KURUMSAL MANTIKLARIN İÇSELLEŞTİRİLMESİ VE STRATEJİK PRATİKLER: TÜRK TEKSTİL SANAYİİNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Bu çalışma bir yanıyla Türk tekstil sanayiinde yaşanan dönüşüm kurumsal mantıkperspektifinden araştırmayı öte yandan da kurumsal mantıkların içselleştirilmesi, stratejikpratikler ve örgütsel performans arasındaki ilişkiyi ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Buamaç doğrultusunda Türk tesktil sanayiinde nitel araştırma teknikleri kullanılarak görgül birçalışma yapılmıştır. Doküman incelemeleri ve görüşmeler yoluyla toplanan verilerin analizikurumsal mantıkların melezleşmesi ile stratejik pratiklerin melezleşmesi arasında doğrusalbir bağlantı olmadığını göstermiştir. Araştırma bulguları kurumsal mantıklarınmelezleşmesiyle, stratejik pratiklerin melezleşmediğini bunun aksine seçici bağlanma(Pache ve Santos, 2013) mekanizmasının kullanılabildiğini ortaya koymuştur. Araştırmabulguları, kurumsal mantıkların benimsenmesinde ve stratejik pratiklerinbiçimlendirilmesinde uyulacak kurumsal mantık türünün hayatta kalabilmede önemliolduğuna işaret etmektedir.

INTERNALIZATION OF INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS AND STRATEGIC PRACTICES: A RESEARCH STUDY IN THE TURKISH TEXTILE INDUSTRY

This study aims to investigate the transformation of the Turkish textile industry through the institutional logic perspective. On the other hand, this study aims to find out the relationship between internalization of the institutional logic, strategic practices, and organizational performance. In accordance with these purposes, the ampirical research has been performed through the usage of qualitative research techniques. The analysis of document examinations as well as the interview notes showed that there was no linear relationship between the hybridization of institutional logic and hybridization of strategic practices. Research findings revealed that the hybridization of institutional logic didn’t hybridize to strategic practices, but that selective coupling (Pache and Santos, 2013) mechanism could be used. Research findings indicate that the type of institutional logic to be followed in adopting institutional logic and shaping strategic practices is important in survival.

