Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018   IUP :10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018    Tam Metin (PDF)

Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Mehmet KızıloğluSabahat Bayrak Kök

Günümüz dünyasında örgütler hızla değişen rekabet koşulları altında hayatta kalabilmek için üstün çaba göstermektedirler. Bu değişimlere uyum sağlayabilmek için örgüt kültürü önemli bir rol üstlenmektedir. Örgüt kültürü birçok örgütsel değişken üzerinde etkili olduğu gibi örgüt içinde çalışanların davranışlarına yön veren temel değişkenlerinden biri olan örgütsel güç algılamalarını etkileyebilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, örgüt kültürünün örgütsel güç kullanımı ve yönetsel güç algılarını hangi boyutlarda etkilediğini ortaya koymaktır. Elde edilen bulgular incelendiğinde örgüt kültürü ve örgütsel güç değişkenlerinin tamamı ile bu değişkenlerin alt boyutları arasında pozitif ve doğru orantılı bir ilişki olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca örgüt kültürünün örgütsel güç ve örgütsel güç kaynaklarını yordadığı ortaya konmuştur. Bu bağlamda değerlendirildiğinde bütün analizlerde öncelikli olarak yasal güç olmak üzere, zorlayıcı güç ve ödüllendirme gücünden oluşan olan pozisyon kaynaklı güçlerin, uzmanlık gücü, karizmatik güç ve bilgiye dayalı güç olan bireysel kaynaklı güçlere göre daha yoğun tercih edildiği ve kullanıldığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. 

DOI :10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018   IUP :10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018    Tam Metin (PDF)

A Research Between Organizational Culture and Organizational Power in the Context of Denison Organizational Culture Model

Mehmet KızıloğluSabahat Bayrak Kök

Organizations in today's world put in tremendous effort to survive in the ever changing competitive environment. Organizational culture plays a significant role in adapting to such changes. Organizational culture both has an impact on multiple organizational variables and affects perceptions of organizational power which are one of the main variables to provide direction for employee behaviour. The objective of this study is to demonstrate the extent that organizational culture affects the use of organizational power and managerial power perceptions. When the findings obtained are examined, it has been identified that there is a positive and directly proportional relationship between all the organizational culture and organizational power variables, and sub-dimensions of these variables. Also, it has been revealed that organizational culture predicts organizational power and organizational power sources. When considered within this context, it has been concluded that position related powers, consisting of legitimate power primarily, coercive power and reward power, are preferred more intensely than individual related powers, based on expert power, referent power and knowledge based power in all analyses.


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


Although organizations consist of employees with different perspectives, different cultures and different characteristics, these employees come together for the purpose of the organization to form a common system of beliefs and values. The name of this system is organizational culture. Organizational culture is a paradigm of intellectual structure that allows the reality of the organization to be seen. In this context, organizational culture is an important phenomenon that separates organizations, gives them identities and brings employees under the same roof. The Denison Organizational Culture Model, which is given special value in the business environment especially because of the language and ease it provides in practice, is the model based on this study. This study was intended to be carried out in order to see the extent to which this model, which is behavior-based, directly connected with the application and has an accountable approach (Denison and Mishra, 1995; Denison and Nieminen, 2014), has gained its place in organizations. In this context, culture can have an impact on many organizational variables and can also have an impact on organizational power used in organizations. Most of the research sees the concept of organizational power in terms of the power of the manager. In this study, French and Raven's (1959) organizational power sources, reward power, coercive power, legitimate power, expertise power, charismatic power and knowledge power, are considered as the power sources of employees who control and manage organizations, and aims to demonstrate the perception of employees towards these power sources.

The topic of this study is to reveal the dimensions in which organizational culture affects the perceptions of organizational power and managerial power. Within the scope of the study, the top 1000 organizations in Turkey were selected to determine the level of influence of the organizational culture on organizational power. In the context of the Denison Organizational Culture Model, it was aimed to analyze the relationships between organizational culture and the sub-dimensions of organizational power. As a sampling method, the method was selected with the convenience sampling method.

The survey method was used for the purpose of collecting research data. 418 questionnaires were collected through interviews by providing questionnaire forms to firms. The reliability coefficient for organizational culture is 0.94, and for organizational power it is 0.92. Reliability coefficients for sub-dimensions of organizational power are 0.90, 0.86, 0.85, 0.73, 0.83, 0.72, respectively. The results obtained as a result of the structural equality model established to reveal the relations between variables determined that the Organizational Power predict variable of organizational power significantly improved the level of 0.05 (B = .22, Beta = .26). According to the results of the analysis obtained within the framework of the model, findings on the sub-dimensions of the organizational power variable (0.75, 0.76, 0.86, 0.73, 0.63, 0.68) were the results to support our other hypotheses. It is observed that the organizational culture also predicts the sub dimensions of the organizational power. In this context, all hypotheses have been accepted. Goodness of fit indexes (RMSEA;0.7, GFI;0.95, SRMR;0.2) which indicate how well they explain the data obtained in the structural equality model for testing our hypotheses have also been acceptable. The results are similar to those previously made regarding organizational culture and organizational power issues.

