Türkiye’de Lojistik Sektörü Çalışanlarının Akıllı Lojistik Teknolojilerine Karşı Tutumu

Abstract

21. yüzyıl dijital dönüşümün ve teknolojik yeniliklerin toplumsal ve ekonomik alanlarda hızlı bir şekilde yaygınlaştığı bir dönemdir. Bu dönemde lojistik sektörü de büyük veri, yapay zekâ ve otomasyon gibi akıllı lojistik teknolojilerinin etkisiyle dönüşüm geçirmektedir. Bu teknolojiler, lojistik süreçlerin verimliliğini, hızını ve güvenliğini artırarak rekabet avantajı sağlamaktadır. Ancak, bu dönüşüm sadece teknolojik bir ilerleme değil, aynı zamanda insan kaynağının rolünü de yeniden tanımlayan bir süreçtir. Çalışanların bu yeni teknolojilere adaptasyonu, teknolojiyi kabul etmeleri ve yeni yetkinlikler kazanmaları, lojistik sektörünün başarılı bir şekilde dijitalleşmesi için kritik öneme sahiptir. Bu bağlamda gerçekleştirilen çalışma, Türkiye’de lojistik sektöründe görev yapan çalışanların akıllı lojistik teknolojilerine karşı tutumlarını, teknoloji kabul modeli çerçevesinde incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. TKM, bireylerin bir teknolojiyi kabul etme veya reddetme eğilimlerini analiz etmekte yaygın olarak kullanılan bir modeldir. Araştırma, Türkiye genelinde lojistik alanında faaliyet gösteren işletmelerde çalışan 413 kişiye uygulanan anket verilerine dayanmaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular, akıllı lojistik teknolojilerinin algılanan faydası ve kullanım kolaylığının, çalışanların bu teknolojilere yönelik tutumları ve kullanım niyetleri üzerinde belirgin bir etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Çalışma, lojistik sektöründe stratejik planlamalar yaparken ve insan kaynakları politikaları geliştirirken dikkate alınması gereken değerli içgörüler sunmakta olup, Türkiye lojistik sektöründe dijital dönüşüm sürecine katkıda bulunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Lojistik sektörü
• akıllı lojistik teknolojileri
• teknoloji kabul modeli

Attitudes of Employees in the Turkish Logistics Sector Toward Smart Logistics Technologies

Abstract

The 21st century is an era in which digital transformation and technological innovations are rapidly spreading across social and economic domains. In this context, the logistics sector is undergoing significant change driven by smart logistics technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and automation. These technologies enhance the efficiency, speed, and security of logistics processes, offering a competitive edge. However, this transformation also redefines the role of human resources. The successful digitalization of the logistics sector depends on employees’ adaptation, acceptance of new technologies, and development of relevant skills. This study examines the attitudes of logistics employees in Turkey towards smart logistics technologies using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which is widely used to analyze individuals’ tendencies to accept or reject a technology. The research is based on survey data collected from 413 employees working in logistics companies across Turkey. The findings reveal that perceived usefulness and ease of use of smart logistics technologies significantly affect employees’ attitudes and their intentions to adopt these technologies. The study provides valuable insights for strategic planning and the development of human resources policies, contributing to the digital transformation of Turkey’s logistics industry.

Keywords

• Logistics sector
• smart logistics Technologies
• technology acceptance model

References

1. Aggorowati, M. A., Suhartono, N. I., & Gautama, H. (2012). Restructuring and expanding technology acceptance model: Structural equation model and Bayesian approach. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(4), 496-504. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2012.496.504 google scholar
2. Akman, I., & Mishra, A. (2015). Sectoral differences in green information technology practices: A study of Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 197-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.017 google scholar
3. Al-Gahtani, S. S. (2016). Empirical investigation of e-learning acceptance and assimilation: A structural equation model. Applied Computing and Informatics, 12(1), 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2014.09.001 google scholar
4. Alexa, L., Pîslaru, M., & Avasilcâi, S. (2022). From Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0—An overview of European Union Enterprises. İn Sustainability and Innovation in Manufacturing Enterprises (pp. 221-231). Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland. google scholar
5. Ali, I., & Phan, H. M. (2022). Industry 4.0 technologies and sustainable warehousing: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. International Journal of Logistics Management, 33(2), 644-662. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-05-2021-0277 google scholar
6. Alnıpak, S., & Toraman, Y. (2023). Acceptance of e-vehicles for last-mile parcel delivery from the perspective of drivers: A study in Turkey. LogForum, 19(3), 443-459. https://doi.org/10.17270/J.LOG.2023.863 google scholar
7. Atzori, L., lera, A., & Morabito, G. (2010). The internet of things: A survey. Computer Networks, 54(15), 2787-2805. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.comnet.2010.05.010 google scholar
8. Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385. https://doi.org/10.1162/ pres.1997.6.4.355 google scholar

