SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 3

T

İş Özerkliğinin İşle İlgili Öz-Yeterlilik ve Çalışan Sesi Üzerindeki Etkisi: Gaziantep’teki İmalat İşletmelerine Yönelik Bir Araştırma

Merve Kaplan(GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5648-0902
Pages
827–851
Publication Date
2026-09-23
🏛️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)

Elde edilen sonuçlara göre işle ilgili öz-yeterliliğin, iş özerkliğinin destekleyici ses ve yasaklayıcı ses üzerindeki etkisinde kısmi aracılık etkisi olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Araştırma, iş özerkliğinin işle ilgili öz-yeterlilik ve çalışan sesi üzerindeki etkisini incelemek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Araştırma, Gaziantep’teki imalat işletmelerinde görev yapan beyaz yakalı çalışanlara yönelik gerçekleştirilmiş ve toplamda 487 adet geçerli anket elde edilmiştir.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Elde edilen sonuçlara göre işle ilgili öz-yeterliliğin, iş özerkliğinin destekleyici ses ve yasaklayıcı ses üzerindeki etkisinde kısmi aracılık etkisi olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:487 adet
⚙️Variables:İş özerkliği · işle ilgili öz-yeterlilik · çalışan sesi

Özet

Araştırma, iş özerkliğinin işle ilgili öz-yeterlilik ve çalışan sesi üzerindeki etkisini incelemek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma, Gaziantep’teki imalat işletmelerinde görev yapan beyaz yakalı çalışanlara yönelik gerçekleştirilmiş ve toplamda 487 adet geçerli anket elde edilmiştir. Bu kapsamda iş özerkliği, işle ilgili öz-yeterlilik ve çalışan sesi arasındaki ilişki “kısmi en küçük kareler” (PLS) ve “yapısal eşitlik modellemesi” (SEM) ile test edilmiştir. Gerçekleştirilen yapısal eşitlik modeli sonuçlarına göre, iş özerkliğinin işle ilgili öz-yeterlilik üzerinde pozitif anlamlı etkisi olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Araştırmada ayrıca, işle ilgili öz-yeterliliğin destekleyici ses ve yasaklayıcı ses üzerinde pozitif anlamlı etkisi olduğu sonucu elde edilmiştir. Araştırmada son olarak işle ilgili öz-yeterliliğin aracılık etkisi incelenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre işle ilgili öz-yeterliliğin, iş özerkliğinin destekleyici ses ve yasaklayıcı ses üzerindeki etkisinde kısmi aracılık etkisi olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kaplan, M. (2026). T. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 3, 827–851. https://doi.org/10.18074/ckuiibfd.1660501

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (67)

