Identifying The Key Success Factors of E-Logistics in Turkey: AHP-VIKOR Integrated Methodology / Türkiye’de E-Lojistiğin Kilit Başarı Faktörlerinin Belirlenmesi: AHP-VIKOR Bütünleşik Yöntem

Abstract

Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin (BİT) hızla gelişmesiyle birlikte işletmeler, faaliyetlerinde yeni uygulamalara yönelmişlerdir. Günümüzde gelişen teknolojiler sayesinde lojistik sektöründeki çoğu faaliyet dijital ortamda gerçekleştirilmektedir. Bu noktadan hareketle, bu çalışmanın amacı, e-lojistik faaliyetlerini sürdürebilmek için kritik olan başarı faktörlerini belirlemektir. İlk olarak, kapsamlı literatür taraması yapılmış, ardından kriterlerin belirlenebilmesi için uzman görüşü alınmıştır. Uzman görüşü ve literatür taraması sonucu, bu çalışma kapsamında beş kriter incelenmiştir. E-lojistikte başarı faktörlerinin değerlendirilmesinde çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerinde (ÇKKV) yaygın olarak kullanılan AHP-VIKOR bütünleşik yöntem uygulanmıştır. AHP yöntemi ile kriter ağırlıkları belirlenmiş ve ilgili kriterler VIKOR yöntemi ile sıralanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları, e-lojistiğin temel başarı faktörlerini belirlemede güvenilirlik kriterinin en yüksek ağırlığa sahip olduğunu, nakliye kriterinin ise en düşük ağırlığa sahip olduğunu göstermiştir.

Keywords

• E-Logistics
• ÇKKV
• AHP
• VIKOR
• TÜRKİYE

Identifying The Key Success Factors of E-Logistics in Turkey: AHP-VIKOR Integrated Methodology / Türkiye’de E-Lojistiğin Kilit Başarı Faktörlerinin Belirlenmesi: AHP-VIKOR Bütünleşik Yöntem

Abstract

With the rapid development of information and communication technologies (ICT), businesses have addressed to new applications in their operations. Nowadays, almost all activities in logistics sector are carried out in the digital environment through emerging technologies. Accordingly, the purpose of this study to identify the success factors that critical for sustaining e-logistics activities. At first, a comprehensive literature review was conducted, and then expert opinion was taken to determine the criteria. By the help of feedbacks and literature review, five criteria were investigated in this study. The AHP-VIKOR integrated method which is widely used in multi-criteria decision-making methods (MCDM) was applied to evaluating success factors in e-logistics. The criteria weights were determined by the AHP method, and the relevant criteria were ranked by the VIKOR method. The results indicated that the reliability criterion has the highest weights, while transportation criterion has the lowest weight in identifying the key success factors of e-logistics.

Keywords

• E-Logistics
• MCDM
• AHP
• VIKOR
• Turkey

References

1. Abdul, D., Wenqi, J. And Tanveer, A. (2022). Prioritization of Renewable Energy Source for Electricity Generation Through AHP-VIKOR Integrated Methodology. Renewable Energy, 184, 1018-1032.
2. Alonso, J. A. And Lamata, M. T. (2006). Consistency in The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A New Approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(4), 445-459.
3. Blanchard. B.S., (1998). Logistics Engineering and Management (5th Edition). Prentice Hall.
4. Büyüközkan, G. and Görener, A. (2015). Evaluation of Product Development Partners Using an Integrated AHP-VIKOR Model. Kybernetes, 44(2), 220-237.
5. Çakılcı, C. and Öztürkoğlu, Y. (2020). Analysis of Sustainable E-Logistics Activities with Analytic Hierarchy Process. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(1), 489-497.
6. Emrouznejad, A. and Marra, M. (2017). The State of the Art Development of AHP (1979–2017): A Literature Review with A Social Network Analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 55(22), 6653-6675.
7. Greco, S., Figueira, J. and Ehrgott, M. (2016). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (Vol. 37). New York: Springer.
8. Gunasekaran, A., Ngai, E. W. and Cheng, T. E. (2007). Developing an E-Logistics System: A Case Study. International Journal of Logistics, 10(4), 333-349.

