ulu.2014, Makale Kabul Tarihi:21.10.2014 Sosy Anahtar Kelimeler: 2014, Cilt:11, 163184
The Relaionship Between Social Capital of Schools And Organizational Image Based On Perceptions of Teachers Abstract:The relationship between social capital and image of schools has been investigated in this study of scanning model. 441 teachers who are working in primary schools of Erzurum province participated to this study. The data obtained from the participants were analyzed using SPSS 19 software package. As a result of the principal component analysis, it has been found that social capital consists of share, satisfaction, integration, participation, and trust. Image capital consists of work environment, quality of management, financial stability, emotional appeal, quality of service, and social responsibility. In this research, t test, oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA), correlation and regression analysis were done. Alpha reliability value of social capital and image capital scales was found as.95 and KMO value as.96. It has been found that there was a strong relationship between social capital of school and organizational image. While subdimensions of social capital explained 73% of organizational image, subdimensions of organizational image explained 71% of social capital. It has been concluded that when social capital of schools becomes stronger, image of schools increases too. Keywords: Social Financing, Organizational Image, School sermayenin unsurl 164
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 tmektedir. r rultusunda ya Toplumu bir arada tutan, birlik duygusunu, dol ini sa erlendirilebilir i, 2010). Okullar, Sosyal sermayenin bil 165
Begenirba fonksiyonunu da yeterince yerine getiremeyecek ve rekabette geri mayeye sahipse o kadar iyi edir. Yine sosyal ve entel te ve de duygusal bir katma 166
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 nin elde tutma becerileri, sosyal sorumluluk bilinci gibi kriterlerle velil dost lan 167
1. 2. 1. 2. r? 168
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 Erzurum bele konunu rma retim okulu kurum imaj anketi 16 toplumsal sorumluluk 169
Tablo1. 170
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 Tablo2. Finansal Duygusal kalitesi cazibe 171
analiz sonucunda sosyal sermaye; hizmet kalitesi ve toplumsal sorumluluk 172
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 Tablo 3. 1 19.680 43.733 43,733 19.680 43.733 43,733 7,289 16,198 16,198 2 2.549 5.665 49,398 2.549 5.665 49,398 7,113 15,808 32,005 3 1.744 3.875 53,273 1.744 3.875 53,273 5,930 13,178 45,183 4 1.464 3.253 56,526 1.464 3.253 56,526 4,433 9,619 55,034 5 1.424 3.164 59,690 1.424 3.164 59,690 2,095 4,656 59,690 6 1.244 2.765 62,456 7 1.093 2.251 64,707 8.964 2.143 66,850 9.839 1.864 68,011 10.816 1.812 70,095 11.770 1.712 72,238 12.763 1.696 73,934 Tablo 4. De 1 21.487 46.710 46,710 21.487 38.707 46,710 7,126 15,491 15,491 2 2.785 6.055 52,765 2.785 6.055 52,765 5,762 12,526 28,016 3 1.733 3.767 56,532 1.733 3.767 56,532 5,233 11,388 39,404 4 1.433 3.114 59,646 1.433 3.114 59,646 4,573 9,940 49,345 5 1.430 3.109 62,755 1.430 3.109 62,755 4,493 9,767 59,112 6 1.121 2.437 65,191 1,121 2.437 65.191 3,797 6,080 65,191 7.980 2.130 67,322 8.925 2.011 69,333 9 1.067 2.371 68,011 i 173
10.864 1.878 71,211 11.780 1.695 72,906 12.713 1.549 74,456 BULGULAR Tablo5. Boyutlar Memnuniyet Sosyal Serm. Top. Finansal Duygusal cazibe Hizmet kalitesi Toplumsal sorum. 1 69 ** 74 ** 55 ** 43 ** 89 ** 74 ** 65 ** 46 ** 56 ** 68 ** 49 ** 72 ** 2 77 ** 60 ** 29 ** 80 ** 76 ** 72 ** 60 ** 63 ** 82 ** 55 ** 80 ** 3 68 ** 38 ** 92 ** 73 ** 72 ** 58 ** 65 ** 75 ** 54 ** 78 ** 4 30 ** 76 ** 57 ** 54 ** 36 ** 48 ** 59 ** 43 ** 59 ** 5 48 ** 36 ** 32 ** 28 ** 26 ** 27 ** 20 ** 34 ** 6 81 ** 76 ** 58 ** 67 ** 78 ** 55 ** 82 ** 7 77 ** 61 ** 70 ** 83 ** 63 ** 91 ** 8 71 ** 69 ** 77 ** 60 ** 89 ** 9 69 ** 64 ** 54 ** 81 ** 10 75 ** 63 ** 85 ** 11 64 ** 91 ** 12 74 ** 13 N=441 **p<01 alt boyut r=.89], memnuniyet [r=r= r= r=.48], 174
