2.1 Managerial Values

The values that constitute the culture are depicted as motives guiding the human behaviour⁽ Reference Aldemir ^{6 )}. The value definitions described by the theories discussed above seem to emphasise two distinct features: density and direction. Density shows the importance of a person and increased importance means enhanced density. Başaran (Ref. 7, p 390) defined belief as the quality and quantity that determines the benefit of a person, object, process, thought process and action, goodness, beauty, authenticity and desirability. Şişman (Ref. 8, p 4) defined value as giving importance and preference to culture. According to Social Psychology ⁽ Reference Rokeach ^{9 )}, value is enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence. Value is used to separate the definition between bad and good, beautiful and ugly, normal and abnormal, rational and irrational in relation to ideas, opinions and behaviours (Ref. 10, p 291; Ref. 11, p 24; Ref. 12, p 51; Ref. 13, p 47).

According to SmithKline Beecham, the reasons that make the values important (Ref. 14, p 175):

• ∙ present a guide framework in relation to behaviours and decisions;

• ∙ help build ethical culture;

• ∙ have potential to effect the organisation’s success;

• ∙ are first degree motivators; and

• ∙ do not only hinder the managers from continuously giving inappropriate orders, but also prevent the employees from implementing such orders.

Values must be defined to understand the human behaviours in the organisation (Ref. 15, p 3; Ref. 16, p 152). Organisations may have human values. In order to become successful, there should be harmony between individual and organisational values (Ref. 3, p 13). Individuals in an interactive relation, which shares the common values, unite in a sense to defend the values against threats. This helps the organisation to be more efficient (Ref. 17, p 57). Values form one of the most important factors of dependency on the goals of a group or the system (Ref. 18, p 384). Culture defines the behaviour with the values it foresees, and manners represent the relationship between the culture and the values (Ref. 1, p 20). This system (culture) and/or subsystems (subcultures) can sometimes be contradictory to themselves and to each other. Some values that are important enough to be indispensable can be located at the top of the hierarchy, while others at the bottom. While the contradictions in the lower values do not affect a person much, the contradictions in the upper values can lead to serious disturbances (Ref. 5, p 257). Organisational arrangements and strategies are largely under the influence of the system of cultural understanding and values shared among the members of the organisation (Ref. 19, p 277). Ideas emerging within this framework can be placed in three groups. First idea assumes the industrialisation as an indicative factor in creating the management and organisation model, and defends that the managerial and organisational applications and values of industrialising countries will resemble each other in parallel with the industrialisation process. Second idea assumes that management and organisational values will differ owing to the local cultural features, and the third idea states that, unlike the exemplar country and local culture’s features, a hybrid of managerial and organisational values will appear (Ref. 20, p 659; Ref. 21, p 38; Ref. 22, p 11; Ref. 10, p 47; Ref. 23).

Determining the managerial value is important because it brings harmony, loyalty and organisational citizenship to an organisation. If organisational and individual values are in harmony, decisions can be made and implemented faster.

2.2 Classification of values

After determining the managerial values, classification of values in the literature is given in a time order in Table 4

Table 4

Classification values in literature in time order.

.

Because of the fact that Aldemir et al⁽ Reference Aldemir, Arbak and Özmen ^{36 )} categorized values as western originated and local values, it has been suitable for carrying out the study.

2.3 Literature review

Studies on managerial values generally focussed on cultural values in management and organisation field⁽ Reference Hofstede ^{37 –} Reference Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner ^{41 )}. Some of these studies were based on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (2001) which are masculinity-femininity, power distance, individualism-collectivism and avoidance of uncertainty. Later on, long–short-term normative orientation and indulgence-restraint were added to these dimensions. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are suitable for cross-cultural research. Studies of Elenkov (1997), Reeves-Ellington (1998), Gordon and Irene (1999), Wallace et al (1999), Ralston et al (1999)⁽ Reference Ralston, Thang and Napier ^{20 ,} Reference Elenkov ^{42 –} Reference Wallace, Hunt and Richards ^{45 )} fall within these dimension scope. In addition to Hofstede, there are many studies⁽ Reference Alas, Papalexandris and Niglas ^{46 –} Reference Lenartowicz and Johnson ^{48 )} which embrace a scale developed by Rokeach. Rokeach’s scale is considered to be more suitable for western societies rather than eastern societies⁽ Reference Bigoness and Blakely ^{49 )}. One of the most cited studies belongs to Schwartz. Further studies include Ralston et al⁽ Reference Ralston, Holt, Terpstra and Kai-Cheng ^{22 )}, Schwartz and Boehnke (2004) and Alexashin and Blenkinsopp⁽ Reference Alexashin and Blenkinsopp ^{50 )} with Schwartz’s scale.

