Volume 3, Number 6 / December issue 2017
Yusuf Can, Feyzullah Koca, Ozlem Kirandi, Senol Yanar, Mehmet Bayansalduz
Organizational support perception and organizational trust relationship in sports workers

The aim of this research is to analyze the relationship between organizational support perception and organizational trust sensation in sports workers. The research also examined whether there are significant differences in the perception of organizational support and organizational trust among sports workers in terms of gender, age groups, service years, employee status and education levels. This research was conducted in the relational screening model and a total of 218 sports worker (age mean = 32,81 ± 9,56, the average age of service = 10,33± 8,17) were selected by random sampling among employees who actively engaged in research, sports organizations and sports clubs participated voluntarily. In the research, as data collection tool, for sports workers’ organizational support perception, Organizational Support Scale developed which was developed by Giray, M.D., and Sahin, N.D. (2012); for organization trust sensation “Organizational Trust Scale” developed by Nyhan and Marlowe (1997); and Personal Information Form composed of 10 questions were used. According to the results of the research; positive correlations were found between sports workers' perception of organizational support, organizational trust, and service years. In addition, while there was no significant difference in the perceived organizational trust and organizational support among the sports workers (p> 0,05) and there were significant differences in terms of age groups, service year groups, employee status, general job satisfaction and general life satisfaction (p <0,05).
Keywords: Organization, Organizational Support, Organizational Trust, Sports Workers

Cite this article:
Yusuf Can, Feyzullah Koca, Ozlem Kirandi, Senol Yanar, Mehmet Bayansalduz. Organizational support perception and organizational trust relationship in sports workers. Acta Scientiae et Intellectus, 3(6)2017, 97-105.


  1. Asunakutlu, T. (2001). Klasik ve Neo-Klasik Donemde Orgutsel Guvenin Karsilastirilmasi Uzerine Bir Deneme, Mugla Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, Bahar 2001, Sayi 5.
  2. Bhanthumnavin, D. (2003). Perceived social support from supervisor and group members’ psychological and situational characteristics as predictors of subordinate performance in Thai work units. Human Resource Development Quar terly, 14, 74-97.
  3. Buchanan, B. (1974). Building organizational commitment: The socialization of managers in work organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19 (1), 533-546.
  4. Cheung, MFY., and Law MCC. (2008). “Relationships of Organizational Justice and Organizational Identification: The Mediating Effects of Perceived Organizational Support in Hong Kong”, Asia Pacific Business Review, 14 (2): 213–31.
  5. Chuebang, P., Baotham, S. (2011). “Voluntary Turnover Intentions: Effects on Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Commitment of Thai Employees in Rajabhat Universities” Review of Business Research, 11: 1–12.
  6. Cheung, M.F.Y. and Law M.C.C. (2008). “Relationships of Organizational Justice and Organizational Identification: The Mediating Effects of Perceived Organizational Support in Hong Kong”, Asia Pacific Business Revie, 14 (2): 213–231.
  7. Demircan, N. and Ceylan, A. (2003). “Orgutsel Guven Kavrami: Nedenleri Ve Sonuclari”, Yonetim Ve Ekonomi Dergisi, Celal Bayar Universitesi Iibf, 10 (2), Ss.139-150.
  8. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507).
  9. Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., and Patrick L. (1997). “Perceived Organizational Support, Discretionary Treatment, and Job Satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (5): 812–820.
  10. Gagnon, M.A. and Michael, J.H. (2004) Outcomes of perceived supervisor support for wood production employees. Forest Products Journal, 54, 172-177).
  11. Meyer, J.P., Allen N.J., Ian R.G. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to organizations: Evaluation of measures and analysis of current and time –lagged relattions. Journal of Applied Psycholhogy, 75, 710-720.
  12. Ozbek, MF., Kosa G. (2009). Duygusal Baglilik, Orgutsel Destek, Ust Yonetim Destegi ve Personel Guclendirmenin Hizmet Kalitesi Uzerindeki Etkisi: Kirgizistan’da Banka Isgorenleri Uzerinde Bir Uygulama”, Erciyes Universitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakultesi Dergisi, 34: 189–212.
  13. Perks, H. and Halliday, S.V. (2003). “Sources, Signs and Signalling For Fast Trust Creation In Organisational Relationships”. European Management Journal, 21(3), Ss. 338–350.
  14. Randall, ML., Cropanzano, Russell, Bormann, CA., and Birjulin A. (1999). “Organizational Politics and Organizational Support as Predictors of Work Attitudes, Job Performance, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20 (2): 159–174.
  15. Singh, AK., Singh, AP. (2010). “Role of Stress and Organizational Support in Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behavior. The IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9 (4): 7–25.
  16. Tyler, T.R. and Blader S.L. (2000). Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Behavioral Engagement. (Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
  17. Van Knippenberg, D. and Sleebos, E. (2006). “Organizational Identification Versus Organizational Commitment: Self-Definition, Social Exchange, and Job Attitudes”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 571–584.
  18. Wahlstrom, K.L. and Louis, K.S. (2008). How Teachers Experience Principal Leadership: The Roles of Professional Community, Trust, Efficacy and Shared Responsibility, Educational Administration Quarterly, Volume 44, No 4.
  19. Yilmaz, K. (2008). The Relationship Between Organizational Trust and Organizational Commitment in Turkish Primary Schools, Journal of Applied Sciences, Volume 8, No 12).
  20. Yoon, J. and Lim, J.C. (1999). Organizational support in the workplace: The case of Korean hospital employees. Human Relations, 52, 923-945).