9. Ballou, R. H. (2007). The evolution and future of logistics and supply chain management. European Business Review, 19(4), 332-348. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340710760152 google scholar
10. Barreto, L., Amaral, A., & Pereira, T. (2017). Industry 4.0 implications in logistics: an overview. Procedia Manufacturing, 13, 1245-1252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.045 google scholar
11. Bhasin, H. (2021, January 6). 6 logistics activities or 6 functions of logistics in an organization. Marketing91. https://www.marketing91. com/logistics-activities/ adresinden 10.03.2024 tarihinde erişilmiştir. google scholar
12. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic commerce service continuance. Decision Support Systems, 32(2), 201-214. https://doi.org/l0.1016/S0167-9236(0l)00111-7 google scholar
13. Cai, L., Yuen, K. F., Xie, D., Fang, M., & Wang, X. (2021). Consumer's usage of logistics technologies: Integration of habit into the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Technology in Society, 67, 101789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101789 google scholar
14. Callaghan, C. W. (2019). Transcending the threshold limitation: A fifth industrial revolution? Management Research Review, 43(4), 447461. https://doi.org/l0.1108/MRR-03-2019-0102 google scholar
15. Chen, J. V., Yen, D. C., & Chen, K. (2009). The acceptance and diffusion of the innovative smartphone use: A case study of a delivery service company in logistics. Information & Management, 46(4), 241-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2009.03.001 google scholar
16. Chen, X., Wu, L., Pan, Y., Siu, K. W. M., Gong, X., & Zhu, D. (2018). Consumer acceptance of an agricultural products traceability system: Evidence from China. İn Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, DC: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association. google scholar
17. Chiu, C. M., Lin, H. Y., Sun, S. Y., & Hsu, M. H. (2009). Understanding customers' loyalty intentions towards online shopping: An integration of Technology acceptance model and fairness theory. Behaviour & Information Technology, 28(4), 347-360. https://doi.org/10. 1080/01449290801892492 google scholar
18. Christopher, M. (2016). Logistics & Supply Chain Management. Pearson UK, London. google scholar
19. Compeau, D., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MİS Quarterly, 19, 189-211. https:// doi.org/10.2307/249688 google scholar
20. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Çok değişkenli istatistik SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları (1. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. google scholar
21. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 google scholar
22. Ding, Y., Jin, M., Li, S., & Feng, D. (2021). Smart logistics based on the Internet of Things technology: An overview. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 24(4), 323-345. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2020.1757053 google scholar
23. Do, H.-N., Shih, W., & Ha, Q.-A. (2020). Effects of mobile augmented reality apps on impulse buying behavior: An investigation in the tourism field. Heliyon, 6, e04667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04667 google scholar
24. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Bellef attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley. google scholar
25. Floreano, D., & Wood, R. J. (2015). Science, Technology and the future of small autonomous drones. Nature, 521(7553), 460-466. https:// doi.org/10.1038/nature14542 google scholar
26. Frederico, G. F. (2021). From supply chain 4.0 to supply chain 5.0: Findings from a systematic literature review and research directions. Logistics, 5, 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics5030049 google scholar
27. Gandomi, A., & Haider, M. (2015). Beyond the hype: Big data concepts, methods, and analytics. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 137-144. https://doi.Org/l0.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.10.007 google scholar
28. Gündüz, Y., & Coşkun, Z. S. (2012). Öğrenci algısına göre öğretmen etik değerler ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(i), 111-131. google scholar
29. Haddad, O. (2024). Depo çalışanlarının Lojistik 4.0 teknolojilerini Teknoloji Kabul Modeli ile benimseme düzeylerinin belirlenmesi ve iş tatminine etkisi (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya. google scholar
30. Hang, W. S., & Selamat, A. S. (2023). Smart logistic adoption towards logistic performance. Journal of Technology Management and Technopreneurship (JTMT), 11 (i), 44-51. google scholar
31. Heinssen, R. K. Jr., Glass, C. R., & Knight, L. A. (1987). Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 3, 49-59. https://doi.org/l0.1016/0747-5632(87)90010-0 google scholar
32. Hofmann, E., & Rüsch, M. (2017). Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics. Computers in Industry, 89, 23-34. https://doi.Org/l0.1016/j.compind.2017.04.002 google scholar
33. Hu, P. J. H., Clark, T. H. K., & Ma, W. W. (2003). Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: A longitudinal study. Information & Management, 41, 227-241. https://doi.org/l0.1016/S0378-7206(03)00050-8 google scholar
34. Hwang, J., Kim, H., & Kim, W. (2019). Investigating motivated consumer innovativeness in the context of drone food delivery services. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 38, 102-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.01.004 google scholar
35. Islam, D. M. Z., Meier, J. F., Aditjandra, P. T., Zunder, T. H., & Pace, G. (2013). Logistics and supply chain management. Research in Transportation Economics, 41(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2012.10.006 google scholar
36. Jazdi, N. (2014, May). Cyber physical systems in the context of Industry 4.0. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics (pp. 1-4). IEEE. https://doi.org/l0.1109/AQTR.2014.6857843 google scholar
37. Kenton, W. (2024). Logistics. Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.eom/terms/l/logistics.asp adresinden 15.10.2024 tarihinde erişilmiştir. google scholar
