SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 68

REGULATORY VARIABLE ROLE OF STAFF EMPOWERMENT BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND INNOVATIVE BEHAVIOR OF EMPLOYEES

ÖRGÜT YAPISI VE ÇALIŞANLARIN YENİLİKÇİ DAVRANIŞI ARASINDA PERSONEL GÜÇLENDİRMENİN DÜZENLEYİCİ DEĞİŞKEN ROLÜ

Mürsel Güler(DUMLUPINAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1464-9834
Kemal Heybet(KÜTAHYA DUMLUPINAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-0375-5316
Ömer Nasuhi Şahin(İZMİR BAKIRÇAY ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5773-9944
Pages
65–73
Publication Date
2024-08-31
🏛️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)

Staff empowerment; It has been accepted that there is a regulatory variable between organizational structure ansupportng, between organizational structure and practice.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of the research is to examine the moderator effect of employee empowerment between organizational structure and innovative behavior.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, 338 out of 360 participants from 5 textile businesses operating in Bursa were included in the research.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Staff empowerment; It has been accepted that there is a regulatory variable between organizational structure ansupportng, between organizational structure and practice.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yapı · Güçlendirme · Yenilikçi Davranış

Abstract

The aim of the research is to examine the moderator effect of employee empowerment between organizational structure and innovative behavior. In this context, 338 out of 360 participants from 5 textile businesses operating in Bursa were included in the research. Demographic findings and regression analysis were includedinr the study. Organizational structure is included in the regression model as an independent variable, personnel empowerment moderator variable and innovative behavior and innovative behavior dimensions as production, research, supp,ort and application dependent variables. It has been found that organizational structure increases innovative behavio,r and the effect is further increased with the introduction of personnel empowerment into the model as a moderator variable. Staff empowerment; It has been accepted that there is a regulatory variable between organizational structure ansupportng, between organizational structure and practice.

Özet

Araştırmanın amacı örgüt yapısı ve yenilikçi davranış arasında personel güçlendirmenin düzenleyici etkisini incelemektir. Bu kapsamda Bursa da faaliyet gösteren 5 tekstil işletmesinden 360 katılımcıdan 338’i araştırmaya dahil edilmiştir. Araştırma için demografik bulgulara ve regresyon analizine yer verilmiştir. Örgüt yapısı bağımsız değişken, personel güçlendirme düzenleyici değişken ve yenilikçi davranış ile yenilikçi davranış boyutları olan üretme, araştırma, destekleme ve uygulama bağımlı değişken olarak regresyon modeline dahil edilmiştir. Örgüt yapısının yenilikçi davranışı arttırdığı ve modele personel güçlendirmenin düzenleyici değişken olarak girmesiyle etkinin daha da arttığı bulgulanmıştır. Personel güçlendirmenin; örgüt yapısı ve desteleme arasında, örgüt yapısı ve uygulama arasında düzenleyici değişken görevi olduğu kabul edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Güler, M., Heybet, K., Şahin, Ö. N. (2024). REGULATORY VARIABLE ROLE OF STAFF EMPOWERMENT BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND INNOVATIVE BEHAVIOR OF EMPLOYEES. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı: 68, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1379825

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (76)

