SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2

Teachers’ Conceptions of Idiosyncratic Deals They Made with Their Principals

Öğretmenlerin Okul Müdürleri ile Gerçekleştirdikleri Kişiye Özgü Anlaşmalara İlişkin Anlayışları

Görkem Bektaş(TC MİLLİ EĞİTİM BAKANLIĞI KONYA)0000-0002-8610-3996
Gökhan Özaslan(NECMETTİN ERBAKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2237-4233
Pages
699–716
Publication Date
2024-12-31
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)

As a result of the research, it was found that the participants understood these agreements in six different ways.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of the present study is to find out how many different ways teachers understand the idiosyncratic deals they make with school principals.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These understandings are (U1) "a practice that can be realized if the necessary conditions are met," (U2) "a practice that makes me feel good," (U3) "a practice that benefits the school," (U4) "a practice that benefits me," (U5) "a practice that other teachers can accept if they see reasonable grounds for it," and (U6) "a practice that the school administrators agree to when they have to." A hierarchical categorization was made between these understandings based on how one understanding encompasses another and it was found that the participants who had understanding U6 also had understanding U5.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the research, it was found that the participants understood these agreements in six different ways.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kişiye özgü anlaşmalar · fenomenografi · öğretmenler

Abstract

The aim of the present study is to find out how many different ways teachers understand the idiosyncratic deals they make with school principals. The study used a phenomenographic design within the qualitative methodology and data was collected through semi-structured interviews with sixteen teachers who were balanced diversified in terms of sector (public/private), school level, subject, age, and gender. As a result of the research, it was found that the participants understood these agreements in six different ways. These understandings are (U1) "a practice that can be realized if the necessary conditions are met," (U2) "a practice that makes me feel good," (U3) "a practice that benefits the school," (U4) "a practice that benefits me," (U5) "a practice that other teachers can accept if they see reasonable grounds for it," and (U6) "a practice that the school administrators agree to when they have to." A hierarchical categorization was made between these understandings based on how one understanding encompasses another and it was found that the participants who had understanding U6 also had understanding U5. Finally, recommendations for research and practice were developed based on the research findings.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı, öğretmenlerin okul müdürleri ile gerçekleştirdikleri kişiye özgü anlaşmaları kaç farklı şekilde anladıklarını ortaya koymaktır. Araştırmada nitel metodoloji kapsamında fenomenografi deseni kullanılmış ve veriler sektör (kamu/özel), okul düzeyi, branş, yaş ve cinsiyet fark alanlarına göre dengeli şekilde çeşitlendirilerek on altı öğretmen ile yarı yapılandırılmış yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme yöntemi kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda katılımcıların bu anlaşmaları altı farklı şekilde anladıkları ortaya konmuştur. Bu anlayışlar, (A1) “gerekli koşulların varlığı ile gerçekleşebilen bir uygulama,” (A2) “bana kendimi iyi hissettiren bir uygulama,” (A3) “okula fayda sağlayan bir uygulama,” (A4) “bana faydaları dokunan bir uygulama,” (A5) “makul nedenler görebilirlerse diğer öğretmenlerin kabullendiği bir uygulama” ve (A6) “okul yöneticilerinin mecbur kalınca razı oldukları bir uygulama” şeklindedir. Bu anlayışlar arasında kapsam bakımından hiyerarşik bir sıralama yapılmış ve A6 anlayışına sahip katılımcıların A5 anlayışınsa da sahip oldukları ortaya çıkmıştır. Son olarak, araştırma bulgularına dayalı olarak araştırmaya ve uygulamaya yönelik öneriler geliştirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bektaş, G., Özaslan, G. (2024). Teachers’ Conceptions of Idiosyncratic Deals They Made with Their Principals. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 699–716. https://ajindex.com/articles/1532086

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (35)

