SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 41 Sayı: 3

Social Network Analysis of School Principals’ Glocal Leadership Behaviors and Interaction with Stakeholders

Okul Müdürlerinin Glokal Liderlik Davranışları ve Paydaşlarla Etkileşiminin Sosyal Ağ Analizi

Pınar Mardin Yılmaz(Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı)0000-0001-8867-3717
Şefika Şule Erçetin(HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-7686-4863
Pages
738–759
Publication Date
2026-07-31
🏛️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)

The findings indicate that school principals demonstrated high levels of glocal leadership behaviors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study investigates school principals' glocal leadership behaviors and their stakeholder interactions within the vocational and technical education system using a mixed-methods research design.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participants consisted of 540 principals, vice principals and assistant principals working in public vocational and technical Anatolian high schools in Ankara, Türkiye.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that school principals demonstrated high levels of glocal leadership behaviors.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:liderlik · glokal liderlik · sosyal ağ analizi

Abstract

This study investigates school principals' glocal leadership behaviors and their stakeholder interactions within the vocational and technical education system using a mixed-methods research design. School principals' glocal leadership behaviors were assessed using non-parametric statistical analyses, while stakeholder interaction patterns were examined through social network analysis. The participants consisted of 540 principals, vice principals and assistant principals working in public vocational and technical Anatolian high schools in Ankara, Türkiye. Data were collected using the Multidimensional Glocal Leadership Scale and the Stakeholder Interaction Questionnaire on the Dimensions of Glocal Leadership and analyzed using SPSS and UCINET software. The findings indicate that school principals demonstrated high levels of glocal leadership behaviors. Network density ranged from 1% to 21% across interaction networks. The Ministry of National Education and provincial and district directorates of national education emerged as the most central stakeholders, whereas interaction with other ministries was relatively limited. Furthermore, stakeholder interactions differed across the dimensions of glocal leadership, with vision and local literacy primarily associated with educational authorities, social network management linked to institutional collaboration, and global literacy reflected in interactions with international organizations. This study contributes to the literature by integrating glocal leadership with social network analysis and demonstrating how stakeholder interaction patterns shape leadership practices in vocational and technical education.

Özet

Mesleki ve teknik eğitim sistemindeki okul müdürlerinin glokal liderlik davranışlarının gerçekleşme düzeyi ve paydaşlarla etkileşimlerinin incelendiği bu çalışma karma yöntemle yürütülmüştür. Yöneticilerin glokal liderlik davranışlarının gerçekleşme düzeyi parametrik olmayan yöntemler kullanılarak bulunmuştur. Paydaşlarla ne sıklıkta etkileşimde bulundukları görselleştirilmiş ve sosyal ağ analizine özgü metrikler hesaplanmıştır. Çalışma grubu Ankara ilindeki resmi mesleki ve teknik Anadolu liselerinin müdür, müdür yardımcısı ve müdür yardımcılarından oluşmaktadır. Çok Boyutlu Glokal Liderlik Ölçeği ve Glokal Liderliğin Boyutlarına İlişkin Paydaş Etkileşim Anketi kullanılmıştır. Veriler 540 yöneticiden elde edilerek SPSS ve UCINET programları ile analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre yöneticilerin glokal liderlik davranışlarının gerçekleşme düzeyi yüksek düzeydedir. Ağ yoğunlukları %1 ile %21 arasında değişmektedir. En fazla iletişim kurulan paydaşlar MEB, ilçe milli eğitim müdürlüğü, il milli eğitim müdürlüğü ve meslek liseleri iken en az etkileşim kurulan paydaşlar diğer bakanlıklar (Ulaştırma ve Altyapı, Ticaret, Dışişleri) olmuştur. Okul yöneticileri, Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı ile etkileşimlerinin çoğunu vizyon sahibi olma alt boyutu ile ilişkilendirmişlerdir. İl milli eğitim müdürlüğü, ilçe milli eğitim müdürlüğü, kaymakamlık, belediye ve valilik gibi paydaşlarla etkileşimler yerel okuryazarlıkla ilişkilidir. Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu, Ölçme, Seçme ve Yerleştirme Merkezi Başkanlığı, küçük ölçekli işletmeler, Türkiye İş Kurumu, orta ölçekli işletmeler, Gençlik ve Spor Bakanlığı, Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, Sağlık Bakanlığı, Hazine ve Maliye Bakanlığı gibi aktörlerle etkileşimler sosyal ağ yönetimi alt boyutu ile ilişkilendirilmiştir. Bölgesel Kalkınma Ajansı, STK'lar ve yabancı kurum ve kuruluşlarla etkileşimler küresel okuryazarlıkla ilişkilendirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yılmaz, P. M., Erçetin, Ş. Ş. (2026). Social Network Analysis of School Principals’ Glocal Leadership Behaviors and Interaction with Stakeholders. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 41 Sayı: 3, 738–759. https://doi.org/10.16986/hunefd.1706830