The results of the analysis show that the legitimate, coercive and reward power of managers is highly perceived according to their expertise, knowledge and charismatic power. In other words, it is observed that managers use their position-based power more than their individual power. In terms of organizational culture, the emphasis on the use of legitimate, coercive and reward power of managers overlaps with the fact that managers use these powers. Although expertise, knowledge and charismatic power were also emphasized in this study, it was observed that managers used these powers less than other power resources. It is considered that the reason for this is that the power distance is perceived more precisely by the employees rather than the managers, and therefore, the individual power resources of the employees are perceived in the secondary plan compared to the position power resources. When we examined all the organizational culture and organizational power variables discussed in the study and all the relationships between the sub-dimensions of these variables, it was determined that there was a positive relationship between them. In other words, organizational power tends to increase as changes in organizational culture increase. When all evaluations and analysis results were considered, it was concluded that all of the hypotheses in the model were accepted.

A number of proposals may be put forward to shed light on the work to be done next. The first of these proposals may be to carry out more research taking into account the social structure of our country and to determine new types of power in accordance with the cultural structure of our country. New research involving participants in companies in different sectors, regions and countries can produce important and useful results. It is assessed that the research carried out in this direction will contribute to the literature by following different methods to demonstrate organizational culture and organizational power, and to do so in different organizational and managerial issues.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Akyüz, B., Kaya, N. ve Aravi, B. (2015). Kamu çalışanlarının iş tatmini üzerinde liderin güç kaynaklarının rolü. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 13(25), 71-90. google scholar
  • Al-Yahya, K. O. (2008). Power-influence in decision making, competence utilization, and organizational culture in public organizations: The Arab World in comparative perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 385-407. google scholar
  • An, J. Y., Yom, Y. H., & Ruggiero, J. S. (2011). Organizational culture, quality of work life and organizational effectiveness in Korean University Hospitals.’ Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 22(1), 22-30. google scholar
  • Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (1996). Bases of power in relation to leader behavior: A field ınvestigation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 11(1), 3-22. google scholar
  • Bayrak, S. (2001). Yönetimde bir ihmal konusu olarak güç ve güç yönetimi II. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), Isparta, 23-42. google scholar
  • Ball, G., Tevino, L., & Sims, H. (1992). Understanding subordinate reactions to punishment incidents: Perspectives from justice and social effect. Leadership Quarterly, 3(4), 307-334. google scholar
  • Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1964). The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence. Houston: Gulf Publishing Co. Can, N. (2013). Öğretmen liderliği. Ankara: Pegem Akademi. google scholar
  • Cribbin, J. J. (1972). Effective Managerial Leadership. USA: American Management Association. Daft, R. L. (2004). Organization theory and design. Ohio: South-Western College Publication. De Hoogh, A. H. B., Den Hartog, D. N., & Koopman, P. L. (2005). Linking the big five-factors of personality to charismatic and transactional leadership; Perceived dynamic work environment as a moderator. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 839-865. google scholar
  • Dean, T., Coleman, P. T., & Sun, H. F. (2003). Effects of organizational values on leaders’ use of ınformational power to affect performance in China. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(2), 152-167. google scholar
  • Deal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Massachusetts: Adison-Wesley. google scholar
  • Denison, D. R. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. New York: John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  • Denison, D. R., & Mishra, A. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization Science, 6(2), 204-223. google scholar
  • Denison, D. R. (1997). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. Ann Arbor, MI: Daniel R. Denison. google scholar
  • Denison, D. R., & Fey, C. F. (2000). Organizational culture and effectiveness: the case of foreign firms in Russia. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration, 4, 1-53. google scholar
  • Denison, D., Nieminen, L. R., & Kotrba, L. (2014). Diagnosing organizational culture: a conceptual and empirical review of culture effectiveness surveys. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(1), 145-161. google scholar
  • Den Hartog, D. N., Van Muijen, J. J., & Koopman, P. L. (1996). Linking transformational leadership and organizational culture. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(4), 68-83. google scholar
  • Dogan, E. A. (2015). Örgüt Kültürünün Çalışan Motivasyonuna Etkileri: Belediyecilik Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Ana Bilim Dalı. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Dyer, W. (1979). Caring and power. California Management Review, 21(4), 85. google scholar
  • Fairhurst, G., & Grant, D. (2010). The social construction of leadership: A sailing guide, Management Communication Quarterly, 24. google scholar
  • Ferguson, S. (2003). Financial analysis of M&A integration, New York, McGraw-Hill, 57. google scholar
  • French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The Bases of Social Power, Cartwright, Studies in Social Power, University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, Anne Arbour. google scholar
  • Giessner, S. R., & Schubert, T. W. (2007). High in the hierarchy: how vertical location and judgment of leaders’ power are interrelated. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104(1), 33-44. google scholar
  • Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (1997). Behavior in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. google scholar
  • Handy, C. B. (1981). Understanding Organizations, London: Hazell Watson & Viney Ltd, Aylesbury, Bucks Set in Monotype Times. google scholar
  • Harrison, J. R., & Carroll, G. R. (2006). Culture and demography in organizations. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. google scholar
  • Hassenboehler, D. (2004). The Exercise of Power by High School Principals, (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), University of New Orleans, USA. google scholar
  • Hayibor, S., Agle, B. R., Sears, G. J., Sonnenfeld, J. A., & Ward, A. (2001). Value congruence and charismatic leadership in CEO-top manager relationships: an empirical ınvestigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 237-254. google scholar
  • Hellriegel, D., Slocum, J. W., & Woodman, R. W. (1989). Organizational behavior. USA: West Publishing Co. google scholar
  • Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C.A. (1989). Development and application of new scales to measure the French and Raven (1959) bases of social power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 561-567. google scholar
  • Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C.A. (1994). An examination of subordinate-perceived relationships between leader reward and punishment behavior and leader bases of power. Human Relations, 47(7), 779-800. google scholar
  • Hitt, M. A., Black, J. S., & Porter, L. W. (2012). Management. USA: Pearson Prentice Hall. google scholar
  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: ınternational differances in work-related attitudes. CA, Sage: Beverly Hills. google scholar
  • Hofstede G., Neuijen B., Ohayv, D. D., & Sanders, G. (1990). Measuring organisational cultures: A qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 286-316. google scholar
  • Hofstede, G. H. & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill. google scholar
  • Hoyle, R.H., & Kenny D. A. (1999). Sample Size, Reliability, and Tests of Statistical Mediation, (Ed.) Hoyle, R.H., Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, 195-222. google scholar
  • Jogaratnam, G. (2017). How organizational culture influences market orientation and business performance in the restaurant industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 211-219. google scholar
  • Koçel, T. (2014). İşletme yöneticiliği (15. Baskı). Ankara: Beta Yayınları google scholar
  • Kuşakçı, Y. (2016). Uluslararası İşletmelerde Örgüt Kültürünün Pazarlama Üzerindeki Etkilerinin Araştırılması. Dokuz Eylül üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Anabilim Dalı Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. google scholar
  • Liu, M. M. A., & Fang, Z. (2006). A Power based leadership approach to project management. Construction Management and Economics, 24(3), 497-507. google scholar
  • Lund, D. (2003). Organizational culture and job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 18(3), 219–236. google scholar
  • Mani, S. S. (1988). An Organizational Culture Approach to the Study of Individual Power and Its Use, (Basılmamış Doktora Tezi), University of Southern California, USA. google scholar
  • Meydan, H. ve Polat, M. (2010). Liderin güç kaynakları üzerine kültürel bağlamda bir araştırma. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 65(4), 123-140. google scholar
  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and Around Organizations, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. California: Sage Publications, Inc. google scholar
  • Munduate, L., & M. A. Dorado (1998). Supervisor power bases, cooperative behaviour and organizational commitment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 7, 163–177. google scholar
  • Norbom, H. M. (2009). Informal Power, Innovative Cultures and Online Communications Use in Horizontal Organizations, (Basılmamıi Doktora Tezi), Alliant International University, USA. google scholar
  • Palmer, M., & Hyman, B. (1993). Yönetimde kadınlar, (Çev. Öner, V.), İstanbul: Rota Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Perry, J. T., Yao, X., & Chandler, G. N. (2011). To get the best new CEO, must the old ceo go? power distribution in external CEO successions. Managerial and Decision Economics, 32(8), 505-525. google scholar
  • Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from america’s best run companies. NewYork: Harper & Row Inc. google scholar
  • Pettigrew, A. M. (1979). On Studying organizational cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 570-581. google scholar
  • Podsakoff, P.M., Bommer, W. H., Podsakoff, P. N., & MacKenize, S. B. (2006). Relationships between leader reward and punishment behavior and subordinate attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors: A meta-analytic review of existing and new research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 113–142. google scholar
  • Podsakoff, N. P., Podsakoff, P. M., & Kuskova, V. V. (2010). Dispelling misconceptions and providing guidelines for leader reward and punishment behavior. Business Horizons, 55(3), 291-303. google scholar
  • Rahim, M. A. (1986). Some psychometric properties of two measures of French and Raven bases of power. The Journal of Psychology, 120(5). google scholar
  • Raven, B. H. (1965). Social Influence and Power, (Eds) Stenier, I.D. and Fishbein M., Current Studies in Social Psychology, Cambridge University Press, New York, 371-381. google scholar
  • Raven, B. H., Schwarzwald, J., & Koslowsky, M. (1998). Conceptualising and measuring a power/ınteraction model of ınterpersonal ınfluence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 28(4), 307-332. google scholar
  • Robbins, S. P. (1986). Organizational behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. google scholar
  • Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2013). Örgütsel davranış, (Çev. Ed: Erdem, İ.), Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. google scholar
  • Rudolph, H. R., & Peluchette, J. V. (1993). The power gap: Is sharing or accumulating power the answer? Journal of Applied Business Research, 9(3), 12. google scholar
  • Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109-119. google scholar
  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müler, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. google scholar
  • Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2002). Organizational behavior. University of Phoneix, Wiley, United Kingdom. google scholar
  • Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. google scholar
  • Scott, W. R. (1992). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs. google scholar
  • Silverzweig, S., & Allen, R. F. (1976). Changing the corporate culture. Sloan Management Review, 17(3), 33-49. google scholar
  • Stoner, J., & Freeman, R. E. (1992). Management. New Jersey. google scholar
  • Tezcan, C. (2008). Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleri, (Basılmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. google scholar
  • Tremblay, M., Vanderberghe, C., & Doucet, O. (2013). Relationships between leader-contingent and noncontingent reward and punishment behaviors and subordinates’ perceptions of justice and satisfaction, and evaluation of the moderating ınfluence of trust propensity, pay level, and role ambiguity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(2), 233-249. google scholar
  • Tziner, A., Shultz, T., & Fisher, T. (2008). Justice, leader-member exchange and job performance: are their relationship mediating by organizational culture? Psychological Reports, 103, 516-526. google scholar
  • Unutkan, G. A. (1995). İşletmelerin yönetimi ve örgüt kültürü. Ankara: Türkmen Kitabevi. google scholar
  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage. google scholar
  • Yahyagil, Y. M. (2004). Denison örgüt kültürü ölçme aracının geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması: Ampirik bir uygulama. İ.Ü. İşletme Fakültesi İşletme İktisadı Enstitüsü Yönetim Dergisi, 47, 53-76. google scholar
  • Yukl, G. A., & Falbe, M. C. (1991). Importance of different power sources in downward and lateral relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(3), 416-423. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Kızıloğlu, M., & Bayrak Kök, S. (2020). Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Istanbul Business Research, 49(1), 60-85. https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