PDF

___

Anand, N. ve Peterson, R. A. (2000). When Market Information Constitutes Fields: Sensemaking of Markets in the Commercial Music Industry. Organization Science, 11(3), 270-284.
Ansoff, H. I. ve Brandenburg, R. G. (1971a). A Language for Organization Design: Part I. Management Science, 17(12), B705-B716.
Ansoff, H. I. ve Brandenburg, R. G. (1971b). A Language for Organization Design: Part II. Management Science, 17(12), B717-B731.
Baron, J. N. (2004). Employing Identities in Organizational Ecology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(1), 3-32.
Battilana, J. Besharov, M. ve Mitzinneck, B. (2017). On Hybrids and Hybrid Organizing: A Review and Roadmap for Future Research. R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence ve R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Instititutionalism (ss. 133-169). California: SAGE Publication.
Battilana, J. ve Dorado, S. (2010). Building Sustainable Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Commercial Microfinance Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419-1440.
Battilana, J. ve Lee, M. (2014). Advancing Research on Hybrid OrganizingInsights from the Study of Social Enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397-441.
Canales, R. (2014). Weaving Straw into Gold: Managing Organizational Tensions between Standardization and Flexibility in Microfinance. Organization Science, 25(1), 1-28.
Dışişleri Bakanlığı (2011). 1/95 Sayılı Ortaklık Konseyi Kararı (Gümrük Birliği Kararı). http://www.mfa.gov.tr/1-95-sayili-ortaklik-konseyi-kararigumruk-birligi-karari.tr.mfa (03.11.2017).
Durand, R. Szostak, B. Jourdan, J. ve Thornton, P. H. (2013). Institutional Logics as Strategic Resources. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 39A, 165-203.
Fligstein, N. (1985). The Spread of the Multidivisional Form among Large Firms, 1919-1979. American Sociological Review, 50(3), 377-391.
Greenwood, R. Raynard, M. Kodeih, F. Micelotta, E. R. ve Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317-371.
İstanbul Sanayi Odası (2017). Geçmiş Yıl Verileri. http://www.iso500.org.tr/iso-500-hakkinda/gecmis-yil-verileri/ (20.11.2017).
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategic Practices: An Activity Theory Perspective on Continuity and Change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 23- 55.
Jarzabkowski, P. (2004). Strategy as Practice: Recursiveness, Adaptation, and Practice-in-Use. Organization Studies, 25(4), 529-560.
Jay, J. (2013). Navigating Paradox as a Mechanism of Change and Innovation in Hybrid Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137-159.
Litrico, J-P. ve David, R. J. (2017). The Evolution of Issue Interpretation within Organizational Fields: Actor Positions, Framing Trajectories, and Field Settlement. Academy of Management Journal, 60(3), 986-1015.
McPherson, C. M. ve Sauder, M. (2013). Logics in Action: Managing Institutional Complexity in A Drug Court. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2), 165-196.
Miller, D. ve Friesen, P. H. (1980). Momentum and Revolution in Organizational Adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 23(4), 591-614.
Miller, D. ve Friesen, P. H. (1982). Structural Change and Performance: Quantum versus Piecemeal-Incremental Approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 25(4), 867-892.
Miles, R. E. Snow, C. C. Meyer, A. D. ve Coleman, H. J. (1978). Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546-562.
Ocasio, W. ve Radoynovska, N. (2016). Strategy and Commitments to Institutional Logics: Organizational Heterogeneity in Business Models and Governance. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 287-309.
Öniş, Z. ve Şenses, F. (2007). Global Dynamics, Domestic Coalitions and a Reactive State: Major Policy Shifts in Post-War Turkish Economic Development. METU Studies in Development, 34(December), 251-286.
Öngüt, Ç. E. (2007). Türk Tekstil ve Hazır Giyim Sanayiinin Değişen Dünya Rekabet Şartlarına Uyumu. Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı İktisadi Sektörler ve Koordinasyon Genel Müdürlüğü Uzmanlık Tezi, Yayın No. 2703.
Özseven, M. ve Danışman, A. (2017). Kurumsal Değişim, Örgütsel Kimlikler ve Örgütsel Uygulamalar: Türk Kamu Bankalarının 2001 Ekonomik Krizi Sonrası Durumu. ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi, 44(3), 335-374.
Pache, A-C. Santos, F. (2013). Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972-1001.
Pratt, M. G. ve Foreman, P. O. (2000). Classifying Managerial Responses to Multiple Organizational Identities. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 18-42.
Resmi Gazete. (1933). Sümerbank Kanunu, Kanun No. 2262. R. G. Sayı: 2424, R. G. Tarih: 11 Haziran 1933, Ankara.
Resmi Gazete. (1995a). 6401 sayılı İhracata Yönelik Devlet Yardımları Kararı. R. G. Sayı: 22168, R, G. Tarih: 11 Ocak 1995, Ankara.
Resmi Gazete. (1995b). 95769 Sayılı Sümerbank’ın Özelleştirilmesine İlişkin Özelleştirme Yüksek Kurulu Kararı, R. G. Sayı: 22402, R. G. Tarih: 12 Eylül 1995, Ankara.
Resmi Gazete. (2004). Yatırımların ve İstihdamın Teşviki İle Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılması Hakkında Kanun, Kanun No. 5084. R. G. Sayı: 25365, R. G. Tarih: 6 Şubat 2004, Ankara.
Tekeli, İ. ve İlkin, S. (2009a). Uygulamaya Geçerken Türkiye’de Devletçiliğin Oluşumu, (1. baskı), Türkiye Belgesel İktisat Tarihi: 2, İstanbul: Bilge Kültür Sanat, Yayın No. 301.
Tekeli, İ. ve İlkin, S. 2009b. Savaş Sonrası Ortamında 1947 İktisadi Kalkınma Planı (1. baskı), Türkiye Belgesel İktisat Tarihi: 3, İstanbul: Bilge Kültür Sanat, Yayın No. 302.
Thornton, P. H. ve Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional Logics and The Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958-1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801-843.
Thornton, P. H. (2001). Personal versus Market Logics of Control: A Historically Contingent Theory of the Risk of Acquisition. Organization Science, 12(3), 294-311.
Thornton, P. H. ve Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional Logics. R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin ve R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (ss. 99-129). Los Angeles: SAGE.
Thornton, P.H. Ocasio, W. ve Lounsbury, M. (2012). The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
York, J. G. Hargrave, T. J. ve Pacheco, D. F. (2016). Converging Winds: Logic Hybridization in the Colorado Wind Energy Field. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 579-610.
Whetten, D. A. (2006). Albert and Whetten Revisited: Strengthening the Concept of Organizational Identity. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(3), 219-234.
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as Practice. Long Range Planning, 29(5), 731-735.
Whittington, R. (2003). The Work of Strategizing and Organizing: For a Practice Perspective. Strategic Organization, 1(1), 117-125.
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the Practice Turn in Strategy Research. Organization Studies, 27(5), 613-634.
Zietsma, C. Groenewegen, P. Logue, D. M. and Hinings, C. R. (Bob). (2017). Field or Fields? Building the Scaffolding for Cumulation of Research on Institutional Fields. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 391-450.
http://www.tekstildunyasi.com.tr/TR/archive-Erişim 13.02.2018