Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

THE MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HEALTH EMPLOYEES’ ETHICAL LEADERSHIP PERCEPTIONS AND KNOWLEDGE SHARING

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 26 Sayı: 1, 29 - 48, 22.03.2023

Murat Baş

Öz

This research focused on examining the effect of the ethical behaviors of managers in the health sector on the knowledge sharing of health employees. Ethical leadership is leaders who take care of their work, treat their employees fairly, and treat their employees ethically.. Knowledge sharing can be expressed as sharing the knowledge and experience that an individual has with others. Organizational communication, on the other hand, can be expressed as the sharing of information, feelings and thoughts that they have with each other in line with a common purpose. The main purpose of this research is to investigate the relationships between ethical leadership, knowledge sharing, and organizational communication, and to reveal the mediating role of organizational communication in the effect of ethical leadership on knowledge sharing. For this purpose, the research was carried out with 268 health employees working in Erzincan Provincial Health Directorate and its affiliated units. Data obtained within the scope of the research were analyzed using SPSS 22, AMOS 23, and SPSS PROCESS MACRO analysis programs. Following the research, it was found that ethical leadership is positively related to knowledge sharing and organizational communication and that there is a positive relationship between organizational communication and knowledge sharing. As a result of examining the mediation model in the research, it was determined that organizational communication has a partial mediating role in the relationship between ethical leadership and knowledge sharing. With the results obtained, recommendations were made to health sector managers. Sector managers should explain to their employees the importance of information exchange and communication within the organization, and exhibit fair, moral and equidistant behaviors towards their employees. In the literature review, no study has been found that has previously investigated the mediating role of organizational communication in the relationship between the direct effect of ethical leadership on organizational communication and the relationship between ethical leadership and knowledge sharing. Therefore, it is thought that this study will provide an important source and contribution to the literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ethical leadership organızational communication knowledge sharing health workers.

