Kurumsal Kuram Açısından Örgütsel Dil İle Örgütsel Meşruiyet İlişkisi: Örgütler Dil Aracılığıyla Meşruiyeti Nasıl Elde Eder?

Year 2017, Volume: 12 Issue: 3, 137 - 164, 15.12.2017

Salih Arslan , Recai Coşkun

https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.333919

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu
çalışma örgütlerin yapı ve pratiklerinin kurumsal çevreye uygun olmadığı
durumlarda bile uyumlu görünümü vermeyi başararak nasıl meşruiyet elde
edebildiklerini kurumsal kuram yaklaşımıyla açıklamayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu
nedenle “örgütsel dilin örgütsel meşruiyetteki rolü kurumsal kuramla
açıklanabilir mi?” sorusunun cevabını aramaktadır. Araştırmada meşruiyet hükmünü
veren değerlendiriciler, meşruiyet arayan örgütler ve değerlendiricilerde bu
hükmü oluşturmak için örgütler tarafından kullanılan dil stratejileri
incelenmiş ve analiz edilmiştir. Örgütlerin kurumsal yapının sembol ve
kelimeleriyle inşa ettikleri dili değerlendiricilerle iletişimlerinde
kullandıkları ve böylelikle değerlendiricilerin pragmatik, bilişsel, ahlaki,
değersel ve duygusal yönlerini etkileyerek meşruiyet hükmü oluşturdukları
sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu sonuç örgütsel dil ile örgütsel meşruiyet arasındaki
ilişkinin her ikisinin de kurumsal olgular olması sebebiyle kurumsal kuram
bakış açısıyla daha anlaşılır bir şekilde açıklanabileceğini göstermiştir.

Keywords

Örgütsel Dil, Örgütsel Meşruiyet, Kurumsal Kuram, Örgütsel Dil Örgütsel Meşruiyet İlişkisi

The Relationship between Organizational Language and Organizational Legitimacy in terms of Institutional Theory: How the Organizations Gain Legitimacy Through Language?

Abstract

This study aims to explain through institutional theory how organizations
can acquire legitimacy by achieving harmonious appearance even when the
structures and practices of organizations don’t conform to the institutional
environment. Therefore it is seeking the answer of the question that "the
role of organizational language in organizational legitimacy can be explained
by institutional theory?". In the investigation have been examined and
analyzed that legitimacy seeking organizations, evaluators who have given
legitimacy and the language strategies used by organizations to create this
provision in evaluators. They have come to the conclusion that the
organizations use in communicating with the evaluators language that they build
with the symbols and words of the institutional structure, thus constituting a
provision of legitimacy by affecting the pragmatic, cognitive, moral, value and
emotional aspects of evaluators. This result shows that the relationship
between organizational language and organizational legitimacy can be explained
more clearly in terms of institutional theory because both are institutional
phenomena.

Keywords

Organizational Language, Organizational Legitimacy, Institutional Theory, Relationship Between Organizational Language and Organizational Legitimacy