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (79)

  1. Adkins, D. (2008). The use of social network analysis to measure knowledge sharing in the New York State project management community of practice (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Albany, NY.
  2. Aktel, M. (2001). Küreselleşme süreci ve etki alanları. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 193-202.
  3. Bennell, P., & Segerstrom, J. (1998). Vocational education and training in developing countries: Has the World Bank got it right? International Journal of Educational Development, 18(4), 271-287. doi:10.1016/S0738-0593(98)00021-2
  4. Barabási, A.L. (2010). Bağlantılar. İstanbul: Optimist.
  5. Borgatti, S. P., & Ofem, B. (2010). Overview: Social network theory and analysis. In A.J. Daly (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change (pp. 17-30). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
  6. Borgatti, S.P. (2006). Identifying sets of key players in a social network. Computational & Mathematical Organizational Theory, 12(1), 21-34. doi:10.1007/s10588-006-7084-x
  7. Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., & Freeman, L.C. (2002). UCINET 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Lexington: Analytic Technologies.
  8. Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 44-55. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00665.x
  9. Bürhan, Y., Baykara, M., & Daş, R. (2017, September). Sosyal ağ analizi ve veri görselleştirme araçlarının incelenmesi ve uygulamalı karşılaştırılması. Paper presented at the International Artificial Intelligence and Data Processing Symposium (IDAP), Malatya, Turkey.
  10. Canbolat, S., Mumcu, S., Şahan, A., Öcal, F., & Akdoğan, N. (2018). Applicability of glocal leadership to educational institutions. In Ş. Ş. Erçetin (Ed.), Chaos, complexity and leadership 2016 (pp. 573-579). Switzerland: Springer.
  11. CEDEFOP. (2011). Exploring leadership in vocational education and training. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publications/6113
  12. Christakis, N.A., & Fowler, J.H. (2012). Sosyal ağların şaşırtıcı gücü ve yaşantımızı biçimlendiren etkisi. İstanbul: Varlık Yayınları.
  13. Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203-235. doi:10.3102/0162373708321829
  14. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120. doi:10.1086/228943
  15. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  16. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  17. Çakmaklı, Y. (2011). Glokal liderlik ve davranışsal göstergeleri üzerine bir çalışma: Bir kamu kurumu örneği (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ufuk Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  18. Daly, A. J. (2019). Sosyal ağ teorisi ve eğitimde değişim (T. Çalık & E. Er, Çev. Ed.) (1st ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  19. Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. S. (2010). A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change, 11(2), 111-138. doi:10.1007/s10833-009-9102-5
  20. Daly, A. J., & Finnigan, K. S. (2011). The ebb and flow of social network ties between district leaders under high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1), 39-79. doi:10.3102/0002831210368990
  21. Daly, A. J., Finnigan, K. S., Jordan, S., Moolenaar, N. M., & Che, J. (2014). Misalignment and perverse incentives: Examining the politics of district leaders as brokers in the use of research evidence. Educational Policy, 28(2), 145-174. doi:10.1177/0895904813513149
  22. Daly, A. J., Moolenaar, N. M., Liou, Y. H., Tuytens, M., & Fresno, M. (2015). Why so difficult? Exploring negative relationships between educational leaders: The role of trust, climate, and efficacy. American Journal of Education, 122(1), 1-38. doi:10.1086/683288
  23. De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2011). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek (2nd ed., rev. and expanded). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  24. Dijkstra, A., Veenstra, R., & Peschar, J. (2004). Social capital in education: Functional communities around high schools in the Netherlands. In H. Flap & B. Völker (Eds.), Creation and returns of social capital: A new research program (pp. 119–144). Routledge.
  25. Doğan, E. (2002). Eğitimde küreselleşme. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 6, 87-98.
  26. Educational International (2009). Literature Review: Vocational Education and Training. Retrieved from http://download.eiie.org/Docs/WebDepot/091213_VET_Literature_EDITED%20AA.pdf