Kaynakça

  • Ada, N., Alver, İ. & Atlı, F. (2008). Örgütsel iletişimin örgütsel bağlılık üzerine etkisi: Manisa Organize Sanayi Bölgesinde yer alan ve imalat sektörü çalışanları üzerinde yapılan bir araştırma. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi 8(2), 487-518.
  • Adıgüzel, Z. & Küçükoğlu, İ. (2020). Examing of loneliness and organizational effectiveness based on work density and organızational communication in organizations. Balıkesir University The Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 23(43), 159-179.
  • Ayan, A. (2005). Etik liderlik tarzının iş performansı, içsel motivasyon ve duyarsızlaşma üzerine etkisi: Kamu kuruluşunda bir uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 10(3), 117-141.
  • Bakar, H. A., & Omillion-Hodges, L. (2020). The mediating role of relative communicative behavior on the relationship between ethical leadership and organizational identification. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 41(1), 52-72.
  • Bakker, K. A. (2007). Organizational Communication (Chapter 13). Management Benchmark Study, 1-15.
  • Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
  • Bandura, A. (1969). Social learning theory of identificatory process. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.) A Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research (pp. 213-262). Chicago: Rand McNally.
  • Bavik, Y. L., Tang, P. M., Shao, R., & Lam, L. W. (2018). Ethical leadership and employee knowledge sharing: Exploring dual-mediation paths. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(2), 322-332.
  • Blakeney, R. N. (1986). A transactional view of the role of trust in organizational communication. Transactional Analysis Journal, 16(2), 95–98.
  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley.
  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 97(2), 117-134.
  • Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.
  • Chennamaneni, A., Teng, J. T., & Raja, M. K. (2012). A unified model of knowledge sharing behaviours: Theoretical development and empirical test. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(11), 1097-1115.
  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Quantitative methods in psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 112 (1), 155-159.
  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.
  • Cummings, J. (2003). Knowledge Sharing: A review of the literatüre. The World Bank Operations Evaluation Department, 1-57.
  • Çakıroğlu, K. I. & Öztürk, A. (2020). Mağaza kişiliği ölçeğinin Türkçe uyarlamasının geçerlilik ve güvenirliği. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(5), 4273-4299.
  • Çelik, S., Dedeoğlu, B. B. & İnanır, A. (2015). Relationship between ethical leadership, organizational commitment and job satisfaction at hotel organizations. Ege Academic Review, 15(1), 53-64.
  • Çetinkaya, F. F. & Akkoca, Y. (2021). Stratejik liderlik ile örgütsel çeviklik arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel iletişimin aracı rolü. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 66- 84.
  • Çizel, B., Selçuk, O. & Atabay, E. (2020). Ortak yöntem yanlılığı üzerine sistematik bir yazın taraması. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 31(1), 7-18.
  • Duman, N. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinde COVID-19 korkusu ve belirsizliğe tahammülsüzlük. The Journal of Social Science, 4(8), 426-437.
  • Erdal, N., & Altındağ, E. (2020). The effect of ethical leadership and relationship orientation healthcare on employee performance. Business Management Dynamics, 10(3), 24.
  • Ekinci, K. (2006). Örgütsel İletişim ve Örgütsel Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişki. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum.
  • Eyidoğan, Ö. (2013). Etik İklimin Örgütsel İletişim Üzerindeki Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İşletme Bölümü, İstanbul.
  • Freire, C. & Bettencourt, C. (2020). Impact of ethical leadership on job satisfaction: The mediating effect of work–family conflict. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(2), 319-330.
  • Gan, J. L. & Yusof, H. M. (2019). The significance of the linkage between organizational communication and employees’ performance: A review paper, Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 1-4.
  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The Psychology of Behavioral Exchange. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • Gross, N. & Kluge, A. (2012). Why should I share what I know?-Antecedents for enhancing knowledge-sharing behavior and its impact on shared mental models in steel production. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 403-407). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
  • Gürgen, H.(1997). Örgütlerde İletişim Kalitesi. Der Yayınları, İstanbul.
  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: Methodology in the Social Sciences. Kindle Edition, 193.
  • Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis second edition: A regression-based approach. New York: The Guilford Press.
  • Hu, L. T. & 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.
  • Ince, M. & Gül, H. (2011). The role of the organizational communication on employees’ perception of justice: A sample of public ınstitution from Turkey. European Journal of Social Sciences. 21(1), 106-124.
  • Kamaşak, R. & Bulutlar, F. (2010). The influence of knowledge sharing on innovation. European Business Review, 22(3), 306-317.
  • Kanungo, R. N. (2001). Ethical values of transactional and transformational leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 18(4), 257-265.
  • King, J. M. (2001). Employee Participation in Organizationally Maintained Knowledge Sharing Activities, A Master Thesis, University of Toronto, Kanada.
  • Koay, K. Y., & Lim, P. K. (2021). Ethical leadership and knowledge hiding: Testing the mediating and moderating mechanisms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(3), 574-591.
  • Le, P. B. & Lei, H. (2018). Fostering knowledge sharing behaviours through ethical leadership practice: the mediating roles of disclosure-based trust and reliance-based trust in leadership. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 16(2), 183-195.
  • Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2004). Perceptions of senior managers toward knowledge‐sharing behaviour. Management decision, 42(1), 108-125.
  • Ma, Y., Cheng, W., Ribbens, B. A., & Zhou, J. (2013). Linking ethical leadership to employee creativity: Knowledge sharing and self-efficacy as mediators. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(9), 1409-1419.
