KURUMSAL BÜYÜME PERFORMANSINA YÖNELİK ÇOK BOYUTLU BİR ÇKKV ÇERÇEVESİ: BİST TEKSTİL FİRMALARI ÜZERİNE KANITLAR

Öz

Bu çalışmada, BİST’te işlem gören tekstil firmalarının büyüme performansının çok boyutlu olarak değerlendirilmesine yönelik yeni bir bütünleşik karar verme modelinin önerilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Sunulan karar çerçevesi; MAXC, WENSLO ve SWI yaklaşımlarının entegrasyonunu içermektedir. Bu modelde MAXC ve WENSLO seçilen performans göstergelerine ilişkin nesnel ağırlıkların belirlenmesinde, SWI ise firmaların büyüme performansı açısından sıralanması sürecinde kullanılmıştır. Önerilen karar modelinin kullanılabilirliği ve uygulanabilirliği, 2015–2025 dönemi için BİST'te işlem gören on altı tekstil firmasının yıllık finansal verileri üzerinden gerçekleştirilen vaka analizi aracılığıyla test edilmiştir. Değerlendirme sürecinin birinci aşamasında elde edilen entegre ağırlıklandırma sonuçları, Tobin Q oranının tekstil firmalarının büyüme performansının açıklanmasında en belirleyici kriter olduğunu ortaya koymakta; bunu sırasıyla net satış büyüme oranı ve toplam borç büyüme oranı izlemektedir. İkinci aşamada uygulanan SWI yöntemine dayalı sıralama sonuçlarına göre BLCYT en yüksek büyüme performansını sergileyen firma olarak öne çıkarken DIRIT en düşük büyüme performansı skorunu kaydetmiştir. Ayrıca gerçekleştirilen duyarlılık ve sağlamlık analizleri, önerilen entegre karar modelinin metodolojik açıdan tutarlı, kararlı ve güvenilir sonuçlar ürettiğini teyit etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Büyüme Performansı
• Tekstil Sektörü
• MAXC
• WENSLO
• SWI

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL MCDM FRAMEWORK FOR CORPORATE GROWTH PERFORMANCE: EVIDENCE FROM BIST TEXTILE FIRMS

Öz

This study proposes a novel hybrid decision-making model for the multidimensional assessment of the growth performance of textile firms listed on BIST. The proposed framework integrates the MAXC, WENSLO, and SWI approaches, whereby MAXC and WENSLO are employed for the objective weighting of the chosen performance metrics and SWI is utilized for the ranking of firms according to their growth performance. The applicability and validity of the model are tested through a case study drawing on the annual financial data of sixteen BIST-listed textile firms over the 2015–2025 period. The integrated weighting findings obtained in the first stage of the assessment process reveal that Tobin's Q ratio constitutes the most decisive criterion in explaining the growth performance of textile firms, followed respectively by net sales growth rate and total debt growth rate. According to the SWI-based ranking findings derived in the second stage, BLCYT emerges as the highest-performing firm while DIRIT records the lowest growth performance score. Moreover, the sensitivity and robustness analyses conducted confirm that the suggested integrated framework produces methodologically consistent, stable, and reliable results.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Growth Performance
• Textile Industry
• MAXC
• WENSLO
• SWI

Kaynakça

1. Abdel-Basset, M., Ding, W., Mohamed, R., & Metawa, N. (2020). An integrated plithogenic MCDM approach for financial performance evaluation of manufacturing industries. Risk Management, 22(3), 192–218. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41283-020-00061-4
2. Akdeniz İhracatçı Birlikleri Genel Sekreterliği [AKİB]. (2025). 2025 yılı Ocak-Aralık dönemi hazır giyim ve konfeksiyon ihracat raporu.
3. Alsanousi, A. T., Alqahtani, A. Y., Makki, A. A., & Baghdadi, M. A. (2024). A hybrid MCDM approach using the BWM and the TOPSIS for a financial performance-based evaluation of Saudi stocks. Information, 15(5), 258. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15050258
4. Anthony, P., Behnoee, B., Hassanpour, M., & Pamucar, D. (2019). Financial performance evaluation of seven Indian chemical companies. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 2(2), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame1902021a
5. Apan, M., Alp, İ., & Öztel, A. (2019). Determination of the efficiencies of textile firms listed in Borsa İstanbul by using DEA-Window Analysis. Sosyoekonomi, 27(42), 183–204. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2019.04.06
6. Ban, A. I., Ban, O. I., Bogdan, V., Sabau Popa, D. C., & Tuse, D. (2020). Performance evaluation model of Romanian manufacturing listed companies by fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 26(4), 808–836. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2020.12367
7. Cho, B., & Saki, Z. (2022). Firm performance under the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of the US textile and apparel industry. The Journal of The Textile Institute, 113(8), 1637-1647. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2021.1943258
8. Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin's q. Financial Management, 23(3), 70-74. https://doi.org/10.2307/3665623

