde düzenlenen 9. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi’nde sözlü bildiri olarak sunulmuş ve genişletilmiş özeti Bildiriler Kitabı’nda basılmıştır.

Thanks

Sayın Editör, Alana katkı sunacağını düşündüğümüz makemelizi derginizde değerlendirmenizi rica eder, çalışmalarınızda ve dergi yayın hayatında başarılar dileriz.

References

  • Ashford, S. J., Caza, B. B., & Reid, E. M. (2018). From surviving to thriving in the gig economy: a research agenda for individuals in the new world of work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2018.11.001
  • Barley, S. R., Bechky, B. A., & Milliken, F. J. (2017). The changing nature of work: careers, identities, and work lives in the 21st century. Academy of Management Discoveries, 3(2), From the Editor. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2017.0034
  • Bauman, Z. (2001). The individualized society. UK; Cambridge, Polity Press.
  • Bilge, A., Öğce, F., Genç R. E., & Oran, N.T. (2009). Algılananstresölçeği (ASÖ)’nin Türkçe versiyonunun psikometrik uygunluğu. Ege Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 2(25), 61-72.
  • Blake, K.R., & Brooks, R.C. (2019). Status anxiety mediates the positive relationship between income equality and sexualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(50), 25029-25033. Erişim adresi: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1909806116.
  • Brown, R. (2000), Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 30: 745-778. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992
  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Academic
  • Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure ofperceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385-396.
  • De Botton, A. (2004). Status anxiety. Pantheon Books.
  • Delhey, J., & Dragolov, G. (2014). Why inequality makes Europeans less happy: the role of distrust, status anxiety, and perceived conflict. European Sociological Review, 30(2),151–165, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jct033.
  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.
  • Doğan. A. ve Varoğlu, A. (2019). Eşitlik Kuramı. S. Yürür (Ed.), Örgütsel Davranış Kuramları içinde (23-45), İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
  • Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020). Algorithmic management and app‐work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 30, 114-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12258.
  • Durak, M., Senol-Durak, E., & Gencoz, T. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale among Turkish university students, correctional officers, and elderly adults. Social Indicators Research, 99(3), 413-429. doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9589-4.
  • Friedman, G. (2014). Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy. Review of Keynesian Economics, 2, 171-188. https://doi.org/10.4337/roke.2014.02.03.
  • Gill, M. J. (2013). Elite identity and status anxiety: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of management consultants. Organization 2013 22, 3, 306-325.
  • Gül, S. (2014). Yapısökümcülük neyi söküyor: Jacques Derrida’yı anlamak. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1, 3, 89-98. https://doi.org/10.30803/adusobed.188820.
  • Grant, A. (2021). Think again: The power of knowing what you don’t know. WH Allen.
  • ILO (2021). Young people and the gig economy. Erişimadresi: https://www.ilo.org/employment/Whatwedo/Publications/WCMS_790117/lang--en/index.htm
  • Jensen, M. (2006). Shoul be stay or should we ego? Accountability, status anxiety, and client defections. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 97-128.
  • Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.1.17
  • Kalleberg, A., & Dunn, M. (2016). Good jobs, bad jobs in the gig economy. Perspectives on Work 20, 10-14.
  • Keser, A., &Bilir, Ö. K. B. (2019). İştatminiölçeğinintürkçegüvenilirlikvegeçerlilikçalışması. Kırklareli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(3), 229-239.
  • Keshabyan, A., & Day, M. V. (2020). Concerned whether you'll make it in life? status anxiety uniquely explains job satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1523. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01523
  • Kuhn, K. M., & Galloway, T. L. (2019). Expanding perspectives on gig work and gig workers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34, 186-191. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-05-2019-507
  • Layte, R., & Whelan, C. T. (2014). Who feels inferior? A test of the status anxiety hypothesis of social inequalities in health. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 30, 525–535. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcu057
  • Petriglieri, G., Petriglieri, J. L., & Wood, J. D. (2018). Fast tracks and inner journeys: crafting portable selves for contemporary careers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63, 479-525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217720930
  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  • Sessions, H., Nahrgang, J. D., Baer, M. D., & Welsh, D. T. (2021). From zero to hero and back to zero: the consequences of status inconsistency between the work roles of multiple jobholders. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000935.
  • Sessions, H., Nahrgang, J. D., Vaulont, M. J., Williams, R., & Bartels, A. L. (2021). Do the hustle! Empowerment from side-hustles and its effects on full-time work performance. Academy of Management Journal, 64, 235-264. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0164
  • Sürücü, L., Maşlakcı, A. &Ertan, S. Ş. (2022). Statü kaygısı ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 25(1), 226-235.
  • Ünal, Ö., & Temiz, H.E. (2022). Gig ekonomisi bağlamında ı̇ş ı̇lişkisinin değişenyüzü: Uber örneği. Çalışma ve Toplum, 1, 167-206.
  • Tak Meydan, B. (2019). Örgütsel Davranış Kuramları. (S. Yürür, Ed.) (Birinci Baskı.). İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş.
  • Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020). What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 273-294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
  • Wilkinson, R. D., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. Allen Lane/Penguin Group UK; Bloomsbury Publishing
  • Woodcock, J., & Graham, M. (2020). The gig economy: A critical introduction. UK; Cambridge, Polity Press.

