ÖRGÜTSEL FAKTÖRLERİN İÇ-GİRİŞİMCİLİĞE ETKİLERİ: KUZEY KIBRIS’TAKİ 5 YILDIZLI OTEL İŞLETMELERİ ÜZERİNDE BİR ÇALIŞMA

Year 2020, Volume: 4 Issue: 8, 547 - 561, 15.09.2020

Mete Ünal Girgen

https://doi.org/10.30520/tjsosci.747617

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın temel amacı, Kuzey Kıbrıs’ta bulunan otel işletmeler için, iç-girişimcilikte örgütsel faktörlerin ne kadar önemli olduğu göstermektir. Bu faktörlerin, rekabet ortamındaki işletmeler açısından önemini göstermek de bu çalışmanın amaçlarından biridir. Diğer bir amaç da araştırmanın bağımsız ve bağımlı değişkenlerini tek tek tanımlamaktır. Bağımsız değişkenler; Memnuniyet, İletişim, Güç mesafesi, Ödüllendirme ve Eğitim gibi örgütsel faktörler olup araştırmanın Bağımlı değişkeni ise; İç-Girişimciliktir (Yaratıcılık, Yenilikçilik ve Proaktiflik). Veri toplama yöntemlerinden biri, literatür araştırmasına dayanan veri toplama yöntemi, diğerleri ise otel çalışanları ve yöneticiler için yapılan anketlerdir. Elde edilen verilerin analiz edilmesi için SPSS (sürüm 23) kullanılmıştır. Personellere sorulan on soruya ait ana fikirler şu şekildedir: Örgütsel faktörlerin (Memnuniyet, İletişim, Güç mesafesi, Ödüllendirme ve Eğitim) İç-Girişimciliktir (Yaratıcılık, Yenilikçilik ve Proaktiflik) üzerinde olumlu etkileri vardır. Hükümet, girişimcilik kural ve düzenlemelerini yeniden düzenlemeli ve çalışanları işlerinde daha yaratıcı olmaya teşvik etmelidir. İletişim ve iş tatmini, iç girişimciliğin geliştirilmesinde kurumsal faktörler olarak çok önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Yapılan araştırmada iletişim ve iş tatmini ile performans arasındaki etkileşim dikkat çekicidir. Bu iki değişken arasında son bir anlamlı ilişki olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Örgütsel Faktörler, İç-Girişimcilik, Kuzey Kıbrıs, Turizm

THE EFFECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS ON INTERNAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP: A STUDY ON HOTELS IN NORTH CYPRUS

Abstract

The main purpose of this research is to show how important organizational factors are in internal entrepreneurship for hotel businesses in Northern Cyprus. It is also one of the aims of this study to show the importance of these factors for businesses in a competitive environment. Another aim is to define the independent and dependent variables of the research one by one. Independent variables are; Organizational factors such as Satisfaction, Communication, Power distance, Rewarding and Education and Dependent variables of the research is; Internal-Entrepreneurship (Creativity, Innovation and Proactivity). One of the data collection methods in the research is a method based on the literature research and another methods are surveys prepared for hotel employees and managers. SPSS (version 23) was used to analyze the data obtained. The main ideas for the ten questions asked to the staff are as follows: Organizational factors (Satisfaction, Communication, Power distance, Rewarding and Education) have positive effects on Internal Entrepreneurship (Creativity, Innovation and Proactivity); The government should rearrange entrepreneurship rules and regulations and encourage employees to be more creative in their work; Communication and job satisfaction play a very important role as institutional factors in the development of internal entrepreneurship; The HRM department should pay attention to these two important factors, both of which create productivity and productivity. The interaction between communication, job satisfaction and performance is remarkable. As a conclusion, this study shows that there is a significant relationship between these two variables.