AMA

Kızıloğlu M, Bayrak Kök S. Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Istanbul Business Research. 2020;49(1):60-85. https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


ABNT

Kızıloğlu, M.; Bayrak Kök, S. Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Istanbul Business Research, [Publisher Location], v. 49, n. 1, p. 60-85, 2020.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Kızıloğlu, Mehmet, and Sabahat Bayrak Kök. 2020. “Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma.” Istanbul Business Research 49, no. 1: 60-85. https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


Chicago: Humanities Style

Kızıloğlu, Mehmet, and Sabahat Bayrak Kök. Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma.” Istanbul Business Research 49, no. 1 (Dec. 2024): 60-85. https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


Harvard: Australian Style

Kızıloğlu, M & Bayrak Kök, S 2020, 'Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma', Istanbul Business Research, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 60-85, viewed 5 Dec. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Kızıloğlu, M. and Bayrak Kök, S. (2020) ‘Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma’, Istanbul Business Research, 49(1), pp. 60-85. https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018 (5 Dec. 2024).


MLA

Kızıloğlu, Mehmet, and Sabahat Bayrak Kök. Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma.” Istanbul Business Research, vol. 49, no. 1, 2020, pp. 60-85. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


Vancouver

Kızıloğlu M, Bayrak Kök S. Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Istanbul Business Research [Internet]. 5 Dec. 2024 [cited 5 Dec. 2024];49(1):60-85. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018 doi: 10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018


ISNAD

Kızıloğlu, Mehmet - Bayrak Kök, Sabahat. Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma”. Istanbul Business Research 49/1 (Dec. 2024): 60-85. https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2020.49.0018



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim20.06.2018
Kabul06.01.2020
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma26.02.2020

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.