Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

İşletmelerin Dijital Dönüşüm Süreçlerinin Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2024, Volume: 31 Issue: 4, 789 - 803, 21.12.2024

Abstract

Dijitalleşme, günümüzde iş dünyasını ve toplumu derinden etkileyen bir dönüşüm sürecidir. Teknolojik ilerlemeler, işletmelerde iletişim ve iş yapma biçimlerinde değişimleri hızlandırırken, bu değişime ayak uydurmada dijital teknolojiler stratejik bir rol üstlenmekte ve işletmelerde dijitalleşmeyi zorunlu kılmaktadır. Dijital altyapı, pazarlama, satış, veri analitiği ve iş zekâsı gibi alanlarda güçlü bir temele dayanmaktadır. Bu süreç, işletmelerin iş modellerini, müşteri ilişkilerini ve operasyonlarını yeniden şekillendirmelerini gerektirmekte, toplumların bilgiye erişimini, iletişim

1İzmir Katip Çelebi Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme Anabilim Dalı Doktora Öğrencisi, huriyeaakpinar@gmail.com, ORCID: 0000-0003-2460-942X
2İzmir Katip Çelebi Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü, zehranuray.nisanci@ikcu.edu.tr, ORCID: 0000-0003-1782-237X
3Manisa Celal Bayar Ünivetsitesi, Mühendislik ve Doğa Bilimleri Fakültesi, Endüstri Mühendisliği Bölümü, mehmetali.ilgin@cbu.edu.tr, ORCID: 0000-0003-1765-2470
**Bu çalışma ilk yazarın doktora tezinden türetilmiştir.

biçimlerini ve yaşam tarzlarını da dönüştürmektedir. Geleneksel işletme faaliyetlerini dijital teknolojilerle birleştiren işletmeler, dijitalleşerek iş süreçlerini optimize etmekte, mobil uygulamalar ve otomasyon araçlarını kullanarak iş süreçlerini iyileştirmekte ve verimliliği artırmaktadırlar. Dijital teknolojileri rekabet avantajı elde etmek için de stratejik bir şekilde kullanan işletmeler, hızla değişen iş dünyasında başarılı olmak için esneklik, yenilik ve teknoloji odaklı bir yaklaşım benimseyerek dijitalleşmektedirler. Bu çalışmanın amacı, İzmir’de üretim alanında faaliyet gösteren işletmelerin dijital dönüşüm süreçlerini çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleriyle değerlendirmektir. Çalışma kapsamında, dijital dönüşümde önem verilen kriterlerin ağırlıkları AHP yöntemiyle belirlenmiş, işletmelerin sıralanmasında ise TOPSIS yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, dijital dönüşüm süreçlerinde en uygun işletme stratejilerinin tespit edilmesine ışık tutmaktadır ve dijitalleşmenin işletme performansı üzerindeki etkilerini somut bir şekilde ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma sonunda dijital dönüşüm işletme ölçeğine göre değerlendirilmesi yapılan işletmeler arasından en uygun olanlarına karar verilmiş ve sonuçlar yorumlanmıştır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Dijitalleşme, Dijital İşletmeler, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme, AHP, TOPSIS
JEL Sınıflandırması: M10, D70, D81

