Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2021, , 27 - 36, 30.03.2021

Abdullah Turk

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391

Abstract

References

  • Abidi, S.S.R. (2006). Healthcare Knowledge Sharing: Purpose, Practices and Prospects. In R.K. Bali, Dwivedi, A. (Ed.), Healthcare Knowledge Management: Issues, Advances and Successes, İçinde (65–86). Springer, Heidelberg.
  • Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. (2001), “Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conception, foundations and research issues”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 107-136.
  • Bolarinwa, J.A.; Olorunfemi, D. Y. (2009), “Organizational Communication for Organizational Climate and Quality Service in Academic Librarian”, Library Philosophy and Practice, 1-5
  • Brakensiek, F.C., (2002), “Knowledge Management for EHS Professionals”, Occupational Health-Safety, January, pp. 72-74.
  • Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., & Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction. Prentice-Hall.
  • Chang Lee, K., S. Lee and I. W. Kang. “KMPI: measuring knowledge management performance”, Information & Management, Vol. 42, Issue 3, 2005, pp. 469-482.
  • Cummings, J.N. (2004), “Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization”, Management Science, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 352-364.
  • Dandridge, T.C., I. Mitroff, W.F. Joyce (1980) “Organizational Symbolism: A Topic to Expand Organizational Analysis”, Academy of Management Review, 5, 77- 82.
  • De Vries, R. E. ve Hooff B. (2006). ‘Explaining knowledge sharing’. Sage Publications. 33, 115-135.
  • FAA (1999) Strategic Program Plan, Aircraft Maintenance Division & Office of Aviation Medicine. Electronic version retrieved March 16, 2009 from http://library.erau.edu/guest /find/online-full-text/hfami.htm#strategic
  • Federal Aviation Administration (2004) Crew Resource Management, Advisory Circular 120- 51E, Washington, D.C.
  • Fleming, J.L. ve Monda-Amaya, L.E. (2001). Process Variables Critical for Team Effectiveness. Remedial and Special Education. 22, 158-171.
  • Garnett, James L; Justin Marlowe ve Sanjay K Pandey, Mar/Apr 2008, “Penetrating the Performance Predicament: Communication as a Mediator or Moderator of Organizational Culture’s Impact on Public Organizational Performance”, Public Administration Review, 68, 2; ABI/INFORM Global, pp. 266-281
  • Garvin, A. D. (1993). Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, JulyAugust, 78-89.
  • Galunic, C., Sengupta, K. and Petriglieri, J.L. (2014), “Deus ex machina? Career progress and the contingent benefits of knowledge management systems”, European Management Journal, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 13-23.
  • Gibbs, Graham R. (2002) Qualitative Data Analysis: Explorations with NVivo. Open University, Buckingham. ISBN 9780335200849
  • Gold, A., H. A., Malhotra and A. H. Segars. “Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective”, Journal of management information systems, Vol. 18, Issue 1, 2001, pp. 185-214.
  • Gupta, S., Sharma, S.L., Dutta, K., (2007). Using Knowledge Mapping to Support Knowledge Management İn Health Organizations. (24.8.2009). Http://Library.İgcar.Gov.İn/Readit2007/Conpro/Htmls/S2.Html.
  • Grant,R. M. (1996). 'Prospering in dynamically-com-petitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration',Organization Science, 7(4),pp.375-387
  • Hamel, G. (1999). The quest for value. Executive Excellence. 16(3): 2-13.
  • Hayashi, A.M. (2004).’’Building beter teams’’. Intelligence. Knowledge Management. 45(2), 5.
  • Hidalgo, C.A. (2011), “The value in the links: networks and the evolution of organizations”, in Allen, P., Maguire, S. and McKelvey, B. (Eds), Sage Handbook on Management and Complexity, Sage, London, pp. 257-569.
  • Husted, K. and Michailova, S. (2002). Knowledge Sharing in Russian Companies with Western Participation. Management International. Vol. 6 (2), pp. 17-28.
  • Hutchison A J, Johnston L H, Breckon J D. Using QSR-NVivo to facilitate the development of a grounded theory project: an account of a worked example. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2010, 13(4): 283-302.
  • Jensen, M. T. (2003). Organizational Communication a Review: Research and Development Report. http://www.agderforskning.no/rapporter/82002046.pdf. Kaynaktan 11/01/2006 tarihinde alınmıştır
  • Kelly, Dawn, 2000, “Using vision to improve organisational communication”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal; 21, 1/2; Abı/Inform Global, pp. 92- 101.
  • Keskin, H., Akgün, AE, Koçoğlu, İ. (2016). Örgüt Teorisi (1. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Kitzinger, J., (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. Bmj, 311(7000), 299-302.
  • Kogut, B. and U. Zander (1992). 'Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology', Organization Science, 3(3), pp.383-397.
  • Kuckartz, U., R¨adiker, S., 2019. Analyzing Focus Group Data, in: Analyzing Qualitative Data with MAXQDA: Text, Audio, and Video. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15671-8_15.
  • Linn Hsiu-F. and Lee Gwo-G., (2005), “Perceptions Of Senior Managers Toward KnowledgeSharing Behavior”, Management Decision, Emerald Publishing Limited 0025-1747, Vol. 42(1), 74-78.
  • Marton, F. (1994). In the International Encyclopedia of Education. Second edition, Volume 8. Eds. Torsten Husén & T. Neville Postlethwaite. Pergamon, 4424 – 4429.
  • MAXQDA,2020. MAXQDA. ........................................................................
  • Miller, R. (2002). Motivating and managing knowledge workers: blending strategy and culture in knowledge organizations, Knowledge Management Review, 5 (1), 6-19.
  • Miles, I. (2012). KIBS and knowledge dynamics in client–supplier interactions. In E. Di Maria, R. Grandinetti, & B. Di Bernardo (Eds.), Exploring knowledge intensive business services (pp. 13–34). London: Palgrave MacMillan.
  • Nevile M (2006) Communication in Context: a Conversational Analysis Tool for Examining Recorded Data in Investigations of Aviation Occurences, ATSB Research and Analysis Report.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
  • Potter, L. R. (2003). The Communicator as Gardener. Communication World, 20(2), 5-14.
  • Polanyi, M. (1997). The tacit dimension. In L. Prusak (Ed.), Knowledge in organizations (pp. 135–146). Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
  • Riege, Andreas (2005) Three-Dozen Knowledge-Sharing Barriers Managers Must Consider. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 9 No. 3. pp. 18-35.
  • Saillard, E.K., 2011. Systematic versus interpretive analysis with two CAQDAS packages: NVivo and MAXQDA. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum. Qualitative Social Research.
  • Senge, M. P. (2000). Beşinci disiplin, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları. Çevirenler: Ayşegül İldeniz, Ahmet Doğukan.
  • Senge, P.M. (1990a). The fifth discipline: the arts and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
  • Senge, M. P. (1990). The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations. Sloan Management Review, (Fall), 9-18.
  • Sexton J B ve Helmreich R L (2000) Analyzing cockpit communication: The links between language, performance, error and workload, Human Performance in Extrem Environments, 5 (1): pp 63-68.
  • Simon H. A. (1991). Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2: 125–134.
  • Steinheider, B., Al-Hawamdeh, S., (2004). Team Coordination, Communication and Knowledge Sharing İn Smss and Large Organizations. J. Inf Knowl Manage, 3(3). 223-232.
  • Taylor, James R. ve Franqois Cooren, (1997). “What makes communication organizational? How the many voices of a collectivity become the one voice of an organization”, Journal of Pragmatics, 27, pp. 409-438.
  • Welsh, E. 2002. “Dealing with Data: Using NVivo in the Qualitative Data Analysis Process [12 paragraphs].” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 3 (2)

EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

Year 2021, , 27 - 36, 30.03.2021

Abdullah Turk

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391

Abstract

Purpose- Aviation has an important place in the world economy. The correct management of operations in this sector is equivalent to the correct management of financial resources. Operations in aviation are a combination of very complex relationships. Effective information sharing and communication cohesion play a vital role in these relationships. This study focuses on the impact and importance of information sharing in aviation on team communication.
Methodology- The study is handled from the perspective of knowledge-based theory and learning organization. The study was conducted through semi-structured interviews with 15 senior operations managers in aviation. The data obtained from these interviews were analyzed in two different qualitative data programs, NVivo 12 and Maxqda 20.
Findings- As a result of the study, an intense relationship was found between criteria such as coordination, organizational success, operational success and effective decision making.
Conclusion- As a result of the study, a cycle was determined. It has been concluded that the impact of information sharing in aviation on team communication and the continuity of operational success supports the organizational success with coordination efficiency in the long term.

Keywords

Information sharing team communication organizational learning aviation sector

References

  • Abidi, S.S.R. (2006). Healthcare Knowledge Sharing: Purpose, Practices and Prospects. In R.K. Bali, Dwivedi, A. (Ed.), Healthcare Knowledge Management: Issues, Advances and Successes, İçinde (65–86). Springer, Heidelberg.
  • Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. (2001), “Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conception, foundations and research issues”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 107-136.
  • Bolarinwa, J.A.; Olorunfemi, D. Y. (2009), “Organizational Communication for Organizational Climate and Quality Service in Academic Librarian”, Library Philosophy and Practice, 1-5
  • Brakensiek, F.C., (2002), “Knowledge Management for EHS Professionals”, Occupational Health-Safety, January, pp. 72-74.
  • Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., & Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction. Prentice-Hall.
  • Chang Lee, K., S. Lee and I. W. Kang. “KMPI: measuring knowledge management performance”, Information & Management, Vol. 42, Issue 3, 2005, pp. 469-482.
  • Cummings, J.N. (2004), “Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization”, Management Science, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 352-364.
  • Dandridge, T.C., I. Mitroff, W.F. Joyce (1980) “Organizational Symbolism: A Topic to Expand Organizational Analysis”, Academy of Management Review, 5, 77- 82.
  • De Vries, R. E. ve Hooff B. (2006). ‘Explaining knowledge sharing’. Sage Publications. 33, 115-135.
  • FAA (1999) Strategic Program Plan, Aircraft Maintenance Division & Office of Aviation Medicine. Electronic version retrieved March 16, 2009 from http://library.erau.edu/guest /find/online-full-text/hfami.htm#strategic
  • Federal Aviation Administration (2004) Crew Resource Management, Advisory Circular 120- 51E, Washington, D.C.
  • Fleming, J.L. ve Monda-Amaya, L.E. (2001). Process Variables Critical for Team Effectiveness. Remedial and Special Education. 22, 158-171.
  • Garnett, James L; Justin Marlowe ve Sanjay K Pandey, Mar/Apr 2008, “Penetrating the Performance Predicament: Communication as a Mediator or Moderator of Organizational Culture’s Impact on Public Organizational Performance”, Public Administration Review, 68, 2; ABI/INFORM Global, pp. 266-281
  • Garvin, A. D. (1993). Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, JulyAugust, 78-89.
  • Galunic, C., Sengupta, K. and Petriglieri, J.L. (2014), “Deus ex machina? Career progress and the contingent benefits of knowledge management systems”, European Management Journal, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 13-23.
  • Gibbs, Graham R. (2002) Qualitative Data Analysis: Explorations with NVivo. Open University, Buckingham. ISBN 9780335200849
  • Gold, A., H. A., Malhotra and A. H. Segars. “Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective”, Journal of management information systems, Vol. 18, Issue 1, 2001, pp. 185-214.
  • Gupta, S., Sharma, S.L., Dutta, K., (2007). Using Knowledge Mapping to Support Knowledge Management İn Health Organizations. (24.8.2009). Http://Library.İgcar.Gov.İn/Readit2007/Conpro/Htmls/S2.Html.
  • Grant,R. M. (1996). 'Prospering in dynamically-com-petitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration',Organization Science, 7(4),pp.375-387
