Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Evaluation of work-life conflict during Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic: A qualitative research from woman academics’ perspective

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 45, 203 - 241, 30.06.2021
https://doi.org/10.31795/baunsobed.865298

Öz

The academicianship is a profession where academic and administrative duties can be carried out at home or in different places. Academicians are not limited to specific working hours. Also, their work and private living spaces often overlap. As a result, especially in societies where women have a primary role in meeting their family demands, it is seen that women academics experience work-life conflict more. In this study, the views of women academics about working from home during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic were investigated. For this purpose, interviews with 20 women academics were analyzed with content analysis. The results indicated that the physical unification of the work and living areas of the participants, unlike the pre-pandemic period, caused role conflict and some difficulties in responding to different job and family demands. It was found that the majority of the participants had negative opinions about working from home during the pandemic period. It was observed that the society’s perspective towards the academic profession was changed. In addition, the participants were psychologically and physically worn out due to their job and home demands.

Kaynakça

  • Akca, M. ve Küçükoğlu, M. T. (2020). Covid-19 ve iş yaşamına etkileri: Evden çalışma. Uluslararası Yönetim Eğitim ve Ekonomik Perspektifler Dergisi, 8(1), 71-81.
  • Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M. ve Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2), 345-376.
  • Ammons, S. K. ve Markham, W. T. (2004). Working at home: Experiences of skilled white collar workers. Sociological Spectrum, 24(2), 191-238.
  • Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E. ve Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day's work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 472-491.
  • Aycan, Z. (2004). Key success factors for women in management in Turkey. Applied Psychology, 53(3), 453-477.
  • Başarır, F. ve Sarı, M. (2015). Kadın akademisyenlerin “Kadın akademisyen olma”ya ilişkin algılarının metaforlar yoluyla incelenmesi. Journal of Higher Education & Science, 5(1), 41-51.
  • Başkale, H. (2016). Nitel araştırmalarda geçerlik, güvenirlik ve büyüklüğünün belirlenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 9(1), 23-28.
  • Bayramoğlu, G. (2018). İş/aile sınırı teorisi bağlamında kadın akademisyenlerin iş/yaşam dengesinin sağlanmasına yönelik bir araştırma. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 17(68), 1722-1744.
  • Bick, A., Blandin, A. ve Mertens, K. (Mayıs, 2020). Real-time survey to provide timelier labor market data in era of COVID-19. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 15 Mayıs 2020 tarihinde https://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2020/0515 adresinden erişildi.
  • Cucinotta, D. ve Vanelli, M. (2020). WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta Bio Medica: Atenei Parmensis, 91(1), 157.
  • Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770.
  • Colaizzi, P. F. (1978). Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. İçinde R. Valle ve M. King (Der.), Existential phenomenological alternatives in psychology (ss. 48-71). Oxford University Press.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative and mixed methods approaches. (3. bs.). Sage Publications.
  • Currie, J. ve Eveline, J. (2010). E-technology and work/life balance for academics with young children. Higher Education, 62(4), 533–550.
  • Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22.
  • Donald, F. ve Linington, J. (2008). Work/family border theory and gender role orientation in male managers. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(4), 659-671.
  • Donald, F. ve Linington, J. (2015). Work/family border theory and gender role orientation. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(4), 659-671.
  • Dorenkamp, I. ve Ruhle, S. (2019). Work–life conflict, professional commitment, and job satisfaction among academics. The Journal of Higher Education, 90(1), 56-84.
  • Dorenkamp, I. ve Süß, S. (2017). Work-life conflict among young academics: Antecedents and gender effects. European Journal of Higher Education, 7(4), 402-423.
  • Elliott, M. (2008). Gender differences in the causes of work and family strain among academic faculty. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 17(1-2), 157-173.
  • Elmas Atay, S. ve Gerçek, M. (2017). Algılanan rol belirsizliğinin işe yabancılaşma üzerindeki etkisinin ve demografik değişkenlere göre farklılıklarının incelenmesi. ODÜ Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi (ODÜSOBİAD), 7(2), 321-332.
  • Er, D. (2008). Modern Türkiye’de kadın öğretim üyelerinin konumuna ve sorunlarına sosyolojik bir yaklaşım [Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi], Fırat Üniversitesi.
  • Ergöl, Ş., Koç, G., Eroğlu, K. ve Taşkin, L. (2012). Türkiye’de kadın araştırma görevlilerinin ev ve iş yaşamlarında karşılaştıkları güçlükler. Journal of Higher Education & Science/ Yüksekögretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 2(1), 43-49.
  • Forster, N. (2001). A case study of women academics’ views on equal opportunities, career prospects and work‐family conflicts in a UK university. Career Development International, 6(1), 28- 38.
  • Fox, M. F., Fonseca, C. ve Bao, J. (2011). Work and family conflict in academic science: Patterns and predictors among women and men in research universities. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 715-735.
