Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Un Üreticilerinde Örgütsel Performans Değerlendirme: Hıdıroğlu Un Üreticisi Örneği

Year 2023, , 108 - 117, 24.08.2023
https://doi.org/10.55775/ijemi.1207247

Abstract

Bu çalışma, un üreticilerinin Örgütsel Teori Kuramlarını kendi süreçlerine nasıl uyarladıklarını ve un üreticilerinin rakipleriyle rekabet edebilmesi için hangi örgütsel çevresel ve yapısal faktörlerden yararlanması gerektiğini, hangi örgüt kültürüne sahip olması ve hangi örgütsel sistemlerin uygulaması gerektiğini belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaçla, bu çalışma açık ve kesin verilerine ulaşılabilen bir un üreticisini analiz etmekte ve çalışma üreticinin kuruluşu, üyeleri, çevresi ve paydaşları için önemli bulgular sunmaktadır. Ayrıca çalışma örnek un üreticisi HIDIROĞLU UN SANAYİ üreticisinin analizlerinden yararlanarak, hangi örgütsel yapının ve uygulamanın bir un üreticisinin faaliyetlerinde başarılı olabilmesi için daha uygun olacağı hakkında değerlendirilme yapılmasına olanak sağlamaktadır.
Bu çalışmada, örnek un üreticisi üzerinde analizler yapılırken; üreticinin örgüt yapısının açık bir hiyerarşiye sahip olduğu gözlenmiştir. Örgüt, ölçüm, dokümantasyon ve bilgi yönetimine önem vermektedir. Kontrol mekanizması iyileştirilmiş ve şirket yapısındaki her aşamada istikrar gözlenmiştir. Yüksek standardizasyon örgütün temel özelliğidir.
Gözlem yapılan un üreticisinin analizlerinin bir neticesi olarak, “un üreticilerinin standartlar ve prosedürler belirlemesi ve sürekli bir başarı elde etmek için sade bir hiyerarşi ile çalışanlar için açık bir görev tanımına sahip olması oldukça önemlidir” fikrine ulaşılmıştır. Öte yandan, bu çalışmanın sınırlılığı olarak, Örgütsel Teori Kuramlarından İç Süreç Modeli’nden ya da Akılcı Hedef Modeli’nden hangisinin un üreticileri için daha uygun olup olmadığı hakkında net bir sonuca varılamamasıdır.

Supporting Institution

8. Uluslararası EMI Girişimcilik & Sosyal Bilimler Kongresi 17-19 Kasım 2022, Aksaray – Kapadokya / Türkiye - En İyi Bildiri Ödülü'ne layık görülen bildiridir.

References

  • Acker, J. (1992). Gendering organizational theory. Classics of organizational theory, 6, 450-459.
  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of management review, 28(2), 238-256.
  • Courtney, H. (2001). Making the most of uncertainty. The McKinsey Quarterly, 38-38.
  • Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS quarterly, 213-236.
  • Gupta, Y. P., & Chin, D. C. (1994). Organizational life cycle: A review and proposed directions. The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, 30(3), 269.
  • Hærem, T. (2002). Task complexity and expertise as determinants of task perceptions and performance. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Norwegian School of Management, Oslo.
  • Hassard, J. S. (2012). Rethinking the Hawthorne Studies: The Western Electric research in its social, political and historical context. Human Relations, 65(11), 1431-1461.
  • Hong, I. B. (2002). A new framework for interorganizational systems based on the linkage of participants’ roles. Information & management, 39(4), 261-270.
  • Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., & Halim, H. A. (2020). How does sustainable leadership influence sustainable performance? Empirical evidence from selected ASEAN countries. Sage Open, 10(4), 2158244020969394.
  • Ktenioudaki, A., Butler, F., Gonzales-Barron, U., Mc Carthy, U., & Gallagher, E. (2009). Monitoring the dynamic density of wheat dough during fermentation. Journal of food engineering, 95(2), 332-338.
  • Lester, D. L., Parnell, J. A., & Carraher, S. (2003). Organizational life cycle: A five-stage empirical scale. The international journal of organizational analysis, 11(4), 339-354.
  • Peck, P., & Sinding, K. (2003). Environmental and social disclosure and data richness in the mining industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(3), 131-146.
  • Peltonen, T. (2016). Organization theory: Critical and philosophical engagements. Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American sociological review, 194-208.
  • Porter, M. E. (2011). Competitive advantage of nations: creating and sustaining superior performance. Simon and Schuster, 269.
  • Schmiedbauer, O., & Biedermann, H. (2020). Validation of a lean smart maintenance maturity model. Tehnički glasnik, 14(3), 296-302.
  • Shafritz, J. M., Ott, J. S., & Jang, Y. S. (2015). Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning.
  • Thompson, M. (2011). Ontological shift or ontological drift? Reality claims, epistemological frameworks, and theory generation in organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 754-773.
  • Thompson, J. D. (2017). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Routledge.
  • Walsh, J. P., & Dewar, R. D. (1987). Formalization and the organizational life cycle [1]. Journal of Management Studies, 24(3), 215-231.
  • Woodward, J. (1958). Management and technology 1,(3). HM Stationery Off.