References

  • Agarwal, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Strategic renewal of organizations. Organization science, 20(2), 281-293.
  • Baloğlu, Ö. Ö. (2023). Teknolojik Bir Dönüşüm Olarak Dijitalleşme Kavramı Ve Etkileri. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 13(2), 1189-1210.
  • Chang, Y., & Huang, C. (2020). Cultural factors in digital transformation: A fuzzy AHP perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(4), 421-439.
  • Gallon, M. R., Stillman, H. M., & Coates, D. (1995). Putting core competency thinking into practice. Research-Technology Management, 38(3), 20-28.
  • Garcia, R., & Lopez, A. (2022). Integrating AI into digital transformation: MCDM frameworks and strategies. Expert Systems with Applications, 198, 116764.
  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1990). Strategic intent. Mckinsey quarterly, (1), 36-61.
  • Hernandez, G., Torres, D., & Martinez, M. (2019). IoT readiness and MCDM applications: A MAUT and ELECTRE study. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 14, 17-29.
  • Helfat, C. E., & Winter, S. G. (2011). Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (N) ever‐changing world. Strategic management journal, 32(11), 1243-1250.
  • Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, 58-191.
  • Ji, X., & Li, W. (2022). Digital Transformation: A Review and Research Framework. Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management, 5(3), 21-27.
  • Josefsson, C., & Berg, E. (2019). Enabling Digital Transformation-a Dynamic Capabilities Approach.
  • Jones, A., & Thompson, B. (2020). Technological preparedness for digital transformation using TOPSIS. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150, 119776.
  • Kim, Y., Park, J., & Lee, H. (2020). MCDM approaches for Industry 4.0 adoption: A VIKOR application. Computers in Industry, 120, 103251.
  • Laudien, S. M., & Daxböck, B. (2016). Path dependence as a barrier to business model change in manufacturing firms: insights from a multiple-case study. Journal of Business Economics, 86, 611-645.
  • Lee, S., & Zhang, W. (2021). Digital skills assessment in organizational transformation: Applying AHP. International Journal of Information Management, 58, 102291.
  • Martinez, J., Gomez, L., & Perez, F. (2018). Strategic roadmaps for sectoral transformation using SWOT-AHP and PROMETHEE. Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), 2673-2691.
  • Petts, N. (1997). Building growth on core competences a practical approach. Long Range Planning, 30(4), 551-561.
  • Rodriguez, E., Martinez, P., & Gonzalez, J. (2019). Sustainability in digital transformation: A DEMATEL and TOPSIS approach. Sustainable Development, 27(5), 900-912.
  • Saaty, T. (1980, November). The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for decision making. In Kobe, Japan (Vol. 1, p. 69).
  • Sağlam, M. (2021). İşletmelerde Geleceğin Vizyonu Olarak Dijital Dönüşümün Gerçekleştirilmesi ve Dijital Dönüşüm Ölçeğinin Türkçe Uyarlaması. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(40), 395-420.
  • Schwertner, K. (2021). The impact of digital transformation on business: a detailed review. Strategic Management in the Age of Digital Transformation, ed J. Metselaar (London: Proud Penn), 1-29.
  • Smith, W. K., Binns, A., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Complex business models: Managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously. Long range planning, 43(2-3), 448-461.
  • Smith, J., Johnson, L., & Carter, R. (2021). Evaluating maturity models for digital transformation: An AHP approach. Journal of Business Research, 134, 45-56.
  • Tahiroğlu, A. F., & Bozkurt, C. (2021). Dijitalleşme ve Covid-19 pandemisi arasındaki ilişki: Uygulamalı bir analiz. İşletme ve İktisat Çalışmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 145-154.
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long range planning, 51(1), 40-49.
  • Teece, D. J. (2014). The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms. Academy of management perspectives, 28(4), 328-352.
  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
  • Velu, C. (2017). A systems perspective on business model evolution: The case of an agricultural information service provider in India. Long Range Planning, 50(5), 603-620.
  • Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long range planning, 52(3), 326-349.
  • Williams, P., & Brown, T. (2019). Leadership styles and digital transformation: Insights from DEMATEL analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 30(3), 234-246.

Evaluating The Digital Transformation Processes of Businesses with Multi-criteria Decision-Making Methods

Year 2024, Volume: 31 Issue: 4, 789 - 803, 21.12.2024

Abstract

Digitalization is a transformative process that deeply impacts the business world and society today. Technological advances accelerate changes in communication and business practices within organizations, positioning digital technologies as a strategic necessity for adapting to these transformations and making digitalization inevitable for businesses. Digital infrastructure relies on a strong foundation in areas such as marketing, sales, data analytics, and business intelligence. This process necessitates the reshaping of business models, customer relationships, and operations, while also transforming how societies access information, communicate and shape their lifestyles. Businesses that integrate traditional operations with digital technologies optimize their processes, enhance workflows through mobile applications and automation tools, and improve efficiency. Companies that strategically leverage digital technologies to gain a competitive advantage adopt a flexible, innovative, and technology-focused approach to succeed in the rapidly evolving business environment. This study aims to evaluate the digital transformation processes of manufacturing enterprises operating in Izmir using multi-criteria decision-making methods. Within the study, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was employed to determine the weights of the criteria prioritized in digital transformation, and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method was used for ranking the enterprises. The findings shed light on identifying the most appropriate business strategies for digital transformation processes and concretely demonstrate the impact of digitalization on business performance. After the study, the enterprises were evaluated based on their digital transformation scales, and the most suitable ones were identified and analyzed.
Key Words: Digitalization, Digital Businesses, Multi-Criteria Decision Making, AHP, TOPSIS
JEL Classification: M10, D70, D81

