Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Investigating the Moderating Role of Economic Justice on the Relationship Between Communicative Rational Action and Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: 1, 138 - 152, 30.06.2025

Ahmet Yavuz Çamlı , Yaşar Alkan

Abstract

The importance that businesses place on the human factor is increasing. It is known that the human factor is affected positively or negatively by various variables in business life. The accurate determination and solution of these will increase the efficiency of the employees and thus make production and operation more effective. In this context, the study focuses on the sustainable improvement of the human factor in business life. This study aims to determine whether communicative rational action affects organizational citizenship behaviour and, if there is an effect between these two variables, to reveal whether economic justice has a moderating impact on this relationship. Economic justice and communicative rational action scales are newly added to the literature. Therefore, the number of studies on these two variables is very low. The originality of the study and its contribution to the literature are important. The sample group consists of 513 people. The participants are minimum-wage workers. The collected data were analyzed with the IBM SPSS 21 program. Multiple regression analysis and SPSS PROCESS v3.5 (model 1) methods were used in the analysis. As a result of the analysis, it was determined that communicative rational action has a positive effect on organizational citizenship behaviour. As a result, it was revealed that economic justice has a moderating role in the relationship between communicative rational action and organizational citizenship behaviour.

Keywords

Economic Justice Organizational Citizenship Communicative Rational Action Job Satisfaction Organizational Justice