Organizational Performance Evaluation of Flour Manufacturers: A Case Study of Hidiroğlu Flour Mills

Year 2023, , 108 - 117, 24.08.2023
https://doi.org/10.55775/ijemi.1207247

Abstract

This study aims to examine how flour producers implement Organizational Theory Principles to their process and to define which organizational environmental and structural factors, culture and systems are appropriate for flour companies in order to improve companies’ success and entreprenuerial skills. For this purpose, this study analyzes a flour company and provides implications of the findings and limitations for the organization, its members, environment and stakeholders.
In this study, while examining on flour companies, a clear hierarchy in the organizations is observed in general. The flour producer HIDIROĞLU FLOUR MILLS taken as an example in the study gives importance to measurement, documentation and information systems management. The control mechanism is improved and the stability can be observed in every stages on the organizational structure. High standardization is a main feature of the company.
As a result of analyses of the flour producer taken as an example, the study come up with the idea: “it is crucial for flour producers to set standards and procedures, and have clear task definition in a plain hierarchy to achieve constant success”. On the other hand, the system boundary for this study is among Organizational Theory Principles whether Internal Process Model or Rational Goal Model is more suitable for flour producers and their entrepreneurial facilities.

References

  • Acker, J. (1992). Gendering organizational theory. Classics of organizational theory, 6, 450-459.
  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of management review, 28(2), 238-256.
  • Courtney, H. (2001). Making the most of uncertainty. The McKinsey Quarterly, 38-38.
  • Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS quarterly, 213-236.
  • Gupta, Y. P., & Chin, D. C. (1994). Organizational life cycle: A review and proposed directions. The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, 30(3), 269.
  • Hærem, T. (2002). Task complexity and expertise as determinants of task perceptions and performance. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Norwegian School of Management, Oslo.
  • Hassard, J. S. (2012). Rethinking the Hawthorne Studies: The Western Electric research in its social, political and historical context. Human Relations, 65(11), 1431-1461.
  • Hong, I. B. (2002). A new framework for interorganizational systems based on the linkage of participants’ roles. Information & management, 39(4), 261-270.
  • Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., & Halim, H. A. (2020). How does sustainable leadership influence sustainable performance? Empirical evidence from selected ASEAN countries. Sage Open, 10(4), 2158244020969394.
  • Ktenioudaki, A., Butler, F., Gonzales-Barron, U., Mc Carthy, U., & Gallagher, E. (2009). Monitoring the dynamic density of wheat dough during fermentation. Journal of food engineering, 95(2), 332-338.
  • Lester, D. L., Parnell, J. A., & Carraher, S. (2003). Organizational life cycle: A five-stage empirical scale. The international journal of organizational analysis, 11(4), 339-354.
  • Peck, P., & Sinding, K. (2003). Environmental and social disclosure and data richness in the mining industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(3), 131-146.
  • Peltonen, T. (2016). Organization theory: Critical and philosophical engagements. Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American sociological review, 194-208.
  • Porter, M. E. (2011). Competitive advantage of nations: creating and sustaining superior performance. Simon and Schuster, 269.
  • Schmiedbauer, O., & Biedermann, H. (2020). Validation of a lean smart maintenance maturity model. Tehnički glasnik, 14(3), 296-302.
  • Shafritz, J. M., Ott, J. S., & Jang, Y. S. (2015). Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning.
  • Thompson, M. (2011). Ontological shift or ontological drift? Reality claims, epistemological frameworks, and theory generation in organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 754-773.
  • Thompson, J. D. (2017). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Routledge.
  • Walsh, J. P., & Dewar, R. D. (1987). Formalization and the organizational life cycle [1]. Journal of Management Studies, 24(3), 215-231.
  • Woodward, J. (1958). Management and technology 1,(3). HM Stationery Off.
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Business Administration
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Duygu Hıdıroğlu 0000-0003-2647-8750

Early Pub Date August 22, 2023
Publication Date August 24, 2023
Submission Date November 19, 2022
Acceptance Date July 17, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023

Cite

APA Hıdıroğlu, D. (2023). Organizational Performance Evaluation of Flour Manufacturers: A Case Study of Hidiroğlu Flour Mills. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Management Inquiries, 7(12), 108-117. https://doi.org/10.55775/ijemi.1207247

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRoj2RSgFvw8N5CG9ZqLQN5NolsDY6Sm-MbIA&usqp=CAU     road-issn.png   download  logo.png 18351   18352       18353    18354  18355     18356    18357     18358


email_ss_1920.png

Journal EMI e-mail Adresi: internationaljournalemi@gmail.com

JOURNAL EMI Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.