  • Malhotra, N. K. (2004). Marketing Research an Applied Orientation, 4. Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
  • Mallinckrodt, B., Abraham, W. T., Wei, M. & Russell, D. W. (2006). Advances in testing the statistical significance of mediation effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3), 372-378.
  • Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. B. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 1-13.
  • Men, L. R. (2014). Why leadership matters to ınternal communication: Linking transformational leadership, symmetrical communication, and employee outcomes. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(3), 256–279.
  • Mihelic, K. K., Lipienik, B. & Tekavcic, M. (2010). Ethical leadership. International Journal of Management & Information Systems – Fourth Quarter, 14(5), 31-42.
  • Mishra P. & Datta, B. (2011). Perpetual asset management of customer-based brand equity-the pam evaluator. Current Research Journal of Social Science, 3(1), 34-43.
  • Nonaka, I., Von Krogh, G. & Voelpel, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge creation theory: evolutionary paths and future advances. Organization Studies, 27(8), 1179-1208.
  • Nye, C. D. & Drasgow, F. (2011). Assessing goodness of fit: Simple rules of thumb simply do not work. Organizational Research Methods, 14(3), 548-570.
  • Okan, T. & Akyüz, A. M. (2015). Exploring the relationship between ethical leadership and job satisfaction with the mediating role of the level of loyalty to supervisor. Business and Economics Research Journal, 6(4), 155-177.
  • Oxford Üniversitesi Sözlüğü, (2022). https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ ethic?q=ethic, Erişim Tarihi: 04.02.2022
  • Oye, N. D., Salleh, M., & Noorminshah, A. (2011). Knowledge sharing in workplace: Motivators and demotivators. International Journal of Managing Information Technology (IJMIT), 3(4),71-84.
  • Özkılıçcı, G. (2011). Örgütsel Adalet Algısı ile Örgütsel İletişim Arasındaki İlişkinin Belirlenmesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi Çalışma Ekonomisi ve Endüstri İlişkileri Bölümü, İstanbul.
  • Özyılmaz, A. & Eser, S. (2013). Ortak Metod Varyansı Nedir? Nasıl Kontrol Edilebilir? 21. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı, 500- 508.
  • Piccolo, R. F., Greenbaum, R., Hartog, D. N. D., & Folger, R. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2‐3), 259-278.
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B. & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.
  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 36(4), 717-731.
  • Qian, Y. & Jian, G. (2020). Ethical leadership and organizational cynicism: the mediating role of leader-member exchange and organizational identification. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 25(2), 207–226.
  • Saenz, J., Aramburu, N., & Rivera, O. (2009). Knowledge sharing and innovation performance: A comparison between high‐tech and low‐tech companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(1), 22-3
  • Sarwar, H., Ishaq, M. I., Amin, A., & Ahmed, R. (2020). Ethical leadership, work engagement, employees’ well-being, and performance: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(12), 2008-2026.
  • Shafique, I., N Kalyar, M., & Ahmad, B. (2018). The nexus of ethical leadership, job performance, and turnover intention: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems: INDECS, 16(1), 71-87.
  • Sims, R. R. (1992). The challenge of ethical behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(7), 505-513.
  • Srivastava A., Bartol K. M. & Locke E. A. (2006) Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of Management Journal 49(6), 1239−1251.
  • Sumiati, S., & Nikmah, K. (2020, July). The role of organizational communication and organizational learning to human resources performance through knowledge sharing. In Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive Systems (pp. 398-407). Springer, Cham.
  • Sveiby, K. E. (2000). A knowledge-based theory of the firm to guide strategy formulation: Towards a knowledge-based theory of the firm. In ANZAM Conference, Macquarie University Sydney, Australia.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics: International edition. Pearson2012, 1.
  • Takala, T. (1997). Charismatic leadership: a key factor in organizational communication. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 2(1), 8–13.
  • Treviño, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42, 128−142.
  • Trevino, L. K., & Brown, M. E. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics myths. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(2), 69-81.
  • Tuna, M., Bircan, H., & Yeşiltaş, M. (2012). Etik liderlik ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması: Antalya örneği. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(2), 143-155.
  • Tutar, H. & Yılmaz, M. K. (2013). İletişim: (Genel ve Örgütsel Boyutuyla). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Ural, A. & Kılıç, İ. (2018). Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Göz. Geç. ve Yenilenmiş 5. Baskı, Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Ünüvar B., & Demirtaş, Ö. (2021). Etik liderlik davranışlarının dile getirme davranışı aracılığıyla örgütsel adalet algısına etkisi: sağlık çalışanları üzerine bir araştırma. Uluslararası Sağlık Yönetimi ve Stratejileri Araştırma Dergisi, 7(1), 117-129.
  • Van Den Hooff, B. & De Ridder, J.A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC usage on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 117-30.
  • Villamizar Reyes, M. M. & Castañeda Zapata, D. I. (2014). Relation between organizational climate and its dimensions and knowledge-sharing behavior among knowledge workers. International Journal of Psychological Research, 7(2), 64-75.
  • Xia, Z. & Yang, F. (2020). Ethical leadership and knowledge sharing: The impacts of prosocial motivation and two facets of conscientiousness. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-10.
  • Yang, H. L. & Wu, T. C. (2008). Knowledge sharing in an organization. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(8), 1128-1156.
  • Yeniçeri, Ö. & Demirel, Y. (2007). Örgüt içi bilgi paylaşımına yönelik bireysel ve örgütsel engeller üzerine bir araştırma. Selçuk Üniversitesi Karaman İ. İ. B. F. Dergisi, 12(9), 221-234.
  • Yıldız, M. L. (2019). Ethical leadership and organizational justice: The mediating effect of communication satisfaction. İs Ahlakı Dergisi, 12(1), 101-112.

SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 26 Sayı: 1, 29 - 48, 22.03.2023

Murat Baş

Öz

Bu araştırma sağlık sektöründeki yöneticilerin etik davranışlarının, sağlık çalışanlarının bilgi paylaşımı üzerindeki etkisini incelemeye odaklanmıştır. Etik liderlik, işine özen gösteren, çalışanlarına adil davranan ve çalışanlarına ahlaki olarak etik davranan liderlerdir. Bilgi paylaşımı, bireyin sahip olduğu bilgi ve tecrübesini başkalarıyla paylaşması olarak ifade edilebilir. Örgütsel iletişim ise, çalışanların ortak bir amaç doğrultusunda, sahip oldukları bilgi, duygu ve düşüncelerini birbirleriyle paylaşması olarak ifade edilebilir. Bu araştırmanın amacı etik liderlik, bilgi paylaşımı ve örgütsel iletişim değişkenleri arasındaki ilişkilerin yanı sıra, etik liderliğin bilgi paylaşımı üzerindeki etkisinde örgütsel iletişimin aracılık rolünü incelemektir. Bu amaçla araştırma Erzincan İl Sağlık Müdürlüğü ve bağlı birimlerinde görev yapan 268 sağlık çalışanı ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında elde edilen veriler SPSS 22, AMOS 23 ve SPSS PROCESS MACRO analiz programları kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, etik liderliğin bilgi paylaşımı ve örgütsel iletişimle pozitif yönlü ilişkili olduğu, ayrıca, örgütsel iletişimle bilgi paylaşımı arasında pozitif ilişkinin bulunduğu tespit edilmiştir. Araştırmada aracılık modelinin incelenmesi sonucunda ise, etik liderlikle bilgi paylaşımı arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel iletişimin kısmi aracılık rolünün bulunduğu saptanmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlarla sağlık sektör yöneticilerine tavsiyelerde bulunulmuştur. Sektör yöneticileri çalışanlarına bilgi alışverişinin ve iletişimin örgüt içindeki önemini anlatmalı, çalışanlarına karşı adil, ahlaki ve eşit mesafeli davranışlar sergilemelidir. Ayrıca bu sektörde faaliyet gösteren örgütlerin örgütsel iletişimi ve çalışanlarının bilgi paylaşımını artırmaya yönelik politikalar geliştirmeleri yönünde önerilerde bulunulmuştur. Literatür incelemesinde, etik liderliğin örgütsel iletişime doğrudan etkisi ile etik liderlik ve bilgi paylaşımı arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel iletişimin aracılık rolünü daha önce araştıran bir çalışmaya rastlanılmamıştır. Dolayısıyla, bu çalışmanın literatüre önemli bir kaynak ve katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Etik liderlik örgütsel iletişim bilgi paylaşımı sağlık çalışanları.