9. Coad, A. (2009). The growth of firms: A survey of theories and empirical evidence. Edward Elgar Publishing.
10. Dwivedi, P. P., & Sharma, D. K. (2026). Performance measures of sustainable development goals using SWI MCDM methods: A case of the Indian states. International Transactions in Operational Research, 33(4), 2466-2498. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.13609
11. Ganotakis, P., & Love, J. H. (2012). Export propensity, export intensity and firm performance: The role of the entrepreneurial founding team. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(8), 693–718. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2012.16
12. Geroski, P. A. (2000). The growth of firms in theory and practice. N. J. Foss & V. Mahnke (Ed.), Competence, governance and entrepreneurship: Advances in economic strategy research in (s. 168–186). Oxford University Press.
13. Ghosh, S., & Bhattacharya, M. (2022). Analyzing the impact of COVID-19 on the financial performance of the hospitality and tourism industries: An ensemble MCDM approach in the Indian context. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(8), 3113–3142. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2021-1328
14. Gibrat, R. (1931). Les inégalités économiques. Librairie du Recueil Sirey.
15. Gligorić, Z., Görçün, Ö. F., Gligorić, M., Pamucar, D., Simic, V., & Küçükönder, H. (2024). Evaluating the deep learning software tools for large-scale enterprises using a novel TODIFFA-MCDM framework. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences, 36(5), 102079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2024.102079
16. Görçün, Ö. F., Shabir, M., Çalık, A., & Işık, Ö. (2025). Evaluation of the financial performance of the textile and apparel industry in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Applied Soft Computing, 169, 113830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2025.113830
17. Işık, C., Türkkan, M., Marbou, S., & Gül, S. (2024). Stock market performance evaluation of listed food and beverage companies in Istanbul Stock Exchange with MCDM methods. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 7(2), 35–64. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame722024692
18. Işık, Ö., Adalar, İ., & Shabir, M. (2025). Measuring efficiency, productivity and sustainability performance for Islamic banks: A fuzzy expert-based multi-criteria decision support model using spherical fuzzy information. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 18(6), 1482–1519. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMEFM-09-2024-0477
19. Işık, Ö., Çalık, A., & Shabir, M. (2024a). A consolidated MCDM framework for overall performance assessment of listed insurance companies based on ranking strategies. Computational Economics, 65(1), 271–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-024-10578-5
20. Işık, Ö., Shabir, M., & Moslem, S. (2024b). A hybrid MCDM framework for assessing urban competitiveness: A case study of European cities. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 96, 102109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2024.102109
21. İstanbul Hazır Giyim ve Konfeksiyon İhracatçıları Birliği [İHKİB]. (2025). Hazır giyim ve konfeksiyon sektörü güncel durum raporu: Temmuz 2025.
22. İstanbul Tekstil ve Hammaddeleri İhracatçıları Birliği [İTHİB]. (2025). Tekstil-konfeksiyon sektörü Ocak-Haziran 2025 değerlendirmesi. https://denib.gov.tr/files/downloads/sektorelsunumlar/Tekstil-konfeksiyon-ocak-haziran-2025.pdf
23. Kaya, A., Pamucar, D., Gürler, H. E., & Ozcalici, M. (2024). Determining the financial performance of the firms in the Borsa Istanbul sustainability index: Integrating multi criteria decision making methods with simulation. Financial Innovation, 10(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-023-00512-3
24. Lam, W. H., Lam, W. S., Liew, K. F., & Lee, P. F. (2023). Decision analysis on the financial performance of companies using integrated entropy-fuzzy TOPSIS model. Mathematics, 11(2), 397. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11020397
25. Lam, W. S., Lam, W. H., Jaaman, S. H., & Liew, K. F. (2021). Performance evaluation of construction companies using integrated entropy–fuzzy VIKOR model. Entropy, 23(3), 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23030320
26. Liew, K. F., Lam, W. S., & Lam, W. H. (2022). Financial network analysis on the performance of companies using integrated entropy–DEMATEL–TOPSIS model. Entropy, 24(8), 1056. https://doi.org/10.3390/e24081056
