SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ÖRGÜTSEL SESSİZLİK, SESSİZLİĞİN NEDENLERİ VE SONUÇLARINA İLİŞKİN GÖRÜŞLERİ

Erşan Çakır, Özgür Uğurluoğlu
{"title":"SAĞLIK ÇALIŞANLARININ ÖRGÜTSEL SESSİZLİK, SESSİZLİĞİN NEDENLERİ VE SONUÇLARINA İLİŞKİN GÖRÜŞLERİ","authors":"Erşan Çakır, Özgür Uğurluoğlu","doi":"10.22139/jobs.535835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Importance of the physical and mental capacity of manpower in the provision of health services and the idea that the concept of organizational silence will become more important with the effect of employee motivation and performance indicates the focus of this study. In Turkey, studies regarding organizational silence of health care employees mostly conducted with nurses, approximately 50%. 42% of this studies conducted with the participation of all staff in the organization and 8% of this studies conducted with both physicians and nurses (Bayin et al., 2015). Studies conducted with all staff in the organization investigate the reasons of organizational silence (Aliogullari, 2012; Cinar et al., 2013), types of organizational silence (Deniz et al., 2013; Aktas ve Şimsek, 2013), and the consequences of this concept with reasons (Afsar, 2013). There is no research in the literature that studies the subjects which employees remain silent, reasons of silence and perceived results of silence with all staff in the organization. In addition to these, current study examines whether the results differ according to individualistic and demographic variables and with this feature the study becomes more original. The study conducted in one of the state hospitals in Ankara. There are 884 staff in the hospital from various occupations (physicians, midwives/nurses, other healthcare personnel, administrative personnel). Instead of using sampling methods, researchers have tried to reach all staff in the hospital. Totally 291 questionnaire were collected due to reasons such as leave of absence (such as sickness, birth, annual leave), shifts, and unwillingness to participate in the study. 15 of the collected questionnaires excluded because of physicians, 98 midwives/nurses, 67 other healthcare personnel and 70 administrative personnel participate the study and this total number of 276 health care workers included in the study accounted for the 31.2% of the hospital population. The questionnaire developed by Cakici (2008) were used to collect data. The Questionnaire consist of two parts; first one is Personal Information Form for individual and demographic information and second part is Organizational Silence Scale. SPSS 21.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) were used to analyze collected data. In the data analyzing process, frequencies and percentages were used to reveal the descriptive findings related to the individual and demographic characteristics of the staff that participate in the research. After this step, validity and reliability analysis were applied to the scales used in the study. In the next step, mean and standard deviation descriptive statistical methods were used to related to the sub-dimensions of the scales used in the study. In order to determine whether the scales and sub-dimensions used in the study differ according to the individual and demographic characteristics of the participants, the significance test (Standard t test) and one-way analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) were used. If there was a significant difference between the groups, Scheffe test, which is one of the Post-hoc tests, was used to compare all possible linear combinations between the groups in order to find out from which group the significance was caused. When the individual and social-demographic characteristics of the participants were examined, it was seen that big part of the participants (59.1%) were women. 