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 r= r=.89], r=.81], duygusal cazibe [r=.85] hizmet kalitesi [r=.91] ve toplumsal sorumluluk [r= Kareler sd Kareler F P 2,552 191,160 193,703 2 438 440 1,276,436 Fark IJ 2,923 042 Lisans Toplam Kareler sd Kareler F P Fark IJ 8,015 2 1,276 2,923 026 1521 ve 385,403 438,436 393,418 440 Toplam 175
Kareler sd Kareler F P 14,341 324,734 339,075 4 436 440 3,585,745 4,814 001 Fark IJ 15 610 21 Toplam Toplam 4,217 184,410 188,626 4 436 440 1,054,423 2,492 043 15 Toplam im faaliyetinde 21 ve 5 ve 6 Kareler sd Kareler F P 11,300 327,776 339,883 3 437 440 3,767,750 5,022 002 Fark IJ 13 Toplam 5,608 3 1,869 3,209 023 710 176
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 Toplumsal sorumluluk 254,537 260,146 437 440,582 13 Toplam 3 ve 7 l hizmete sahip sanatlar gibi toplumsal sorumluluk etkinliklerinin ku Tablo 8. B SH B t P Sabit,328,108 3,021,003,180,040,182 4,530,000 Memnuniyet,416,039,443 10,780,000,267,046,281 5,861,000,023,035,022,644,520,017,019,025,879,380 n=441, R=.86, R 2 =.73, F=230.769, p<.01 177
regresyon analizi yer a R=86, R 2 Tablo 9. Sosyal Sermaye B SH B t P Sabit 839,091 9,215,000,356,044,412 8,095,000 kalitesi,196,035,268 5,672,000,022,027,032,807,420 Duygusal cazibe,058,036,070 1,587,113 Hizmet kalitesi,174,044,216 3,956,000 Toplumsal sorumluluk,025,028,032,092 368 n=441, R=.85, R 2 =.71, F=179,906 p<.01 2 =71, 178
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 toplumsal sorumluluk na % % sosyal 179
So sosyal ser de g 180
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 181
KAYNAKLAR Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E. (2001), Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues, MIS Quarterly, 25(1): 107 136. 7(1) 2007: 337 36. Dergisi / Teori ve Uygulama, 18., Ankara 65(4): 88109. 365 Choi, B. & Lee, H. (2003). An empirical investigatiotion of km styles and their effect on corporate performance, Information & Management, 40: 403417. Chua, A. (2002 ), The influence of social interaction on knowledge creation, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(4): 375392. Dichter, E. (1985). What's In An Image. Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 2 Iss: 1, pp.75 81. Ekinci, A. (2010), Okullarda sosyal sermaye, Ank Bilimleri Dergisi, 12 (4). Erdo an B.. Z. Devel Kurumsal, Ferguson, D. P., Wallace J. D. and Chandler, R. C. (2012) Rehabilitating Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Ethicality of Image Repair Strategies in Crisis Situations, Public Relations Journal Vol. 6, No. 1 ISSN 194246. Fukuyama, F. (2005)., 182
U Journal of Social Science 11(2) 2014 Grootaert, C. and Van Bastelaer, T. (2002). Understanding and measuring social capital: A multidisciplinary tool for practitioners. Washington DC: World Bank Publication Karasar, N. (2013). KOSGEP (2005)., 266. ve Bir Uygulama, Cilt: 19, Lievens F., Hoye G. V. and Anseel F. (2007). Organizational Identity and Employer Image: Towards a Unifying Framework, British Journal of Management, Vol. 18, S45 S59 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467 8551.2007.00525. Nahapiet, J.ve Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage, Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242266, Konya: Kitabevi. sunda incelenmesi, 5(34): 109130. Polis Bilimleri Dergisi, 183
Tu 7(1): 146160. / Issue: 61 2011/2, 201 226. 184