TÜRK LOJİSTİK VE TAŞIMACILIK FİRMALARININ STRATEJİK POZİSYON VE AKSİYONLARININ DEĞERLENDİRMESİ

Year 2017, 16. UIK Special Issue, 767 - 780, 14.11.2017

A. Zafer Acar , Pınar Gürol

https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.323627

Cited By: 1

Abstract

1990’lardan itibaren küresel ticari
entegrasyonve mal hareketleri artmış, bununla birlikte pazarda çok sayıda aktör
yer almaya başlamıştır. Firmalar rekabet avantajı kazanabilmek ve varlıklarını
sürdürebilmek için değer zincirinin önemli temel
faaliyetlerinden birisi olan "lojistiğe"
ayrı önem vermeye başlamıştır. Uluslararası ticaret ile doğrudan
ilişkisi olan sektörün oyuncuları olarak lojistik firmaların kendilerini
stratejik olarak konumlandırmaları yerlerini güçlendirecek, olası olumsuz
etkilerden uzak kalmalarını sağlayacak, nihayetinde ekonomilerinin dış ticaret
hacmine olumlu katkılar yapacaktır.

Bu bağlamda çalışmanın amacı; Türk lojistik firmalarının küresel
rekabete cevap verebilmek maksadıyla kendilerini stratejik olarak nasıl
konumlandırdığını ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda Delphi tekniği ile AHP ve SPACE analizleri
entegre edilerek uygulanan bir alan araştırmasıylaTürkiye’deki lojistik
firmalarının stratejik pozisyon ve yönelimleri tespit edilmiştir. Genellikle
muhafazakar stratejiler uygulayan bu firmalara elde edilen bulgular ışığında
rekabet avantajlarını artırabilecek çeşitli önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

Stratejik Yönetim, AHP, SPACE Analizi, Lojistik Sektörü

EVALUATION OF STRATEGIC POSITION AND ACTION OF TURKISH LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES

Abstract

Since 1990s, global
trade integration and commodity movements have increased, and lots of new
actors have started to appear in the market.Companies have begun to give a
special importance to "logistics" that is one of the core business
operations in the value chain in order to gain competitive advantage and continue
existence. Logistics sector has a direct relationship to the international
trade, and for logistics companies as logistics sector players, strategically
positioning of themselves can be strengthened their place, keep away from
possible negative effects, and finally make positive contributions to their national
foreign trade volume.

This study aimed
to demonstrate how Turkish logistics firms need to strategically position
themselves to respond to global competition. According to this aim, the
strategic positions and orientations of the logistics companies in Turkey have
been determined through a field research which is implemented by integrating Delphi
technique, AHP and SPACE analyzes. According to findings, some recommendations have
given to increase competitive advantage to these companies which are generally
applying conservative strategies. 

