Öğretmenlerin Algıladıkları Örgütsel Desteğin Örgütsel Sonuçları Üzerindeki Etkisi: Bir Meta-Analiz Çalışması

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 119 - 135, 17.04.2020

Gamze Kasalak

https://doi.org/10.18394/iid.572572

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, öğretmenlerin algıladıkları örgütsel desteğin örgütsel sonuçlar üzerindeki etkisini belirten araştırmaların etki büyüklüklerini ortaya koymak ve elde edilecek etki büyüklüğünün; örneklem bölgesi ve eğitim kademesi moderatör değişkenlerine göre farklılık gösterip göstermediğini meta-analiz yöntemiyle araştırmaktır. Bu araştırmalardan öğretmenlerin algıladıkları örgütsel desteğin örgütsel sonuçlarına etkisine ilişkin ve kodlama stratejisi uygun verileri kapsayan 23 araştırma bu araştırmaya dâhil edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçları, öğretmenlerin algıladığı örgütsel desteğin örgüt-iş uyumu sonuçlarını yüksek düzeyde ve pozitif yönde; davranışsal ve öznel iyi oluş sonuçlarını zayıf düzeyde ve pozitif yönde etkilediğini göstermiştir. Örneklem bölgesi ve öğretim kademesi değişkenleri öğretmenlerin algıladıkları örgütsel desteğin örgütsel sonuçları üzerindeki etkisinde moderatör değişkenler olarak anlamlı değildir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Algılanan örgütsel destek, Örgüt-iş uyumu sonuçları, Davranışsal sonuçlar, Öznel iyi oluş sonuçları, Meta-analiz

The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support on Organizational Variables: A Meta-Analysis Study

Öz

The purpose of this research is to reveal the effect size of the research that indicates the effect of the teachers' perceived organizational support on organizational outcomes and is to investigate whether the effect size to be obtained differs according to the sample region and educational level moderator variables by meta-analysis method. 23 researches, having appropriate data related to the effects of teachers’ perceived organizational support on organizational variables and coding strategy were included in this study. The findings showed that perceived organizational support has high positive effects on job orientation toward the organization and work, whereas it has low positive effects on behavioural outcomes. And also, perceived organizational support has low positive effects on subjective well-being. The study indicating that the sampling region and educational level have a moderator role on the effect of perceived organizational support on organizational variables is not supported.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Perceived Organizational Support, Job Orientation Toward The Organization And Work, Behavioural Outcomes, Subjective Well-Being