  1. Abramson, M. (1985). The autonomy-paternalism dilemma in social work practice. Social Casework, 66(7), 387-393.
  2. Ahuja, M.K., Chudoba, K.M., Kacmar, C.J., McKnight, D.H. ve George, J.F. (2007). IT road warriors: balancing work-family conflict, job autonomy, and work overload to mitigate turnover intentions. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 1-17.
  3. Ali, F., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M. ve Ryu, K. (2018). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research. International journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1), 514-538. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-10-2016-0568
  4. Azari Noughabi, M. ve Amirian, S. M. R. (2021). Assessing the contribution of autonomy and self-efficacy to EFL teachers’ self-regulation. English Teaching & Learning, 45(1), 71-88.
  5. Bagozzi, R. P. ve Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94. doi:10.1007/BF02723327
  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986 (23-28), 2.
  7. Becker, J. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M. ve Völckner, F. (2015). How collinearity affects mixture regression results. Marketing Letters, 26, 643-659. doi:10.1007/s11002-014-9299-9
  8. Bollen, K. A. (1986). Sample size and Bentler and Bonett's nonnormed fit index. Psychometrika, 51 (3), 375-377. doi:10.1007/BF02294061
  9. Brey, P. (1999). Worker autonomy and the drama of digital networks in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 22, 15-25.
  10. Chamberlin, M., Newton, D. W., & Lepine, J. A. (2017). A meta‐analysis of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms: Identification of key associations, distinctions, and future research directions. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 11-71.
  11. Clausen, T., Pedersen, L. R. M., Andersen, M. F., Theorell, T., & Madsen, I. E. (2022). Job autonomy and psychological well-being: A linear or a non-linear association?. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 31(3), 395-405.
  12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  13. Daly, J. P. ve Geyer, P. D. (1994). The role of fairness in implementing large‐scale change: Employee evaluations of process and outcome in seven facility relocations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(7), 623-638.
  14. De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., De Witte, H., Niesen, W. ve Van Hootegem, G. (2014). On the relation of job insecurity, job autonomy, innovative work behaviour and the mediating effect of work engagement. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(3), 318-330.
  15. Dedahanov, A. T., Rhee, C. ve Gapurjanova, N. (2019). Job autonomy and employee voice: Is work-related self-efficacy a missing link?. Management Decision, 57(9), 2401-2413. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-06-2017-0607
  16. Dedahanov, A. T., Fayzullaev, A. K. U., Abdurazzakov, O. S., Rakhmonov, D. A. ve Zakirova, O. (2022). Paternalistic leadership styles and employee voice: The roles of trust in supervisors and self-efficacy. Sustainability, 14(19), 1-14.
  17. Dijkstra, T. K. ve Henseler, J. (2015). Consistent and asymptotically normal PLS estimators for linear structural equations. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 81, 10-23. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2014.07.008
  18. Dobbin, F. ve Boychuk, T. (1999). National employment systems and job autonomy: Why job autonomy is high in the Nordic countries and low in the United States, Canada, and Australia. Organization Studies, 20(2), 257-291.
  19. Dundon, T., Wilkinson, A., Marchington, M. ve Ackers, P. (2004). The meanings and purpose of employee voice. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15(6), 1149-1170.
  20. Dyne, L. V., Ang, S. ve Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359-1392.
  21. Dysvik, A. ve Kuvaas, B. (2011). Intrinsic motivation as a moderator on the relationship between perceived job autonomy and work performance. European Journal of Work and Organizationa Psychology, 20(3), 367-387.
  22. Edokpolor, J., Otache, I. ve Osifo, K. (2022). Work self-efficacy and engagement of vocational business education lecturers. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 14(3), 112-124.
  23. Eibl, B., Lang, F. R. ve Niessen, C. (2020). Employee voice at work: The role of employees’ gender, self-efficacy beliefs, and leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(4), 570-585.
  24. Fast, N. J., Burris, E. R. ve Bartel, C. A. (2014). Managing to stay in the dark: Managerial self-efficacy, ego defensiveness, and the aversion to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 57(4), 1013-1034.
  25. Federici, R. A. (2013). Principals’ self-efficacy: Relations with job autonomy, job satisfaction, and contextual constraints. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 73-86.
  26. Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi:10.1177/002224378101800104
  27. Gorden, W. I., Infante, D. A. ve Graham, E. E. (1988). Corporate conditions conducive to employee voice: A subordinate perspective. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 1(2), 101-111.
  28. Hackman, J. R. ve Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279.
  29. Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. ve Ringle, C.M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24. doi:10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
  30. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. ve Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. New Challenges to International Marketing (Advances in International Marketing), 20, 277-319. doi:10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
  31. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. ve Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  32. Heslin, P.A. ve Klehe, U.C. (2006). Self-efficacy. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Industrial/Organizational Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 705-708). Thous and Oaks: Sage.
  33. Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
  34. Kaiser, H.F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36, doi: 10.1007/ BF02291575.