  • Gornall, L. ve Salisbury, J. (2012). Compulsive working, ‘hyperprofessionality’ and the unseen pleasures of academic work. Higher Education Quarterly, 66(2), 135–154.
  • Guba, E. G. ve Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic ınquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30 (4), 233-252.
  • Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D. ve Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. Wiley. Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Nobel.
  • Kinman, G. ve Jones, F. (2008). A life beyond work? Job demands, work-life balance, and wellbeing in UK academics. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 17(1-2), 41-60.
  • Kotecha, K., Ukpere, W. ve Geldenhuys, M. (2014). The effect of family relationships on technology-assisted supplemental work and work-life conflict among academics. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(10), 516.
  • Kramer, A. ve Kramer, K. Z. (2020). The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on occupational status, work from home, and occupational mobility. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 1-4.
  • Küçükşen, K. ve Kaya, Ş. D. (2016). Yönetici pozisyonundaki akademisyen kadınlarda aile-iş-özel yaşam dengesi. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(37), s. 662-674.
  • Lechner, V. ve Creedon, M. (1994). Managing Work and Family Life. Springer.
  • Lewis, S. (2003). The integration of paid work and the rest of life: Is post industrial work the new leisure? Leisure Studies, 22(4), 343-355.
  • Mahmood, A.N. (2007), Work and home boundaries: Socio-spatial analysis of women’s live-work environments. Housing and Society, 34(1), 77-100.
  • Martinez-Sanchez, A., Perez-Perez, M., Vela-Jimenez, M.J. ve de-Luis-Carnicer, P. (2008), Telework adoption, change management, and firm performance, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 21(1), 7-31.
  • McCloskey, D. W. (2016). Finding work-life balance in a digital age: An exploratory study of boundary flexibility and permeability. Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), 29(3), 53-70.
  • Montreuil, S. ve Lippel, K. (2003), Telework and occupational health: A quebec empirical study and regulatory ımplications. Safety Science, 41(4), 339-58.
  • Morgan, R. E. (2004). Teleworking: An assessment of the benefits and challenges. European Business Review, 16(4), 344-357.
  • Naz, S., Fazal, S. ve Khan, M. I. (2017). Perceptions of women academics regarding work–life balance: A Pakistan case. Management in Education, 31(2), 88-93.
  • Ng, C.F. (2010). Teleworker’s home office: An extension of corporate office?. Facilities, 28(3/4), 137–155.
  • Olson-Buchanan, J. B. ve Boswell, W. R. (2006). Blurring boundaries: Correlates of integration and segmentation between work and nonwork. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 432-445.
  • Özen-Kapız, S. (2002). İş-aile yaşamı dengesi ve dengeye yönelik yeni bir yaklaşım. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4, 139-153.
  • Pérez, M. P., Sanchez, A. M. ve de Luis Carnicer, M. P. (2003). The organizational implications of human resources managers’ perception of teleworking. Personnel Review, 32(6), 733-755.
  • Polingham, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. Valle, R. S., and Halling, S. Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology: Exploring the breadth of the human experience içinde (ss. 41-60). Plenum Press,
  • Richman, A.L., Civian, J.T., Shannon, L.L., Hill, E.J. ve Brennan, R.T. (2008). The relationship of perceived flexibility to employee engagement and expected retention. Community, Work & Family, 11(2), 183-197.
  • Sallee, M. W. ve Lewis, D. V. (2020). Hyper-separation as a tool for work/life balance: Commuting in academia. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 26(4), 1-22.
  • Saltiel, F. (2020). Who can work from home in developing countries?. Covid Economics, 7(2020), 104-118.
  • Smith, J. A. ve Shinebourne, P. (2012). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf ve K. J. Sher (Ed.), APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological içinde (ss. 73-82). American Psychological Association.
  • Sullivan, C. (2003). What's in a name? Definitions and conceptualisations of teleworking and homeworking. New Technology, Work and Employment, 18(3), 158-165.
  • T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı. (2020). Haberler. 29 Mart 2020 tarihinde https://www.saglik.gov.tr- /Genel/MansetHaberListesi.aspx adresinden erişildi.
  • Toffoletti, K. ve Starr, K. (2016). Women academics and work–life balance: gendered discourses of work and care. Gender, Work & Organization, 23(5), 489-504.
  • Tremblay, D. G. ve Thomsin, L. (2012). Telework and mobile working: Analysis of its benefits and drawbacks. International Journal of Work Innovation, 1(1), 100-113.
  • UNESCO (2020). COVID‐19 Educational disruption and response. 2 Mayıs 2020 tarihinde https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse adresinden erişildi.
  • Weinrib, J., Jones, G. A., Metcalfe, A. S., Fisher, D., Gingras, Y., Rubenson, K. ve Snee, I. (2013). Canadian university academics’ perceptions of job satisfaction: The future is not what it used to be. P. J. Bentley, H. Coates, I. R. Dobson, L., Goedegebuure ve V. Lynn Meek (Ed.). Job satisfaction around the academic world içinde (ss. 83-102). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Winefield, A.H., Gillespie, N., Stough, C., Dua, J., Hapuarachchi, J. ve Boyd, C. (2003). Occupational stress in Australian university staff. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 51-63.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (9. bs.). Seçkin Yayınevi.

