E-HİZMET KALİTESİNE GÖRE SANAL ALIŞ VERİŞ SİTELERİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

In this study, E-Service Quality Scale, developed by Parasuraman (2004), has been given to evaluated by 415 clients who made shopping from company selling electronic device operates in five big cities of Turkey (İstanbul, Ankara, İzmir, Antalya, Eskişehir) and from virtual organizations at least three times. Obtained data has been defuzzyfied by fuzzy logic and has been emerging. After the data obtained was defuzzyfied by fuzzy logic theory, the defuzzyfied data has been applied to reliability and factor analysis. Then, comparisons has been performed among E-Service Quality of gittigidiyor.com E-Bay.com and hepsiburada.com settled the most commonly used as a shopping sites by measurement method based on space. The comparisons have been showed that ranking according to E-Service Quality and the most commonly used sites has been found same. In addition, the study,has been investigated which effective dimensions of E-Service Quality belonging to the most preferred three-sites and Privacy dimension has been determined to be very important. Being reliable of company operates on web base and believing of customers knowledge protected by company have been determined to increase use of sites

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

E-HİZMET KALİTESİNE GÖRE SANAL ALIŞ VERİŞ SİTELERİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’deki beş büyük ilde (İstanbul, Ankara, İzmir, Antalya, Eskişehir) faaliyet gösteren elektronik eşya satan mağazalardan alış veriş yapan ve en az üç kez sanal alış veriş sitelerinden alış veriş yapmış olan 415 adet müşteriye Parasuraman’ın (2004) geliştirmiş olduğu E-Hizmet kalitesi ölçeği verilerek en çok kullandıkları siteleri değerlendirmeleri istenmiştir. Elde edilen veriler, bulanık mantık teoremi ile durulaştırıldı ve güvenirlik Analizine ve faktör analizine tabi tutuldu. Daha sonra, boşluk temeline dayalı ölçüm yöntemi ile en çok kullanıldığı tespit edilen gittigidiyor.com, E-Bay.com ve hepsiburada.com alış veriş sitelerinin E-Hizmet kaliteleri arasında karşılaştırmalar yapıldı. Karşılaştırmalar E-Hizmet Kalitesine göre yapılan sıralamanın en çok tercih edilen site sıralamasıyla aynı olduğunu gösterdi. Ek olarak çalışmada, en çok tercih edilen üç sitenin E-Hizmet Kalitesinin hangi boyutlarındaki farklılığın en çok tercih edilen site olmasında etkili olduğu araştırıldı ve Gizlilik boyutunun çok önemli olduğu belirlendi. Müşteriler web tabanında işlem gören firmaların güvenilir olması ve kendi bilgilerinin korunacağına inanmalarının sitelerin kullanımını arttıracağı bu çalışma ile ortaya konulmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• E-Hizmet Kalitesi, Sanal alış veriş, İnternet

Kaynakça

1. ALDEN, D. L., JAN-BENEDİCT, E.M. STEENKAMP, ve RAJEEV, B. (2006), “Consumer Attitudes toward
2. CAPORALETTI, L. E. ve DULA, J. H. (1999). Performance Evaluation Based on Multiple Attributes with Non- parametric Frontiers, The International Journal of Management Science, 17, pp.637-645.
3. CHEN, S. (1997). A new method for tool stell materials selection under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Set and System 92: 265-274.
4. DE RUYTER, K., WETZELS, M. ve KLEİJNEN, M. (2001). Customer adoption of service: An experimental study. International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.12, No.2, 184-207.
5. DORSEY D.W. ve COVERT, M. D., (2003). Mathematical modeling of decision making a soft and fuzzy approach to capturing hard decisions. Human Factors, 45(1), 117-119.
6. DUBOIS, D., PRADE, H. ve FRANCESCO, M. (1998). Fuzzy set modelling in case-based reasoning. International
7. Journal of Intelligent Systems, 13(4), 345-373. FORSYTHE, S. M., SHİ, B. (2003). Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in Internet shopping. Journal of
8. Business Research Vol. 56 No. 11 pp. 867-875. GEFEN, D., KARAHANNA, E. ve STRAUB, D.W. (2003), “Trust and TAM in Online Shopping,” MIS Quarterly 27 (1). 51-83.