  1. Aksay, K. (2011). Yenilikçilik kültürünün örgütsel yenilikçilik üzerine etkisi: konya ilinde faaliyet gösteren özel hastanelerde bir uygulama (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Konya Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü
  2. Alkhodary, D. (2016). The relationship between employees’ empowerment and innovative work behavior. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR), 4(2), 1-15.
  3. Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
  4. Amabile, T. M. (1988). From individual creativity to organizational innovation.
  5. Anand, K. N. (1996). The master chart: a potent and simple tool for continuous improvement. Total Quality Management, 7(3), 257-266. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544129650034828
  6. Appelbaum, S. H., Karasek, R., Lapointe, F. ve Quelch, K. (2014). Employee empowerment: factors affecting the consequent success or failure–Part I. Industrial and Commercial Training. 46(7), 379-386.
  7. Axtell, C. M., Holman, D. J., Unsworth, K. L., Wall, T. D., Waterson, P. E., & Harrington, E. (2000). Shopfloor innovation: Facilitating the suggestion and implementation of ideas. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 73(3), 265-285.
  8. Barker, A. (2001). Yenilikçiliğin Simyası. (Çev. Ahmet Kardam). İstanbul: MESS Yayınları Baruch, Y. (1998). Applying empowerment: Organizational model. Career Development International, 3, 82–87.
  9. Biçer, M. (2021). Lider-üye etkileşimi ve yenilikçi davranış ilişkisinde personel güçlendirmenin aracılık etkisi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13(1), 330-342.
  10. Bordin, C. M., Bartram, T., & Casimir, G. (2006). The antecedents and consequences of psychological empowerment among singaporean it employees. Management Research News, 30(1), 34-46. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170710724287
  11. Chang, L. C., ve Liu, C. H. (2008). Employee empowerment, innovative behavior and job productivity of public health nurses: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. International journal of nursing studies, 45(10), 1442-1448.
  12. Covin, J. G., Slevin D. P. ve Schultz, R.L. (1994), Implementing Strategic Mission: Effective Strategic, Structural And Tactical Choices, Journal Of Management Studies, 31, 481-505
  13. Çalışkan, A. (2013). İç odaklı örgüt kültürünün yenilikçi davranışa etkisinde personel güçlendirmenin aracılık rolü. ISGUC The Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 15(1), 88-112.
  14. Çimen, İ, ve Yücel, C. (2017). Yenilikçi davranış ölçeği (YDÖ): Türk kültürüne uyarlama çalışması. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education. 6(3) 365 – 381
  15. Çubukcu, M. (2018). Organizasyon yapısını belirleyen faktörler ve yapının önemi. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 175-190.
  16. Daft, R. L. (2015). "Organization Theory and Design." Cengage Learning.
  17. Daft, R.L., (1978). A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Acad. Manage. J. 21, 193–210.
  18. Daft, R.L., (1982). Bureaucratic versus non-bureaucratic structure and the process of innovation and change. In: Samuel Bacharach (Ed.) Research in the Sociology of Organizations içinde (ss 129 – 166), Greenwich, İngiltere: JAI Press
  19. Damanpour, F., ve Evan, W. M. (1984). Organizational innovation and performance: the problem of" organizational lag". Administrative science quarterly, 392-409.
  20. Damanpour, F., ve Gopalakrishnan, S, (1998). Theories of organizational structure and innovation adoption: the role of environmental change. J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 15, 1–24.
  21. De Jong, J.,Hartog, D. N. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 23-35.
  22. Dedahanov, A. T., Bozorov, F., ve Sung, S. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and innovative behavior: Psychological empowerment as a mediator. Sustainability, 11(6), 1770.
  23. Dedahanov, A. T., Rhee, C., & Yoon, J. (2017). Organizational structure and innovation performance. Career Development International, 22(4), 334-350. https://doi.org/10.1108/cdi-12-2016-0234
  24. Demirer, M. C. (2020). Effects of structural and psychological empowerment on career satisfaction and innovative work behavior. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 15(1), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.573761
  25. DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage publications.
  26. Dinç, Ö. E. (2010). Algılanan örgüt yapısı ile iş tatmini arasındaki ilişkide kişilik özelliklerinin rolü ve bir araştırma.
  27. Duncan, R.B., (1976). The ambidextrous organization: designing dual structures for innovation. Kilmann, R.H., Pondy, L.R., Slevin, D.P. (Eds.) içinde (ss 167 – 188). The Management of Organization: Strategy and Implementation, New York, ABD: AMA.
