Türk Yükseköğretiminde Akademik Orta Düzey Liderlerin Yöneticilik Deneyimleri: Örgütsel Arayüz Rolüne Yönelik Fenomenolojik Bir İnceleme

Yazarlar

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33308/26674874.20264021093

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Yükseköğretim Yönetimi- Akademik Orta Düzey Liderlik- Örgütsel Arayüz Rolü- Fenomenoloji

Özet

Bu araştırma Türk yükseköğretim sisteminde görev yapan akademik orta düzey liderlerin yönetsel deneyimlerini ve bu deneyimleri şekillendiren yapısal ve ilişkisel dinamikleri incelemektedir. Çalışma nitel araştırma çerçevesinde fenomenolojik desende yürütülmüş ve bir devlet üniversitesinde görev yapan 13 akademik orta düzey yönetici ile gerçekleştirilen yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelere dayanmaktadır. Veriler Yorumlayıcı Fenomenolojik Analiz yöntemiyle çözümlenmiştir. Bulgular akademik orta düzey liderliğin “akademik ve liderlik rolleri arasında gidip gelme”, “örgütsel arayüz rolünü üstlenme”, “yetki-sorumluluk dengesizliği ve görünmeyen iş yüküyle karşılaşma”, “duygusal emek ve ilişkisel yönetim süreçlerini yürütme”, “kişisel anlam üretimi ve yılmazlık stratejileri geliştirme” olarak birbiriyle ilişkili beş boyut üzerinden deneyimlendiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Türkiye bağlamında akademik orta düzey liderlik büyük ölçüde deneyimle öğrenilen, yapısal kısıtlar, yoğun iş yükü ve sınırlı sistematik hazırlık koşulları altında şekillenen çok katmanlı bir rol olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Örgütsel arayüz rolünün yaşantısal boyutunu görünür kılan bu çalışma yükseköğretimde orta düzey liderliğin daha derinlemesine anlaşılmasına katkı sunmakta ve bu rollerin profesyonelleşmesini destekleyecek yapılandırılmış mesleki gelişim programlarına duyulan ihtiyacı vurgulamaktadır.

İndirmeler

İndirme verileri henüz mevcut değil.

Yazar Biyografisi

Kürşat Arslan, Karabük Üniversitesi

e-posta: kursatarslan@karabuk.edu.tr

Referanslar

Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 217–230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/257905

Ball, S. J. (2012). Global education inc.: New policy networks and the neoliberal imaginary. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203803301

Bayram, A., Balyer, A., Özcan, K., & Kiraz, Z. (2025). From classroom to boardroom: Insights from higher education administrators in Turkey. SAGE Open, 15(3), 1–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251368028

Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870

Buller, J. L. (2012). The essential department chair. Jossey-Bass.

Bush, T. (2022). Middle leadership in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(5), 737-738. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221112489

Castillo-Montoya, M. (2016). Preparing for interview research: The interview protocol refinement framework. The Qualitative Report, 21(5), 811–831. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2016.2337

Cone, L., & Brøgger, K. (2020). Soft privatisation: Mapping an emerging field of European education governance. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 18(4), 374–390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2020.1732194

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Davis, A., Jansen van Rensburg, M., & Venter, P. (2016). The impact of managerialism on the strategy work of university middle managers. Studies in Higher Education, 41(8), 1480–1494. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.981518

Deem, R., Fulton, O., Hillyard, S., Johnson, R., Reed, M., & Watson, S. (2003). Managing contemporary UK universities: Manager-academics and new managerialism. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, 1(3), Article 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58809/ALJ20030701/LQGU9157

deMarrais, K. B. (2004). Qualitative interview studies: Learning through experience. In K. B. deMarrais & S. D. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp. 51–68). Routledge.

Dimici, K., Seggie, F., Hacifazlioglu, O., & Caner, A. (2016). Challenges of the professionalization of department heads in higher education: A qualitative study in Turkey. Education and Science, 41(184), 131-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2016.6149

Floyd, A. (2016). Supporting academic middle managers in higher education: Do we care? Higher Education Policy, 29, 167-183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2015.11

Ghamrawi, N., Abu-Shawish, R. K., Shal, T., & Ghamrawi, N. A. R. (2024). Destructive leadership behaviors: The case of academic middle leaders in higher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 126, 102382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102382

Gill, R. (2010). Breaking the silence: The hidden injuries of neo-liberal academia. In R. Ryan-Flood & R. Gill (Eds.), Secrecy and silence in the research process: Feminist reflections (pp. 228–244). Routledge.

Grootenboer, P., Edwards-Groves, C., & Rönnerman, K. (2015). Leading practice development: Voices from the middle. Professional Development in Education, 41(3), 508–526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.924985

Gümüş, S., & Gülmez, D. (2020). Yükseköğretimde kurumsal yönetim: Akademik birimlerin yönetim süreci ve karşılaşılan sorunlar. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 10(1), 73-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.19.016

Hussni, I., & Qadhi, S. (2025). Exploring academic middle leadership development through a multidimensional lens: A case of Qatar University. International Education Studies, 18(6), 68–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v18n6p68

Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. Wiley.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). Wiley.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8

Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders: Why we follow destructive bosses and corrupt politicians—and how we can survive them. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195166347.001.0001

Lizier, A. L. (2024). Middle leaders in higher education: the role of social-political arrangements in prefiguring practices of middle leading. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 56(2), 241-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2023.2255534

Maddock, L. C. (2023). Academic middle leaders, middle leading and middle leadership of university learning and teaching: A systematic review of the higher education literature. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 45(4), 357-392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2022.2160888

Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–1222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Pepper, C., & Giles, W. (2015). Leading in middle management in higher education. Management in Education, 29(2), 46-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020614529987

Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford University Press.

Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150–163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2391486

Robinson, O. C. (2014). Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11(1), 25–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2013.801543

Shin, J. C. (2014, March). Higher education governance under neoliberalism. In Higher Education Forum (Vol. 11, pp. 37-52). Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University.

Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Smith, J. A., & Nizza, I. E. (2022). Essentials of interpretative phenomenological analysis. American Psychological Association. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0000259-000

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. SAGE Publications.

Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 209–264). JAI Press.

Vial, A. C., & Hentschel, T. (2022). Heavier lies her crown: Gendered patterns of leader emotional labor and their downstream effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 849566. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.849566

Wolverton, M., & Gmelch, W. H. (2002). College deans leading from within. American Council on Education & Oryx Press.

Yardley, L. (2017). Demonstrating the validity of qualitative research. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 295–296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262624

Yayınlanmış

2026-05-31

Nasıl Atıf Yapılır

Arslan, K. (2026). Türk Yükseköğretiminde Akademik Orta Düzey Liderlerin Yöneticilik Deneyimleri: Örgütsel Arayüz Rolüne Yönelik Fenomenolojik Bir İnceleme. Yaşadıkça Eğitim, 40(2), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.33308/26674874.20264021093

Sayı

Bölüm

Araştırma Makaleleri