38. Kim, E., Park, M.-C., & Lee, J. (2017). Determinants of the intention to use Buy-Online, Pickup In-Store (BOPS): The moderating effects of situational factors and product type. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1721-1735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.08.006 google scholar
39. Knobloch, M., & Schaarschmidt, M. (2020). What impedes consumers' delivery drone service adoption? A risk perspective. Arbeitsberichte des Fachbereichs Informatik, 1-18. google scholar
40. Kong, X. T., Yang, X., Peng, K. L., & Li, C. Z. (2020). Cyber physical system-enabled synehronization mechanism for pick-and-sort ecommerce order fulfilment. Computers in Industry, 118, 103220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2020.103220 google scholar
41. Lee, E. A., Seshia, S. A., & Lee, J. (2015). Introduction to embedded systems: A cyber-physical systems approach. MIT Press. google scholar
42. Mell, P., & Grance, T. (2011). The NIST definition of cloud computing. National Institute of Standards and Technology, 53(6), 50. google scholar
43. Mocan, A., & Draghici, A. (2018). Reducing ergonomic strain in warehouse logistics operations by using wearable computers. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences, 238, 1-8. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2018.03.001 google scholar
44. Mougayar, W. (2016). The Business Blockchain: Promise, Practice, and Application of the Next Internet Technology. Wiley. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/9781119300330 google scholar
45. Nahavandi, S. (2019). Industry 5.0-A human-centric solution. Sustainability, 11(16), 4371. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164371 google scholar
46. Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer Electronic cash system. Bitcoin.org. https://assets.pubpub.org/d8wct41f/31611263538139. pdf google scholar
47. Ngoc, A. M., Nishiuchi, H., & Nhu, N. T. (2023). Determinants of carriers' intentions to use electric cargo vehicles in last-mile delivery by extending the technology acceptance model: A case study of Vietnam. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 34(1), 210-235. https://doi.org/l0.1108/IJLM-12-2021-0566 google scholar
48. Nofita, M., & Sebastian, D. (2022). Technology acceptance models pada teknologi digital: Survey paper. KONSTELASI: Konvergensi Tebnologi dan Sistem Informasi, 2(2), 309-320. https://doi.org/l0.24002/konstelasi.v2i2.5347 google scholar
49. Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers' beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(2), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504526 google scholar
50. Qin, J., Liu, Y., & Grosvenor, R. (2016). A categorical framework of manufacturing for industry 4.0 and beyond. Procedia ÇIRP, 52, 173-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.08.005 google scholar
51. Rondan-Cataluna, F. J., Arenas-Gaitân, J., & Ramîrez-Correa, P. E. (2015). A comparison of the different versions of popular Technology acceptance models: A non-linear perspective. Kybernetes, 44 (3/4), 529-545. doi:10.1108/K-09-2014-0184. google scholar
52. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson Education Limited. google scholar
53. Shin, H., & Perdue, R. R. (2019). Self-service Technology research: A bibliometric co-citation visualization analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 80, 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.01.012 google scholar
54. Song, Y., Yu, F. R., Zhou, L., Yang, X., & He, Z. (2021). Applications of the Internet of Things (IoT) in smart logistics: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 8(6), 4250-4274. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2020.3034385 google scholar
55. Sun, X., Yu, H., Solvang, W., Wang, Y., & Wang, K. (2021). The application of Industry 4.0 technologies in sustainable logistics: A systematic literature review (2012-2020) to explore future research opportunities. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 95609591. https://doi.org/l0.1007/s11356-021-17693-y google scholar
56. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. google scholar
57. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176. https://doi.Org/l0.1287/isre.6.2.144 google scholar
58. Thrun, S. (2010). Toward robotic cars. Communications of the ACM, 53(4), 99-106. https://doi.org/l0.1145/l721654.1721679 google scholar
59. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.Org/l0.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 google scholar
60. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 google scholar
61. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2012/36.1.07 google scholar
62. Wang, K. (2016). Logistics 4.0 Solution-New challenges and opportunities. İn 6th International Workshop of Advanced Manufacturing and Automation. Atlantis Press: Manchester, UK. google scholar
63. Wong, W. P., & Tang, C. F. (2018). The major determinants of logistic performance in a global perspective: Evidence from panel data analysis. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 21(4), 431-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2018. 1438377 google scholar
64. Xu, X., Lu, Y., Vogel-Heuser, B., & Wang, L. (2021). İndustry 4.0 and İndustry 5.0-lnception, conception and perception. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 61, 530-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.10.006 google scholar
65. Xu, Y., Wang, Y., Khan, A., & Zhao, R. (2021). Consumer flow experience of senior citizens in using social media for online shopping. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 732104. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.732104 google scholar
66. Zeren, D. (2014). Gerekçeli eylem teorisi. İn M. İ. Yağcı & S. Çabuk (Eds.), Pazarlama teorileri.İstanbul: MediaCat Yayıncılık. google scholar
67. Zhao, H., & Khan, A. (2021). The students' flow experience with the continuous intention of using online English platforms. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 807084. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.807084 google scholar