تأثیر رفتار ترور روحی بر شکل‌گیری سکوت سازمانی کارکنان

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی ( با رویکردهای کمی)

نویسندگان

1 بازرگانی،دانشکده مدیریت،حسابداری و اقتصاد،دانشگاه یزد،یزد.ایران

2 دانشگاه یزد، دانشکده اقصاد حسابداری و مدیریت

10.52547/jpap.2021.222575.1076

چکیده

هدف: سکوت سازمانی پدیده‌­ای رایج و متداول در سازمان­‌ها و واقعیتی موجود و ملموس برای مدیران و کارکنان است. یکی از موانع مهم در موفقیت برنامه‌­ها و اهداف سازمان، فقدان اطلاعات، اعتماد و فقدان آن چیزی است که پژوهشگران آن را سکوت سازمانی نام نهاده‌­اند که عبارت است از خودداری از بیان ایده‌­ها، نظرات و اطلاعات راجع به مشکلات سازمانی. از سویی دیگر قصد ترور روحی با ایجاد فشار روانی روی شخص مورد هدف، دورکردن هویت کارکنان با استفاده از فشارهای منظم و مستمراست. با توجه به اینکه سازمان امور مالیاتی یکی از پر درآمدترین سازمان‌های دولتی در ایران می­‌باشد و همچنین میزان اهمیت و نقش بسزای این سازمان در مدیریت امور اقتصادی، مالی و تجاری ایران؛ عملکرد کارکنان و در نتیجه بهره‌­وری این سازمان اهمیت به خصوصی دارد، پژوهش حاضر به تعیین تأثیر ترور روحی بر ابعاد سکوت سازمانی می‌پردازد.
طراحی/ روش‌شناسی/ رویکرد: این پژوهش از نظر هدف، کاربردی و از نظر شیوه گردآوری داده‌­ها توصیفی-پیمایشی است. آزمون مدل مفهومی نیز به روش معادلات ساختاری انجام شد و از نرم‌افزارهای Spss و Amos استفاده گردید. جامعه آماری پژوهش حاضر، کارکنان اداره امور مالیاتی شهر یزد به تعداد 320 نفر می‌­باشد که طبق جدول مورگان تعداد نمونه 175 می­باشد. از نمونه­‌گیری طبقه‌­ای استفاده و از هر طبقه نیز نمونه‌­ها بـه صـورت تـصادفی سـاده انتخاب شده‌­اند. از نظرات 5 نفر از اساتید و خبرگان حوزه مدیریت برای بررسی روایی محتوا استفاده گردید و همچنین آلفای متغیر ترور روحی 926/0 و آلفای متغیر سکوت سازمانی 733/0 به‌دست آمد. همچنین از پرسشنامه استاندارد سکوت سازمانی داین و همکاران و پرسشنامه استاندارد ترور روحی وینهارت وآندریوکاتین استفاده شده است. تعداد 171 پرسشنامه مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت.
یافته‌­های پژوهش:  یافته‌­های این تحقیق عبارت است از اینکه ترور روحی بر سکوت مطیع اثر مثبت و معناداری دارد و همچنین اینکه ترور روحی بر سکوت تدافعی اثر مثبت و معناداری دارد ولی ترور روحی بر سکوت نوع‌دوستانه اثر معناداری ندارد.
محدودیت­‌ها و پیامدها: عدم امکان تعمیم‌­پذیری نتایج پژوهش به همه جوامع و استفاده از ابزار پرسشنامه برای سنجش نگرش افراد از جمله محدودیت­‌های این پژوهش تلقی می­‌شود.
پیامدهای عملی: بروز فشار روانی بر کارکنان در سازمان تحت تاثیر عوامل مختلفی قرار دارد. این عوامل برای جلوگیری از بروز ­رفتار سکوت می­‌بایست شناسایی شوند و مورد توجه قرار گیرند.
ابتکار یا ارزش مقاله: ارائه مدلی برای نشان اثراث ترور روحی بر سکوت سازمانی کارکنان.
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The effect of Mobbing behavior on the formation of employees organizational silence

نویسندگان [English]

  • zohre sadat doaei 1
  • Mehdi Sabokroo 2
1 Business, Faculty of Management, Accounting and Economics, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2 Faculty of Economics, Management and accounting, Yazd University,
چکیده [English]