85.1% of the participants were married, 50.7% of them are 38 of age and under, 49.3% of them are 39 age and above. In terms of working experience of participants in the specific hospital; 60.5% of the participants were working for 6 years and less, remaining 39.5% of them were working of 7 years and more. In terms of educational levels, 19.9% of participants had primary and high school degrees, 26.5% had associate degree, 36.6% had undergraduate degree and 17% had graduate education degrees. It was seen that 14.9% of the participants were physicians, 35.5% were midwives / nurses, 24.3% were other health care staff and 25.4% were administrative staff. In terms of managerial position, it was seen that 17.8% of the participants were in the managerial position and 82.2% of the participants were in the non-managerial positions. As a result of the construct validity analysis of the scales used to measure subjects that employees remain silent, reasons of silence and perceived results of silence: Subjects that employees remain silent dimension is consist of ‘Working Opportunities and Responsibilities’, ’Management Problems', ’Employee Performance’, ‘Ethical Issues' and' Improvement Efforts' sub-dimensions. Reasons of silence dimension is consist of ’Administrative and Organizational Causes‘, ’Fears about Work and Fear of Isolation’, ‘Lack of Experience’ and ‘Fear of Damaging Relationships’ sub-dimensions. Perceived results of silence dimension is consist of ‘Results Affecting Performance and Synergy‘, ‘Results causing Staff Unhappiness’ and ‘Restrictions to Improvement and Development’ sub-dimensions. In this research, it is determined that, healthcare staff stays mostly silent about management problems (2.65±0.96) and staff performance (2.64±0.88), however healthcare staff gave lowest average to ethical issues dimension (1,79±0,73). According to this, it can be said that hospital staff do not remain silent or rarely remain silent, especially in ethical issues (abuse, molestation, etc.) and they remain silent most likely in problems caused by management and other staff. Results of the reasons for remain silence, the highest average was given to administrative and organizational reasons (3.10 ± 0.92) and the lowest average was given to lack of experience (2.39 ± 0.89). According to this results it can be said that administrative and organizational reasons are basic reasons of organizational silence. In the perceived results of silence dimension highest score was given to ‘Results Affecting Performance and Synergy’ (3.60±0.77) sub-dimension and lowest score was given to ‘Result Causing Staff Unhappiness’ (3.31±0.87) sub-dimension. In other words, employees believe that remaining silent creates consequences that affects performance and synergy. When the relation between organizational silence scores and demographic variables examined for each dimension statistically significant results were found according to sub-dimensions. In the '‘Subjects that Employees Remain Silent’' dimension there are statistically significant results as following: “Working opportunities and responsibilities” sub-dimension differs by status of holding a managerial position (t=-3.327; p<0.05); “management issues” sub-dimension differs to age (t=-2.116; p<0.05), marital status (t= 1.987; p<0.05) and working experience in hospital (t=-3.631; p<0.05); “performance of workers” sub-dimension differs according to status of holding a managerial position  (t=-2.802; p<0.05)  and working experience in hospital (t=-2.651; p<0.05); “ethical issues” sub-dimension differs according to education level (F=4.464; p<0.05) and   “improvement efforts” sub-dimension differs according to status of holding a managerial position (t=-3.058; p<0.05). In the ''Reasons of Silence’' dimension there are statistically significant results as following: “fear of work and fear of isolation” sub-dimension differs to age (t=2.123; p<0.05), marital status (t=-3.189; p<0.05), working experience in the hospital (t=2.002; p<0.05) and position in the hospital (F=2.782; p<0.05); “lack of experience” sub-dimension differs to marital status (t=-3.011; p<0.05), education level (t=-3.011; p<0.05) and position in the hospital (F=5.361; p<0.05). Finally, in the ‘'Perceived Results of Silence’' dimension there are significant results as following: “results affecting performance and synergy” sub-dimension differs to their position in hospital (F=3.287; p<0.05); '‘results causing staff unhappiness’' sub-dimension differs to gender (t=-2.261; p<0.05), marital status (t=-2.143; p<0.05) and their position in the hospital (F=5.806; p<0.05); ‘'restrictions to improvement and development’' sub-dimension differs according to marital status (t=-3.085; p<0.05) and working experience (t=2.568; p<0.05). According to results of the current study organizational silence can be prevent by choosing managers according to qualification, education, and experience. In addition to these, increasing corporate