Kurumsal Direniş Sürecinde Yapılan Kurumsal İşler: TTB ve Tam Gün Yasası Örneği

Year 2022, Volume: 24 Issue: 2, 226 - 244, 30.12.2022

Abdullah Kıray , Oktay Koç

Abstract

Kurumsal kontrol veya eyleyenliği kısıtlamaya dönük aktör girişimlerini ifade eden kurumsal direniş, bir yönüyle kurumların sürdürülmesini ve nihayet bu anlamda stratejik olarak bir takım kurumsal işlerin gerçekleştirilmesini gerektirir.
Mevcut çalışma, bir yandan kurumsal kontrol altındaki aktörlerin eyleyenleşmesine odaklanmış, diğer yandan da bu aktörlerin, kurumsal baskılar karşısında mevcut kurumsal düzenlemelerin sürdürülmesi adına direnirken gerçekleştirdikleri kurumsal işleri belirlemeyi amaç edinmiştir. Çalışmada nitel araştırma yöntemleri kullanılarak kurumsal direniş açısından gerçekleştirilen kurumsal işler, Tam Gün Yasası olarak bilinen yasal düzenleme ve Türk Tabipleri Birliği örnekliğinde çalışılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında on kişi ile yarı yapılandırılmış sorularla derinlemesine mülakatlar yapılarak birincil veriler elde edilmiştir. Ayrıca araştırma ve sektör raporları, kurumsal yazışmalar, yasal düzenlemeler, medya haberleri gibi ikincil verilerin elde edilmesi amacıyla açık kaynaklardan arşiv araştırması yapılarak veri toplanmıştır. Toplanan veriler, nitel analizde kullanılan “satır satır kodlama” yoluyla açık olarak tasnif edilerek bulgular elde edilmiştir. Böylece mevcut kurumsal düzenin sürdürülmesi noktasında, yüceltme ve kötülemenin yanı sıra, kurumsal ağ(lar) oluşturma ve işbirliği başlıkları altında bir takım kurumsal işlerin kuruluş yasası tarafından ayrıcalıklandırılmış bir aktör olan TTB tarafından gerçekleştirildiği belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

Eyleyenlik, Kurumsal direniş, Kurumsal iş, Kurumsal kontrol, TTB, Tam Gün Çalışma Yasası

Institutional Works During the Institutional Resistance Process: TTB and Full-time Working Act

Abstract

Institutional resistance refers to actors’ attempts that aim to limit institutional control or agency. It requires the maintenance of institutions and in this respect realizing some strategic institutional works.
This study uses qualitative research methods and investigates institutional works for institutional resistance in the case of the Turkish Medical Association and the act known as the Full-time Working Act Within the scope of the research, primary data were obtained by conducting in-depth interviews with ten people using semi-structured questions. In addition, archival research was conducted in order to obtain secondary data such as research and sector reports, organizational correspondence, legal regulations, and media news. To get the findings, the data were clearly classified through “line by line coding” used in qualitative analysis. Thus, this study concludes that several institutional works under the titles of valourizing and demonizing, establishing institutional networks and cooperation were conducted to maintain existing institutional arrangements by the Turkish Medical Association, which was given the privilege by its founding act.

Keywords

Agency, Institutional resistance, Institutional work, Institutional control, Turkish Medical Association (TMA), Full-time Work act.