UNRAVELING THE STATUS ANXIETY AT WORK: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY ON GIG ECONOMY WORKERS

Year 2024, Issue: 68, 99 - 105, 31.08.2024

Deniz Dirik , İnan Eryılmaz , Burak Özdoğan

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1376422

Abstract

This study problematizes status concerns and a range of variables associated with this concern among 115 freelancers, members of the gig economy. While specific roles traditionally played a significant function in work systems and collective memory, they have disappeared with the emergence of alternative forms of employment. However, the assumptions conveyed by these statuses persist. The meanings accompanying these statuses and the anxiety of not having a status emerge as a pattern overlooked in organizational behavior literature. The evaluation of new work practices in the context of status concerns is carried out with two aims: 1) providing a different perspective on commonly adopted concepts in the field of organizational behavior and shedding light on change blindness, 2) demonstrating the continued existence of status concerns in an ever-evolving work life, where fewer constants remain, and proving that it is a neglected yet shared experience in organizational life. Building on these foundational assumptions, this study claims to be the first academic work that examines both status concerns, an important component of identity formation, and the gig economy together.

Keywords

Status anxiety Gig economy Freelance Stress Job satisfaction

References

  • Ashford, S. J., Caza, B. B., & Reid, E. M. (2018). From surviving to thriving in the gig economy: a research agenda for individuals in the new world of work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2018.11.001
  • Barley, S. R., Bechky, B. A., & Milliken, F. J. (2017). The changing nature of work: careers, identities, and work lives in the 21st century. Academy of Management Discoveries, 3(2), From the Editor. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2017.0034
  • Bauman, Z. (2001). The individualized society. UK; Cambridge, Polity Press.
  • Bilge, A., Öğce, F., Genç R. E., & Oran, N.T. (2009). Algılananstresölçeği (ASÖ)’nin Türkçe versiyonunun psikometrik uygunluğu. Ege Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 2(25), 61-72.
  • Blake, K.R., & Brooks, R.C. (2019). Status anxiety mediates the positive relationship between income equality and sexualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(50), 25029-25033. Erişim adresi: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1909806116.
  • Brown, R. (2000), Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 30: 745-778. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992
  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Academic
  • Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure ofperceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385-396.
  • De Botton, A. (2004). Status anxiety. Pantheon Books.
  • Delhey, J., & Dragolov, G. (2014). Why inequality makes Europeans less happy: the role of distrust, status anxiety, and perceived conflict. European Sociological Review, 30(2),151–165, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jct033.
  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.
  • Doğan. A. ve Varoğlu, A. (2019). Eşitlik Kuramı. S. Yürür (Ed.), Örgütsel Davranış Kuramları içinde (23-45), İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
  • Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020). Algorithmic management and app‐work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and HRM. Human Resource Management Journal, 30, 114-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12258.
  • Durak, M., Senol-Durak, E., & Gencoz, T. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale among Turkish university students, correctional officers, and elderly adults. Social Indicators Research, 99(3), 413-429. doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9589-4.
  • Friedman, G. (2014). Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy. Review of Keynesian Economics, 2, 171-188. https://doi.org/10.4337/roke.2014.02.03.
  • Gill, M. J. (2013). Elite identity and status anxiety: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of management consultants. Organization 2013 22, 3, 306-325.
