SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR TEDARİK ZİNCİRİ YÖNETİMİNDE KRİTİK BAŞARI FAKTÖRLERİNİN GELENEKSEL VE DİJİTAL PERSPEKTİFTEN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI DEĞERLENDİRMESİ

Year 2022, , 151 - 165, 03.11.2022

Mehri Banu Erdem

https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1124402

Abstract

Sürdürülebilir tedarik zinciri yönetimi, firmaları sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel çabalarını tedarik zincirleri boyunca genişletmeye itmektedir. Diğer taraftan ise dijital çağa geçilmekte ve tüm faaliyetler dijitalleşmeye doğru yönelmektedir. Bu noktada sürdürülebilir tedarik zinciri yönetiminde dijitalleşme önemli bir sıçrayış yaratmaktadır. Bu çalışmada tedarik zinciri yönetiminde sürdürülebilirlikte etkili olan kritik başarı faktörlerinin geleneksel ve dijital perspektiften değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla veriler büyük ölçekli iki işletmeden alınmıştır. Çalışmada çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerinden analitik ağ süreci kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular sonucu her iki perspektiften de sosyal baskılar faktörünün ön planda olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Ayrıca geleneksel perspektiften paydaşların baskısı ve rekabet baskısı öne çıkarken dijital perspektiften yeşil bilgi sitemi ve tedarikçi yönetimi olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. Dijitalleşmenin zincirdeki entegrasyon, işbirliği ve bilgi paylaşımını sağlama açısından önemli bir katkı ve verimlik sağladığı bunun da sürdürülebilirlikteki başarıda önemli bir rol oynadığı kanaatine varılmıştır.

Keywords

Sürdürülebilir Tedarik Zinciri, Dijitalleşme, Analitik Ağ Süreci, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri

COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS IN SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT FROM A TRADITIONAL AND DIGITAL PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

Sustainable supply chain management pushes companies to expand their social, economic and environmental efforts throughout their supply chains. On the other hand, we are entering the digital age and all activities are moving towards digitalization. In this study, it is aimed to evaluate the critical success factors that are effective in sustainability in supply chain management from a traditional and digital perspective. For this purpose, data were taken from two large-scale enterprises. In the study, the analytical network process, one of the multi-criteria decision making methods, was used. As a result of the findings, it has been revealed that the social pressures factor is at the forefront from both perspectives. In addition, while the pressure of the stakeholders and competitive pressure came to the fore from the traditional perspective, it emerged as a green information system and supplier management from the digital perspective. It has been concluded that digitalization provides an important contribution and efficiency in terms of integration, cooperation and information sharing in the chain, which plays an important role in the success in sustainability.

Keywords

Sustainable Supply Chain, Digitization, Analytical Network Process, Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods

References

• Ahmad, W. N. K. W., Rezaei, J., Sadaghiani, S., & Tavasszy, L. A. (2017). Evaluation of the external forces affecting the sustainability of oil and gas supply chain using Best Worst Method. Journal of cleaner production, 153, 242-252.
• Almasri, M. V. (2019). Sürdürülebilir tedarik zinciri yönetimi uygulamalarının kritik başarı faktörleri ve sürdürülebilirlik performansı üzerine etkileri. (Yayın No. 607093) [Doktora tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü]
• Brandenburg, M., & Rebs, T. (2015). Sustainable supply chain management: A modeling perspective. Annals of Operations Research, 229(1), 213-252.
• Büyüközkan, G., & Göçer, F. (2018). Digital supply chain: literature review and a proposed framework for future research. Computers in Industry, 97, 157-177.
• Carter, C. R., & Jennings, M. M. (2002). Logistics social responsibility: an integrative framework. Journal of business logistics, 23(1), 145-180.
• Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory. International journal of physical distribution & logistics management.
• Chandra, C., Grabis, J., & Tumanyan, A. (2007). Problem taxonomy: a step towards effective information sharing in supply chain management. International Journal of Production Research, 45(11), 2507-2544.
• Eitiveni, I., Kurnia, S., & Buyya, R. (2017). Sustainable supply chain management: Taxonomy, gaps, and future directions. PACIS 2017 Proceedings. 121. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2017/121
• Faisal, M. N. (2010). Sustainable supply chains: a study of interaction among the enablers. Business Process Management Journal. 16(3), 508-529.
• Grzybowska, K. (2012). Sustainability in the supply chain: analysing the enablers. In Environmental issues in supply chain management, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Gupta, S., & Palsule-Desai, O. D. (2011). Sustainable supply chain management: Review and research opportunities. IIMB Management review, 23(4), 234-245.
• Hazen, B. T., Skipper, J. B., Ezell, J. D., & Boone, C. A. (2016). Big data and predictive analytics for supply chain sustainability: A theory-driven research agenda. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 101, 592-598.
• Hoejmose, S., Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2013). An empirical examination of the relationship between business strategy and socially responsible supply chain management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(5), 589-621.
• Holt, D., & Ghobadian, A. (2009). An empirical study of green supply chain management practices amongst UK manufacturers. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 20(7), 933-956.
• Kayikci, Y. (2018). Sustainability impact of digitization in logistics. Procedia manufacturing, 21, 782-789.
• Kheybari, S., Rezaie, F. M., & Farazmand, H. (2020). Analytic network process: An overview of applications. Applied mathematics and Computation, 367, 124780.
• Knemeyer, A. M. (2006). Logistics and Supply Chain Management: Creating Value-Adding Networks. Transportation Journal, 45(1), 61-63.
• Kumar, S., Teichman, S., & Timpernagel, T. (2012). A green supply chain is a requirement for profitability. International Journal of Production Research, 50(5), 1278-1296.
• Legner, C., Eymann, T., Hess, T., Matt, C., Böhmann, T., Drews, P., ... & Ahlemann, F. (2017). Digitalization: opportunity and challenge for the business and information systems engineering community. Business & information systems engineering, 59(4), 301-308.
• Lin, Y. H., & Tseng, M. L. (2016). Assessing the competitive priorities within sustainable supply chain management under uncertainty. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 2133-2144.
• Manavalan, E., & Jayakrishna, K. (2019). A review of Internet of Things (IoT) embedded sustainable supply chain for industry 4.0 requirements. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, 925-953.
• Mangan, J., & Lalwani, C. (2016). Global logistics and supply chain management. John Wiley & Sons.
• Meacham, J., Toms, L., Green, K. W., & Bhadauria, V. S. (2013). Impact of information sharing and green information systems. Management Research Review. 36(5), 478-494.
• Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., & Zacharia, Z. G. (2001). Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business logistics, 22(2), 1-25.
• Muñoz-Villamizar, A., Solano, E., Quintero-Araujo, C., & Santos, J. (2019). Sustainability and digitalization in supply chains: A bibliometric analysis. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 7(4), 703-712.
• Müller, A. L. (2014). Sustainability and customer relationship management: current state of research and future research opportunities. Management Review Quarterly, 64(4), 201-224.
• Nunes, K. R., Schnatmeyer, M., Thoben, K. D., & Valle, R. A. (2006). Using RFID for waste minimization in the automotive industry. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 39(3), 221-226.
• Önder, E. (2015). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri, B. F., Yıldırım & E., Önder (Eds.), Dora Basım Yayım, Bursa.
• Özbek, A. (2017). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ve excel ile problem çözümü. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
• Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. Journal of supply chain management, 45(2), 37-56.
• Papetti, A., Marconi, M., Rossi, M., & Germani, M. (2019). Web-based platform for eco-sustainable supply chain management. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 17, 215-228.
• Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2013). The analytic network process. In Decision making with the analytic network process, Springer, Boston, MA.
• Shrouf, F., Ordieres, J., & Miragliotta, G. (2014, December). Smart factories in Industry 4.0: A review of the concept and of energy management approached in production based on the Internet of Things paradigm. In 2014 IEEE international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management.
• Stadtler, H., Stadtler, H., Kilger, C., Kilger, C., Meyr, H., & Meyr, H. (2015). Supply chain management and advanced planning: concepts, models, software, and case studies. Springer.
• Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2006). Extending green practices across the supply chain: the impact of upstream and downstream integration. International journal of operations & Production Management, 26(7), 795-821.
• Waller, M. A., & Fawcett, S. E. (2013). Data science, predictive analytics, and big data: a revolution that will transform supply chain design and management. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(2), 77-84.
• Winter, M., & Knemeyer, A. M. (2013). Exploring the integration of sustainability and supply chain management: Current state and opportunities for future inquiry. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. 43(1). 18-38.
• Yang, F., Wu, D., Liang, L., Bi, G., & Wu, D. D. (2011). Supply chain DEA: production possibility set and performance evaluation model. Annals of operations research, 185(1), 195-211.
• Zhou, Z., Cheng, S., & Hua, B. (2000). Supply chain optimization of continuous process industries with sustainability considerations. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 24(2-7), 1151-1158.