9. GHOSH, S., SURJADJAJA, H., ANTONY, J. (2004), “Optimization of the determinants of e-service operation.
10. Business Process Management Journal, Vol.10, No.6, 616-636. JONES, S. M., WİLİKENS, P. MORRİS ve MASERA, M. (2000), “Trust Requirements in E-Business: A conceptual framework for understanding the needs and concerns of different stakeholders,” Communications of the ACM (43:12). 81-87.
11. Kaplan, D., (2000). Structural Equation Modelling; Faundations and Extensions, Sage Publications,Newbury Park, CA,
12. LİN, H. F., (2007). Predicting consumer ıntentions to shop online: an empirical test of competing theories.
13. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol.3,No.2, 3-4. PANDYA, A., DHOLAKİA, N. (2005). ‘Conceptualizing B2C Business as a New Category of Services’. Journal of
14. Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 3(1), 1-12. PARASURAMAN, A., GREWAL, D. ve KRİSHNAN, R. (2004). Marketing research. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.
15. PITTER. K., AMATO. S., CALLAHAN. J., KEER. N. ve TILTON. E. (1995). Çev. Ulus T., Herkes İçin Internet
16. Rehberi, McGraw HillLiteratür Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 1995, s.4-5.
17. RAYPORT, J.F., SVIOKLA, J.J. (1994). ‘Managing in the Marketspace’, Harvard Business Review, 72(6), 123
18. RAYPORT, J. F., SVİOKLA, J. J. (1995). ‘Exploiting the Virtual Value Chain’, Harvard Business Review, 73(6), 75
19. ROBERTSON, A., SOOPRAMANIEN, D. ve FILDES, R., (2007), “Segmental new-product diffusion of residential broadband services”, Telecommunications Policy, vol 31(5), 265-275.
20. ROTCHANAKITUMNUAI, S., ve SPEECE, M. (2004). “Business Value of Thai Internet Banking Services: The Corporate Customers’ Perspectives,” Journal of Electronic Commerce Research (5:4), November, 270-286.
21. ROWLEY, J. (2006). An analysis of the service literature: Towards a research agenda. Internet Research, Vol.16, No.3, 339-359. 100           DPUJSS, Number 33, August 2012
22. SANTOS, J. (2003). E-service quality a model of virtual service dimensions. Managing Service Quality, 13(3), 233- 2
23. TEO, THOMPSON, S. H., VİVİEN, K. G. LİM, ve RAYE Y. C. L. (1999). “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation in
24. Internet Usage,” OMEGA International Journal of Management Science, 27(1), 25-37. VIJAYASARATHY, L. R. (2004). Predicting consumer intentions to use online shopping: the case for an augmented technology acceptance model. Information and Management, (41), 747-762.
25. VOSS, C.A. (2002). ‘Rethinking Paradigms of Service in a Virtual Environment’, Working Paper, London Business
26. School, Operations and Technology Management, Ref. No. OTM 02-008:London. WOLFINBARGER, M., GILLY, M.C. (2003). “eTailQ: Dimensionalizing, Measuring and Predicting Etail
27. Quality”, Journal of Retailing, 79(4), 183-198. YANG, Z. (2001). Consumer perceptions of service quality in Internetbased electronic commerce. Proceedings of the EMAC Conference, 811 May 2001, Bergen.
28. ZEITHAML, V.A., PARASURAMAN, A., A. MALHOTRA (2000). “e-Service Quality: Definition, Dimensions and Conceptual Model”, Working Paper, Marketing Science Institute Working Paper Series: Cambridge.
29. ZEITHAML, V.A., PARASURAMAN, A., A. MALHOTRA (2002). Service quality delivery through websites: A critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, Vol.30, No.4, 362-375.
30. ZIMMERMAN, J. F. (2001). The Referendum: The People Decide Public Policy. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.