Vol. 6 No. 4 (2018): BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT STUDIES: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
Articles

THE EFFECT OF MINTZBERG’S CLASSIFICATION OF MANAGERIAL ROLES ADOPTED BY MANAGERS, ON HUMAN RESOURCES’ PERCEPTION OF ENDOGENEITY ANS EXOGENEITY STATUS IN SERVICE SECTOR: A SAMPLE APPLICATION

PDF (Türkçe)
  • Nilüfer RÜZGAR
Nilüfer RÜZGAR
Bursa Teknik Üniversitesi, İnsan Ve Toplum Bilimleri Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü, Yönetim Ve Organizasyon Anabilim Dalı
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i4.325

Published 2019-01-03

How to Cite

RÜZGAR, N. (2019). THE EFFECT OF MINTZBERG’S CLASSIFICATION OF MANAGERIAL ROLES ADOPTED BY MANAGERS, ON HUMAN RESOURCES’ PERCEPTION OF ENDOGENEITY ANS EXOGENEITY STATUS IN SERVICE SECTOR: A SAMPLE APPLICATION. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(4), 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i4.325

Abstract

The integration of human resources with the organization via behavioural approaches, constitutes great importance in the organizations that are active in service sector; because of the fact that the employees are in face-to-face interaction with customers at most of their times. Endogeneity and exogeneity status is one of these approaches. A member who feels belonged to the organization and given important responsibilities; acquires endogeneity status and thus enhance performance. On the other hand, a member who acquires exogeneity status will feel the same interaction in a negative way and thus, organizational efficiency will be affected in a negative way because of the low quality of the service. Along with this, the member of the organization perceives these statuses, in accordance with the adopted and displayed roles by the leader. In this sense, the purpose of this study is to research the effect of managerial roles, which are cathegorized by Mintzberg, adopted by leaders on employees’ perception of endogeneity and exogeneity status. For this purpose, survey method is applied in Yalova branch of Ramada Hotels. The survey consists Sharp’s (1993) Managerial Roles Scale, which aims at classifying managerial roles with 46 items; Perceived Insider Status Scale of 6 items developed by Stamper and Masterson (2002), which aims at measuring the employees’ endogeneity and exogeneity status perception; and demographical questions. A total of 150 surveys are delivered and 108 participants have responded to the surveys. The data gathered is analysed by SPSS 20.0 package programme. The findings show that while the decision-maker and informative roles do not have a statistically meaningful effect on perceived insider status of employees, interpersonnel roles have a decreasing effect on perceived insider status of employees.