Keywords

Strategic Management, AHP, SPACE Analysis, Logistics Sector

References

• Acar, A.Z. (2017). Rakamlarla 2016 yılında Türkiye. Ekonomi Yöntem. Erişim Adresi: http://www.ekonomiyontem.com.tr/yazarlar/doc-dr-avni-zafer-acar/dunya-ticaretinde-degisen-dengeler-turkiye-ve-lojistik/37/
• Acar, A. Z., Bentyn, Z., ve Kocaoglu, B. (2015). Turkey as a Regıonal Logistic Hub in Promotion Of Revivaling Ancient Silk Route Between Europe And Asia. Journal of Management Marke-ting and Logistics, 2(2).
• Aldrich, H. (2008). Organizations and environments. Stanford University Press.
• Ansoff, H. I. (1957). Strategies for diversification. Harvard Business Review, 35(5), 113-124.
• Aragón-Correa, J. A. ve Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of management review, 28(1), 71-88.
• Bakoğlu, R. (2010). Çağdaş Stratejik Yönetim. İstanbul: Beta.
• Barca, M. (2005). Stratejik Yönetim Düşüncesinin Evrimi: Bilimsel Bir Disiplinin Oluşum Hikaye-si. Journal of Management Research/Yonetim Arastirmalari Dergisi, 5(1).
• Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management science, 32(10), 1231-1241.
• Bharadwaj, S. G., Varadarajan, P. R., ve Fahy, J. (1993). Sustainable competitive advantage in ser-vice industries: a conceptual model and research propositions. The Journal of Marketing, 83-99.
• Bhatt, G. D., Grover, V., veGrover, V. (2005). Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: An empirical study. Journal of management information systems, 22(2), 253-277.
• Chaghooshi, A. J., Rahmani, M., ve Zarchi, M. K. (2012). Proposing a Framework for Strategic Positioning in Tile and Ceramic Industry (Integrated Approach). Journal of American Science, 8(6) 20, 91-99.
• Chakravarthy, B. S. (1982). Adaptation: A promising metaphor for strategic management. Academy of Management Review, 7(1), 35-44.
• Chandler, A. D. (1990). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise (Vol. 120). MIT press.
• CSCMP (2017). Supply Chain Management Definitions and Glossary, Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. Erişim Adre-si:http://cscmp.org/CSCMP/Educate/SCM_Definitions_and_Glossary_of_Terms/CSCMP/Educate/SCM_Definitions_and_Glossary_of_Terms.aspx?hkey=60879588-f65f-4ab5-8c4b-6878815ef921
• Çevik, O., Gülcan, B., (2011). Lojistik Faaliyetlerin Çevresel Sürdürülebilirliği ve Marco Polo Prog-ramı, KMÜ Sosyal ve Ekonomi̇k Araştirmalar Dergi̇si, 13 (20), 36.
• Daugherty, P. J., ve Pittman, P. H. (1995). Utilization of time-based strategies: creating distribution flexibility/responsiveness. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(2), 54-60.
• David, F.R. (2011), Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases (13th ed.). Prentice Hall, Saddle River, NJ.
• Dyer, J. S. (2005). MAUT—multiattribute utility theory. In Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 265-292). Springer New York.
• Feurer, R., ve Chaharbaghi, K. (1995). Strategy development: past, present and future. Management Decision, 33(6), 11-21.
• Fresard, L. (2010). Financial strength and product market behavior: The real effects of corporate cash holdings. The Journal of finance, 65(3), 1097-1122.
• Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation. California management review, 33(3), 114-135.
• Gurbuz, T. (2013). A Modified Strategic Position and Action Evaluation (SPACE) Matrix Method. In Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists (Vol. 2).
• Hamel, G., ve Prahalad, C. K. (2010). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Press.
• Ishizaka, A. ve Labib, A. (2011). Selection of new production facilities with the group analytic hierarcy process ordering method. Expert System With Application, 38, 7317-7325.
• Küçük, O., (2011). Stok Yönetimi. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara, Türkiye, 129.
• LPI. (2017). The World Bank LPI Data Set. Erişim Adresi: http://lpi.worldbank.org/
• Lynch, D. F., Keller, S. B., ve Ozment, J. (2000). The effects of logistics capabilities and strategy on firm performance. Journal of business logistics, 21(2), 47.
• Mintzberg, H. (1990). The design school: reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strategic management journal, 11(3), 171-195.
• Mintzberg, H. (1991). Learning 1, planning 0 reply to Igor Ansoff. Strategic management journal, 12(6), 463-466.
• Mintzberg, H. (1994). The fall and rise of strategic planning. Harvard business review, 72(1), 107-114.
• Morash, E. A., Droge, C. L., ve Vickery, S. K. (1996). Strategic logistics capabilities for competitive advantage and firm success. Journal of business Logistics, 17(1), 1.
• Moffet, A., Dyer, J.S. ve Sarkar, S. (2006). Integration biodiversity represantation with multiple criteria in North Central Namibia usin non-dominated alternatives and a modified anlytic hierarchy process. Biological Conversation, 129, 181-191.
• Nag A, (2011) “Strategic management analysis, implementation, control” Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. India, s.270- ISBN: 978-81259-4267-2
• Omasa, T., Kishimoto, M., Kawase, M. ve Yagi, K. (2004). An attempt at decision making in tissue engineering: reactor evaluation using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Biochemical Engineering Journal, 20, 173-179.
• Porter, M. E. (1985) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, New York.
• Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations.
• Radder, L. ve Louw, L. (1998). The SPACE matrix: A tool for calibrating competition. Long range planning, 31(4), 549-559.
• Roos, J., ve Victor, B. (1999). Towards a new model of strategy-making as serious play. European Management Journal, 17(4), 348-355.
• Rudnicki, W. ve Vagner, I. (2014). Methods of strategic analysis and proposal method of measuring productivity of a company. Zeszyty Naukowe Małopolskiej Wyższej Szkoły Ekonomicznej w Tarnowie, (2 (25)), 175-184.
• Saaty, T.L. (1977). A Scalling methods for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234-281.
• Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York.
• Saaty, T.L. (1989). Group Decision Making and The AHP. Springer-Verlag, New York.
• Saaty, T.L. (1990). An exposition of the AHP in repply to the paper remarks on the analytic hiyerarchy process. Management Science, 36 (3), 259-268.
• Saaty, T.L. (1994). Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic hierarchy process. Europen Journal of Operational Research, 74, 426-447.
• Saaty, T.L. (1996). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
• Sarvan, F., ARICI, E. D., Özen, J., Özdemir, B., & İçigen, E. T. (2003). On stratejik yönetim okulu: Biçimleşme okulunun bütünleştirici çerçevesi. Akdeniz İİ BF Dergisi, 6, 73-122.
• Slater, S. F., Olson, E. M., ve Hult, G. T. M. (2006). The moderating influence of strategic orientation on the strategy formation capability–performance relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1221-1231.
• Srivastava, R. K., Fahey, L. ve Christensen, H. K. (2001). The resource-based view and marketing: The role of market-based assets in gaining competitive advantage. Journal of management, 27(6), 777-802.
• Swamidass, P. M., ve Newell, W. T. (1987). Manufacturing strategy, environmental uncertainty and performance: a path analytic model. Management science, 33(4), 509-524.
• Tafti, S. F., Jalili, E. ve Yahyaeian, L. (2013). Assessment and Analysis Strategies according to Space Matrix-case Study: Petrochemical and Banking Industries in Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). Procedia-Social and Behaences, 99, 893-901.
• TUİK. (2017). Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Erişim Adresi: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/Start.do
• Venkatraman, N. (1989). Strategic orientation of business enterprises: The construct, dimensionality, and measurement. Management science, 35(8), 942-962.