Journals / Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

The Paradox Between Institutional Logics In Organizational Fields: The Case of Turkish Military Service Field

Örgütsel Alanda Kurumsal Mantıklar Arası Oluşan Çelişki: Türk Askerlik Hizmeti Alanı Örneği

Pages
153–176
Publication Date
2015-08-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Broadly, the results indicate that dominant and alternative logics can support each other in order to preserve field’s static condition, rather than interfere with each other so as to induce a permanent transformation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Turkish military services field can be conceptualized for embracing two distinct and inconsistent types of institutional logics, namely; mandatory military service logic as the dominant and pragmatic logics as the alternatives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:We examine the relationship between the dominant logic which determines legitimate organizational activities and alternative logics which are activated sporadically in the field of Turkish military services.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Broadly, the results indicate that dominant and alternative logics can support each other in order to preserve field’s static condition, rather than interfere with each other so as to induce a permanent transformation.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kurumsal değişim · kurumsal mantıklar · egemen mantık

Abstract

Turkish military services field can be conceptualized for embracing two distinct and inconsistent types of institutional logics, namely; mandatory military service logic as the dominant and pragmatic logics as the alternatives. We examine the relationship between the dominant logic which determines legitimate organizational activities and alternative logics which are activated sporadically in the field of Turkish military services. From this standpoint, the circumstances whereby pragmatic logics as alternative institutional logics become effective in the field without devitalizing the dominant logic is explored. Broadly, the results indicate that dominant and alternative logics can support each other in order to preserve field’s static condition, rather than interfere with each other so as to induce a permanent transformation.

Özet

Bu çalışmada farklı kurumsal mantıkların birlikte var olduğu Türk askerlik hizmeti alanında egemen mantığın etkisini sürdürdüğü dönem içerisinde alternatif mantıkların etkinleştirilmesine yol açan koşulların neler olduğu açıklığa kavuşturulmaktadır. Ayrıca Türk askerlik hizmeti alanında örgütsel faaliyetleri yönlendiren egemen bir mantık olan zorunlu askerlik hizmeti mantığının, profesyonel askerlik hizmeti mantığı ve bedelli askerlik hizmeti mantığı olarak tanımlanan alternatif mantıklar ile ilişkisi incelenmektedir. Bu anlamda Türk askerlik hizmeti alanının incelenmesi, egemen ve alternatif mantıkların birbirlerini desteklemeleri sayesinde örgütsel alanda oluşabilecek kalıcı bir dönüşümden ziyade, alanın durağanlığını ve sürdürülebilirliğini nasıl koruduklarının anlaşılmasına katkıda bulunması açısından önemli görülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KALEMCİ, R. A., GÖKOĞLU, M. M., TÜZÜN, İ. K. (2015). The Paradox Between Institutional Logics In Organizational Fields: The Case of Turkish Military Service Field. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 153–176. https://ajindex.com/articles/104402

References (15)

  1. Altınay, A. (2004), The Myth of the Military-Nation: Militarism, Gender and Education in Turkey. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Press.
  2. Altınay, A., Bora, T. (2002), Ordu Militarizm ve Milliyetçilik. T. Bora (Der.) Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 140–154.
  3. Andrews, K. R. (1971), The concept of corporate strategy. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin. Askerlik Kanununun Geçici 37. Maddesinin Uygulanmasına Dair Usul ve Esaslar, (1999), T.C. Resmi Gazete. 23876, 14.11.1999. Askerlik Kanununa Bir Geçici Madde Eklenmesi Hakkında Kanun Tasarısı, (1999), http://www.tbmm.gov.tr/sirasayi/donem21/yil01/ss188m.htm, 18.09.2009.
  4. Audia, P., Freeman, J., Reynolds, P. (2006), Organizational foundings in community context: Instruments manufacturers and their interrelationship with other organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51: 381-419.
  5. Blatter, J. (2003), Beyond Hierarchies and Networks: Institutional Logics and Change in Transboundary Spaces. Governance, 16 (4): 503-526.
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1990), The logic of practice. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
  7. Bulger, S. L. (1996), Performance Management: The Foundation for a High – Performance Organization. National Productivity Review, 1995/96: 101-109.
  8. Campbell, J. (2004), Institutional Change and Globalization. New Jersey: Princeton. Collins, J. C., Porras, J. I. (1994), Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harper Business. Çatışmayı Önle, Gerginliği Azalt, İstikrarı Yükselt, (1999), Genelkurmay Başkanı Org. Hüseyin Kıvrıkoğlu ile Söyleşi. Ulusal Strateji, (5): 18-26.
  9. Çörekçi, A. (2001), Silahlı Kuvvetler’de Yeniden Yapılanma. Ulusal Strateji, 18: 37- 41. DiMaggio, P. (1997), Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23: 263- 287. DiMaggio, P., Powell, W. (1991), Introduction. W. Powell ve P. DiMaggio, (Der.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1-38.
  10. Erözden, O. (1997), Ulus-Devlet. Ankara:
  11. Dost Kitabevi Yayınları.
  12. Fligstein, N. (1985), The spread of the multidivisional form among large firms, 1919- 1979. American Sociological Review, 50: 377-91.
  13. Fligstein, N. (1987), The Interorganizational Power Struggle: The Rise of Finance Personel to Top Leadership in Large Corporations, 1919- 1979. American Sociological Review, 52: 44-58.
  14. Fligstein, N. (1990), The transformation of corporate control. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  15. Fligstein, N. (1997), Social skill and institutional theory. American Beha