  • Hamel, G. (1999). The quest for value. Executive Excellence. 16(3): 2-13.
  • Hayashi, A.M. (2004).’’Building beter teams’’. Intelligence. Knowledge Management. 45(2), 5.
  • Hidalgo, C.A. (2011), “The value in the links: networks and the evolution of organizations”, in Allen, P., Maguire, S. and McKelvey, B. (Eds), Sage Handbook on Management and Complexity, Sage, London, pp. 257-569.
  • Husted, K. and Michailova, S. (2002). Knowledge Sharing in Russian Companies with Western Participation. Management International. Vol. 6 (2), pp. 17-28.
  • Hutchison A J, Johnston L H, Breckon J D. Using QSR-NVivo to facilitate the development of a grounded theory project: an account of a worked example. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2010, 13(4): 283-302.
  • Jensen, M. T. (2003). Organizational Communication a Review: Research and Development Report. http://www.agderforskning.no/rapporter/82002046.pdf. Kaynaktan 11/01/2006 tarihinde alınmıştır
  • Kelly, Dawn, 2000, “Using vision to improve organisational communication”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal; 21, 1/2; Abı/Inform Global, pp. 92- 101.
  • Keskin, H., Akgün, AE, Koçoğlu, İ. (2016). Örgüt Teorisi (1. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Kitzinger, J., (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. Bmj, 311(7000), 299-302.
  • Kogut, B. and U. Zander (1992). 'Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology', Organization Science, 3(3), pp.383-397.
  • Kuckartz, U., R¨adiker, S., 2019. Analyzing Focus Group Data, in: Analyzing Qualitative Data with MAXQDA: Text, Audio, and Video. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15671-8_15.
  • Linn Hsiu-F. and Lee Gwo-G., (2005), “Perceptions Of Senior Managers Toward KnowledgeSharing Behavior”, Management Decision, Emerald Publishing Limited 0025-1747, Vol. 42(1), 74-78.
  • Marton, F. (1994). In the International Encyclopedia of Education. Second edition, Volume 8. Eds. Torsten Husén & T. Neville Postlethwaite. Pergamon, 4424 – 4429.
  • MAXQDA,2020. MAXQDA. ........................................................................
  • Miller, R. (2002). Motivating and managing knowledge workers: blending strategy and culture in knowledge organizations, Knowledge Management Review, 5 (1), 6-19.
  • Miles, I. (2012). KIBS and knowledge dynamics in client–supplier interactions. In E. Di Maria, R. Grandinetti, & B. Di Bernardo (Eds.), Exploring knowledge intensive business services (pp. 13–34). London: Palgrave MacMillan.
  • Nevile M (2006) Communication in Context: a Conversational Analysis Tool for Examining Recorded Data in Investigations of Aviation Occurences, ATSB Research and Analysis Report.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
  • Potter, L. R. (2003). The Communicator as Gardener. Communication World, 20(2), 5-14.
  • Polanyi, M. (1997). The tacit dimension. In L. Prusak (Ed.), Knowledge in organizations (pp. 135–146). Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
  • Riege, Andreas (2005) Three-Dozen Knowledge-Sharing Barriers Managers Must Consider. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 9 No. 3. pp. 18-35.
  • Saillard, E.K., 2011. Systematic versus interpretive analysis with two CAQDAS packages: NVivo and MAXQDA. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum. Qualitative Social Research.
  • Senge, M. P. (2000). Beşinci disiplin, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları. Çevirenler: Ayşegül İldeniz, Ahmet Doğukan.
  • Senge, P.M. (1990a). The fifth discipline: the arts and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
  • Senge, M. P. (1990). The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations. Sloan Management Review, (Fall), 9-18.
  • Sexton J B ve Helmreich R L (2000) Analyzing cockpit communication: The links between language, performance, error and workload, Human Performance in Extrem Environments, 5 (1): pp 63-68.
  • Simon H. A. (1991). Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2: 125–134.
  • Steinheider, B., Al-Hawamdeh, S., (2004). Team Coordination, Communication and Knowledge Sharing İn Smss and Large Organizations. J. Inf Knowl Manage, 3(3). 223-232.
  • Taylor, James R. ve Franqois Cooren, (1997). “What makes communication organizational? How the many voices of a collectivity become the one voice of an organization”, Journal of Pragmatics, 27, pp. 409-438.
  • Welsh, E. 2002. “Dealing with Data: Using NVivo in the Qualitative Data Analysis Process [12 paragraphs].” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 3 (2)
There are 49 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Business Administration
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Abdullah Turk This is me 0000-0002-2804-4203