Purpose:  Organizational silence is a common phenomenon in organizations and an existing and tangible reality for managers and employees. One of the most important obstacles to the success of an organization's plans and goals is the lack of information, trust, and lack of what researchers call organizational silence, which is the refusal to express ideas, opinions, and information about organizational problems. On the other hand, by putting psychological pressure on the target person, mobbing intends to remove the identity of employees by using regular and continuous pressures. As a result of mobbing, employees lose their sense of belonging to the organization. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of mobbing on the dimensions of organizational silence.
Design/ methodology/ approach:   This research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-survey in terms of data collection method. Conceptual model testing was performed by structural equation method and Spss and Amos softwares were used. The statistical population of the present study is the employees of governmental offices in Yazd. Also, the standard questionnaire of organizational silence of Dine et al. And the standard questionnaire of Mobbing Weinhart and Andriukatin were used. 171 questionnaires were analyzed.
Research Findings The findings of this study are that mobbing has a positive and significant effect on obedient silence and also that mobbing has a positive and significant effect on defensive silence but mobbing has no significant effect on altruistic silence.
Limitations & Consequences:  Lack of similar research and lack of objective indicators for comparison within the country were the most important limitations.
Practical Consequences:  The occurrence of stress on employees in the organization is affected by various factors. These factors must be identified and considered to prevent the occurrence of silent behavior.
Innovation or value of the Article:  Providing a model to show the effect of mobbing on employee’s organizational silence.
Paper Type: Research Article

