The Moderating Role of Marital Satisfaction on the Relationship between Dimensions of Work-Family Conflict and Perfectionism

The main aim of this study is to investigate the moderating role of marital satisfaction in explaining the relationship between perfectionism and both dimensions of work-family conict (i.e. family-to-work and work-to-family). The study also examines gender differences regarding both dimensions of work-family conict. The study included 132 married participants (57 female, 75 male). In order to collect data from the participants demographic information form, Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale, Relationship Stability Scale and Work-Family Conict Scale were used. The results of the t-test analysis for independent samples have revealed a signicant gender difference indicating that men experience higher levels of family-to-work conict. As a result of the hierarchical regression analyses, marital satisfaction was found to have a moderating role in explaining the relationship between perfectionism and both dimensions of workfamily conict. It was found that compared to perfectionism, marital satisfaction is more related to work-family conict in marriage

Kuruma bağlılığın olduğu değişkenler :kurumsal iletişime özel bir vurgu.

The aim of this study was to examine the relationships among individual and organizational characteristics variables, several aspects of organizational communication, organizational commitment, organizational identification, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. Furthermore, the influence of supervisor and workgroup commitment on organizational commitment was also examined. With these purposes, following two different pilot studies, questionnaires were administered to a sample of 321 white collar bank employees who are working in different branches of different banks in Ankara. The results of the study revealed that influence of individual and organizational characteristics variables on job satisfaction, organizational identification, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions were low and most of the time insignificant. The results of both regression analyses and model test indicated that job satisfaction was significantly and positively predicted by downward instrumental communication and turnover intentions was found to be significantly predicted by upward instrumental and downward positive communication and organizational identification was found to be significantly predicted by downward instrumental communication in the model test. Furthermore, both job satisfaction and organizational identification were found to be significant positive predictors of organizational commitment. In addition, organizational commitment was found to significantly and positively predicted by commitment to workgroup but not by commitment to supervisor. On the other hand, organizational commitment was found as a significant negative predictor of turnover intentions. However, when entered into the regression analysis together with organizational commitment, neither job satisfaction, nor organizational identification predicted turnover intentions significantly. However, significance of indirect effect of job satisfaction and organizational identification on turnover intentions through organizational commitment confirms the mediation of organizational commitment. The results of the present study, its limitations, and implications were discussed in more detail in the light of the relevant empirical evidence.Ph.D. - Doctoral Progra

Comparisons of behaviorally anchored rating scales, graphic rating scales, and modified graphic rating scales in student evaluation of instructors

M.S. - Master of Scienc

Yıkıcı Liderliğin Bilişsel Yanlılıkları: Makyevelizm Odaklı bir İnceleme

Organizations are investing their resources to identify effective leaders;however, the most commonly utilized assessments of leadership potential donot cover the social cognitions of individuals. Trait assessments, which areexplicit in nature, also have other problems, including faking and sociallydesirable responding. In this chapter, we highlight the importance of leaders’implicit reasoning processes, with a particular focus on cognitive biases, inan attempt to understand how destructive leaders frame the world, situationsand people and how they justify their choice of behaviours and decisions.Empirical evidence in the literature supports the valid use of implicitreasoning measurements in organizational contexts. Thus, we first summarizeand list the cognitive biases of destructive leaders as identified in theliterature. We then turn our focus on Machiavellian leaders as they havebeen associated with destructive leadership. We present the most commonsix cognitive biases and justification mechanisms of Machiavellian leadersbased on our qualitative analysis of interview responses from 72 employees.We aim to encourage researchers and practitioners to make use of theliterature on implicit reasoning and to further contribute to developingmeasures assessing such implicit reasoning processes

Organizasyonlarda Darth Vader'ların 50 Tonu: Yıkıcı Liderliğe Genel Bakış

The common notion that leaders should be ethical, good, responsible andtrustworthy has been strongly challenged in the fields of business and politicsworldwide. Due to the high prevalence of unethical leadership by immediatesupervisors and decline in trust in leaders (Cowart, Gilley, Avery, Barber, &Gilley, 2014), scholars started to pay closer attention to the dark sides anddestructive aspects of leadership. Many different concepts are suggested todefine the dark side of leadership, and each of them captures similar butdistinct dimensions. In this vein, Einarsen and colleagues’ (2007) constructiveand destructive leadership model serves as an umbrella concept fordifferent types of dark sides of leadership, covering concepts which havebeen studied separately such as abusive supervision, tyrannical leadership,petty tyranny, toxic leadership and leader derailment. The present chapteraims to provide a summary of the definitions of these interrelated constructsto acknowledge some other leadership (e.g., paternalistic leadership, pseudotransformationalleadership) and personality styles (e.g., Machiavellianism,narcissism) that have not been considered in this framework and to providesuggestions for future research