  27. Erçetin, Ş. Ş. (2000). Lider sarmalında vizyon (Genişletilmiş 2. baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  28. Erçetin, Ş. Ş., & Hamedoğlu, M. A. (2007). Küreselleşme sürecinde ulusal liderlerin rolleri ve uluslararası izdüşümleri [National leaders' roles in the globalization process and their international projections]. In Proceedings of ICANAS 38, International Congress of Asian and North African Studies (pp. 159-163). Ankara, Turkey: Atatürk Supreme Council for Culture, Language and History.
  29. Erçetin, Ş. Ş., & Neyişci, N. B. (2015). Social networks: Connections in structures. In Ş. Ş. Erçetin & S. Banerjee (Eds.), Chaos, complexity and leadership 2013 (pp. 299-303). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
  30. Erçetin, Ş. Ş., & Neyişci, N. B. (2016). Social network analysis: A brief introduction to the theory. In Erçetin, Ş.Ş. (Ed.), Chaos, complexity and leadership 2014 (pp. 167-171). Switzerland: Springer.
  31. Erçetin, Ş. Ş., Potas, N., Açıkalın, S. N., & Kısa, N. (2011). Multidimensional glocal leadership scale. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 8(2), 314-318.
  32. Erçetin, S. S., Potas, N., Açıkalın, S. N., Yılmaz, M., Kısa, N., & Güngör, H. (2017). Glocal leadership behaviors of managers working in private institutions. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 16(2). 74-87. doi:10.17512/pjms.2017.16.2.07
  33. Everett, M., & Borgatti, S. (2005). Extending centrality. In P. J. Carrington, J. Scott, & S. Wasserman (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 57-76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  34. Franco, M.J.B., Mainardes, E., & Martins, O. (2011). A review of inter-organizational networks: Evidence from studies published in 2005-2008. Cuadernos de Administración, 24(43), 133-155.
  35. Francois, E. J. (2015). Building global education with a local perspective: An introduction to glocal higher education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  36. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Marshfield: Pitman.
  37. Gök, Ö. (2014). Üniversite yöneticilerinin glokal liderlik ve uygulamalarına ilişkin görüşleri (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  38. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. doi:10.1086/225469
  39. Gürsakal, N. (2009). Sosyal ağ analizi. Bursa: Dora Yayıncılık.
  40. Güzeller, C.O., Eser, M.T., & Aksu G. (2016). UCINET ile sosyal ağ analizi (1.baskı). Ankara: Maya Akademi Yayıncılık.
  41. Hanneman, R., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Retrieved from http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/nettext/
  42. Hatala, J.P. (2006). Social network analysis in human resource development: A new methodology. Human Resource Development Review, 5(1), 45-71.
  43. Hawe, P., & Ghali, L. (2007). Use of social network analysis to map the social relationships of staff and teachers at school. Health Education Research, 23(1), 62-69.
  44. García Hernández, A., & de los Reyes López, E. (2009). Analysis of the relationship between the properties of the social networks of R&D groups and their scientific performance. Paper retrieved from CSIC Institutional Repository. Retrieved from http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/10023/1/AC195_1_viewpaper.pdf
  45. Great Britain Home Office. (2016). Social network analysis: 'How to' guide (Report No. ISBN 978-1-78655-066-8). Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/491572/socnet_howto.pdf
  46. Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2010). Eğitim yönetimi: Teori, araştırma ve uygulama (S. Turan, Çev. Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  47. Kadushin, C. (2004). Some basic network concepts and propositions. In Kadushin, C. (Ed.), Introduction to social network theory. Retrieved from http://ccftp.scu.edu.cn:8090/Download/7511966c-84c9-4e8d-ac4c a2f99b478da0.pdf
  48. Karabağ, S. (2014). Mekânın siyasallaşması (4. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  49. Katz N., Lazer D., Arrow H., & Contractor, N. 2004. Network theory and small groups. Small Group Research, 35(3), 307-332.
  50. Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. London: Sage.
  51. Korkmaz, C. (2021). Glokal liderlik: Eğitim bağlamında bir alanyazın incelemesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 50(232), 421-450. doi:10.37669/milliegitim.741585
  52. Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28-51.
  53. Marsden, P. V. (2011). Survey methods for network data. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.),The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis (pp. 370–388). London: Sage.
