Vekalet ve Temsil Teorilerinin Kültür Boyutlarıyla İrdelenmesi
Anahtar Kelimeler:
Kültür boyutları- temsil kuramı- vekalet kuramı- yönetim kuramlarıÖzet
Gelişen teknoloji ve değişen rekabet koşulları örgütlerin insan kaynağına duyduğu ihtiyacı artırmaktadır. Küresel yapı ve teknolojinin verdiği imkanlar ölçüsünde dağınık yapılarda çalışan organizasyonlar farklı kültürlerden bireyleri istihdam etmektedir. Çoğunlukla merkezden uzak, hedeflerle, takımlar halinde yönetilen organizasyonların yöneticilerinin yaklaşımları da hayati önem arz etmektedir. Bu çalışmada vekalet kuramı ve temsil kuramının varsayımlarından bahsedilmiştir. Daha sonra Hofstede’ in kültür boyutları irdelenmiş ve iki yönetim kuramı ile ilişkilendirilerek açıklanmıştır.
Referanslar
Akın, A. (2004). Mülkiyet sahipliğinden kaynaklanan yönetim hakkının devri açısından post-modern yönetsel kontrol yaklaşımları ve stratejileri. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22 (1), s. 127-148.
Aktaş, M. (2010). İzleyicilerin kültürel değerleri ve liderliğe duydukları ihtiyaç. Doktora Tezi, Başkent Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme Anabilim Dalı, Yönetim ve Organizasyon Doktora Programı. Ankara.
Aktaş, M. , Gelfand, M. ve Hanges, P. (2015). Cultural tightness-looseness and perceptions of effective leadership. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, s. 1-16.
Alchian, A., ve Demsetz, H. (1972). Production, information costs and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62: s. 777-795.
Arıkan, Ö. U. ve Çalışkan, A. (2021). Rekabet stratejilerinin örgütsel performansa etkisi, girişimciliğin aracılık rolü. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8 (1), 339-369. DOI: 10.30798/makuiibf.819843
Berle, A. , ve Means, G. (1932). The modern corporation and private property. New York: Macmillan.
Block, P. (1993). Stewardship: Choosing service over self-interest, Barret- Koehler Publ, San Fransisco.
Coase, R. H. (1937). The Nature of the firm. readings in price theory. Homewood, IL, Irwin. New Series, 16 (4), s. 331-351.
Craig, J.,ve Dibrell, C. (2006). The natural environment, innovation, and firm performance: A
comparative study. Family Business Review, 19(4), s.275-288.
Davis, J. H., Allen, M. R., ve Hayes, H. D. (2010). Is blood thicker than water? A study of stewardship perceptions in family business. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(6), s. 1093-1116.
Davis, J., Schoorman, F., ve Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review. 22(1). s. 20-47.
Dibrell, C., ve Moeller, M. (2011). The impact of a service-dominant focus strategy and stewardship culture on organizational innovativeness in family-owned businesses. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(1), s. 43-51.
Donaldson, L., (1990a). The ethereal hand: organizational economics and management theory, Academy of Management Review, 15, s. 369–381.
Donaldson, L., (1990b). A rational basis for criticisms of organizational economics: a reply to Barney, Academy of Management Review, 15, s. 394–401.
Donaldson, L. and Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory. Australian Journal of Management, 16, s. 49–64.
Eddleston, K. A. (2008). Commentary: The prequel to family firm culture and stewardship: The leadership perspective of the founder. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), s. 1055-1061.
Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W., ve Zellweger, T. M. (2012). Exploring the entrepreneurial behavior of family firms: does the stewardship perspective explain differences?. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), s. 347-367.
Eddleston, K. A. ve Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), s. 545-565.
Eisenhardt, K. (1985). Control: Organizational and economic approaches. Management Science, 31, s. 134-149.
Eisenhardt, K. (1988). Agency and institutional explanations of compensation in retail sales. Academy of Management Journal, 31, s. 488-511.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1), s. 57-74.
Erdoğan, E. O. ,(2016). Temsil teorisi çerçevesinde sahiplik yapısının işletmelerin sermaye yapısı kararları üzerine etkisi: Bist uygulaması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24 (2), s.159-181.
Fama, E. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88, s. 288-307.
Fama, E. , ve Jensen, M. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, s.301-325.