9. Hanzl, J. (2020). General Application of Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Finding the Optimal Solution in City Logistics. Open Engineering, 10(1), 147-153.
10. Iskandar, Y. and Ramantoko, G. (2018). Factors Affecting the Adoption of E-Logistics in Indonesian E-Commerce Industry Using TOE Framework. Sustainable Collaboration in Business, Technology, Information and Innovation (SCBTII), 1(1).
11. Li, Y., Liu, X. and Chen, Y. (2011). Selection of Logistics Center Location Using Axiomatic Fuzzy Set and TOPSIS Methodology in Logistics Management. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(6), 7901-7908.
12. Liu, Y. (2017). The Empirical Study On the Factors Affecting E-Logistics System in Chinese Logistics Industry. In 2017 2nd International Conference On Machinery, Electronics and Control Simulation (MECS 2017) (Pp. 337-343). Atlantis Press.
13. Miscevic, G., Tijan, E., Žgaljić, D. and Jardas, M. (2018). Emerging Trends in E-Logistics. In 2018 41st International Convention On Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO) (Pp. 1353-1358). IEEE.
14. Önder, E. and Yıldırım, B. F. (2014). VIKOR Method for Ranking Logistic Villages in Turkey. Journal of Management and Economics Research, 12(23), 293-314.
15. Opricovic, S. (1998). Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 2(1), 5-21.
16. Opricovic, S. and Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455.
17. Opricovic, S. and Tzeng, G. H. (2007). Extended VIKOR Method in Comparison with Outranking Methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514-529.
18. Özbek, A. (2018). Fortune 500 Listesinde Yer Alan Lojistik Firmalarin Değerlendirilmesi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1), 13-26.
19. Özbek, A. ve Engür, M. (2018). EDAS Yöntemi İle Lojistik Firma Web Sitelerinin Değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 21(2), 417-429.
20. Pamucar, D., Žižović, M., Biswas, S. and Božanić, D. (2021). A New Logarithm Methodology of Additive Weights (LMAW) For Multi-Criteria Decision-Making: Application in Logistics. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering.
21. Pekkaya, M. and Keleş, N. (2021). Determining Criteria Interaction and Criteria Priorities in The Freight Village Location Selection Process: The Experts' Perspective in Turkey. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Access Address: Https://Www.Emerald.Com/Insight /Content/ Doi/10.1108/APJML-05-2021-0338/Full/Html
22. Prasad, K. D., Prasad, M., Rao, S. B. and Patro, C. S. (2016). Supplier Selection Through AHP-VIKOR Integrated Methodology. SSRG International Journal of Industrial Engineering, 3(5), 1-6.
23. Rao, C., Goh, M., Zhao, Y. and Zheng, J. (2015). Location Selection of City Logistics Centers Under Sustainability. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 36, 29-44.
24. Rekik, R., Kallel, I., Casillas, J. and Alimi, A. M. (2016). Using Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Approaches to Assess the Quality of Web Sites. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, 14(7), 747.
25. Saaty, R. W. (1987). The Analytic Hierarchy Process-What It Is and How It Is Used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3-5), 161-176.
26. Saaty, T. L. (1990). How To Make A Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process?. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26.
27. Sennaroglu, B. and Celebi, G. V. (2018). A Military Airport Location Selection by AHP Integrated PROMETHEE and VIKOR Methods. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 59, 160-173.
28. Shokri, H., Ashjari, B., Saberi, M. and Yoon, J. H. (2013). An Integrated AHP-VIKOR Methodology for Facility Layout Design. Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, 12(4), 389-405.
29. Singh, S., Olugu, E. U., Musa, S. N., Mahat, A. B. and Wong, K. Y. (2016). Strategy Selection for Sustainable Manufacturing with Integrated AHP-VIKOR Method Under Interval-Valued Fuzzy Environment. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 84(1), 547-563.
30. Skitsko, V. I. (2016). E-Logistics and M-Logistics in Information Economy. Logforum, 12(1), 7-16.
31. Stopka, O., Droździel, P. and Ľupták, V. (2022). Modeling The Designs in Terms of Logistics Service Center Placement: A Case Study. Archives of Transport, 64(4), 59-71.
32. Taha, H. A. (2017). Operation Research: An Introduction (10th Ed). UK:Pearson.
33. Turki, S. and Rezg, N. (2017). Study of The E-Maintenance Service in E-Logistic Supply Chain. In 2017 IEEE Symposium On Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE) (Pp. 132-137). IEEE.
34. Tzeng, G. H., Lin, C. W. and Opricovic, S. (2005). Multi-Criteria Analysis of Alternative-Fuel Buses for Public Transportation. Energy Policy, 33(11), 1373-1383.
35. Velasquez, M. and Hester, P. T. (2013). An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods. International Journal of Operations Research, 10(2), 56-66.
36. Wang, C. and Chen, Y. (2006). Utilizing E-Logistics: Case Studies in Sweden and China. (Master Thesis). Lulea University of Technology, Sweden.
37. Wang, C. and Yue, C. (2006). Utilizing E-Logistics: Case Studies in Sweden and China. (Master Thesis). Lulea University of Technology, Sweden.
38. Wang, Y. (2018). Application of TOPSIS and AHP in The Multi-Objective Decision-Making Problems. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 228, P. 05002). EDP Sciences.
39. Wątróbski, J. (2016). Outline of Multicriteria Decision-Making in Green Logistics. Transportation Research Procedia, 16, 537-552.
40. Yu, L. and Bae, J. H. (2009). A Study On the Factors Affecting E-Logistics Systems in The Chinese Logistics Industry. International Commerce and Information Review, 2(1), 25-48.
41. Yu, P. L. (1973). A Class of Solutions for Group Decision Problems. Management Science, 19(8), 936-946.
42. Zaralı, F., Yazgan, H. R. ve Delice, Y. (2018). AHP Ve VIKOR Bütünleşik Yaklaşımıyla Lojistik Merkez Yer Seçimi: Kayseri İli Örneği. Erciyes Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 34(3), 1-9.
43. Zarghami, M. and Szidarovszky, F. (2011). Multicriteria Analysis: Applications to Water and Environment Management. Springer Science & Business Media.
44. Zavadskas, E. K., Stević, Ž., Tanackov, I. and Prentkovskis, O. (2018). A Novel Multicriteria Approach–Rough Step-Wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis Method (R-SWARA) And Its Application in Logistics. Studies in Informatics and Control, 27(1), 97-106.
45. Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple Criteria Decision Making. New York: Mcgraw-Hillcompany.
46. Zhenhub. (2022). The Benefits and Challenges of E-Logistics. Access Address: Https://Zhenhub.Com/Blog/E-Logistics/
47. Zunder, T. H. and Islam, D. M. Z. (2011). E-Logistics Systems Applications for Service Users and Providers. Transportation Research Record, 2238(1), 50-60.