References

  • Akpınar, K. (2023). The Role of Public Relations in the Rational Decision-Making Process of Managers: A Study on the Managers of Turkey's Top 500 Industrial Enterprises (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Konya Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya.
  • Allen, A. (2020). The Unforced Force of the Better Argument: Reason and Power in Habermas’ Political Theory. In: A. Allen (Ed.), Habermas and Law, (pp. 107-122). Routledge.
  • Anser, M. K. (2021). Spiritual Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior for the Environment: An Intervening and Interactional Analysis. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 64(8), 1496-1514. Ashenden, S. (2014). On Violence in Habermas’s Philosophy of Language. European Journal of Political Theory, 13(4), 427–452.
  • Baah, C., Zhihong J. & Liang T. (2020). Organizational and Regulatory Stakeholder Pressures Friends or Foes to Green Logistics Practices and Financial Performance: Investigating Corporate Reputation as a Missing Link. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119125.
  • Basım, H. N. & Şeşen, H. (2006). Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışı Ölçeği Uyarlama ve Karşılaştırma Çalışması. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 61(4), 83-101.
  • Blau, A. (2022). Habermas on Rationality: Means, Ends and Communication. European Journal of Political Theory, 21(2), 321-344.
  • Budiyanti, S., Siahaan, H. M. & Nugroho, K. (2020). Social Communication Relation of Madurese People in Max Weber Rationality Perspective. Jurnal Studi Komunikasi, 4(2), 389-409.
  • Chebbi, H., Dorra Y., Mohamed S., Ioanna P. & Yioula M. (2020). Focusing on Internal Stakeholders to Enable the Implementation of Organizational Change Towards Corporate Entrepreneurship: A Case Study from France. Journal of Business Research, 119, 209-217.
  • Chen, K. & Ying Y. (2024). Is Your Working Life Good? Alienation in the Nexus Between Job Characteristics and Organizational Citizenship Behavior of Hospitality Frontline Employees. Tourism Review, 79(1), 133-151.
  • Chriss, J. J. (2022). Jurgen Habermas and Theory of Communicative Action. In: Lenz, K., Hettlage, R. edited by Goffman-Handbuch. J. B. & Metzler: Stuttgart.
  • Chris B. & G. J. Melendez-Torres. (2023). Using Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action to Transform Sociological Analyses of Evidence-Based Policy. Critical Public Health, 33(4), 495-502.
  • Çamlı, A. Y., Alkan, Y. & Şensazlı, A. C. (2023). Developing a Scale to Measure the Economic Justice. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(4), 301-320. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.1323418
  • Çamlı, A. Y., Palamutçuoğlu, T. B., Bărbuță-Mișu, N., Çavuşoğlu, S., Virlanuta, F. O., Alkan, Y., David, S. & Manea, L. D. (2022). The Moderator Effect of Communicative Rational Action in the Relationship between Emotional Labor and Job Satisfaction. Sustainability, 14(13), 7625. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137625
  • Çamlı, A. Y., Virlanuta, F. O., Palamutçuoğlu, B. T., Bărbuță-Mișu, N., Güler, Ş. & Züngün, D. (2021). A Study on Developing a Communicative Rational Action Scale. Sustainability, 13(11), 6317. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116317
  • Dalal, R. S. (2005). A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Counterproductive Work Behavior. Journal of applied psychology, 90(6), 1241-1255.
  • Dhanesh, G. S. (2020). Who Cares About Organizational Purpose and Corporate Social Responsibility, and How Can Organizations Adapt? A Hypermodern Perspective. Business Horizons, 63(4), 585-594.
  • Derelioğlu, S. (2022). İletişimsel Rasyonel Eylemin Örgütsel Performansa Etkisi: Kamu ve Özel Sektör Yöneticileri Üzerine Mukayeseli Bir Araştırma. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 20(46), 793-818.
  • De Angelis, G. (2021). Habermas, Democracy and the Public Sphere: Theory and Practice. European Journal of Social Theory, 24(4), 437-447.
  • Donglong, Z. (2020). The Structural Relationship between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in University Faculty in China: The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21, 167-179.
  • Duran, B. & Bayrak, A. Z. (2020). Habermas’ın İletişim Rasyonellik Teorisi Çerçevesinde Bankaların İncelenmesi. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
  • Eatough, E. M. (2011). Relationships of Role Stressors with Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 619-632.
  • Elche, D., Pablo R.-P. & Jorge L.-L. (2020). Servant Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Empathy and Service Climate. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(6), 2035-2053.
  • Jehanzeb, K. & Jagannath, M. (2020). The Mediating Role of Organizational Commitment between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Power Distance as Moderator. Personnel Review, 49(2), 445-468.
  • Jiang, W., Bingqian, L. & Linlin, W. (2023). The Double-Edged Sword Effect of Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior: The Relationship between Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Work Effort. Journal of Business Ethics, 183(4), 1159-1172.
  • Jovanoski, A. & Kire, S. (2021). Jurgen Habermas and His Contribution to the Theory of Deliberative Democracy. American International Journal of Social Science Research, 7(1), 36-47.
  • Ibsen, M. F. (2023). Jürgen Habermas and the Communicative Paradigm of Critical Theory. In: A Critical Theory of Global Justice: The Frankfurt School and World Society (pp. 149-199). (Oxford, 2023; online edn, Oxford Academic, 19 Jan. 2023), https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192864123.003.0006
  • Kantabutra, S. (2020). Toward an Organizational Theory of Sustainability Vision. Sustainability, 12(3), 1125.
  • Kao, J., Cheng-Chung C. & Rui-Hsin K. (2023). Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Citizenship Behavior–A Study of the Moderating Effect of Volunteer Participation Motivation, and Cross-Level Effect of Transformational Leadership and Organizational Climate. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1082130.
  • Koomen, M. (2020). The Method of Rational Reconstruction for Education in the Tradition of Habermas. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 478-497.
  • Lehtinen, J. & Kirsi, A. (2020). Organizing External Stakeholder Engagement in Inter-Organizational Projects: Opening the Black Box. International Journal of Project Management, 38(2), 85-98.
  • Moslehpour, M., Purevdulam, A., Weiming, M. & Wing-Keung, W. (2019). Organizational Climate and Work Style: The Missing Links for Sustainability of Leadership and Satisfied Employees. Sustainability, 11(1), 125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010125.
  • O’Mahony, P. (2021). Habermas and the Public Sphere: Rethinking a Key Theoretical Concept. European Journal of Social Theory, 24(4), 485-506.
  • Organ, D. W. (1988), Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington, England: Lexington Books.
  • Rundell, J. (2020). Jürgen Habermas. In: Social Theory (pp. 133-140). Routledge.
  • Sefidan, S., Maria, P., Roberto, La M., Thomas, W., Lilian, R., Dena, S., Hubert, A. & Serge, B. (2021). Transformational Leadership, Achievement Motivation, and Perceived Stress in Basic Military Training: A Longitudinal Study of Swiss Armed Forces. Sustainability, 13(24), 13949. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413949
  • Santos, R., Eva, P., Maria, M. & João, A. (2023). First, Be a Good Citizen: Organizational Citizenship Behaviors, Well-Being at Work and the Moderating Role of Leadership Styles. Behavioral Sciences, 13(10), 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13100811
  • Smith, C. A. Iorgan, D. W. & Near, Y. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature and Antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663.
  • Steinhoff, U. (2009). Communicative Versus Purposive Rationality. In: The Philosophy of Jürgen Habermas: A Critical Introduction. Oxford, Online Edn, Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547807.003.0002
  • Udin, U. & Ahyar, Y. (2020). Psychological Capital, Personality Traits of Big-Five, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Task Performance: Testing Their Relationships. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business (JAFEB), 7(9), 781-790.
  • Urhan, S. (2018). Kanıt Yapma Sürecinin Habermas Akılcı Davranış Modeli ile Analizi (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Utami, N. (2021). Relationship between Workplace Spirituality, Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(1), 507-517.
  • Velter, M. G. E., Verena Bitzer, N. M. P. Bocken, & René Kemp. (2020). Sustainable Business Model Innovation: The Role of Boundary Work for Multi-Stakeholder Alignment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119497.
  • Walz, S. M. & Brian, P. N. (2020). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: Their Relationship to Organizational Effectiveness. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 24(3), 301-319.
  • Weidner, K., Cheryl, N. & Zhen, Z, (2021). Sustainable Innovation and the Triple Bottom-Line: A Market-Based Capabilities and Stakeholder Perspective. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 29(2), 141-161.
  • Yang, X., Linzhuo, W., Fangwei, Z. & Ralf, M. (2022). Prior and Governed Stakeholder Relationships: The Key to Resilience of Inter-Organizational Projects. International Journal of Project Management, 40(1), 64-75.