References

• Aldrich, H. and Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645-670.
• Ashforth, B. E. and Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1(2), 177-194.
• Bansal, P. and Clelland, I. (2004). Talking trash: Legitimacy, impression management and unsystematic risk in the context of the natural environment. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (1), 93-103.
• Berger, J., Ridgeway, C., Fisek, M. H. and Norman, R. Z. (1998). The legitimation and delegitimation of power and prestige orders. American Sociological Review, 63, 379-405.
• Bitektine, A. (2011). Toward a theory of social judgments of organizations: The case of legitimacy, reputation and status. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 151-179.
• Bitektine, A. and Haack, P. (2015). The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 49-75.
• Boje, D.M., Oswick, C. and Ford, J.D. (2004). Language and organization: the doing of discourse. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 571-577.
• Boxenbaum, E. (2008). The process of legitimation. In Scheuer, S. and Schewer, J.D.(Eds) The anatomy of change. 237-262. CBS Press.
• Boyd, J. (2000). Actional legitimacy: No crisis necessary. Journal of Public Relations Research, 4, 341-353.
• Brown, A.D. (1997). Narcissism, idendity and legitimacy. Academy of Management Review. (22)3, 643-686.
• Brown, A.D. and Humphreys, M. (2006). Organizational identy and place: A discoursive exploration of hegemony and resistance. Journal of Management Studies, 43(2), 231-257.
• Collins, R. (1981), On the microfoundations of macrosociology. American Journal of Sociology, 86(5), 984-1014.
• Cornelissen, J. P., Durand, R., Fiss, P. C., Lammers, J. C. and Vaara, E. (2015). Putting communication front and center in institutional theory and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 10-27.
• Creed, W. E. D., Scully, M. A. and Austin, J. R. (2002). Clothes make the person? The tailoring of legitimating accounts and the social construction of identity. Organization Science, 13(5), 475-496.
• David, R. J., Sine, W. D. and Haveman, H. A. (2013). Seizing opportunity in emerging fields: How institutional entrepreneurs legitimated the professional form of management consulting. Organization Science, 24(2), 356-377.
• Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate?. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 1024-1039.
• Deephouse, D.L. and Carter, S.M. (2005). An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation. Journal of Management Studies, 42(2), 329-360.
• DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1991). Introdiction. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. 1-38. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• DiMaggio, P. J. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263-287.
• Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122-136.
• Elsbach, K. D. and Sutton, R. I. (1992). Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Academy of Management Journal, 35(4), 699-738.
• Elsbach, K. D. (1994). Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 57-88.
• Etzion, D. and Ferraro, F. (2010). The role of analogy in the institutionalization of sustainability reporting. Organization Science, 21(5), 1092-1107.
• Fligstein, N. (1997). Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(4), 397-405.
• Friedland, R. and Alford, R.R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practies ve institutional contradictions. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.232-263. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Autline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.
• Glynn, M. A. and Abzug, R. (2002). Institutionalizing identity: Symbolic isomorphism and organizational names. The Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 267-280.
• Glynn, M. A. and Navis, C. (2013). Categories, identities and cultural classification: Moving beyond a model of categorical constraint. Journal of Management Studies, 50(6), 1124-1137.
• Golant, B. D. and Sillince, J. A. A. (2007). The constitution of organizational legitimacy: A narrative perspective. Organization Studies, 28(8), 1149-1167.
• Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure. The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
• Grant, D., Keenoy, T. and Oswick, C. (2001). Organizational discourse. International Studies of Management and Organization, 31(3), 5-24.
• Green, S. E. (2004). A rhetorical theory of diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 653-669.
• Green, S. E., Li, Y. and Nohria, N. (2009). Suspended in self-spun webs of significance: A rhetorical model of institutionalization and institutionally embedded agency. Academy of Management Journal, 52(1), 11-36.
• Green, S. E. and Li, Y. (2011). Rhetorical institutionalism: Language, agency and structure in institutional theory since Alvesson 1993. Journal of Management Studies, 48(7), 1662-1697.
• Haack, P., Pfarrer, M. D. and Scherer, A. G. (2014). Legitimacy as feeling: How affect leads to vertical legitimacy spillovers in transnational governance. Journal of Management Studies, 51(4), 634-666.
• Habermas, J. (2001). İletişimsel Eylem Kuramı. (Çev. Mustafa Tüzel), Kabalcı Yayınevi, İstanbul.
• Hardy, C. and Maguire, S. (2010). Discourse, field-configuring events and change in organizations and institutional fields: Narratıves of DDT and the Stockholm convention. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1365-1392.
• Harmon, D. J., Green, S. E. and Goodnight, G. T. (2015). A model of rhetorical legitimation: The structure of communication and cognition underlying institutional maintenance and change. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 76-95.
• Hasselbladh, H. and Kallinikos, J. (2000). The Project of rationalization: A critique and reappraisal of neo-istitutionalism in organization studies. Organization Studies, 21(4), 697-720.
• Heracleous, L. and Barrett, M. (2001). Organızational change as discourse: Communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation. Academy of Management Journal. 44(4) 755-778.
• Heracleous, L. and Marshak, R.J. (2004). Organizational discourse as situated symbolic action: Application through and intervention. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, ODC, 1-6.
• Hirsch, P.M. (1997). Sociology without social structure: Neo-institutional theory meets brave new World. American Journal of Sociology, 102(6), 1702-1723.
• Hybels, R.C. (1995) On legitimacy, legitimation, and organizations: A critical review and integrative theoretical model. Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, 241-245.
• Jepperson, R.L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects and institutionalism. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.143-163. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Jepperson, R.L. and Meyer, J.W. (1991). The puclic order and the construction of formal organization. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.204-231. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Jepperson, R.L. and Meyer, J.W. (2011). Multiple levels of analysis and the limitations of methodological individualisms sociological theory, 29(1), 54-73.
• Johnson, C., Dowd, T. J. and Ridgeway, C. L. (2006). Legitimacy as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 53-78.