Kaynakça

• Abed, F. & Elewa, A. H. (2016). The Relationship between organizational support, work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior as perceived by staff nurses at different hospitals. IOSR Journal of Nursing and Health Science (IOSR-JNHS), 5(4), 113-123.
• Ahmed, I., Nawaz, M. M., Ali, G. & Islam, T. (2015). Perceived organizational support and its outcomes: A meta-analysis of latest available literature, Management Research Review, 38(6), 627-639, https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0220
• Annamalai T., Abdullah A. G. K. & Alazidiyeen N. J. (2010). The mediating effects of perceived organizational support on the relationships between organizational justice, trust and performance appraisal in Malaysian secondary schools, European Journal of Social Sciences,13(4), 623-632.
• Armeli, S., Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. & Lynch, P. (1998). Perceived organizational support and police performance: The moderating influence of socioemotional needs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 288-297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.288
• Arshadi, N. (2011). The relationships of perceived organizational support (POS) with organizational commitment, in-role performance, and turnover intention: Mediating role of felt obligation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1103 – 1108
• Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/258189
• Asgari, A., Silong, A. D., Ahmad A. & Samah B. A. (2008). The Relationship between transformational leadership behaviors, organizational justice, leadermember exchange, perceived organizational support, trust in management and organizational citizenship behaviors, European Journal of Scientific Research, 23(2), 227-242.
• Aube, C., Rousseau, V. & Morin, E. M. (2007). Perceived organizational support and organizational commitment: The moderating effect of locus of control and work autonomy. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(5), 479-495. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940710757209.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Cooper, C. L. & Robertson, I. T. (1986). The international review of industrial and organizational psychology. Chichester and NewYork: John Wiley&Sons.
• Çoğaltay, N., Karadağ, E. & Öztekin, Ö. (2014). Okul müdürlerinin dönüşümcü liderlik davranışlarının öğretmenlerin örgütsel bağlılığına etkisi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 20(4), 483-500. doi: 10.14527/kuey.2014.019.
• Çoğaltay, N., Anar, S. & Karadağ, E. (2017). Öğretmenlerin tükenmişliğini etkileyen faktörler: cinsiyetin ve medeni durumun etkisine yönelik bir meta-analiz çalışması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(3), 695-707. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2016018517
• Dağyar & Demirel (2015). Probleme Dayalı Öğrenmenin Akademik Başarıya Etkisi: Bir Meta-Analiz Çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 40(181), 139-174.
• Diener, E., Scollon, C. N. & Lucas, R. E. (2004). The evolving concept of subjective well-being: The multifaceted nature of happiness. In P. T. Costa & I. C. Siegler (Eds.), Advances in cell aging and gerontology (Vol. 15, pp. 187-220). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• Dinçer, S. (2014). Eğitim bilimlerinde uygulamalı meta-analiz. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Dipaola, M. F. & Hoy, W. K.(2005). Organizational citizenship of faculty and achievement of high school students. The High School Journal, 88(3), 35-44.
• Duffy, J. A. & Lilly, J. (2013). Do individual needs moderate the relationships between organizational citizenship behavior, organizational trust and perceived organizational support? Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 14(3), 185-197.
• Eder, P. & Eisenberger, R. (2008). Perceived organizational support: Reducing the negative influence of coworker withdrawal behavior. Journal of Management, 34(1), 55-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206307309259.
• Eisenberger, R., Aselage, J., Sucharski, I. L. & Jones, J. R. (2004). Perceived organizational support. In Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M., Shore, L. M., Taylor, M. S. & Tetrick, L. E. (Eds.), The employment relationship: Psychological and contextual perspectives, 206-225. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. & Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). Perceived organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(1), 51-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.1.51.
• Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500.
• Eisenberger, R. & Stinglhamber, F. (2011). Perceived organizational support: Fostering enthusiastic and productive employees. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/12318-000.
• Erdaş, K. D. (2010). Lider-üye mübadelesi, algılanan örgütsel destek ve öz denetim kişilik özelliğinin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışları üzerindeki etkileri (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Edwards, M. R. & Peccei, R. (2010). Perceived organizational support, organizational identification, and employee outcomes: Testing a simultaneous multifoci model. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9(1), 17-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000007.
• Fay, D. & Frese, M. (2001). The concept of personal initiative: An overview of validity studies. Human Performance, 14(1), 97-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327043HUP1401_06
• Hoy, W. K, Tarter, C. J. & Witkoskie, L. (1992). Faculty trust in colleagues: linking the principal with school effectiveness. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 26, 38–45.
• Howes, R., Citera, M. & Cropanzano, J. (1995). Goal hierarchies and plan revision. Motivation and Emotion, 19, 77-98.
• Jawahar, I. M., Stone, T. H. & Kisamore, J. L. (2007). Role conflict and burnout: The direct and moderating effects of political skill and perceived organizational support on burnout dimensions. International Journal of Stress Management, 14(2), 142-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.142.
• Jebeli, M. J. & Etebarian, A. (2015). Perceived organizational support and organizational citizenship behavior. MAGNT Research Report,3(4), 153-158. DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2015/3-4/MAGNT.15.