İletişimsel Rasyonel Eylem ile Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışı Arasındaki İlişkide Ekonomik Adaletin Düzenleyici Rolünün Araştırılması

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: 1, 138 - 152, 30.06.2025

Ahmet Yavuz Çamlı , Yaşar Alkan

Abstract

İşletmelerin insan faktörüne verdikleri önem giderek artmaktadır. İş hayatında, insan faktörünün çeşitli değişkenler tarafından olumlu veya olumsuz etkilendiği bilinmektedir. Bu değişkenlerin doğru tespiti ve çözümü çalışanların verimini artıracak ve dolayısıyla üretimi ve işleyişi daha etkin hale getirecektir. Bu bağlamda, çalışma iş hayatında insan faktörünün sürdürülebilir iyileştirilmesi üzerine odaklanmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı da, iletişimsel rasyonel eylemin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı üzerinde etkisinin olup olmadığını tespit etmek, eğer bu iki değişken arasında bir etki varsa bu ilişkide ekonomik adaletin düzenleyici etkisinin olup olmadığını ortaya koymaktır. Ekonomik adalet ve iletişimsel rasyonel eylem ölçekleri literatüre yeni kazandırılmış ölçeklerdir. Bu nedenle bu iki değişkenle ilgili araştırma sayısı çok azdır. Araştırmanın özgünlüğü ve literatüre yapacağı katkı önemlidir. Örneklem grubu 513 kişiden oluşmaktadır. Katılımcılar, asgari ücretli çalışanlardır. Toplanan veriler IBM SPSS 21 programıyla analiz edilmiştir. Analizde çoklu regresyon analizi ve SPSS PROCESS v3.5 (model 1) yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Analiz sonucunda, iletişimsel rasyonel eylemin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı üzerinde olumlu etkisinin olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sonuçta ekonomik adaletin, iletişimsel rasyonel eylem ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişkide düzenleyici bir role sahip olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır.