Publication Date March 30, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021

Cite

APA Turk, A. (2021). EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS. Research Journal of Business and Management, 8(1), 27-36. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391
AMA Turk A. EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS. RJBM. March 2021;8(1):27-36. doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391
Chicago Turk, Abdullah. “EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS”. Research Journal of Business and Management 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 27-36. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391.
EndNote Turk A (March 1, 2021) EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS. Research Journal of Business and Management 8 1 27–36.
IEEE A. Turk, “EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS”, RJBM, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 27–36, 2021, doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391.
ISNAD Turk, Abdullah. “EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS”. Research Journal of Business and Management 8/1 (March 2021), 27-36. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391.
JAMA Turk A. EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS. RJBM. 2021;8:27–36.
MLA Turk, Abdullah. “EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS”. Research Journal of Business and Management, vol. 8, no. 1, 2021, pp. 27-36, doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1391.
Vancouver Turk A. EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT AND IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION SHARING IN THE AVIATION SECTOR WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS. RJBM. 2021;8(1):27-36.

Research Journal of Business and Management (RJBM) is a scientific, academic, double blind peer-reviewed, quarterly and open-access online journal. The journal publishes four issues a year. The issuing months are March, June, September and December. The publication languages of the Journal are English and Turkish. RJBM aims to provide a research source for all practitioners, policy makers, professionals and researchers working in all related areas of business, management and organizations. The editor in chief of RJBM invites all manuscripts that cover theoretical and/or applied researches on topics related to the interest areas of the Journal. RJBM publishes academic research studies only. RJBM charges no submission or publication fee.

Ethics Policy - RJBM applies the standards of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). RJBM is committed to the academic community ensuring ethics and quality of manuscripts in publications. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden and the manuscripts found to be plagiarized will not be accepted or if published will be removed from the publication. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work. Plagiarism, duplicate, data fabrication and redundant publications are forbidden. The manuscripts are subject to plagiarism check by iThenticate or similar. All manuscript submissions must provide a similarity report (up to 15% excluding quotes, bibliography, abstract, method).

Open Access - All research articles published in PressAcademia Journals are fully open access; immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Open access is a property of individual works, not necessarily journals or publishers. Community standards, rather than copyright law, will continue to provide the mechanism for enforcement of proper attribution and responsible use of the published work, as they do now.