İş-yaşam çatışmasının Koronavirüs (COVID-19) pandemisi sürecinde yeniden değerlendirilmesi: Kadın akademisyenler açısından nitel bir araştırma

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 45, 203 - 241, 30.06.2021
https://doi.org/10.31795/baunsobed.865298

Öz

Akademisyenlik, doğası gereği akademik ve idari çalışmaların çalışılan fiziksel alanlar ile sınırlı kalmadığı, ev veya farklı mekânlarda da sürdürülebildiği bir meslektir. Akademisyenlerin belirli/sınırlı çalışma saatlerinin olmadığı, mesai saatlerinin dışına taştığı, iş ve özel yaşam alanlarının sıklıkla birbirine karıştığı söylenebilir. Bu durumun sonucu olarak, özellikle kadınların aile taleplerini karşılamada öncelikli role sahip olduğu toplumlarda, akademisyenlik mesleğini tercih eden kadınların iş-yaşam çatışmasını erkeklere kıyasla daha çok deneyimledikleri görülmektedir. Bu çalışmada Koronavirüs (COVID-19) Pandemisi sürecinde kadın akademisyenlerin evden çalışma olgusuna yönelik görüşleri iş-yaşam çatışması bağlamında ele alınmıştır. Bu amaçla pandemi döneminde evden çalışan 20 kadın akademisyenle yapılan görüşmeler içerik analizi ile incelenmiştir. Verilerin analizi sonucunda kadın akademisyenlerin, iş ve yaşam alanlarının pandemi öncesi dönemde fiziksel bakımdan birleşmiş olmasının alanlar arasındaki sınırların bulanıklaşması, alan taşması, rol çatışması ve farklı taleplere karşılık vermekte zorluklara neden olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Katılımcıların çoğunluğunun pandemi döneminde evden çalışma olgusuna yönelik olumsuz görüşlere sahip olduklarına, çevrelerinin akademisyenlik mesleğine olan bakış açılarının içeriğine, kadının toplumsal cinsiyet rolüne bağlı olarak iş ve ev talepleri nedeniyle psikolojik ve fiziksel açıdan yıprandığına yönelik bulgular elde edilmiştir.