  54. Marsden, P.V. (1990). Network data and measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 435-463. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.16.080190.002251.
  55. Marsden, P. V. (2005). Recent developments in network measurement models and methods in social network analysis. In P. J. Carrington, J. Scott, & S. Wasserman (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 8-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  56. Moolenaar, N. M., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2015). Social networks, trust, and innovation: The role of relationships in supporting innovative climate in Dutch schools. In: Daly, A.J. (Ed.), Social network theory and educational change, (pp. 97-114). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
  57. Moolenaar, N.M., Daly, A.J., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2010). Occupying the principal position: examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and school's innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623-670.
  58. Moreno, J. L. (1934). Who shall survive?: A new approach to the problem of human interrelations. Beacon:Beacon House Inc.
  59. Neuman, W. L. (2013). Toplumsal araştırma yöntemleri: Nicel ve nitel yaklaşımlar (Cilt 1-2) (S. Özge, Çev.). İstanbul: Yayın Odası.
  60. Novak, D. A. (2008). Leadership of organizational networks: An exploration of the relationship between leadership and social networks in organizations (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Regent University, Virginia Beach.
  61. OECD. (2015). OECD reviews of vocational education and training. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  62. OECD. (2010). Learning for jobs. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/Learning%20for%20Jobs%20book.pdf
  63. Özcan, E. G. (2017). Ortaöğretim kurumlarının diğer örgütlerle ortakyaşar ilişkileri (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  64. Özdemir, G., & Şahin, S. (2016). Development of the technical leadership skills scale in vocational and technical high school administrators: Reliability and validity studies. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 135-152.
  65. Özdemir, G., & Şahin, S. (2020). Mesleki ve teknik anadolu liseleri yöneticilerinin teknik liderlik becerilerinin geliştirilmesi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 63-79. doi:10.17860/mersinefd.632608
  66. Özer, M. (2018). 2023 eğitim vizyonu ve mesleki ve teknik eğitimde yeni hedefler. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 8(3), 425-435.
  67. Özer, M., & Perc, M. (2021). Impact of social networks on the labor market inequalities and school-to-work transitions. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 11(1), 38–50. doi:10.2399/yod.21.868353
  68. Öztaş, N. (2015). Yönetim örgüt ve yönetim kuramları. Ankara: Otorite Yayınları.
  69. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
  70. Siciliano, M. D., & Thompson, J. R. (2015). If you are committed, then so am I: The role of social networks and social ınfluence on organizational commitment. Administration & Society, 50(7), 1-31. doi:10.1177/0095399715617987
  71. Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of Educational Research, 78(2), 330-368. doi: 10.3102/0034654308317846
  72. Tağ-Kalafatoğlu, Ş. (2017). Etkileşim: Kavramsal açıklamalar, boyutları ve kuramsal yaklaşımlar. Z. Yüksekbilgili (Ed.), In Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Kongresi (USAK'17) Bildiri Kitapçığı (Cilt II). İstanbul.
  73. Uğurlu, Z. (2013). Eğitim örgütlerinin örgütsel ağbağ düzeneğindeki konumunun iş birliği düzeylerine etkisi Sinop ili örneği (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  74. UNESCO. (2016). Revised recommendation concerning technical and vocational education and training. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245068.page=5
  75. Van Duijn, M. A., & Vermunt, J. K. (2006). What is special about social network analysis?, Methodology, 2(1), 2-6. doi:10.1027/1614-2241.2.1.2
  76. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  77. World Bank. (2019). World Development Report 2019: The changing nature of work. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/816281518818814423/2019-WDR-Report.pdf
  78. Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching up or leading the way: American education in the age of globalization. Alexandria: ASCD.
  79. Moolenaar, N.M., Daly, A.J., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2010). Occupying the principal position: examining relationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and school's innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623-670.