belonging by providing active participation of the staff with high average age and professional experience can prevent organizational silence. Finally, it is considered that incentives to increase the educational level of the employees and employing non-physician personnel in the fields appropriate to their education and position, and the establishment of interior career goals on the subject may be effective in preventing organizational silence.","PeriodicalId":258137,"journal":{"name":"İşletme Bilimi Dergisi","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"İşletme Bilimi Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22139/jobs.535835","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Importance of the physical and mental capacity of manpower in the provision of health services and the idea that the concept of organizational silence will become more important with the effect of employee motivation and performance indicates the focus of this study. In Turkey, studies regarding organizational silence of health care employees mostly conducted with nurses, approximately 50%. 42% of this studies conducted with the participation of all staff in the organization and 8% of this studies conducted with both physicians and nurses (Bayin et al., 2015). Studies conducted with all staff in the organization investigate the reasons of organizational silence (Aliogullari, 2012; Cinar et al., 2013), types of organizational silence (Deniz et al., 2013; Aktas ve Şimsek, 2013), and the consequences of this concept with reasons (Afsar, 2013). There is no research in the literature that studies the subjects which employees remain silent, reasons of silence and perceived results of silence with all staff in the organization. In addition to these, current study examines whether the results differ according to individualistic and demographic variables and with this feature the study becomes more original. The study conducted in one of the state hospitals in Ankara. There are 884 staff in the hospital from various occupations (physicians, midwives/nurses, other healthcare personnel, administrative personnel). Instead of using sampling methods, researchers have tried to reach all staff in the hospital. Totally 291 questionnaire were collected due to reasons such as leave of absence (such as sickness, birth, annual leave), shifts, and unwillingness to participate in the study. 15 of the collected questionnaires excluded because of physicians, 98 midwives/nurses, 67 other healthcare personnel and 70 administrative personnel participate the study and this total number of 276 health care workers included in the study accounted for the 31.2% of the hospital population. The questionnaire developed by Cakici (2008) were used to collect data. The Questionnaire consist of two parts; first one is Personal Information Form for individual and demographic information and second part is Organizational Silence Scale. SPSS 21.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) were used to analyze collected data. In the data analyzing process, frequencies and percentages were used to reveal the descriptive findings related to the individual and demographic characteristics of the staff that participate in the research. After this step, validity and reliability analysis were applied to the scales used in the study. In the next step, mean and standard deviation descriptive statistical methods were used to related to the sub-dimensions of the scales used in the study. In order to determine whether the scales and sub-dimensions used in the study differ according to the individual and demographic characteristics of the participants, the significance test (Standard t test) and one-way analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) were used. If there was a significant difference between the groups, Scheffe test, which is one of the Post-hoc tests, was used to compare all possible linear combinations between the groups in order to find out from which group the significance was caused. When the individual and social-demographic characteristics of the participants were examined, it was seen that big part of the participants (59.1%) were women. 