Studies in Turkey show that the values are held as cultural dimensions. Aycan and Kanungo⁽ Reference Aycan and Kanungo ^{51 )} included a scope of 10 countries and a sample size of 2003 managers. These countries are Canada, China, Germany, India, Israel, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, Turkey and USA. Further studies, e.g. Refs. 36,52,53, especially Ref. 54, p 698), involve upper-level managers and MBA students in İstanbul. It has been established that there are differences between students’ and managers’ values. Another study carried out with a sample size of business and economic school students figured that the individual values have an important role in understanding managerial behavior (Ref. 55, p 214). Süral Özer et al⁽ Reference Süral Özer, Eriş and Timurcanday Özmen ^{56 )} studied Baby boomer, X and Y generation’s values within the context of Turkish culture with emic approach and emphasised that their study has importance in understanding and managing values. Pazarcık⁽ Reference Pazarcık ^{57 )} studied the effects of selected educational institutions on the transaction of business of the graduates. The general opinion taken into account in the determination of the values adopted by managers is that the Turkish society has a binary culture structure, western-originated and local. For this reason, Aldemir et al’s scale was adopted in this study.

2.4 Research methodology

The purpose of this study is to determine the values which provide reference to daily actions and decisions taken by airport managers in Turkey. Work-mentality scale (58 items), developed by Aldemir, Arbak and Özmen, was implemented to private-airport operations managers in Turkey. The research sample consisted of middle- and upper-level managers who were decision makers. An online survey was sent to the managers. The number of participants who could be reached was 163, which is an adequate number for aviation sector in Turkey. The survey was shared through the corporate communication department. The data were analysed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM-SPSS 22). The factor analysis was used to determine the value groups of the region where the managers were located, the organisations they worked in and their own individual values. Ranking analysis was used to determine the level of adoption of values.

2.5 Private airport operations in Turkey

Airports are the places where all aviation activities take place (Ref. 58, p 99). In Turkey, both management of airports and controlling airspace are performed by the General Directorate of State Airports Authority (DHMI). There are 57 domestic and international airports in Turkey, 55 of which are open to passenger/cargo/business and other flights. 11 of which are operated by private airport business. 44 of them are operated by DHMI. In addition, airport’s management can be given to private businesses which, in most cases, are called as Build–Operate–Transfer (BOT). One of the examples of BOT is TAV Airports which maintains its leading position in the airport operations sector in Turkey and operates Istanbul Ataturk, Ankara Esenboga, Izmir Adnan Menderes, Gazipasa Alanya, Milas Bodrum and Antalya Airports^{( 59 )}. A Joint venture of Fraport AG and IC İçtaş previously operated Antalya Airport terminals. However, in May 2018, TAV Airports purchased shares of İçtaş and became an equal partner with Fraport in the management of Antalya Airport. One of the partners, Içtaş, now operates Kütahya Zafer Airport. Istanbul Sabiha Gökçen International Airport (ISG), a company founded in partnership by Limak Holding, GMR Infrastructure Limited, and Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad, has 20 years’ operation rights. As of 2014, ISG continued as MAHB partnership, as Limak and GMR groups transferred their shares to MAHB^{( 60 )}. Zonguldak Özel Sivil Havacılık operates Zonguldak-Çaycuma Airport^{( 61 )}. Hezarfen Havalimanı which got into service in 1992 as first private training airport operation in Turkey, presents pilot training, leasing aircraft and air taxi^{( 62 )}. YDA Group, which is ATM Airport, has operated Dalaman International Airport International Terminal since 2006^{( 63 )}. Eskişehir Hasan Polatkan Airport is operated by Anadolu University Rectorate^{( 64 )}.