  28. Dust, S. B., Resick, C. J., ve Mawritz, M. B. (2013). Transformational leadership, psychological empowerment, and the moderating role of mechanistic–organic contexts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 413-433. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1904
  29. Dyer, J. H., Gregersen, H. B., ve Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator's DNA: Mastering the five skills of disruptive innovators. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
  30. Ettlie, J.E., Bridges, W.P. ve O’Keefe, R.D., (1984). Organization strategy and structural differences for radical versus incremental innovation. Manage. Sci. 30, 682–695.
  31. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). "Designing Complex Organizations." Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Gorman, T. (2007). Innovation: Create an ıdea culture, redefine your business, grow your business, F + W Publications.
  32. Goswami, S., ve Mathew, M. (2005). Definition of innovation revisited: An emprical study on Indian information technology industry. International Journal of Innovation Management, 9(3), 371–383.
  33. Gross, R. (2017). The links between innovative behavior and strategic thinking. Contemporary Management Research, 13(4), 239 – 254
  34. Gultom, L., Suroso, G., & Gasjirin, J. (2022). The Influence Of Proactive Behavior And Psychological Empowerment On Innovative Work Behavior: Moderating Role Of Job Characteristic. Journal of World Science, 1(9), 674-682.
  35. Guo, Y., Peng, Y., ve Zhu, Y. (2023). How does empowering leadership motivate employee innovative behavior: A job characteristics perspective. Current Psychology, 42(21), 18280-18290.
  36. Hage, J., (1980). Theories of organizations. Wiley, New York.
  37. Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
  38. Handayani, T., ve Hartijasti, Y. (2021). The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on Employee Innovative Behavior in Indonesian Startup Companies: The Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment. In Sixth Padang International Conference on Economics Education, Economics, Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA 2020) (pp. 589-597). Atlantis Press.
  39. Hull, F. ve Hage, J., (1982). Organizing for innovation: beyond Burns and Stalker’s organic type. Sociology 16, 564–577.
  40. Imran, F., Shahzad, K., Butt, A. F., ve Kantola, J. (2022). Structural challenges to adopt digital transformation in industrial organizations: A multiple case study. Human Factors in Management and Leadership, 55, 47 - 51.
  41. Jogaratnam, G. ve Tse, E. C. (2006). Entrepreneurial orientation and the structuring of organizations. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(6), 454-468. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110610681502
  42. Kavrakoğlu, İ. (2006). Yönetimde Devrimin Rehberi: İnovasyon”, İstanbul: Alteo Yayıncılık
  43. Knight, K.E., (1967). A descriptive model of intra-firm innovation process. J. Manage. 41, 478–496.
  44. Knol, J., ve Van Linge, R. (2009). Innovative behaviour: The effect of structural and psychological empowerment on nurses. Journal of advanced nursing, 65(2), 359-370.
  45. Lawler, E. E. III, Mohrman, S. A., ve Ledford, G. E. Jr. (1998). Strategies for high performance organizations: Employee involvement, TQM, and reengineering programs in Fortune 1000 corporations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
  46. Lawrence, P. R., ve Lorsch, J. W. (1967). "Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration." Harvard University Press.
  47. Leila, G. ve Hamidah, D. R. H. (2022) Effect of Structural Empowerment and Work Autonomy on Innovative Work Behavior in Plantation Companies, 9(1), 351 – 359
  48. Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). Mechanistic-organic organizations-An Axiomatic Theory: Authority based on bureaucracy or professional norms. International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, 14(1), 1-7.
  49. Luoh, H. F., Tsaur, S. H., ve Tang, Y. Y. (2014). Empowering employees: job standardization and innovative behavior. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(7), 1100-1117.
  50. Mallén, F., Chiva, R., Alegre, J. ve Jacob Guinot (2016). Organicity and performance in excellent HRM organizations: the importance of organizational learning capability. Rev Manag Sci 10, 463–485 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-014-0164-2
  51. Martins, E.C. ve Terblance, F., (2003), “Building Organizational Culture that Stimulates Creativity and Innovation”, European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), pp. 64-74.
  52. Mintzberg, H. (1980). "Structure in 5's: A Synthesis of the Research on Organization Design." Management Science, 26(3), 322-341.
  53. Niehoff, B. P., Moorman, R. H., Blakely, G., ve Fuller, J. (2001). The influence of empowerment and job enrichment on employee loyalty in a downsizing environment. Group & Organization Management, 26(1), 93-113.