Kaynakça

  • Ada, N., Alver, İ. & Atlı, F. (2008). Örgütsel iletişimin örgütsel bağlılık üzerine etkisi: Manisa Organize Sanayi Bölgesinde yer alan ve imalat sektörü çalışanları üzerinde yapılan bir araştırma. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi 8(2), 487-518.
  • Adıgüzel, Z. & Küçükoğlu, İ. (2020). Examing of loneliness and organizational effectiveness based on work density and organızational communication in organizations. Balıkesir University The Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 23(43), 159-179.
  • Ayan, A. (2005). Etik liderlik tarzının iş performansı, içsel motivasyon ve duyarsızlaşma üzerine etkisi: Kamu kuruluşunda bir uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 10(3), 117-141.
  • Bakar, H. A., & Omillion-Hodges, L. (2020). The mediating role of relative communicative behavior on the relationship between ethical leadership and organizational identification. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 41(1), 52-72.
  • Bakker, K. A. (2007). Organizational Communication (Chapter 13). Management Benchmark Study, 1-15.
  • Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
  • Bandura, A. (1969). Social learning theory of identificatory process. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.) A Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research (pp. 213-262). Chicago: Rand McNally.
  • Bavik, Y. L., Tang, P. M., Shao, R., & Lam, L. W. (2018). Ethical leadership and employee knowledge sharing: Exploring dual-mediation paths. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(2), 322-332.
  • Blakeney, R. N. (1986). A transactional view of the role of trust in organizational communication. Transactional Analysis Journal, 16(2), 95–98.
  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley.
  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 97(2), 117-134.
  • Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.
  • Chennamaneni, A., Teng, J. T., & Raja, M. K. (2012). A unified model of knowledge sharing behaviours: Theoretical development and empirical test. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(11), 1097-1115.
  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Quantitative methods in psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 112 (1), 155-159.
  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.
  • Cummings, J. (2003). Knowledge Sharing: A review of the literatüre. The World Bank Operations Evaluation Department, 1-57.
  • Çakıroğlu, K. I. & Öztürk, A. (2020). Mağaza kişiliği ölçeğinin Türkçe uyarlamasının geçerlilik ve güvenirliği. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(5), 4273-4299.
  • Çelik, S., Dedeoğlu, B. B. & İnanır, A. (2015). Relationship between ethical leadership, organizational commitment and job satisfaction at hotel organizations. Ege Academic Review, 15(1), 53-64.
  • Çetinkaya, F. F. & Akkoca, Y. (2021). Stratejik liderlik ile örgütsel çeviklik arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel iletişimin aracı rolü. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 66- 84.
  • Çizel, B., Selçuk, O. & Atabay, E. (2020). Ortak yöntem yanlılığı üzerine sistematik bir yazın taraması. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 31(1), 7-18.
  • Duman, N. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinde COVID-19 korkusu ve belirsizliğe tahammülsüzlük. The Journal of Social Science, 4(8), 426-437.
  • Erdal, N., & Altındağ, E. (2020). The effect of ethical leadership and relationship orientation healthcare on employee performance. Business Management Dynamics, 10(3), 24.
  • Ekinci, K. (2006). Örgütsel İletişim ve Örgütsel Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişki. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum.
  • Eyidoğan, Ö. (2013). Etik İklimin Örgütsel İletişim Üzerindeki Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İşletme Bölümü, İstanbul.
  • Freire, C. & Bettencourt, C. (2020). Impact of ethical leadership on job satisfaction: The mediating effect of work–family conflict. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(2), 319-330.
  • Gan, J. L. & Yusof, H. M. (2019). The significance of the linkage between organizational communication and employees’ performance: A review paper, Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 1-4.
  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The Psychology of Behavioral Exchange. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • Gross, N. & Kluge, A. (2012). Why should I share what I know?-Antecedents for enhancing knowledge-sharing behavior and its impact on shared mental models in steel production. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 403-407). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
  • Gürgen, H.(1997). Örgütlerde İletişim Kalitesi. Der Yayınları, İstanbul.