85.1% of the participants were married, 50.7% of them are 38 of age and under, 49.3% of them are 39 age and above. In terms of working experience of participants in the specific hospital; 60.5% of the participants were working for 6 years and less, remaining 39.5% of them were working of 7 years and more. In terms of educational levels, 19.9% of participants had primary and high school degrees, 26.5% had associate degree, 36.6% had undergraduate degree and 17% had graduate education degrees. It was seen that 14.9% of the participants were physicians, 35.5% were midwives / nurses, 24.3% were other health care staff and 25.4% were administrative staff. In terms of managerial position, it was seen that 17.8% of the participants were in the managerial position and 82.2% of the participants were in the non-managerial positions. As a result of the construct validity analysis of the scales used to measure subjects that employees remain silent, reasons of silence and perceived results of silence: Subjects that employees remain silent dimension is consist of ‘Working Opportunities and Responsibilities’, ’Management Problems', ’Employee Performance’, ‘Ethical Issues' and' Improvement Efforts' sub-dimensions. Reasons of silence dimension is consist of ’Administrative and Organizational Causes‘, ’Fears about Work and Fear of Isolation’, ‘Lack of Experience’ and ‘Fear of Damaging Relationships’ sub-dimensions. Perceived results of silence dimension is consist of ‘Results Affecting Performance and Synergy‘, ‘Results causing Staff Unhappiness’ and ‘Restrictions to Improvement and Development’ sub-dimensions. In this research, it is determined that, healthcare staff stays mostly silent about management problems (2.65±0.96) and staff performance (2.64±0.88), however healthcare staff gave lowest average to ethical issues dimension (1,79±0,73). According to this, it can be said that hospital staff do not remain silent or rarely remain silent, especially in ethical issues (abuse, molestation, etc.) and they remain silent most likely in problems caused by management and other staff. Results of the reasons for remain silence, the highest average was given to administrative and organizational reasons (3.10 ± 0.92) and the lowest average was given to lack of experience (2.39 ± 0.89). According to this results it can be said that administrative and organizational reasons are basic reasons of organizational silence. In the perceived results of silence dimension highest score was given to ‘Results Affecting Performance and Synergy’ (3.60±0.77) sub-dimension and lowest score was given to ‘Result Causing Staff Unhappiness’ (3.31±0.87) sub-dimension. In other words, employees believe that remaining silent creates consequences that affects performance and synergy. When the relation between organizational silence scores and demographic variables examined for each dimension statistically significant results were found according to sub-dimensions. In the '‘Subjects that Employees Remain Silent’' dimension there are statistically significant results as following: “Working opportunities and responsibilities” sub-dimension differs by status of holding a managerial position (t=-3.327; p<0.05); “management issues” sub-dimension differs to age (t=-2.116; p<0.05), marital status (t= 1.987; p<0.05) and working experience in hospital (t=-3.631; p<0.05); “performance of workers” sub-dimension differs according to status of holding a managerial position  (t=-2.802; p<0.05)  and working experience in hospital (t=-2.651; p<0.05); “ethical issues” sub-dimension differs according to education level (F=4.464; p<0.05) and   “improvement efforts” sub-dimension differs according to status of holding a managerial position (t=-3.058; p<0.05). In the ''Reasons of Silence’' dimension there are statistically significant results as following: “fear of work and fear of isolation” sub-dimension differs to age (t=2.123; p<0.05), marital status (t=-3.189; p<0.05), working experience in the hospital (t=2.002; p<0.05) and position in the hospital (F=2.782; p<0.05); “lack of experience” sub-dimension differs to marital status (t=-3.011; p<0.05), education level (t=-3.011; p<0.05) and position in the hospital (F=5.361; p<0.05). Finally, in the ‘'Perceived Results of Silence’' dimension there are significant results as following: “results affecting performance and synergy” sub-dimension differs to their position in hospital (F=3.287; p<0.05); '‘results causing staff unhappiness’' sub-dimension differs to gender (t=-2.261; p<0.05), marital status (t=-2.143; p<0.05) and their position in the hospital (F=5.806; p<0.05); ‘'restrictions to improvement and