  • Gül, S. (2014). Yapısökümcülük neyi söküyor: Jacques Derrida’yı anlamak. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1, 3, 89-98. https://doi.org/10.30803/adusobed.188820.
  • Grant, A. (2021). Think again: The power of knowing what you don’t know. WH Allen.
  • ILO (2021). Young people and the gig economy. Erişimadresi: https://www.ilo.org/employment/Whatwedo/Publications/WCMS_790117/lang--en/index.htm
  • Jensen, M. (2006). Shoul be stay or should we ego? Accountability, status anxiety, and client defections. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 97-128.
  • Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C., & Kluger, A. N. (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.1.17
  • Kalleberg, A., & Dunn, M. (2016). Good jobs, bad jobs in the gig economy. Perspectives on Work 20, 10-14.
  • Keser, A., &Bilir, Ö. K. B. (2019). İştatminiölçeğinintürkçegüvenilirlikvegeçerlilikçalışması. Kırklareli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(3), 229-239.
  • Keshabyan, A., & Day, M. V. (2020). Concerned whether you'll make it in life? status anxiety uniquely explains job satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1523. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01523
  • Kuhn, K. M., & Galloway, T. L. (2019). Expanding perspectives on gig work and gig workers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34, 186-191. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-05-2019-507
  • Layte, R., & Whelan, C. T. (2014). Who feels inferior? A test of the status anxiety hypothesis of social inequalities in health. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 30, 525–535. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcu057
  • Petriglieri, G., Petriglieri, J. L., & Wood, J. D. (2018). Fast tracks and inner journeys: crafting portable selves for contemporary careers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63, 479-525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217720930
  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  • Sessions, H., Nahrgang, J. D., Baer, M. D., & Welsh, D. T. (2021). From zero to hero and back to zero: the consequences of status inconsistency between the work roles of multiple jobholders. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000935.
  • Sessions, H., Nahrgang, J. D., Vaulont, M. J., Williams, R., & Bartels, A. L. (2021). Do the hustle! Empowerment from side-hustles and its effects on full-time work performance. Academy of Management Journal, 64, 235-264. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0164
  • Sürücü, L., Maşlakcı, A. &Ertan, S. Ş. (2022). Statü kaygısı ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 25(1), 226-235.
  • Ünal, Ö., & Temiz, H.E. (2022). Gig ekonomisi bağlamında ı̇ş ı̇lişkisinin değişenyüzü: Uber örneği. Çalışma ve Toplum, 1, 167-206.
  • Tak Meydan, B. (2019). Örgütsel Davranış Kuramları. (S. Yürür, Ed.) (Birinci Baskı.). İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş.
  • Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020). What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 273-294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
  • Wilkinson, R. D., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. Allen Lane/Penguin Group UK; Bloomsbury Publishing
  • Woodcock, J., & Graham, M. (2020). The gig economy: A critical introduction. UK; Cambridge, Polity Press.
There are 36 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Business Administration
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Deniz Dirik 0000-0002-7652-5079

İnan Eryılmaz 0000-0001-8307-2402

Burak Özdoğan 0000-0002-8504-5085

Early Pub Date August 22, 2024
Publication Date August 31, 2024
Submission Date October 15, 2023
Acceptance Date June 5, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Issue: 68

Cite

APA Dirik, D., Eryılmaz, İ., & Özdoğan, B. (2024). İŞ YAŞAMINDA STATÜ ENDİŞELERİ: GİG EKONOMİSİ ÇALIŞANLARI BAĞLAMINDA KEŞFEDİCİ BİR ARAŞTIRMA. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(68), 99-105. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1376422
 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.