27. Makki, A. A., & Alqahtani, A. Y. (2023). Capturing the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak on the financial performance disparities in the energy sector: A hybrid MCDM-based evaluation approach. Economies, 11(2), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11020061
28. Naranjo, P., García-Muiña, F. E., & Siligardi, C. (2025). Sustainable decision-making in SMEs of the textile industry: Integrating methodologies, practices, and barriers. Business Strategy and the Environment, 34(5), 4800–4822. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4295
29. Nariswari, T. N., & Nugraha, N. M. (2020). Profit growth: Impact of net profit margin, gross profit margin and total assets turnover. International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies, 9(4), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijfbs.v9i4.937
30. Nazir, A., Azam, M., & Khalid, M. U. (2021). Debt financing and firm performance: Empirical evidence from the Pakistan Stock Exchange. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 6(3), 324–334. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-03-2019-0019
31. Nuridah, S., Sitohang, R. M., Sofura, A. S., & Sagitarius, E. (2022). Effect of sales profitability and growth on stock price. Jurnal Ekonomi, 11(03), 1139–1146.
32. Özdağoğlu, A., Acar, E., Güner, M., & Çetmeli Bakadur, A. (2024). Applications of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable development: A case study of fashion textile group. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 35(5), 1028–1047. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-05-2023-0147
33. Pamucar, D., Ecer, F., Gligorić, Z., Gligorić, M., & Deveci, M. (2024). A novel WENSLO and ALWAS multicriteria methodology and its application to green growth performance evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 9510-9525. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3321697
34. Pechdin, W., & Chalayonnavin, N. (2025). Sustainability performance and firm financial performance: Evidence from textile and apparel firms. Discover Sustainability, 6, 673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01567-1
35. Phan, D. N., & To, T. N. M. (2025). Determinants of market capitalization of listed firms: Evidence from an emerging country. Journal of Economics and Development, 27(1), 38–55. https://doi.org/10.1108/JED-06-2024-0202
36. Richard, P. J., Devinney, T. M., Yip, G. S., & Johnson, G. (2009). Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management, 35(3), 718–804. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308330560
37. Santos, E., & Castanho, R. A. (2022). The impact of size on the performance of transnational corporations operating in the textile industry in Portugal during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 14(2), 717. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020717
38. Temel, E., & Çakır, U. (2022). Covid-19 salgınının tekstil sektöründeki işletmelerin finansal performanslarına etkilerinin TOPSIS yöntemiyle analizi: BİST örneği. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 24(4), 1446–1466. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1032227
39. Türegün, N. (2022). Financial performance evaluation by multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Heliyon, 8(5), e09361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09361
40. Wang, C.-N., Nguyen, P. T. T., Wang, Y.-H., & Dang, T.-T. (2022). A study of performance evaluation for textile and garment enterprises. Processes, 10(11), 2381. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10112381
41. Wang, C.-N., Nguyen, T. T. M., Nhieu, N.-L., & Chung, Y.-C. (2025). Performance evaluation of Vietnamese industrial goods and services during and post-COVID-19 era based on multi-criteria decision-making methods. PLOS ONE, 20(5), e0323764. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0323764
42. Yazdanfar, D., & Öhman, P. (2015). Debt financing and firm performance: An empirical study based on Swedish data. The Journal of Risk Finance, 16(1), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRF-06-2014-0085
43. Zahra, Z., Elahi, A. R., Khan, W., Mehmood, B., & Sohail, M. (2025). Unraveling the effects of COVID-19 on the textile industry in South Asia region: a comparative study of major players. Kybernetes, 54(8), 4229-4250. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-08-2023-1449
44. Zhang, X., Wang, C., Li, E., & Xu, C. (2014). Assessment model of ecoenvironmental vulnerability based on improved entropy weight method. The Scientific World Journal, 2014(1), 797814. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/797814