  54. Nord, W.R. ve Tucker, S., (1987). Implementing routine and radical innovation. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. Normann, R. (1971). Organizational innovativeness: Product variation and reorientation. Administrative
  55. Science Quarterly, 203-215.OECD & Eurostat Manual: “Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovaton Data”, Oslo, 2005.
  56. Nwachukwu, C. ve Vu, H. M. (2022). Service innovation, marketing innovation and customer satisfaction: moderating role of competitive intensity. SAGE Open, 12(2), 1- 12, 215824402210821. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221082146
  57. Park, S. J., ve Yi, Y. (2023). Assessing moderation effects with a heterogeneous moderated regression analysis. Quality & Quantity, 57(1), 701-719.
  58. Pelit, E., Öztürk, Y., ve Arslantürk, Y. (2011). The effects of employee empowerment on employee job satisfaction: A study on hotels in Turkey. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(6), 784-802
  59. Peters, T. (1989), Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution Paperback, Pan, London. Pierce, J.L., ve Delbecq, A.L., (1977). Organizational structure, individual attitudes and innovation. Acad. Manage. Rev. 2, 26–37.
  60. Pondy, L. R. (1972). Letter to the Editor, Administrative Science Quarterly. 17, 408-409. Rhee, J., Seog, S. D., Bozorov, F., ve Dedahanov, A. T. (2017). Organizational structure and employees' innovative behavior: The mediating role of empowerment. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 45(9), 1523-1536.
  61. Rogers, E.M., (1983). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, New York. Rose, M. (1978). Industrial Behaviour, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
  62. Schonberger, R. (1990), Building a Chain of Customers, Hutchinson Business Books, London.
  63. Shalley, C. E., ve Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33-53.
  64. Singh, M., ve Sarkar, A. (2013). Dimensions, outcomes and mediating roles of empowerment. Management and Labour Studies, 38(4), 315-333.
  65. Singh, M., ve Sarkar, A. (2019). Role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between structural empowerment and innovative behavior. Management Research Review, 42(4), 521-538.
  66. Sousa, C. M. P., Coelho, F., & Guillamon-Saorin, E. (2012). Personal values, autonomy, and self-efficacy: Evidence from frontline service employees. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20, 159–170.
  67. Sparrowe, R. T. (1994). Empowerment in the hospitality industry: an exploration of antecedents and outcomes. Hospitality Research Journal, 17(3), 51-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/109634809401700306
  68. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment ın the workplace: Dimentions, measurement and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
  69. Stamarski, C. S., ve Son Hing, L. S. (2015). Gender inequalities in the workplace: the effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’ sexism. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 135488. Streiner, D. L. (2003). Developing and evaluating instruments for clinical research. Oxford University Press, USA.
  70. Şahbaz, A. ve Tanyeri, M. (2018). Küçük ve orta büyüklükteki işletmelerde inovasyona yönelik tutumlar ve inovasyon engelleri: Çanakkale ilinde kobi’ler üzerine bir araştırma. ÇOMÜ Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 3 (2), 233-263.
  71. Şeyhanlıoğlu,H,Ö, 2021. Otel işletmelerinde duygusal emek ve temel benliğin yapıcı norm dışı davranış üzerindeki etkisi: Personel güçlendirmenin aracılık rolü. (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi) Sakarya Uygulamalı Bilimler Üniversitesi.
  72. Tworek, K., Walecka-Jankowska, K., Zgrzywa-Ziemak, A., ve Martan, J. (2015). It and knowledge management influence on organizational learning capability—the mediating role of organic structures. China-Usa
  73. Business Review, 14(7) 362 - 378 https://doi.org/10.17265/1537-1514/2015.07.003 Wilkinson, A, (1997). Empowerment: theory and practice. School of Management, UMIST, Manchester, UK. Personnel Review 27,1.
  74. Yıldırım, F., ve Karabey, C. N. (2016). Örgüt kültürünün yeniliğe etkisinde personel güçlendirmenin biçimlendirici rolü. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(2), 426-453.
  75. Yukl, G. A., ve Becker, W. S. (2006). Effective empowerment in organizations. Organization Management Journal, 3(3), 210-231.
  76. Zhu, X. ve Bao, M. (2017). Substitutes or complements? individual-focused and group-focused transformational leadership in different organizational structures in new firms. Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal, 38(5), 699-718. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-04-2016-0097