  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: Methodology in the Social Sciences. Kindle Edition, 193.
  • Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis second edition: A regression-based approach. New York: The Guilford Press.
  • Hu, L. T. & 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.
  • Ince, M. & Gül, H. (2011). The role of the organizational communication on employees’ perception of justice: A sample of public ınstitution from Turkey. European Journal of Social Sciences. 21(1), 106-124.
  • Kamaşak, R. & Bulutlar, F. (2010). The influence of knowledge sharing on innovation. European Business Review, 22(3), 306-317.
  • Kanungo, R. N. (2001). Ethical values of transactional and transformational leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 18(4), 257-265.
  • King, J. M. (2001). Employee Participation in Organizationally Maintained Knowledge Sharing Activities, A Master Thesis, University of Toronto, Kanada.
  • Koay, K. Y., & Lim, P. K. (2021). Ethical leadership and knowledge hiding: Testing the mediating and moderating mechanisms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(3), 574-591.
  • Le, P. B. & Lei, H. (2018). Fostering knowledge sharing behaviours through ethical leadership practice: the mediating roles of disclosure-based trust and reliance-based trust in leadership. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 16(2), 183-195.
  • Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2004). Perceptions of senior managers toward knowledge‐sharing behaviour. Management decision, 42(1), 108-125.
  • Ma, Y., Cheng, W., Ribbens, B. A., & Zhou, J. (2013). Linking ethical leadership to employee creativity: Knowledge sharing and self-efficacy as mediators. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(9), 1409-1419.
  • Malhotra, N. K. (2004). Marketing Research an Applied Orientation, 4. Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
  • Mallinckrodt, B., Abraham, W. T., Wei, M. & Russell, D. W. (2006). Advances in testing the statistical significance of mediation effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(3), 372-378.
  • Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. B. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 1-13.
  • Men, L. R. (2014). Why leadership matters to ınternal communication: Linking transformational leadership, symmetrical communication, and employee outcomes. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(3), 256–279.
  • Mihelic, K. K., Lipienik, B. & Tekavcic, M. (2010). Ethical leadership. International Journal of Management & Information Systems – Fourth Quarter, 14(5), 31-42.
  • Mishra P. & Datta, B. (2011). Perpetual asset management of customer-based brand equity-the pam evaluator. Current Research Journal of Social Science, 3(1), 34-43.
  • Nonaka, I., Von Krogh, G. & Voelpel, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge creation theory: evolutionary paths and future advances. Organization Studies, 27(8), 1179-1208.
  • Nye, C. D. & Drasgow, F. (2011). Assessing goodness of fit: Simple rules of thumb simply do not work. Organizational Research Methods, 14(3), 548-570.
  • Okan, T. & Akyüz, A. M. (2015). Exploring the relationship between ethical leadership and job satisfaction with the mediating role of the level of loyalty to supervisor. Business and Economics Research Journal, 6(4), 155-177.
  • Oxford Üniversitesi Sözlüğü, (2022). https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ ethic?q=ethic, Erişim Tarihi: 04.02.2022
  • Oye, N. D., Salleh, M., & Noorminshah, A. (2011). Knowledge sharing in workplace: Motivators and demotivators. International Journal of Managing Information Technology (IJMIT), 3(4),71-84.
  • Özkılıçcı, G. (2011). Örgütsel Adalet Algısı ile Örgütsel İletişim Arasındaki İlişkinin Belirlenmesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi Çalışma Ekonomisi ve Endüstri İlişkileri Bölümü, İstanbul.
  • Özyılmaz, A. & Eser, S. (2013). Ortak Metod Varyansı Nedir? Nasıl Kontrol Edilebilir? 21. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı, 500- 508.
  • Piccolo, R. F., Greenbaum, R., Hartog, D. N. D., & Folger, R. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2‐3), 259-278.
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B. & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.
  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 36(4), 717-731.
  • Qian, Y. & Jian, G. (2020). Ethical leadership and organizational cynicism: the mediating role of leader-member exchange and organizational identification. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 25(2), 207–226.
  • Saenz, J., Aramburu, N., & Rivera, O. (2009). Knowledge sharing and innovation performance: A comparison between high‐tech and low‐tech companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(1), 22-3