development’' sub-dimension differs according to marital status (t=-3.085; p<0.05) and working experience (t=2.568; p<0.05). According to results of the current study organizational silence can be prevent by choosing managers according to qualification, education, and experience. In addition to these, increasing corporate belonging by providing active participation of the staff with high average age and professional experience can prevent organizational silence. Finally, it is considered that incentives to increase the educational level of the employees and employing non-physician personnel in the fields appropriate to their education and position, and the establishment of interior career goals on the subject may be effective in preventing organizational silence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人力的身心能力在提供健康服务中的重要性,以及组织沉默的概念会随着员工动机和绩效的影响而变得更加重要,这是本研究的重点。在土耳其,关于卫生保健员工组织沉默的研究主要是在护士中进行的,约占50%。42%的研究是在组织中所有员工的参与下进行的,8%的研究是在医生和护士的参与下进行的(Bayin et al., 2015)。对组织中所有员工进行的研究调查了组织沉默的原因(Aliogullari, 2012;Cinar et al., 2013),组织沉默的类型(Deniz et al., 2013;Aktas ve Şimsek, 2013),以及这个概念的后果与原因(Afsar, 2013)。文献中没有对组织中所有员工保持沉默的对象、沉默的原因和沉默的感知结果进行研究。除此之外,目前的研究还考察了结果是否会根据个人主义和人口变量而有所不同,有了这个特点,研究变得更加原始。这项研究是在安卡拉的一家州立医院进行的。医院共有884名不同职业的工作人员(医生、助产士/护士、其他保健人员、行政人员)。研究人员试图接触医院的所有员工,而不是使用抽样方法。因病假(如生病、出生、年假)、轮班、不愿参加研究等原因,共收集问卷291份。15份问卷被排除,因为医生、98名助产士/护士、67名其他卫生保健人员和70名行政人员参与了研究,这276名卫生保健人员被纳入研究,占医院人口的31.2%。使用Cakici(2008)开发的问卷来收集数据。问卷由两部分组成;第一部分是个人信息表,用于统计个人和人口信息;第二部分是组织沉默量表。使用SPSS 21.0 (Statistical Package for Social Sciences)软件对收集到的数据进行分析。在数据分析过程中,使用频率和百分比来揭示与参与研究的工作人员的个人和人口特征有关的描述性发现。在此步骤之后,对研究中使用的量表进行效度和信度分析。接下来,使用均值和标准差描述性统计方法对研究中使用的量表的子维度进行关联。为了确定研究中使用的量表和子维度是否根据参与者的个体和人口学特征而有所不同,我们使用了显著性检验(标准t检验)和单向方差分析(单向方差分析)。如果组间存在显著性差异,则使用事后检验之一的Scheffe检验比较组间所有可能的线性组合,以找出显著性是由哪一组引起的。当检查参与者的个人和社会人口特征时,可以看到大部分参与者(59.1%)是女性。85.1%的受访者已婚,50.7%的受访者年龄在38岁及以下,49.3%的受访者年龄在39岁及以上。参与者在具体医院的工作经验;60.5%的参与者工作6年及以下,其余39.5%的参与者工作7年及以上。从受教育程度来看,19.9%的受访者拥有小学及高中学历,26.5%的受访者拥有大专学历,36.6%的受访者拥有本科学历,17%的受访者拥有研究生学历。可以看出,14.9%的参与者是医生,35.5%是助产士/护士,24.3%是其他保健人员,25.4%是行政人员。在管理职位方面,17.8%的参与者处于管理职位,82.2%的参与者处于非管理职位。通过对员工沉默主体测量量表、沉默原因和沉默感知结果的构效度分析,发现员工沉默主体维度由“工作机会与责任”、“管理问题”、“员工绩效”、“道德问题”和“改进努力”子维度组成。沉默的原因维度由“行政和组织原因”、“对工作的恐惧和对孤立的恐惧”、“缺乏经验”和“害怕破坏关系”等子维度组成。 人力的身心能力在提供健康服务中的重要性,以及组织沉默的概念会随着员工动机和绩效的影响而变得更加重要,这是本研究的重点。在土耳其,关于卫生保健员工组织沉默的研究主要是在护士中进行的,约占50%。42%的研究是在组织中所有员工的参与下进行的,8%的研究是在医生和护士的参与下进行的(Bayin et al., 2015)。对组织中所有员工进行的研究调查了组织沉默的原因(Aliogullari, 2012;Cinar et al., 2013),组织沉默的类型(Deniz et al., 2013;Aktas ve Şimsek, 2013),以及这个概念的后果与原因(Afsar, 2013)。文献中没有对组织中所有员工保持沉默的对象、沉默的原因和沉默的感知结果进行研究。除此之外,目前的研究还考察了结果是否会根据个人主义和人口变量而有所不同,有了这个特点,研究变得更加原始。这项研究是在安卡拉的一家州立医院进行的。医院共有884名不同职业的工作人员(医生、助产士/护士、其他保健人员、行政人员)。研究人员试图接触医院的所有员工,而不是使用抽样方法。因病假(如生病、出生、年假)、轮班、不愿参加研究等原因,共收集问卷291份。15份问卷被排除,因为医生、98名助产士/护士、67名其他卫生保健人员和70名行政人员参与了研究,这276名卫生保健人员被纳入研究,占医院人口的31.2%。使用Cakici(2008)开发的问卷来收集数据。问卷由两部分组成;第一部分是个人信息表,用于统计个人和人口信息;第二部分是组织沉默量表。使用SPSS 21.0 (Statistical Package for Social Sciences)软件对收集到的数据进行分析。在数据分析过程中,使用频率和百分比来揭示与参与研究的工作人员的个人和人口特征有关的描述性发现。在此步骤之后,对研究中使用的量表进行效度和信度分析。接下来,使用均值和标准差描述性统计方法对研究中使用的量表的子维度进行关联。为了确定研究中使用的量表和子维度是否根据参与者的个体和人口学特征而有所不同,我们使用了显著性检验(标准t检验)和单向方差分析(单向方差分析)。如果组间存在显著性差异,则使用事后检验之一的Scheffe检验比较组间所有可能的线性组合,以找出显著性是由哪一组引起的。当检查参与者的个人和社会人口特征时,可以看到大部分参与者(59.1%)是女性。85.1%的受访者已婚,50.7%的受访者年龄在38岁及以下,49.3%的受访者年龄在39岁及以上。参与者在具体医院的工作经验;60.5%的参与者工作6年及以下,其余39.5%的参与者工作7年及以上。从受教育程度来看,19.9%的受访者拥有小学及高中学历,26.5%的受访者拥有大专学历,36.6%的受访者拥有本科学历,17%的受访者拥有研究生学历。可以看出,14.9%的参与者是医生,35.5%是助产士/护士,24.3%是其他保健人员,25.4%是行政人员。在管理职位方面,17.8%的参与者处于管理职位,82.2%的参与者处于非管理职位。通过对员工沉默主体测量量表、沉默原因和沉默感知结果的构效度分析,发现员工沉默主体维度由“工作机会与责任”、“管理问题”、“员工绩效”、“道德问题”和“改进努力”子维度组成。沉默的原因维度由“行政和组织原因”、“对工作的恐惧和对孤立的恐惧”、“缺乏经验”和“害怕破坏关系”等子维度组成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
LOW PRICING ANOMALY IN INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERINGS: COMPARISON OF THE MARKET ADJUSTED ABNORMAL RETURN MODEL WITH CAPM IN BORSA ISTANBUL PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION WITH SEMI-VARIANCE MODEL: AN APPLICATION ON BIST-100 INDEX THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL DEEPENING ON BANK PROFITABILITY: AN APPLICATION ON PARTICIPATION BANKS IN TURKEY THOUGHTS OF YOUNG VOTERS ABOUT POLITICAL MARKETING PRACTICES: THE CASE OF CAUCASIAN UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN IN-SERVICE TRAINING ATTITUDES AND JOB SATISFACTION LEVELS OF PERSONNEL WORKING IN HEALTH INSTITUTIONS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1