García de Soto, B., Agustí-Juan, I., Joss, S., & Hunhevicz, J. (2019). Implications of Construction 4.0 to the workforce and organizational structures. International Journal of Construction Management, 1–13. doi:10.1080/15623599.2019.1616414
Gentner, S. (2016) “Industry 4.0: Reality, Future or just Science Fiction? How to Convince Today’s Management to Invest in Tomorrow’s Future! Successful Strategies for Industry 4.0 and Manufacturing IT.” Chimia, 70(9): 628-633.
Harris, M. ve Raviv, A. (1978). Some results on ıncentive contracts with applications to education and employment, health insurance, and law enforcement, The American Economic Review, 68 (1), s. 20-30.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership and organization: do American theories apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 2, s. 98-122.
Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories, Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2).
Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimension in management and planning. Asia Pasific Journal of Management, January, s. 82-99.
Hofstede, G. (1986). Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, s. 301-320.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J. ve Minkov, M. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: Mc Graw-Hill.
Hofstede G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories, The Academy of Managemet Perspectives; 7(1), s.ş 81-94.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), s. 1-26.
Hofstede, G. ve Bond, M.H. , (1984). Hofstede's culture dimensions: an independent validation using rokeach's value survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15, s. 417-433.
Hofstede, G. ve Bond, M.H. , (1988). The Confucius connection: from cultural roots to economic growth, Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), s. 5-21.
Hofstede, G. ve McCrae, R. R. (2004). Culture and personality revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38, s. 52-88.
Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohayv, D.D. ve Sanders, G., (1990). Measuring organizational cultures: A qualitative and quantiative study across twenty cases, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(2), s. 286-316.
Jensen, M. ve Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Man- agerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, s. 305-360.
Jensen, M. ve Meckling, W. (1994). The natura of man, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 7(2), s. 419.
Karra, N. , Tracey, P. , ve Phillips, N. (2006). Altruism and agency in the family firm: Exploring the role of family, kinship, and ethnicity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), s. 861-877.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., ve Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. The Journal of Finance, 54(2), s. 471–517.
Le Breton‐Miller, I. ve Miller, D. (2009). Agency vs. stewardship in public family firms: A social embeddedness reconciliation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6), s. 1169- 1191.
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review. 50 (4): s. 370–96.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. and Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integration model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, s. 709–34.
Miller, D., Le Breton‐Miller, I., ve Scholnick, B. (2008). Stewardship vs. stagnation: An empirical comparison of small family and non‐family businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), s. 51-78.
Mitnick, B. (1986). The theory of agency and organizational analysis. unpublished working paper, University of Pittsburgh.
Ouchi, W. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25, s. 833-848.
Pearson, A. W., ve Marler, L. E. (2010). A leadership perspective of reciprocal stewardship in
family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(6), s. 1117-1124.
Pepper, A. ve Gore, J. (2012). Behavioral agency theory: new foundations for theorizing about executive compensation. Journal of management (In Press) ISSN 1557-1211
Pieper, T. M., Klein, S. B., ve Jaskiewicz, P. (2008). The impact of goal alignment on board existence and top management team composition: Evidence from family-influenced Businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(3), s. 372-394.
Phatak, V.A. (2000). Uluslar arası Yönetim, (Çev. Atilla Baransel), Jön Ajans.
Ross, S. A., (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem, Decision Making Uncertainty, 63 (2), s. 134-139.
Sığrı U. ve Tığlı M. (2006). Hofstede’ in “Belirsizlikten Kaçınma” kültürel boyutunun yönetsel-örgütsel süreçlere ve pazarlama açısından tüketici davranışlarına etkisi, Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 21(1).
Şeşen, H.; Soran, S.ve Caymaz, E. (2014). Toplumsal kültürün üniversite öğrencilerinin girişimcilik niyetine etkisi: sosyal ağ kullanımının aracılık rolü, Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı: 41.
Turnbull, S. (1997). Corporate governance: its scope concern and theories, Scholarly Research and Theory Papers, 5 (4), s. 180-205.
Yıldız, F. ve Doğan, M. (2012). Genel müdür’ün yönetim kurulu üyesi olması halinin menkul kıymet yatırım ortaklığı firmalarının performansına etkisi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi.17 (2), s.353-366.
Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., Neubaum, D. O., Dibrell, C., ve Craig, J. (2008). Culture of family commitment and strategic flexibility: The moderating effect of stewardship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), s. 1035-1054.