  • Sarwar, H., Ishaq, M. I., Amin, A., & Ahmed, R. (2020). Ethical leadership, work engagement, employees’ well-being, and performance: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(12), 2008-2026.
  • Shafique, I., N Kalyar, M., & Ahmad, B. (2018). The nexus of ethical leadership, job performance, and turnover intention: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems: INDECS, 16(1), 71-87.
  • Sims, R. R. (1992). The challenge of ethical behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(7), 505-513.
  • Srivastava A., Bartol K. M. & Locke E. A. (2006) Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of Management Journal 49(6), 1239−1251.
  • Sumiati, S., & Nikmah, K. (2020, July). The role of organizational communication and organizational learning to human resources performance through knowledge sharing. In Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive Systems (pp. 398-407). Springer, Cham.
  • Sveiby, K. E. (2000). A knowledge-based theory of the firm to guide strategy formulation: Towards a knowledge-based theory of the firm. In ANZAM Conference, Macquarie University Sydney, Australia.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics: International edition. Pearson2012, 1.
  • Takala, T. (1997). Charismatic leadership: a key factor in organizational communication. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 2(1), 8–13.
  • Treviño, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42, 128−142.
  • Trevino, L. K., & Brown, M. E. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics myths. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(2), 69-81.
  • Tuna, M., Bircan, H., & Yeşiltaş, M. (2012). Etik liderlik ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması: Antalya örneği. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(2), 143-155.
  • Tutar, H. & Yılmaz, M. K. (2013). İletişim: (Genel ve Örgütsel Boyutuyla). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Ural, A. & Kılıç, İ. (2018). Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Göz. Geç. ve Yenilenmiş 5. Baskı, Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Ünüvar B., & Demirtaş, Ö. (2021). Etik liderlik davranışlarının dile getirme davranışı aracılığıyla örgütsel adalet algısına etkisi: sağlık çalışanları üzerine bir araştırma. Uluslararası Sağlık Yönetimi ve Stratejileri Araştırma Dergisi, 7(1), 117-129.
  • Van Den Hooff, B. & De Ridder, J.A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC usage on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 117-30.
  • Villamizar Reyes, M. M. & Castañeda Zapata, D. I. (2014). Relation between organizational climate and its dimensions and knowledge-sharing behavior among knowledge workers. International Journal of Psychological Research, 7(2), 64-75.
  • Xia, Z. & Yang, F. (2020). Ethical leadership and knowledge sharing: The impacts of prosocial motivation and two facets of conscientiousness. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-10.
  • Yang, H. L. & Wu, T. C. (2008). Knowledge sharing in an organization. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(8), 1128-1156.
  • Yeniçeri, Ö. & Demirel, Y. (2007). Örgüt içi bilgi paylaşımına yönelik bireysel ve örgütsel engeller üzerine bir araştırma. Selçuk Üniversitesi Karaman İ. İ. B. F. Dergisi, 12(9), 221-234.
  • Yıldız, M. L. (2019). Ethical leadership and organizational justice: The mediating effect of communication satisfaction. İs Ahlakı Dergisi, 12(1), 101-112.
Toplam 79 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Murat Baş 0000-0002-9479-4571

Yayımlanma Tarihi 22 Mart 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Cilt: 26 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Baş, M. (2023). SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 26(1), 29-48.
AMA Baş M. SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ. HSİD. Mart 2023;26(1):29-48.
Chicago Baş, Murat. “SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ”. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi 26, sy. 1 (Mart 2023): 29-48.
EndNote Baş M (01 Mart 2023) SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi 26 1 29–48.
IEEE M. Baş, “SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ”, HSİD, c. 26, sy. 1, ss. 29–48, 2023.
ISNAD Baş, Murat. “SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ”. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi 26/1 (Mart 2023), 29-48.
JAMA Baş M. SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ. HSİD. 2023;26:29–48.
MLA Baş, Murat. “SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ”. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, c. 26, sy. 1, 2023, ss. 29-48.
Vancouver Baş M. SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ETİK LİDERLİK ALGISININ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNDE ÖRGÜTSEL İLETİŞİMİN ARACILIK ROLÜ. HSİD. 2023;26(1):29-48.
 Kapak Resmi İndir