SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İktisat İşletme ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1

THE VISIBLE TRANSFORMATION OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: PEOPLE & CULTURE

İNSAN KAYNAKLARI YÖNETİMİNİN GÖRÜNÜR DÖNÜŞÜMÜ: İNSAN VE KÜLTÜR YAKLAŞIMI

Pınar Sarp Hüseyin(İSTANBUL KÜLTÜR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-3022-5182
Selçuk Yeke(ARDAHAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1953-6222
Pages
58–79
Publication Date
2026-08-16
🏛️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 results show that institutional pressures explain not only why organizations adopt P&C but also how they embed it as a legitimate response to evolving employee expectations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Business life, employee profiles, globalization, and technological developments are reshaping human resources management (HRM).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data were coded and thematically analysed, yielding seven themes: traditional call/need for change, culture formation, culture transfer, P&C legitimacy, P&C dynamics, P&C practices, and achievements.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results show that institutional pressures explain not only why organizations adopt P&C but also how they embed it as a legitimate response to evolving employee expectations.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İKY · İnsan & Kültür · Çalışan Odaklılık

Abstract

Business life, employee profiles, globalization, and technological developments are reshaping human resources management (HRM). The traditional HRM approach is no longer sufficient to meet contemporary employee expectations. One of the most notable shifts is the evolution of HRM into People & Culture (P&C). In Turkey, this transformation remains limited, with only a few organizations having completed the transition. This study investigates the antecedents of this structural and cultural transformation and the reasons behind the emergence of the P&C function. A qualitative research design was adopted, consisting of online interviews with twelve P&C professionals and content analysis of six LinkedIn job postings. The data were coded and thematically analysed, yielding seven themes: traditional call/need for change, culture formation, culture transfer, P&C legitimacy, P&C dynamics, P&C practices, and achievements. The results show that institutional pressures explain not only why organizations adopt P&C but also how they embed it as a legitimate response to evolving employee expectations. This article systematically examines the People & Culture (P&C) approach for the first time in Turkey and empirically unpacks its structural and cultural transformation dimensions, an aspect overlooked in prior HRM research. The findings provide a conceptual and methodological foundation for future research.

Özet

İş yaşamı, çalışan profilleri, küreselleşme ve teknolojik gelişmeler, insan kaynakları yönetimini köklü biçimde yeniden şekillendirmektedir. Geleneksel İKY yaklaşımı, günümüz çalışan beklentilerini karşılamakta artık yetersiz kalmaktadır. Bu bağlamda öne çıkan en dikkat çekici dönüşümlerden biri, İKY’nin İnsan&Kültür yaklaşımına evrilmesidir. Türkiye’de bu dönüşüm henüz sınırlı düzeydedir ve yalnızca az sayıda örgüt bu geçişi tamamlamış durumdadır. Bu çalışma, söz konusu yapısal ve kültürel dönüşümün öncüllerini ve İnsan & Kültür departmanı fonksiyonunun ortaya çıkış nedenlerini incelemektedir. Araştırmada nitel bir yöntem benimsenmiş; on iki İnsan & Kültür departmanı profesyoneli ile gerçekleştirilen çevrim içi görüşmeler ile altı LinkedIn iş ilanının içerik analizi yapılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler kodlanmış ve tematik analiz yoluyla çözümlenmiş; analiz sonucunda yedi tema ortaya çıkarılmıştır: geleneksel yapı / değişim ihtiyacı, kültürün oluşturulması, kültürün aktarımı, İnsan & Kültür departmanı meşruiyeti, İnsan & Kültür dinamikleri, İnsan & Kültür uygulamaları ve kazanımlar.Bulgular, kurumsal baskıların yalnızca örgütlerin İnsan & Kültür yaklaşımını neden benimsediğini değil, aynı zamanda bu yaklaşımı değişen çalışan beklentilerine verilen meşru bir yanıt olarak nasıl içselleştirdiklerini de açıkladığını göstermektedir. Bu makale, Türkiye bağlamında İnsan & Kültür yaklaşımını ilk kez sistematik biçimde ele almakta ve önceki insan kaynakları yönetimi literatüründe büyük ölçüde ihmal edilen yapısal ve kültürel dönüşüm boyutlarını ampirik olarak açımlamaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular, gelecekte yapılacak çalışmalar için kavramsal ve yöntemsel bir temel sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hüseyin, P. S., Yeke, S. (2026). THE VISIBLE TRANSFORMATION OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: PEOPLE & CULTURE. İktisat İşletme ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 58–79. https://doi.org/10.58654/jebi.1865994