References

  • Agarwal, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Strategic renewal of organizations. Organization science, 20(2), 281-293.
  • Baloğlu, Ö. Ö. (2023). Teknolojik Bir Dönüşüm Olarak Dijitalleşme Kavramı Ve Etkileri. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 13(2), 1189-1210.
  • Chang, Y., & Huang, C. (2020). Cultural factors in digital transformation: A fuzzy AHP perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(4), 421-439.
  • Gallon, M. R., Stillman, H. M., & Coates, D. (1995). Putting core competency thinking into practice. Research-Technology Management, 38(3), 20-28.
  • Garcia, R., & Lopez, A. (2022). Integrating AI into digital transformation: MCDM frameworks and strategies. Expert Systems with Applications, 198, 116764.
  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1990). Strategic intent. Mckinsey quarterly, (1), 36-61.
  • Hernandez, G., Torres, D., & Martinez, M. (2019). IoT readiness and MCDM applications: A MAUT and ELECTRE study. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 14, 17-29.
  • Helfat, C. E., & Winter, S. G. (2011). Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (N) ever‐changing world. Strategic management journal, 32(11), 1243-1250.
  • Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, 58-191.
  • Ji, X., & Li, W. (2022). Digital Transformation: A Review and Research Framework. Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management, 5(3), 21-27.
  • Josefsson, C., & Berg, E. (2019). Enabling Digital Transformation-a Dynamic Capabilities Approach.
  • Jones, A., & Thompson, B. (2020). Technological preparedness for digital transformation using TOPSIS. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150, 119776.
  • Kim, Y., Park, J., & Lee, H. (2020). MCDM approaches for Industry 4.0 adoption: A VIKOR application. Computers in Industry, 120, 103251.
  • Laudien, S. M., & Daxböck, B. (2016). Path dependence as a barrier to business model change in manufacturing firms: insights from a multiple-case study. Journal of Business Economics, 86, 611-645.
  • Lee, S., & Zhang, W. (2021). Digital skills assessment in organizational transformation: Applying AHP. International Journal of Information Management, 58, 102291.
  • Martinez, J., Gomez, L., & Perez, F. (2018). Strategic roadmaps for sectoral transformation using SWOT-AHP and PROMETHEE. Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), 2673-2691.
  • Petts, N. (1997). Building growth on core competences a practical approach. Long Range Planning, 30(4), 551-561.
  • Rodriguez, E., Martinez, P., & Gonzalez, J. (2019). Sustainability in digital transformation: A DEMATEL and TOPSIS approach. Sustainable Development, 27(5), 900-912.
  • Saaty, T. (1980, November). The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for decision making. In Kobe, Japan (Vol. 1, p. 69).
  • Sağlam, M. (2021). İşletmelerde Geleceğin Vizyonu Olarak Dijital Dönüşümün Gerçekleştirilmesi ve Dijital Dönüşüm Ölçeğinin Türkçe Uyarlaması. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(40), 395-420.
  • Schwertner, K. (2021). The impact of digital transformation on business: a detailed review. Strategic Management in the Age of Digital Transformation, ed J. Metselaar (London: Proud Penn), 1-29.
  • Smith, W. K., Binns, A., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Complex business models: Managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously. Long range planning, 43(2-3), 448-461.
  • Smith, J., Johnson, L., & Carter, R. (2021). Evaluating maturity models for digital transformation: An AHP approach. Journal of Business Research, 134, 45-56.
  • Tahiroğlu, A. F., & Bozkurt, C. (2021). Dijitalleşme ve Covid-19 pandemisi arasındaki ilişki: Uygulamalı bir analiz. İşletme ve İktisat Çalışmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 145-154.
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long range planning, 51(1), 40-49.
  • Teece, D. J. (2014). The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms. Academy of management perspectives, 28(4), 328-352.
  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
  • Velu, C. (2017). A systems perspective on business model evolution: The case of an agricultural information service provider in India. Long Range Planning, 50(5), 603-620.
  • Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long range planning, 52(3), 326-349.
  • Williams, P., & Brown, T. (2019). Leadership styles and digital transformation: Insights from DEMATEL analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 30(3), 234-246.
There are 31 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Strategy, Management and Organisational Behaviour (Other)
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Huriye Akpınar 0000-0003-2460-942X

Zehra Nuray Nişancı 0000-0003-1782-237X

Mehmet Ali Ilgın 0000-0003-1765-2470

Publication Date December 21, 2024
Submission Date May 13, 2024
Acceptance Date December 11, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 31 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Akpınar, H., Nişancı, Z. N., & Ilgın, M. A. (2024). Evaluating The Digital Transformation Processes of Businesses with Multi-criteria Decision-Making Methods. Yönetim Ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 31(4), 789-803.