  1. Anand, S., Meuser, J. D., Vidyarthi, P. R., Liden, R. C., Rousseau, D. M., & Ekkirala, S. (2022). A multi‐level model of i‐deals in workgroups employee and coworker perceptions of leader fairness, i-deals and group performance. Journal of Management Studies, 59(2), 489–517. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12750
  2. Anand, S., Vidyarthi, P., Liden, R., & Rousseau, D. (2010). Good citizens in poor-quality relationships: Idiosyncratic deals as a substitute for relationship quality. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 970–988. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.54533176
  3. Anuk İşlek, S. & Bakioğlu, F. (2023). The mediating role of organizational silence in the relationship between preschool teachers' organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Journal of Ahmet Kelesoglu Education Faculty, 5(1), 170-193. https://doi.org/10.38151/akef.2023.49
  4. Bal, P. M., & Boehm, S. A. (2017). How do i-deals influence client satisfaction? The role of exhaustion, collective commitment, and age diversity. Journal of Management, 45(4), 1461–1487. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317710722
  5. Bal, P. M., De Jong, S. B., Jansen, P. G. W., & Bakker, A. B. (2012). Motivating employees to work beyond retirement: A multi-level study of the role of i-deals and unit climate. Journal of Management Studies, 49(2), 306–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01026.x
  6. Barnard, A., McCosker, H., & Gerber, R. (1999). Phenomenography: A qualitative research approach for exploring understanding in health care. Qualitative Health Research, 9(2), 212–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973299129121794
  7. Blau, P.M. (1986). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley.
  8. Brown, B. W., & Woodbury, S. A. (1998). Seniority, external labor markets, and faculty pay. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 38(4), 771–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1062-9769(99)80132-x
  9. Bursalıoğlu, Z. (2021). Okul yönetiminde yeni yapı ve davranış (21. Baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  10. Duran, A. & Cemaloğlu, N. (2020). A phenomenological inquiry into the professional identity of successful school principals: Voices from the field. Journal of Necmettin Erbakan University Ereğli Faculty of Education, 2(1), 12-39.
  11. Greenberg, J., Roberge, M. É., Ho, V. T., & Rousseau, D. M. (2004). Fairness in idiosyncratic work arrangements: Justice as an i-deal. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 23, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(04)23001-8
  12. Hornung, S., Glaser, J., Rousseau, D. M., Angerer, P., & Weigl, M. (2011). Employee-oriented leadership and quality of working life: Mediating roles of idiosyncratic deals. Psychological Reports, 108(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.2466/07.13.14.21.PR0.108.1.59-74
  13. Hornung, S., Rousseau, D. M., & Glaser, J. (2008). Creating flexible work arrangements through idiosyncratic deals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 655–664. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.655
  14. Hornung, S., Rousseau, D. M., & Glaser, J. (2009). Why supervisors make idiosyncratic deals: Antecedents and outcomes of i-deals from a managerial perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(8), 738–764. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940910996770
  15. Hornung, S., Rousseau, D. M., Glaser, J., Angerer, P., & Weigl, M. (2010). Beyond top-down and bottom-up work redesign: Customizing job content through idiosyncratic deals. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2–3), 187–215. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/job.625
  16. Karataş, A., & Doğan, S. (2011). A research on the effect of organizational ethics on employee satisfaction. Erciyes University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 37, 1–40. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/66571
  17. Kroon, B., Freese, C., & Schalk, R. (2016). A strategic HRM perspective on i-deals: Conceptual issues, applications and the role of co-workers. In M. Bal & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Idiosyncratic deals between employess and organizations (pp. 73–91). Routledge.
  18. Larsson, J., & Holmström, I. (2007). Phenomenographic or phenomenological analysis: Does it matter? Examples from a study on anaesthesiologists work. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 2(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620601068105
  19. Lee, C., & Hui, C. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of idiosyncratic deals: A frame of resource exchange. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 5(3), 380–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11782-011-0136-1
  20. Liu, J., Lee, C., Hui, C., Kwan, H. K., & Wu, L. Z. (2013). Idiosyncratic deals and employee outcomes: The mediating roles of social exchange and self-enhancement and the moderating role of individualism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 832–840. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032571
  21. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(3), 28–49. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203645994-17
  22. Marton, F., & Pong, W. Y. (2005). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(4), 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360500284706
  23. Ng, T. W. H., Yim, F. H. K., Zou, Y., & Chen, H. (2021). Receiving developmental idiosyncratic deals over time: Showing innovative behavior is key. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 130, 1–16. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103630
  24. Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2009). Idiosyncratic deals and organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.006
  25. Orgill, M. (2012). Phenomenography. In N. M. Seed (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 2608–2611). Springer.
  26. Özaslan, G. (2023). Principals’ views on the factors facilitating idiosyncratic deals they make with teachers. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 58, 2345-2364. https://doi.org/ 10.53444/deubefd.1265785
  27. Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. (2010). Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. Journal of Management, 36(4), 827–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310363732
  28. Rosen, C. C., Slater, D. J., Chang, C., & Johnson, R. E. (2013). Let ’s make a deal: Development and validation of the expost i-deals scale. Journal of Management, 39(3), 709–742. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310394865
  29. Rousseau, D. M. (2005). I-deals: Idiosyncratic deals employees bargain for themselves. Routledge.
  30. Rousseau, D. M., Ho, V. T., & Greenberg, J. (2006). I-deals: Idiosyncratic terms in employment relationships. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 977–994. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.22527470
  31. Rousseau, D. M., Hornung, S., & Kim, T. G. (2009). Idiosyncratic deals: Testing propositions on timing, content, and the employment relationship. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 338–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.02.004
  32. Rousseau, D. M., Tomprou, M., & Simosi, M. (2016). Negotiating flexible and fair idiosyncratic deals (i-deals). Organizational Dynamics, 45(3), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2016.07.004
  33. Singh, S., & Vidyarthi, P. R. (2018). Idiosyncratic deals to employee outcomes: Mediating role of social exchange relationships. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 25(4), 443-455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051818762338
  34. Tomlinson, E. C., & Mayer, R. C. (2009). The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 85–104. https://doi.org/ 10.5465/amr.2009.35713291
  35. Yaman, S., Bal İncebacak, B., & Sarışan Tungaç, A. (2022). Stakeholder views on determining teacher qualifications. Journal of Ahmet Kelesoglu Education Faculty, 4(2), 376-397. https://doi.org/ 10.38151/akef.2022.24