• Kraatz, M. S. and Zajac, E. J. (1996). Exploring the limits of the new institutionalism: The causes and consequences of illegitimate organizational change. American Sociological Review, 61(5), 812-836.
• Lawrence, T. B. (1999). Institutional strategy. Journal of Management, 25(2), 161-188.
• Lawrence, T.B. and Phillips, N. (2004). From moby dick to free willy: Macro-cultural discourse and institutional entrepreneurship in emerging institutional fields. Organization, 11(5), 689-711.
• Leeuwen, T. V. and Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse historical analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83-118.
• Lounsbury, M. and Glynn, M.A. (2001). Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 545-564.
• Massey, J. E. (2001). Managing organizational legitimacy: Communication strategies for organization in crisis. Journal of Business Communication, 38(2), 153-183.
• Mazza, C. (1999). Claim, intent, and persuasion: Organizational legitimacy and the rhetoric of corporate mission statements. Springer Science-Business Media.
• Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony . The American Journal of Sociology, (83)2, 340-363.
• Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1991). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony . In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.41-62. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Meyer, J. W. and Jepperson, R. L. (2000). The actors of modern society: The cultural construction of social agency, Sociological Theory, 18(1), 101-120.
• Meyer, J.W. (2008). Reflections on institutional theories of organizations. In Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R. and Andersson, K.S., (Eds.). Handbook of organizational institutional. 788-809. Sage.
• Meyer, J. W. (2010). World society, institutional theories, and the actor. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 1-20.
• Navis, C. and Glynn, M. A. (2010). How new market categories emerge: Temporal dynamics of legitimacy, identity and entrepreneurship in satellite radio, 1990-2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(3), 439-471.
• Oakes, L. S., Townley B. and Cooper, D. J. (1998). Business planning as pedagogy: Language and control in a changing institutional field. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 257-292.
• Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. The Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
• Oliver, C. (1992). The antecedents of deinstitutionalization. Organization Studies, 13(4), 563-588.
• Patriotta, G., Gond, J. P. and Schultz, F. (2011). Maintaining legitimacy: Controversies, orders of worth and public justifications. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1804-1836.
• Phillips, N., Lawrence, T.B., and Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635-652.
• Phillips, N. and Oswick, C. (2012). Organizational discourse: Domains, debates, and directions. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 435-481.
• Pollock, T. G. and Rindova, V. P. (2003). Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 631-642.
• Powell, W.W. (1991). Expanding the scope of institutional analysis. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.183-203. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Powell, W. W. and Colyvas, J. A. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, and R. Suddaby (Eds) The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 276-298. London: Sage.
• Ridgeway, C. L. and Berger, J. (1986). Expectations, legitimation and dominance behavior in task groups. American Sociological Review, 51(5), 603-617.
• Ruef, M. and Scott, W. R. (1998). A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4), 877-904.
• Scott, W.R. (1991). Unpacking institutional arguments. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis.164-182. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Scott, W.R. (2008). Approaching adulthood: The maturing of institutional theory. Theory Sociology. 37, 427-442.
• Searle, J.R. (2005). Toplumsal Gerçekliğin İnşası. (Çev. Muhittin Macit ve Ferruh Özpilavcı), Litera Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
• Sewell, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1-29.
• Sillince, J.A. (2005). A contingency theory of rhetorical congruence. Academy of Management Review, 30(3), 608-621.
• Strang, D. and Bradburn, E.M. (2001). Theorizing legitimacy or legitimating theory? Neoliberal discourse and HMO policy, 1970-1989. In The second movement in institutional analysis. neoliberalizm in perspective, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Stryker, R. (1994). Rules, resources and legitimacy processes: Some implications for social conflict, order and change. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 847-910.
• Suchman, M. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–610.
• Suddaby, R. and Greenwood, R. (2005). Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 35-67.
• Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51(2), 273-286.
• Tolbert, P. S. and Zucker, L. G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory. In Clegg, S., Hardy, C. and Nord, W. (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies.175-190. London: Sage.
• Tost, L. P. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 686-710.
• Vaara, E., Tienari, J. and Laurila, J. (2006). Pulp and paper fiction: On the discursive legitimation of global industrial restructuring. Organization Studies, 27(6), 789-810.
• Vaara, E. and Tienari, J. (2008). A discursive perspective on legitimation strategies in multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 985-993.
• Vaara, E. and Monin, P. (2010). A recursive perspective on discursive legitimation and organizational action in mergers and acquisitions. Organization Science, 21(1), 3-22.
• Vaara, E. and Tienari, J. (2011). On the narrative construction of multinational corporations: An antenarrative analysis of legitimation and resistance in a cross-border merger. Organization Science, 22(2), 370-390.
• Waeraas, A. and Ihlen, Q. (2009). Green legitimation: The construction of an environmental ethos. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 17(2), 84-102.
• Westphal, J. D., Gulati, R. and Shortell, S. M. (1997). Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the contentand consequences of TQM adoption. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2), 366-394.
• Wiley, N. (1988). The micro – macro problem in social theory. Sociological Theory, 6(2), 254-261.
• Woodward, D. G., Edwards, P. and Birkin, F. (1996). Organizational legitimacy and stakeholder information provision. British Journal of Management, 7, 329-347.
• Zbaracki, M. J. (1998). The rhetoric and reality of total quality management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 602-636.
• Zelditch, M. J. (2001). Processes of legitimation: Recent developments and new directions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, 4-17.
• Zimmerman, M. A. and Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. The Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414-431.
• Zucker, L.G. (1991). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. In Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. (Eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. 83-107. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.