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (28)

  1. Baird, L., & Meshoulam, I. (1984). The HRS matrix: Managing the human resource function strategically. Human Resource Planning, 7(1), 1-30.
  2. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
  3. Becker Brian E. & Huselid Mark A. (2006). Strategic Human Resources Management: Where Do We Go From Here?, Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925.
  4. Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2016). Strategy and human resource management. Palgrave Macmillan Publishing.
  5. Chatman, J. A. (1989). Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person-organization fit. Academy of management Review, 14(3), 333-349.
  6. Chiavenato, I. (2001). Advances and challenges in human resource management in the new millennium. Public Personnel Management, 30(1), 17-26.
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
  8. Dessler, G., & Varrkey, B. (2005). Human Resource Management, 15e. Pearson Education India.
  9. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
  10. Ferris, G. R., Hall, A. T., Royle, M. T., & Martocchio, J. J. (2004). Theoretical development in the field of human resources management: Issues and challenges for the future. Organizational Analysis, 12(3), 231-254.
  11. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 18 (1), 59-82.
  12. Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1995). Understanding human resource management in the context of organizations and their environments. Annual review of psychology, 46(1), 237-264. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.46.020195.001321
  13. Kaufman, B. E. (2014). The historical development of American HRM broadly viewed. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3), 196-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2014.03.003
  14. Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person‐organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel psychology, 49(1), 1-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x
  15. Lengnick-Hall, M. L., Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Andrade, L. S., & Drake, B. (2009). Strategic human resource management: The evolution of the field. Human Resource Management Review, 19(2), 64–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.01.002
  16. Luu, T. T. (2019). Service-oriented high-performance work systems and service-oriented behaviours in public organizations: the mediating role of work engagement. Public Management Review, 21(6), 789-816. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1526314
  17. Martín-Alcázar, F., Romero-Fernández, P. M., & Sánchez-Gardey, G. (2005). Strategic human resource management: integrating the universalistic, contingent, configurational and contextual perspectives. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 633-659. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500082519
  18. O'Reilly III, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. The Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 487-516. https://doi.org/10.2307/256404
  19. Racolţa-Paina, N. D., & Irini, R. D. (2021). Generation Z in the workplace through the lenses of human resource professionals–A qualitative study. Quality - Access to Success, 22(183), 78-85.
  20. Ryan, F., Coughlan, M., & Cronin, P. (2009). Interviewing in qualitative research: The one-to-one interview. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 16(6), 309-314. https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2009.16.6.42433
  21. Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  22. Toffler, A. (1980) The Third Wave, William Morrow.
  23. Turunç, Ö. (2015). Stratejik yönetim örgütsel performans ilişkisinde kişi-örgüt uyumunun rolü. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 16-30.
  24. Varandas, C., Fernandes, C. I., & Veiga, P. M. (2024). Human resource management in ambidextrous organisations-A systematic literature review. Technology in Society, 77, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102504
  25. Walker, J. S., & Matarese, M. (2011). Using a theory of change to drive human resource development for wraparound. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 20(6), 791-803.
  26. Wright, P. M., & McMahan, G. C. (1992). Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. Journal of management, 18(2), 295-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063920180020
  27. Vural, B. (2008). Bilgi iletişim teknolojileri ve ütopyan bakış açısı. Selçuk İletişim, 5(3), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.18094/si.35577
  28. Zhang, J., & Chen, Z. (2023). Exploring human resource management digital transformation in the digital age. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(1),1482-1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01214-y