Keywords

Organizational Factors, Internal Entrepreneurship, North Cyprus, Tourism

References

• Ağca, V. ve Kurt, M. (2007). İç girişimcilik ve temel belirleyicileri: kavramsal bir çerçeve, Erciyes Üniv. İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 29, 83-112.
• Ahmad, N. H., Nasurdin, A. M., & Zainal, S. R. M., (2012). Nurturing intrapreneurship to enhance job performance: the role of pro-intrapreneurship organizational Architecture, Journal of Innovation Management in Small & Medium Enterprises, Article ID 868880.
• Antoncic, B. and Hisrich, R.D. (2004). Corporate entrepreneurship contingencies and organizational wealth creation, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 518-50.
• Bulut, C. & Yilmaz, C., (2008). Innovative performance impacts of corporate entrepreneurship: an empirical research in Turkey, Proceedings of Academy of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Conference, pp. 414-417, Beijing, China.
• Corbett, A.C., Neck, H.M. & DeTienne, D.R. (2007). How corporate entrepreneurs learn from fledgling innovation initiatives: cognition and the development of a termination script. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6):829-852, Nov.
• De Villiers, I. (2008). An assessment of corporate entrepreneurship in the South African Broadcasting Corporation limited (SABC). (Unpublished MBA-dissertation.) North-West University, Potchefstroom.
• Deakins, D and Freel, M. (2009). Entrepreneurship and small firms. 5th Edition. New York: McGraw Hill, 2009.
• Dess, G.G., & Lumpkin, G.T. 2005. The role of entrepreneurial orientation in stimulating effective corporate entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Executive, 19(1): 147-156, Feb.
• Dobni, C.B. (2008). Measuring innovation cul¬ture in organizations: The development of a generalized innovation culture construct us¬ing exploratory factor analysis. European Jour¬nal of Innovation Management, 11(4), 539-559. doi:10.1108/14601060810911156.
• Fiş, M.A. (2009), Unlocking The Relationship Between Corporate Entrepreneurship and Performance, İstanbul: Sabancı Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitisü, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi.
• Foley, S. (2013, 8 Kasım). 5 reasons why intrapreneurship is important, Erişim tarihi: 29 Ocak 2016, http://www.corporate-entrepreneurs.com/2013/11/08/5-reasonswhy-intrapreneurship-is-important/
• Goosen, C.J., De Coning, T.J. & Smit, E. v.d.M. (2002). Corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: The role of management. South African Journal of Business Management, 33(4):21-27.
• Hough, J. & Screepers, R., (2008), Creating corporate entrepreneurship through strategic leadership, Journal of Global Strategic Management, vol 3.
• İşcan, Ö. F. (2006). Dönüştürücü/etkileşimci liderlik algısı ve örgütsel özdeşleşme ilişkisinde bireysel farklılıkların rolü. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 160-177.
• Karabey, C. N., ve Bingöl, D. (2010). Girişimciliğin başlangıcı olarak fırsat tanımlama. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi İşletme İktisadı Enstitüsü Dergisi: Yönetim, 67. 9-31.
• Karyotakis, K.M., & Moustakis, V.S. (2015). Innovating in public administration. Paper presented at the 12th Student Conference of Science and Technology, Athens University of Economics and Business & Hellenic Management Association, Athens, 14 May (pp. 114-124). In Greek.
• Karyotakis, K.M., Bakatsaki, M., & Moustakis, V.S. (2015). The entrepreneurial facets of public ad¬ministration. Paper presented at the Synthesis In¬ternational Scientific Conference of IT and Business- Related Research, Singidunum University, Belgrade, 16-17 April (pp. 327-331). doi:10.15308/Synthe¬sis-2015-327-331.
• Kelley, D. (2011). Sustainable corporate entrepreneurship: evolving and connecting with the organization. Article in Business Horizons (2011) 54, 73-83. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2010.09.003
• Kuratko, D. F. (2003). Entrepreneurship education: emerging trends and challenges for the 21st century. Coleman Foundation White Paper Series for the U.S. Association of Small Business & Entrepreneurship.
• Lo, M. C., Ramayah, T., Min, H. W., ve Songan, P. (2010). The relationship between leadership styles and organizational commitment in Malaysia: role of leader–member exchange. Asia Pacific business review, 16, 79-103.
• McBeth, E.W. & Rimac, T. (2004). The age of entrepreneurial turbulence: creating sustainable advantage for individuals, organizations, and societies in the new century. ESADE MBA Business Review, 2:17-23.
• Mokaya, S.O., (2012). Corporate entrepreneurship and organizational performance theoretical perspectives, approaches and outcomes, International Journal of Arts and Commerce, Vol. 1 No. 4 September 2012.
• Morris, M. H. ve Kuratko, D. F.; (2002). Corporate entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial development within organizations, Harcourt College Publishers, Orlando, Florida.
• Naktiyok, A., ve Kök, B. S. (2006). Çevresel faktörlerin iç girisimcilik üzerine etkileri, Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 8:2, , 78-96.
• Papatya, N. (2005). Sürdürülebilir başarı için iç-girişimcilik. A. Bozgeyik, Girişimcilere Yol Haritası, İstanbul: Hayat Yayıncılık No. 210/59, 83-87.
• Parry, W. K., ve Sinha, N. P. (2005). Researching the Trainability of Transformational Organizational Leadership, Human Resource Development International, 8, 165-183.
• Rutherford, W.R., & Holt, D.T., (2007). Corporate Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Look at the Innovativeness Dimension and Its Antecedents, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 429-446.
• Schneider, K. (2017). Promoting the entrepreneurial success of women entrepreneurs through education and training. Science Journal of Education. Vol. 5, No. 2, 2017, pp. 50-59. doi: 10.11648/j.sjedu.20170502.13.
• Sebora, T.C., Theerapatvong, T. & Lee, S.M., (2010). Corporate entrepreneurship in the face of changing competition: a case analysis of six Thai manufacturing firms, Journal of Organizational Change, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 453-70.
• Thornberry, N. (2003). Corporate entrepreneurship: teaching managers to be entrepreneurs, The Journal of Management Development, 22(4), 329-344.
• Uittenbogaard, B., Broens, L. & Groen, A.J. (2005). Towards a guideline for design of a corporate entrepreneurship function for business development in medium-sized technologybased companies. Creativity and innovation management, 14(3):258-271.
• Wang, C. L., (2008). ‘Entrepreneurial orientation, learning orientation, and firm performance’ Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(4): 635-656.
• Wiklund, J., and Shepherd, D. (2005). “Entrepreneurial Orientation and Small Business Performance: A Configurational Approach, Journal of Business Venturing, 20 (1), ss. 71-91.
• Wu, J. (2011). Asymmetric roles of business ties and political ties in product innovation. Journal of Busi¬ness Research, 64(11), 1151-1156. doi:10.1016/j.jbus¬res.2011.06.014.
• Yiğit, S. (2014). İnovasyona davranışsal yaklaşımın bir yansıması: kurumsal Girişimcilik, International Journal of Social Science, 30, 411-428.
• Zahra, S. & Covin, J.G., (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis”, Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 44.
• Zahra, S., D. Garvis (2000). International corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance: the moderatıng effect of international environmental hostility”, Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5), 469-492.