References

• Akdağ, R. (2011a). (Der.) Türkiye Sağlıkta Dönüşüm Programı Değerlendirme Raporu (2003-2010), Yayın No. 839, Ankara: Sağlık Bakanlığı.
• Akdağ, R. (2011b). “Akdağ: Tam Gün Yasası'ndan sonra kamudaki hekim sayısı azalmadı, arttı”, http://www.memurlar.net/haber/178896/ (18.04.2014)
• Aldrich, E. H. (2010). Beam me up Scott(ie)! Institutional Theorists’ Struggles with the Emergent Nature of Entrepreneurship. Research in the Sociology of Work, 21, 329-364.
• Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and Institutions: The Enabling Role of Individuals' Social Position. Organization, 13(5), 653–676.
• Battilana, J., Leca B. & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How Actors Change Institutions: Towards a Theory of Institutional Entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65-107.
• Battilana, J. & D’ Aunno, T. (2009). Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency, Edt: Thomas B. Lawrence, Roy Suddaby ve Bernard Leca, Institutional Work, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Bigelow, B. & Middleton Stone, M. (1995). Why Don't They Do What We Want? An Exploration of Organizational Responses to Institutional Pressures in Community Health Centers. Public Administration Review, 55 (2), 183-192.
• Brint, S. & Karabel, J. (1991). Institutional origins and transformations: the case of american community colleges. s. 337-60 in The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, edited by W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio. University of Chicago Press.
• Chia, R.C. H & Holt, R. (2009). Strategy Without Design: The Silent Efficacy of Indirect Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Clemens, E.S. & Cook, J.M. (1999). Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining Durability and Change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 441-466.
• Clemens, W.B. & Douglas, J.T. (2005). Understanding strategic responses to institutional pressures. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1205– 1213.
• Currie, G. Lockett, A. Finn, R. Martin, G. & Waring, J. (2012). Institutional Work to Maintain Professional Power: Recreating the Model of Medical Professionalism. Organization Studies, 33(7), 937–962.
• DiMaggio, P.J. & Powell, W.W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
• DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. L. G. Zucker (Der.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment içinde, s. 3-21, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
• DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). Constructing an organizational field as a professional project: US art museums, 1920–1940. Powell W. ve DiMaggio P.J. (Der.) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis içinde, , s. 267–292. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Ehterington, L.D. & Richardson A.J. (1994). Institutional Pressures on University Accounting Education in Canada. Contemporary Accounting Research, Special Education Research Issue: 141-162.
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
• Garud, R., Jain S. & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standarts: the case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Magamenet Journal, 45(1), 196-214.
• Goodstein, J. D. (1994). Institutional pressures and strategic responsiveness: employer involvement in work-family issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37(2), 350-382.
• Gorges, J. M. (2001). New Institutionalist Explanations for Institutional Change: A Note of Caution. Politics, 21(2), 137-145.
• Greenwood, R. & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional Entrepreneurship in Mature Fields: The Big Five Accounting Firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 27–48.
• Greenwood, R., Díaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521-539.
• Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, R.E. & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317-371.
• Hallet, T. & Ventresca, J. M. (2006). Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Theory and Society, 3, 213–236.
• Jepperson, L. R. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. W.W.Powell ve P.J. DiMaggio (Der.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis içinde, Chicago: Chicago University Press, s. 143-163.
• Kaghan, W. & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutions and Work. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20, 73-81.
• Lawrence, T. B. (2008). Power, Institutions and Organizations. In Greenwood R. , Oliver C., Suddaby R., Sahlin-Andersson K. (Der.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism içinde, London: Sage Publications, s. 170-197.
• Lawrence, T. B. & Suddaby, R. (2006). lnstitutions and institutional work. Steward R. C. Cynthia H. Lawrence T.B. ve Walter R. N. (Der.), Handbook of Organization Studies içinde London: Sage, s. 215-254.
• McKay, R.B. 2001. Organizational Responses to an Environmental Bill of Rights. Organization Studies, 22, 625-658.
• Meyer, J.W. & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
• Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
• Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2010). When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 455-476.
• Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251-267.
• Phillips, N., Thomas, B. L. & Cynthia, H. (2000). Inter-organizational collaboration and the dynamics of institutional fields. Journal of Management Studies, 37(1), 23–43.
• Powell, W. W. & Colyvas, A. J. (2008). Microfoundations of Institutional Theory. Greenwood R., Oliver C., Sahlin K. ve Suddaby R. (Der.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism içinde, California: Sage, s. 276-298.
• Reay, T. & Hinings, B. (2009). Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics. Organization Studies, 30, 629-652.
• Riaz, S., Buchanan, S. & Pabuji, H. (2011). Institutional work amidst the financial crisis: emerging positions of elite actors. Organization, 18(2), 187–214.
• Rowan, B. (1982). Organizational Structure and the Institutional Environment: The Case of Public Schools. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(2), 259-279.
• Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and Organizations. California: Sage
• Scott, W.R. (2008). Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37, 427–442.
• Smets, M. & Jarzabkowski, P. (2013). Reconstructing institutional complexity in practice: A relational model of institutional work and complexity. Human Relations, 66(10), 1279–1309.
• Staber, U. & Aldrich, H. (1983). Trade Association Stability and Public Policy. Hall R.A. ve Quinn R.E. (Der.), Organizational Theory and Public Policy içinde London: Sage, s. 163-178.
• Suddaby, R. (2010). Challenges for Institutional Theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19, 14-20.
• Suddaby, R. & Viale, T. (2011). Professionals and field-level change: Institutional work and the professional Project. Current Sociology, 59(4), 423–442.
• Thompson, M.A. & Perry, L. J. (2006). Collaboration Processes: Inside the Black Box. Public Administration Review , December 2006, Special Issue: 20- 32.
• TTB (2008a). Tam Gün Hakkında TTB Görüşleri, www.ttb.org.tr/en/index.php/tuem-haberler-blog/179-ttb/1054-tam-gun-gorus (12.10.2013)
• TTB (2008b). Sağlık Bakanlığı ile Tam Gün Yasa Taslağı Hakkında Görüşme, www.ttb.org.tr/en/index.php/tuem-haberler-blog/179-ttb/1037-1037 (10.10.2013)
• TTB (2009). Tam Gün Yasası ile ilgili iç yazışma, http://www.ttb.org.tr/index.php/Yazismalar/890-2009-1593.html (10.10.2013)
• Vermeulen, P., Büch, R., & Greenwood, R. (2007). The impact of governmental policies in institutional fields: The case of innovation in the Dutch concrete industry. Organization Studies, 28(4), 515-540.
• Zucker, G. L. (1987). Institutional Theories of Organizations, Annual Reviews of Sociology, 13, 443-464.
• RG (1953), Türk Tabipleri Birliği Kanunu, RG Sayı: 8323 RG Tarih: 31 Ocak 1953
• RG (1983), AYM Kuruluşu ve Yargılama Usulleri Hakkında Kanun, RG Sayı: 18220
• RG (2010a), AYM Kararı, RG Sayı: 27775, RG Tarih: 4 Aralık 2010
• RG (2010b), Sağlık Personelinin Tam Gün Çalışmasına ve Sağlıkla İlgili Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun (5947 sayılı), RG Sayı: 27478, RG Tarih: 30 Ocak 2010
• Tam Gün Yasa Taslağı, 2007, www.tdb.org.tr/tdb/admin/mevzuat/userfiles/tam_gun_taslak21.pdf (18.04.2014)