Keywords

ekonomik adalet örgütsel vatandaşlık iletişimsel rasyonel eylem iş tatmini

References

  • Akpınar, K. (2023). The Role of Public Relations in the Rational Decision-Making Process of Managers: A Study on the Managers of Turkey's Top 500 Industrial Enterprises (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Konya Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya.
  • Allen, A. (2020). The Unforced Force of the Better Argument: Reason and Power in Habermas’ Political Theory. In: A. Allen (Ed.), Habermas and Law, (pp. 107-122). Routledge.
  • Anser, M. K. (2021). Spiritual Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior for the Environment: An Intervening and Interactional Analysis. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 64(8), 1496-1514. Ashenden, S. (2014). On Violence in Habermas’s Philosophy of Language. European Journal of Political Theory, 13(4), 427–452.
  • Baah, C., Zhihong J. & Liang T. (2020). Organizational and Regulatory Stakeholder Pressures Friends or Foes to Green Logistics Practices and Financial Performance: Investigating Corporate Reputation as a Missing Link. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119125.
  • Basım, H. N. & Şeşen, H. (2006). Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışı Ölçeği Uyarlama ve Karşılaştırma Çalışması. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 61(4), 83-101.
  • Blau, A. (2022). Habermas on Rationality: Means, Ends and Communication. European Journal of Political Theory, 21(2), 321-344.
  • Budiyanti, S., Siahaan, H. M. & Nugroho, K. (2020). Social Communication Relation of Madurese People in Max Weber Rationality Perspective. Jurnal Studi Komunikasi, 4(2), 389-409.
  • Chebbi, H., Dorra Y., Mohamed S., Ioanna P. & Yioula M. (2020). Focusing on Internal Stakeholders to Enable the Implementation of Organizational Change Towards Corporate Entrepreneurship: A Case Study from France. Journal of Business Research, 119, 209-217.
  • Chen, K. & Ying Y. (2024). Is Your Working Life Good? Alienation in the Nexus Between Job Characteristics and Organizational Citizenship Behavior of Hospitality Frontline Employees. Tourism Review, 79(1), 133-151.
  • Chriss, J. J. (2022). Jurgen Habermas and Theory of Communicative Action. In: Lenz, K., Hettlage, R. edited by Goffman-Handbuch. J. B. & Metzler: Stuttgart.
  • Chris B. & G. J. Melendez-Torres. (2023). Using Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action to Transform Sociological Analyses of Evidence-Based Policy. Critical Public Health, 33(4), 495-502.
  • Çamlı, A. Y., Alkan, Y. & Şensazlı, A. C. (2023). Developing a Scale to Measure the Economic Justice. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(4), 301-320. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.1323418
  • Çamlı, A. Y., Palamutçuoğlu, T. B., Bărbuță-Mișu, N., Çavuşoğlu, S., Virlanuta, F. O., Alkan, Y., David, S. & Manea, L. D. (2022). The Moderator Effect of Communicative Rational Action in the Relationship between Emotional Labor and Job Satisfaction. Sustainability, 14(13), 7625. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137625
  • Çamlı, A. Y., Virlanuta, F. O., Palamutçuoğlu, B. T., Bărbuță-Mișu, N., Güler, Ş. & Züngün, D. (2021). A Study on Developing a Communicative Rational Action Scale. Sustainability, 13(11), 6317. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116317
  • Dalal, R. S. (2005). A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Counterproductive Work Behavior. Journal of applied psychology, 90(6), 1241-1255.
  • Dhanesh, G. S. (2020). Who Cares About Organizational Purpose and Corporate Social Responsibility, and How Can Organizations Adapt? A Hypermodern Perspective. Business Horizons, 63(4), 585-594.
  • Derelioğlu, S. (2022). İletişimsel Rasyonel Eylemin Örgütsel Performansa Etkisi: Kamu ve Özel Sektör Yöneticileri Üzerine Mukayeseli Bir Araştırma. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 20(46), 793-818.
  • De Angelis, G. (2021). Habermas, Democracy and the Public Sphere: Theory and Practice. European Journal of Social Theory, 24(4), 437-447.
  • Donglong, Z. (2020). The Structural Relationship between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in University Faculty in China: The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21, 167-179.
  • Duran, B. & Bayrak, A. Z. (2020). Habermas’ın İletişim Rasyonellik Teorisi Çerçevesinde Bankaların İncelenmesi. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
  • Eatough, E. M. (2011). Relationships of Role Stressors with Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 619-632.
  • Elche, D., Pablo R.-P. & Jorge L.-L. (2020). Servant Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Empathy and Service Climate. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(6), 2035-2053.
  • Jehanzeb, K. & Jagannath, M. (2020). The Mediating Role of Organizational Commitment between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Power Distance as Moderator. Personnel Review, 49(2), 445-468.
  • Jiang, W., Bingqian, L. & Linlin, W. (2023). The Double-Edged Sword Effect of Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior: The Relationship between Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Work Effort. Journal of Business Ethics, 183(4), 1159-1172.