  35. Kakkar, H, Tanirala, S, Srivastava, N ve Kamdar, D (2016) Dispositional antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(9), 1342-1351.
  36. Kao, K. Y., Hsu, H. H., Thomas, C. L., Cheng, Y. C., Lin, M. T. ve Li, H. F. (2021). Motivating employees to speak up: Linking job autonomy, PO fit, and employee voice behaviors through work engagement. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01222-0
  37. Keenan, J. (1999). A concept analysis of autonomy. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(3), 556-562.
  38. Kreis, K. ve Brockopp, D. Y. (1986). Autonomy: A component of teacher job satisfaction. Education, 107(1). 110-115.
  39. Lagerveld, S. E., Brenninkmeijer, V., Blonk, R. W., Twisk, J. ve Schaufeli, W. B. (2017). Predictive value of work-related self-efficacy change on RTW for employees with common mental disorders. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 74(5), 381-383.
  40. Landau, J. (2009). To speak or not to speak: Predictors of voice propensity. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 13(1), 35-54.
  41. Lange, M. ve Kayser, I. (2022). The role of self-efficacy, work-related autonomy and work-family conflict on employee’s stress level during home-based remote work in Germany. International Journal of Environmental Research and Publichealth, 19(9), 4955.
  42. Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C. ve Farh, J. L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management journal, 55(1), 71-92.
  43. Liang, A., Wu, S., Xiao, S., Wen, T. ve Nkansah, J. O. (2024). How leaders’ empowering behavior influences teacher’s positive voice behavior: The mediating role of self-efficacy and burnout. Education and Lifelong Development Research, 1(2), 83-92.
  44. Lin, S.- H. J. ve Johnson, R. E. (2015). A suggestion to improve a day keeps your depletion away: Examining promotive and prohibitive voice behaviors within a regulatory focus and ego depletion framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(5). http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000018
  45. Lloyd, J., Bond, F. W. ve Flaxman, P. (2016). Work-related self-efficacy as a moderator of the impact of a worksite stress management training intervention: Intrinsic work motivation as a higher order condition of effect. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(1), 115-127.
  46. Luchak, A. A. (2003). What kind of voice do loyal employee suse?. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(1), 115-134.
  47. McCloskey, J. C. (1990). Two requirements for job contentment: Autonomy and social integration. Image: The Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 22(3), 140-143.
  48. Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373-412.
  49. Park, I. J., Doan, T., Zhu, D., & Kim, P. B. (2021). How do empowered employees engage in voice behaviors? A moderated mediation model based on work-related flow and supervisors’ emotional expression spin. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 95, 102878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102878
  50. Parker, S. K., Axtell, C. M. ve Turner, N. (2001). Designing a safer workplace: Importance of job autonomy, communication quality, and supportive supervisors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(3), 211-228.
  51. Pepe, S. J., Farnese, M. L., Avalone, F. ve Vecchione, M. (2010). Work self-efficacy scale and search for work self-efficacy scale: A validation study in Spanish and Italian cultural contexts. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 26(3), 201-210.
  52. Saragih, S. (2011). The effects of job autonomy on work outcomes: Self efficacy as an intervening variable. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 4(3), 203-215.
  53. Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 7(2), 112-137.
  54. Sisodia, S. ve Das, I. (2013). Effect of job autonomy upon organizational commitment of employees at different hierarchical level. Psychological Thought, 6(2), 241-251.
  55. Snee, R. D. (1995). Listening to the voice of the employee. Quality Progress, 28(1), 91.
  56. Song, J., Gu, J., Wu, J. ve Xu, S. (2019). Differential promotive voice–prohibitive voice relationships with employee performance: Power distance orientation as a moderator. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 36(4), 1053-1077.
  57. Song, J., He, C., Wu, W. ve Zhai, X. (2020). Roles of self-efficacy and transformational leadership in explaining voice-job satisfaction relationship. Current Psychology, 39, 975-986.
  58. Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
  59. Qian, X., Li, Q., Song, Y. ve Wang, J. (2020). Temporary employment and voice behavior: The role of self‐efficacy and political savvy. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 58(4), 607-629.
  60. Ural, A. ve Kilic, I. (2006). Scientific Research Process and Data Analysis with SPSS. Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara, Türkiye.
  61. Van Mierlo, H., Rutte, C. V., Vermunt, J. K., Kompier, M. A. J. ve Doorewaard, J. A. M. C. (2006). Individual autonomy in workteams: The role of team autonomy, self-efficacy, and social support. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(3), 281-299.
  62. Vax, S., Schreuer, N. ve Sachs, D. (2012). Work-related self-efficacy of occupational therapists in mental health. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 19(1), 42-48.
  63. Volmer, J., Spurk, D. ve Niessen, C. (2012). Leader–member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 456-465.
  64. Wang, G. ve Netemyer, R. G. (2002). The effects of job autonomy, customer demandingness, and trait competitiveness on salesperson learning, self-efficacy, and performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 217-228.
  65. Wei, X., Zhang, Z. X. ve Chen, X. P. (2015). I will speak up if my voice is socially desirable: A moderated mediating process of promotive versus prohibitive voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(5), 1641.
  66. Wilkinson, A., Dundon, T., Marchington, M. ve Ackers, P. (2004). Changing patterns of employee voice: Case studies from the UK and Republic of Ireland. Journal of Industrial Relations, 46(3), 298-322.
  67. Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G. ve Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206. doi:10.1086/651257