Kaynakça

  • Akca, M. ve Küçükoğlu, M. T. (2020). Covid-19 ve iş yaşamına etkileri: Evden çalışma. Uluslararası Yönetim Eğitim ve Ekonomik Perspektifler Dergisi, 8(1), 71-81.
  • Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M. ve Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2), 345-376.
  • Ammons, S. K. ve Markham, W. T. (2004). Working at home: Experiences of skilled white collar workers. Sociological Spectrum, 24(2), 191-238.
  • Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E. ve Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day's work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 472-491.
  • Aycan, Z. (2004). Key success factors for women in management in Turkey. Applied Psychology, 53(3), 453-477.
  • Başarır, F. ve Sarı, M. (2015). Kadın akademisyenlerin “Kadın akademisyen olma”ya ilişkin algılarının metaforlar yoluyla incelenmesi. Journal of Higher Education & Science, 5(1), 41-51.
  • Başkale, H. (2016). Nitel araştırmalarda geçerlik, güvenirlik ve büyüklüğünün belirlenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 9(1), 23-28.
  • Bayramoğlu, G. (2018). İş/aile sınırı teorisi bağlamında kadın akademisyenlerin iş/yaşam dengesinin sağlanmasına yönelik bir araştırma. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 17(68), 1722-1744.
  • Bick, A., Blandin, A. ve Mertens, K. (Mayıs, 2020). Real-time survey to provide timelier labor market data in era of COVID-19. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 15 Mayıs 2020 tarihinde https://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2020/0515 adresinden erişildi.
  • Cucinotta, D. ve Vanelli, M. (2020). WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta Bio Medica: Atenei Parmensis, 91(1), 157.
  • Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770.
  • Colaizzi, P. F. (1978). Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. İçinde R. Valle ve M. King (Der.), Existential phenomenological alternatives in psychology (ss. 48-71). Oxford University Press.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative and mixed methods approaches. (3. bs.). Sage Publications.
  • Currie, J. ve Eveline, J. (2010). E-technology and work/life balance for academics with young children. Higher Education, 62(4), 533–550.
  • Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22.
  • Donald, F. ve Linington, J. (2008). Work/family border theory and gender role orientation in male managers. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(4), 659-671.
  • Donald, F. ve Linington, J. (2015). Work/family border theory and gender role orientation. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(4), 659-671.
  • Dorenkamp, I. ve Ruhle, S. (2019). Work–life conflict, professional commitment, and job satisfaction among academics. The Journal of Higher Education, 90(1), 56-84.
  • Dorenkamp, I. ve Süß, S. (2017). Work-life conflict among young academics: Antecedents and gender effects. European Journal of Higher Education, 7(4), 402-423.
  • Elliott, M. (2008). Gender differences in the causes of work and family strain among academic faculty. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 17(1-2), 157-173.
  • Elmas Atay, S. ve Gerçek, M. (2017). Algılanan rol belirsizliğinin işe yabancılaşma üzerindeki etkisinin ve demografik değişkenlere göre farklılıklarının incelenmesi. ODÜ Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi (ODÜSOBİAD), 7(2), 321-332.
  • Er, D. (2008). Modern Türkiye’de kadın öğretim üyelerinin konumuna ve sorunlarına sosyolojik bir yaklaşım [Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi], Fırat Üniversitesi.
  • Ergöl, Ş., Koç, G., Eroğlu, K. ve Taşkin, L. (2012). Türkiye’de kadın araştırma görevlilerinin ev ve iş yaşamlarında karşılaştıkları güçlükler. Journal of Higher Education & Science/ Yüksekögretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 2(1), 43-49.
  • Forster, N. (2001). A case study of women academics’ views on equal opportunities, career prospects and work‐family conflicts in a UK university. Career Development International, 6(1), 28- 38.
  • Fox, M. F., Fonseca, C. ve Bao, J. (2011). Work and family conflict in academic science: Patterns and predictors among women and men in research universities. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 715-735.
  • Gornall, L. ve Salisbury, J. (2012). Compulsive working, ‘hyperprofessionality’ and the unseen pleasures of academic work. Higher Education Quarterly, 66(2), 135–154.
  • Guba, E. G. ve Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic ınquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30 (4), 233-252.
  • Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D. ve Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. Wiley. Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Nobel.
  • Kinman, G. ve Jones, F. (2008). A life beyond work? Job demands, work-life balance, and wellbeing in UK academics. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 17(1-2), 41-60.
  • Kotecha, K., Ukpere, W. ve Geldenhuys, M. (2014). The effect of family relationships on technology-assisted supplemental work and work-life conflict among academics. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(10), 516.
  • Kramer, A. ve Kramer, K. Z. (2020). The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on occupational status, work from home, and occupational mobility. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 1-4.