PDF (Türkçe)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Atkinson, J. (1984). Manpower strategies for flexible organisations. Personnel Management.16. 28-31.
  2. Aydınlı, H. (2003). Örgüt kültürünün yönetim açısından önemi. Bilgi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2. 79-99.
  3. Baron, R. A. (1986). Behavior in Organizations. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
  4. Bayat F. (2005). Örgüt içerisindeki rol ve işlevleri bakımından ‘orta kademe’ yöneticileri. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(3). s. 1-13
  5. Bayram M. (2011). Otel işletmelerinin genel müdür profillerinin değerlendirilmesi üzerine bir Araştırma. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi. 22(1). Bahar: 35-48
  6. Becker, G. (1964). Human capital. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  7. Behehstifar M., Motahari J., ve Moghadam M. (2012). Relation between managers’ traits with their assessment of the successful criterion in Iran. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2(9). pp. 301-314
  8. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
  9. Boone L. ve Kurtz D. (2001). CEOs: a Group profile. Business Horizons, pp. 38-42
  10. Broadbridge A. (1999). A profile of female retail managers: Some insights. The Service Industries Journal. 19(3). pp. 135-161.
  11. Buonocore, F., Metallo C. ve Salvatore, D. (2009).Behavioural consequences of job insecurityand perceived insider statusfor contingent workers.Papers of SystemCongress, pp. 1–29, Internet Address: www. oa2009.it/papers/ Buonocore_Metallo_ Salvatore. pdf, Date of Access: 11.07.2011.
  12. Burgaz B. (1997). Managerial roles approach and the prominent study of Henry Mintzberg and some empirical studies upon the principal work. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 13: 9-20
  13. Chen, Z. X. ve Aryee, S. (2007). Delegationand employee work outcomes: The cultural context of mediating processes in China. Academy of Management Journal. 50(1). pp. 226-238.
  14. Chow, I. H-S. (2002). Organizational socialization and career success of Asian managers. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(4), ss.720–737.
  15. Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M. ve Jacqueline, A-M. (2002). A psychological contract perspective on organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.173
  16. Daft, R. L. (1994). Management. New York: Dryden Press.
  17. Davis, R. C. (1951). The fundamentals of top management. New York: Harper
  18. Eleren, A. ve Kılıç, B. (2007). Turizm sektöründe servqual analizi ili hizmet kalitesinin ölçülmesi ve bir termal otelde uygulama. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi. 9(1). 235-263
  19. Eren, E. , (2010). Örgütsel davranış ve yönetim psikolojisi. İstanbul: Beta Basım. 12.Basım
  20. Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management. (Trans. C. Storrs). London: Pitman.
  21. Gökçe O. ve Şahin A. (2003). Yönetimde rol kavramı ve yönetsel roller. SÜ İİBF Sosyal Ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, s. 133-156
  22. Katz, D. ve Kahn, R.L. (1966).The Social Psychology of Organizations. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
  23. Koçoğlu E. (2010). İşletmelerde yöneticilerin karar verme süreci ve bu süreçte bilişim sistemlerinin kullanımı: Ankara ili örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Atılım Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Ana Bilim Dalı.
  24. Koontz, H., O'Donnell, C. ve Weihrich, H. (1980). Management: A Book of Readings. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  25. Lapalme, M. E., Stamper, C., Semard, G. ve Tremblay, M. (2009). “Bringingthe Outside in: Can ‘‘external’’ workers experience insider status? Journal of Organizationa lBehavior. 30(9). pp. 919–940.
  26. McMillan, D.W., ve Chavis, D.M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6-23.
  27. Merriam, S. B., Johnson-Bailey, J., Lee, M. Y., Kee, Y., Ntseane, G., ve Muhamad, M. (2001). Power and positionality: Negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures. International Journal of Lifelong Education. 20(5), 405-416.
  28. Miller, H. E., ve Terborg, J. R. (1979). Job attitudes of part-time and full-time employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 380-386.
  29. Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York: Harper & Row. Management Library: HD 31.M457
  30. Mintzberg, H. (1990). The manager’s job: Folklore and fact. Harvard Business Review. March – April, pp. 49 – 61.
  31. Mullings, B. (1999).Insideror outsider, bothor neither: Some dilemmas of interviewing in a cross-cultural setting. Geoforum. 30. pp. 337–350
  32. Nelson, D. L. (1987). Organizational socialization: A stress perspective. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 8, ss.311-324
  33. Özdevecioğlu, M. ve Balcı, F. (2011). Algılanan içsellik statüsünün örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı üzerindeki etkisi. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 37. ss.41-64.
  34. Rüzgar, N. ve Kurt, M. (2013). Yöneticiler aslında ne yapar? Yönetici rolleri hakkında Bursa merkezli işletmelerde bir araştırma. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi. 5(4).
  35. Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E. Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H. ve Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management. 37(4). pp. 1–28.
  36. Snyder, N. H. ve Wheelen, T. L.(1981). Managerial roles: Mintzberg and the management process theorists. In K. H. Chung (Ed.). Academy of Management Proceedings, 149-253.
  37. Stamper, C. L. ve Masterson, S. (2002). Insider or outsider? How employee perceptions of insider status affect their work behaviory. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 23.pp. 875– 894.
  38. Stassen, M.,Armstrong M. ve Schlosser F.(2011).Perceived organizational membershipandthe retention of older workers.Journal of Organizational Behavior. 32. pp. 319–344
  39. Wang, L., Chu, X. ve Ni, J. (2010). Leader-member exchange and organizational citizenship behavior: A new perspectivefrom perceived insider statusand Chinese traditionality. Frontiers Business Research China. 4(1). pp. 148–169.
  40. Wright P., Theerathorn P., Gilmore J. ve Lado A. (1992). Top managers, organizational culture and strategic profiles: Implications for business performance. American Business Review, pp. 25-36.
  41. Yue V. (2012). Role and position: Job expectation and practises. Asian Social Science, 8(1). January 2012, pp. 12-26