  • Jovanoski, A. & Kire, S. (2021). Jurgen Habermas and His Contribution to the Theory of Deliberative Democracy. American International Journal of Social Science Research, 7(1), 36-47.
  • Ibsen, M. F. (2023). Jürgen Habermas and the Communicative Paradigm of Critical Theory. In: A Critical Theory of Global Justice: The Frankfurt School and World Society (pp. 149-199). (Oxford, 2023; online edn, Oxford Academic, 19 Jan. 2023), https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192864123.003.0006
  • Kantabutra, S. (2020). Toward an Organizational Theory of Sustainability Vision. Sustainability, 12(3), 1125.
  • Kao, J., Cheng-Chung C. & Rui-Hsin K. (2023). Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Citizenship Behavior–A Study of the Moderating Effect of Volunteer Participation Motivation, and Cross-Level Effect of Transformational Leadership and Organizational Climate. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1082130.
  • Koomen, M. (2020). The Method of Rational Reconstruction for Education in the Tradition of Habermas. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 478-497.
  • Lehtinen, J. & Kirsi, A. (2020). Organizing External Stakeholder Engagement in Inter-Organizational Projects: Opening the Black Box. International Journal of Project Management, 38(2), 85-98.
  • Moslehpour, M., Purevdulam, A., Weiming, M. & Wing-Keung, W. (2019). Organizational Climate and Work Style: The Missing Links for Sustainability of Leadership and Satisfied Employees. Sustainability, 11(1), 125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010125.
  • O’Mahony, P. (2021). Habermas and the Public Sphere: Rethinking a Key Theoretical Concept. European Journal of Social Theory, 24(4), 485-506.
  • Organ, D. W. (1988), Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington, England: Lexington Books.
  • Rundell, J. (2020). Jürgen Habermas. In: Social Theory (pp. 133-140). Routledge.
  • Sefidan, S., Maria, P., Roberto, La M., Thomas, W., Lilian, R., Dena, S., Hubert, A. & Serge, B. (2021). Transformational Leadership, Achievement Motivation, and Perceived Stress in Basic Military Training: A Longitudinal Study of Swiss Armed Forces. Sustainability, 13(24), 13949. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413949
  • Santos, R., Eva, P., Maria, M. & João, A. (2023). First, Be a Good Citizen: Organizational Citizenship Behaviors, Well-Being at Work and the Moderating Role of Leadership Styles. Behavioral Sciences, 13(10), 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13100811
  • Smith, C. A. Iorgan, D. W. & Near, Y. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature and Antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663.
  • Steinhoff, U. (2009). Communicative Versus Purposive Rationality. In: The Philosophy of Jürgen Habermas: A Critical Introduction. Oxford, Online Edn, Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547807.003.0002
  • Udin, U. & Ahyar, Y. (2020). Psychological Capital, Personality Traits of Big-Five, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Task Performance: Testing Their Relationships. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business (JAFEB), 7(9), 781-790.
  • Urhan, S. (2018). Kanıt Yapma Sürecinin Habermas Akılcı Davranış Modeli ile Analizi (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Utami, N. (2021). Relationship between Workplace Spirituality, Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(1), 507-517.
  • Velter, M. G. E., Verena Bitzer, N. M. P. Bocken, & René Kemp. (2020). Sustainable Business Model Innovation: The Role of Boundary Work for Multi-Stakeholder Alignment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119497.
  • Walz, S. M. & Brian, P. N. (2020). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: Their Relationship to Organizational Effectiveness. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 24(3), 301-319.
  • Weidner, K., Cheryl, N. & Zhen, Z, (2021). Sustainable Innovation and the Triple Bottom-Line: A Market-Based Capabilities and Stakeholder Perspective. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 29(2), 141-161.
  • Yang, X., Linzhuo, W., Fangwei, Z. & Ralf, M. (2022). Prior and Governed Stakeholder Relationships: The Key to Resilience of Inter-Organizational Projects. International Journal of Project Management, 40(1), 64-75.
There are 45 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Political Economy, Political Theory and Political Philosophy, Organisational Behaviour
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Ahmet Yavuz Çamlı 0000-0002-0746-9755

Yaşar Alkan 0000-0001-9553-5646

Publication Date June 30, 2025
Submission Date November 22, 2024
Acceptance Date June 11, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 27 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Çamlı, A. Y., & Alkan, Y. (2025). Investigating the Moderating Role of Economic Justice on the Relationship Between Communicative Rational Action and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1), 138-152. https://doi.org/10.21180/iibfdkastamonu.1590035
 Download Cover Image