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Mobbing
  • Organizational silence
  • Staff
  1. Afshani, Seyed Alireza; Nourian, Morteza; Pahlavan Sharif, Saeed. (2016). Analysis of statistical equations with spss & amos, first edition, Fazel Thought Publishing. ) in persain)
  2. Akgeyik, T., DELEN, M. G., Şelale, U. Ş. E. N., & Umut, O. M. A. Y. (2009). İşyerinde Psikolojik Taciz Olgusu: Niteliği, Yaygınlığı ve Mücadele Stratejisi. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, (56).
  3. Aldığ, E. (2011). İş yerinde yıldırma (mobbing) ve örnek bir çalışma (Master's thesis, Doğuş Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü).
  4. Alparslan, A.M. (2010). Örgütsel Sessizlik İklimi ve İşgören Sessizlik Davranışları Arasındaki Etkileşim: Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Öğretim Elemanları Üzerinde Bir Araştırma, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme Anabilim Dalı, Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
  5. Avery, D. R., & Quiñones, M. A. (2002). Disentangling the effects of voice: the incremental roles of opportunity, behavior, and instrumentality in predicting procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 81.
  6. Bagheri, G., Zarei, R., Aeen, M. N. (2012). Organizational silence, Ideal Type of Management, Vol.1, No.1, 47-58.
  7. Barling, J., Rogers, A. G., ve Kelloway, E. K. (2001). Behind closed doors: In-home workers’ experience of sexual harassment and workplace violence. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(3), 225-269.
  8. Bowen, F., & Blackmon, K. (2003). Spirals of silence: The dynamic effects of diversity on organizational voice. Journal of management Studies, 40(6), 1393-1417.
  9. Budd, J. W., Arvey, R. D., & Lawless, P. (1996). Correlates and consequences of workplace violence. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1(2), 197.
  10. Çakici, A. (2008). Örgütlerde sessiz kalınan konular sessizliğin nedenleri ve algılanan sonuçları üzerine bir araştırma. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1), 117-134.
  11. Çakıcı, A., (2010), Örgütlerde İş Gören Sessizliği, Neden Sessiz Kalmayı Tercih Ediyoruz?, Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  12. Cetin, A. (2020). Organizational silence and organizational commitment: a study of Turkish sport managers. Annals of Applied Sport Science, 8(2), 0-0.
  13. Chou, S. Y., & Chang, T. )2017(. Employee Silence and Silence Antecedents: A Theoretical Classification. International Journal of Business Communication, 57)3(, 401-426.
  14. Dehghanan, Hamed, Shakeri, Elmira, & Azari Rad. (2020). Investigating the relationship between poor volunteer fitness and the organization and the intention to leave the organization with emphasis on the role of burnout, spirituality and narcissism (Case study: volunteers of the Red Crescent Society of Qazvin province). Public Management Perspectives, 11 (2), 149-176. ) in persain)
  15. Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of management studies, 40(6), 1359-1392.
  16. Elçi, M., Erdilek, M. K., Alpkan, L., & Şener, İ. (2014). The mediating role of mobbing on the relationship between organizational silence and turnover intention. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 455-464.
  17. Ertürk, A. (2011). İlköğretim okullarında görevli Öğretmen ve yöneticilere yönelik duygusal yıldırma davranışlarının incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Ana Bilim Dalı, Ankara.
  18. Fatemeh Alavi Matin, Hossein Damghanian, & Abbas Ali Rastegar. (2020). The effect of comparative sadness on social wear mediated by silent jealousy. Public Management Perspectives. ) in persain)
  19. Hüsrevsahi, S. P. (2015). Relationship between Organizational Mobbing and Silence Behavior among Teachers. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(5), 1179-1188.
  20. Jamshidi, Z., & Heidari, P. (2020), How Mobbing Leads to Organizational Silence, Fifth International Conference on Innovation and Research in Educational Sciences, Management and Psychology, Tehran.) in persain)
  21. Kalantari, Kh. (2009). Modeling Cultural Equations in Social and Economic Studies (by LISREL and SIMPLIS) Tehran: Farhang Saba, 1-240.) in persain)
  22. Konrad, Lorenz (1971). Sobre la agresión: el pretendido mal. Siglo XXI Editores.
  23. Korsgaard, M. A., Meglino, B. M., & Lester, S. W. (1997). Beyond helping: Do other-oriented values have broader implications in organizations? .Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 160.
  24. Köylüoğlu, A. S., Bedük, A., Duman, L., & Büyükbayraktar, H. H. (2015). Analyzing the relation between teachers’ organizational silence perception and whistle blowing perception. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 207, 536-545.
  25. Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 5(2), 165-184.
  26. Lybecker, C., & Sofield, L. (2000). Verbal abuse. SSM, 6(6), 32.
  27. Mirmohammadi, S.M., & Rahimian, M., (2014), The effect of authentic leadership on employees creativity with regard to the mediator role of psychological capital.Journal of Management Resarches In Iran,18(3).2014.181-203. ) in persain)
  28. Morrison, E. W. & Milliken, F.J. (2000). Organizational Silence: A Barrier to Change and Development in a Pluralistic World, The Academy Of Management Review, 25(4): 706-725.
  29. Nazim, M., Zeb, N., Maqbool, A., Nadeem, A. H., Ghazanfar, S., Sharif, M. S., & Javed, M. A. (2021). Predicting Organizational Silence and Employee Turnover Intentions. Psychology and Education Journal, 58(1), 6602-6617.
  30. Perlow, L. A., & Repenning, N. P. (2009). The dynamics of silencing conflict. Research in organizational behavior, 29, 195-223.
  31. Pinder, C. C., & Harlos, K. P. (2001). Employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as responses to perceived injustice. Research in Personnel and Human Research Management, 20(1), 331–369.
  32. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B. and Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviours: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research’. Journal of Management, 26, 513–63.
  33. Premeaux, S. F. (2001). Breaking the Silence: Toward an Understanding of Speaking Up in the Workplace.
  34. Saberi, F; Kazemi, S A (2015), The Impact of Managers' Power Sources on Organizational Silence of Study Employees: Kashan University, International Conference on Management and Humanities, Emirates-Dubai, Vira Capital of Ideas.) in persain)
  35. Saberi, Fatemeh; Kazemi, Seyed Abbas (2015), The Impact of Managers' Power Sources on Organizational Silence of Study Employees: Kashan University, International Conference on Management and Humanities, UAE-Dubai, Vira Capital of Ideas. (in persain)
  36. Saeidipour, B., Akbari, P., & Alizadeh, Z. (2021). The Role of Organizational Silence & Organizational Mobbing on the Turnover Intention. International Journal of Ethics and Society, 3(1), 59-69.
  37. Souba, W., Way, D., Lucey, C., Sedmak, D., Notestine, M., (2011). Elephants in academic medicine, Academic Medicine, Vol.86, 1492-1499.
  38. Tetik, S. (2010). Mobbing kavramı: Birey ve örgütler açısından önemi. KMÜ Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12 (18), 81-89.
  39. Tilki, T., GÜNEY, S., & METİN CAMGÖZ, S. E. L. İ. N. (2021). Serial Mediation Effects on Relationships among Mobbing, Organizational Cynicism, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention: Research on Disabled Individuals in Organizations.
  40. Tinaz P. (2006). “İşyerinde Psikolojik Taciz (Mobbing)”, Çalışma ve Toplum, No: 4, s.13-28.
  41. Vandekerckhove, W., & Commers, M. R. (2003). Downward workplace mobbing: a sign of the times? Journal of business Ethics, 45(1-2), 41-50.
  42. Vévodová, Š., Vévoda, J., & Grygová, B. (2020). Mobbing, subjective perception, demographic factors, and prevalence of burnout syndrome in nurses. Central European Journal of Public Health, 28(Supplement), S57-S64.
  43. Vveinhardt, J., & Andriukaitienė, R. (2015). Questionnaire verification of prevention of mobbing/bullying as a psychosocial stressor when implementing CSR. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 13(2), 57-70.
  44. Yildiz, S. M. (2021). The effect of workplace mobbing on organizational silence: empirical results from higher education institutions. Sistemas & Gestão, 16(1), 101-108.
  45. Zarei Matin, H; Taheri, F; Sayyar, A al-Q (2011). Organizational silence: Concepts, Causes and Consequences, Iranian Journal of Management Sciences, Volume 6, Issue21, Pp. 104-77.) in persain)