  • Küçükşen, K. ve Kaya, Ş. D. (2016). Yönetici pozisyonundaki akademisyen kadınlarda aile-iş-özel yaşam dengesi. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(37), s. 662-674.
  • Lechner, V. ve Creedon, M. (1994). Managing Work and Family Life. Springer.
  • Lewis, S. (2003). The integration of paid work and the rest of life: Is post industrial work the new leisure? Leisure Studies, 22(4), 343-355.
  • Mahmood, A.N. (2007), Work and home boundaries: Socio-spatial analysis of women’s live-work environments. Housing and Society, 34(1), 77-100.
  • Martinez-Sanchez, A., Perez-Perez, M., Vela-Jimenez, M.J. ve de-Luis-Carnicer, P. (2008), Telework adoption, change management, and firm performance, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 21(1), 7-31.
  • McCloskey, D. W. (2016). Finding work-life balance in a digital age: An exploratory study of boundary flexibility and permeability. Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), 29(3), 53-70.
  • Montreuil, S. ve Lippel, K. (2003), Telework and occupational health: A quebec empirical study and regulatory ımplications. Safety Science, 41(4), 339-58.
  • Morgan, R. E. (2004). Teleworking: An assessment of the benefits and challenges. European Business Review, 16(4), 344-357.
  • Naz, S., Fazal, S. ve Khan, M. I. (2017). Perceptions of women academics regarding work–life balance: A Pakistan case. Management in Education, 31(2), 88-93.
  • Ng, C.F. (2010). Teleworker’s home office: An extension of corporate office?. Facilities, 28(3/4), 137–155.
  • Olson-Buchanan, J. B. ve Boswell, W. R. (2006). Blurring boundaries: Correlates of integration and segmentation between work and nonwork. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 432-445.
  • Özen-Kapız, S. (2002). İş-aile yaşamı dengesi ve dengeye yönelik yeni bir yaklaşım. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4, 139-153.
  • Pérez, M. P., Sanchez, A. M. ve de Luis Carnicer, M. P. (2003). The organizational implications of human resources managers’ perception of teleworking. Personnel Review, 32(6), 733-755.
  • Polingham, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. Valle, R. S., and Halling, S. Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology: Exploring the breadth of the human experience içinde (ss. 41-60). Plenum Press,
  • Richman, A.L., Civian, J.T., Shannon, L.L., Hill, E.J. ve Brennan, R.T. (2008). The relationship of perceived flexibility to employee engagement and expected retention. Community, Work & Family, 11(2), 183-197.
  • Sallee, M. W. ve Lewis, D. V. (2020). Hyper-separation as a tool for work/life balance: Commuting in academia. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 26(4), 1-22.
  • Saltiel, F. (2020). Who can work from home in developing countries?. Covid Economics, 7(2020), 104-118.
  • Smith, J. A. ve Shinebourne, P. (2012). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf ve K. J. Sher (Ed.), APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological içinde (ss. 73-82). American Psychological Association.
  • Sullivan, C. (2003). What's in a name? Definitions and conceptualisations of teleworking and homeworking. New Technology, Work and Employment, 18(3), 158-165.
  • T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı. (2020). Haberler. 29 Mart 2020 tarihinde https://www.saglik.gov.tr- /Genel/MansetHaberListesi.aspx adresinden erişildi.
  • Toffoletti, K. ve Starr, K. (2016). Women academics and work–life balance: gendered discourses of work and care. Gender, Work & Organization, 23(5), 489-504.
  • Tremblay, D. G. ve Thomsin, L. (2012). Telework and mobile working: Analysis of its benefits and drawbacks. International Journal of Work Innovation, 1(1), 100-113.
  • UNESCO (2020). COVID‐19 Educational disruption and response. 2 Mayıs 2020 tarihinde https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse adresinden erişildi.
  • Weinrib, J., Jones, G. A., Metcalfe, A. S., Fisher, D., Gingras, Y., Rubenson, K. ve Snee, I. (2013). Canadian university academics’ perceptions of job satisfaction: The future is not what it used to be. P. J. Bentley, H. Coates, I. R. Dobson, L., Goedegebuure ve V. Lynn Meek (Ed.). Job satisfaction around the academic world içinde (ss. 83-102). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Winefield, A.H., Gillespie, N., Stough, C., Dua, J., Hapuarachchi, J. ve Boyd, C. (2003). Occupational stress in Australian university staff. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 51-63.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (9. bs.). Seçkin Yayınevi.
Toplam 57 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular İşletme
Bölüm İşletme
Yazarlar

Sevgi Elmas-atay 0000-0002-2238-4979

Merve Gerçek 0000-0002-7076-8192

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2021
Gönderilme Tarihi 20 Ocak 2021
Kabul Tarihi 2 Haziran 2021
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 45

Kaynak Göster

APA Elmas-atay, S., & Gerçek, M. (2021). İş-yaşam çatışmasının Koronavirüs (COVID-19) pandemisi sürecinde yeniden değerlendirilmesi: Kadın akademisyenler açısından nitel bir araştırma. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(45), 203-241. https://doi.org/10.31795/baunsobed.865298

BAUNSOBED