• Kalkan, F. (2017). The Effect of gender on school administrators and teachers’ perceptions of learning organization: A meta-analysis study. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(191),165–183. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2017.5033Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3), 341-349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.3.341.
• Kaufman, J. D., Stamper, C. L. & Tesluk, P. E. (2001). Do supportive organizations make for good corporate citizens? Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(4), 436-449.
• Kurtessis, J. N., Eisenberger, R., Ford, M. T., Buffardi, L. C., Stewart, K. A. & Adis, C. S. (2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1854-1884. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554.
• Landis J. R. & Koch G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 33(1):159-74.
• Leary, H. M. (2012). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning versus traditional lecture-based learning: A meta-analysis. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Utah State University, Utah, USA.
• Mael, F. A. & Ashforth, B. E. (1995). Loyal from day one: Biodata, organizational identification, and turnover among newcomers. Personnel Psychology, 48(2), 309-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01759.x
• Maslach, C. (1982). Burnout: The cost of caring. Englewood Cliffs, New-Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Ng, T. W. H. (2015). The incremental validity of organizational commitment, organizational trust, and organizational identification homas. Journal of Vocational Behavior 88, 154–163.
• Organ, D. W. (1988). Issues in organization and management series. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA, England: Lexington Books/D. C. Heath and Com.
• Orthner, D. K. & Pittman, J. F. (1986). Family contributions to work commitment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48(3), 573-581. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/352043
• Panaccio, A. & Vandenberghe, C. (2009). Perceived organizational support, organizational commitment and psychological well-being: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(2), 224-236.
• Parker, S. K. & Collins, C. G. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors, Journal of Management, 36(3), 655-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321554.
• Piercy, N. F., Cravens, D. W., Lane, N. & Vorhies, D. W. (2006). Driving organizational citizenship behaviors and salespersons in role behavior performance: The role of management control and perceived organizational support. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 244-62.
• Radin, D. İ. & Ferrari, D. C. (1991). Effects of consciousness on the fall of dice: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 5(1), 6 1-83.
• Randall, M. L., Cropanzano, R., Bormann, C. A. & Birjulin, A. (1999). Organizational politics and organizational support as predictors of work attitudes, job performance, and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(2), 159-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199903)20:2<159::AID-JOB881>3.0.CO;2-7.
• Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R. & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825-836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.825.
• Rhoades, L. & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698-714.
• Scott, S. & Lane, V. (2000). A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity. The Academy of Management Review,25(1), 43-62.
• Sezgin, F. (2005). Örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışları: Kavramsal bir çözümleme ve okul açısından bazı çıkarımlar. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1), 317-339.
• Shore, L. M. & Shore, T. H. (1995). Perceived organizational support and organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano & M. Kacmar (Eds.), Organizational politics, justice and support: Managing the social climate in the work place (pp. 149-164). Westport, CT: Quorum.
• Shore, L. M. & Tetrick, L. E. (1991). A construct validity study of the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 637-643. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.5.637.
• Silbert, L. T. (2005). The effect of tangible rewards on perceived organizational support (Unpublished master's thesis), University of Waterloo, Canada
• Sluss, D. M., Klimchak, M. & Holmes, J. J. (2008). Perceived organizational support as a mediator between relational exchange and organizational identification. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(3), 457-464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.09.001.
• Tarter, C. J., Bliss, J. R. & Hoy, W. K. (1989). School characteristics and faculty trust in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 25(3), 294-308.
• Turunç, Ö. & Çelik, M. (2010). Çalışanların algıladıkları örgütsel destek ve iş stresinin örgütsel özdeşleşme ve iş performansına etkisi, Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 17(2), 183-206.
• Walters, G. & Raybould, M. (2007). Burnout and perceived organisational support among front-line hospitality employees, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 14(2), 144-156. doi:10.1375/jhtm.14.2.144
• Wayne, S. J. & Green, S. A. (1993). The effects of leader-member exchange on employee citizenship and ımpression management behavior. Human Relations, 46(12), 1431–1440. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679304601204.
• Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M. & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/257021.
• Wickramasinghe, D. & Wickramasinghe, V. (2011). Perceived organisational support, job involvement and turnover intention in lean production in Sri Lanka. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 55(5-8), 817-830.
• Yoshimura, K. E. (2003). Employee traits, perceived organizational support, supervisory communication, affective commitment and ıntent to leave: Group differences (Unpublished master's thesis). North Carolina State University, Raleigh NC.
• Zhai, Q., Wang, S. & Weadon, H. (2017). Thriving at work as a mediator of the relationship between workplace support and life satisfaction. Journal of Management & Organization, 1-17. doi:10.1017/jmo.2017.62.
• Zagenczyk, T. J. (2001). A social influence analysis of perceived organizational support ((Unpublished doctoral dissertation),, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.