Metal Mutfak Eşyaları İmalatı Sektöründe Yapay Zekâ Hazırlığı, Güvenilir Yapay Zekâ ve Algılanan İşletme Verimliliği: Mühendis Deneyimlerine Dayalı Nitel Bir Araştırma

Öz

Bu araştırma, metal mutfak eşyaları imalatında çalışan mühendislerin yapay zekâ kullanım deneyimlerini yapay zekâ hazırlığı ve güvenilir yapay zekâ bağlamında incelemekte; işletme verimliliğine ilişkin algılanan katkılara odaklanmaktadır. Veriler, 30 mühendisin eşzamansız olarak yanıtladığı yarı yapılandırılmış yazılı açık uçlu form aracılığıyla toplanmış ve nitel içerik analiziyle desteklenen tematik analizle çözümlenmiştir. Bulgular, genel amaçlı/üretken yapay zekânın raporlama, metin düzenleme ve özetlemede; süreç odaklı uygulamaların ise üretim planlama, kalite, bakım, enerji, stok ve tasarımda deneyim ya da beklenti düzeyinde yer aldığını göstermektedir. Katılımcılar zaman tasarrufu, karar desteği, kalite, hata/fire, koordinasyon ve müşteri memnuniyetiyle ilişkili katkılar bildirmiştir. Bu değerlendirmeler doğrulanmış performans sonuçları değil, öz bildirime dayalı algılanan etkilerdir. Veri güvenliği, hatalı çıktı, altyapı, maliyet, uzman personel eksikliği ve direnç öne çıkan engellerdir. Katılımcı anlatıları, algılanan verimlilik katkısını örgütsel hazırlık, veri kalitesi, güvenilir kullanım ve insan denetimiyle ilişkilendirmektedir. Metal mutfak eşyaları imalatında faaliyet gösteren işletmeler için yapay zekâ hazırlığının değerlendirilmesi ve sınırlı kapsamlı uygulamaların güvenli, insan denetimli pilotlarla sınanması önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yapay Zekâ
• Metal Mutfak Eşyaları İmalatı Sektörü
• Yapay Zekâ Hazırlığı
• Güvenilir Yapay Zekâ
• İşletme Verimliliği
• Nitel Araştırma

Artificial Intelligence Readiness, Trustworthy AI and Perceived Business Efficiency in the Metal Kitchenware Sector: A Qualitative Study Based on Engineers’ Experiences

Öz

This study examines engineers' experiences of using artificial intelligence in metal kitchenware manufacturing through the lenses of AI readiness and trustworthy AI, with a focus on perceived contributions to business efficiency. Data were collected asynchronously from 30 engineers through a semi-structured written open-ended questionnaire and analyzed using thematic analysis supported by qualitative content analysis. General-purpose/generative AI was associated mainly with reporting, editing, and summarization, whereas process-oriented applications in production planning, quality, maintenance, energy, inventory, and design appeared as reported experiences or expectations. Participants described benefits related to time, decision support, quality, errors and waste, coordination, and customer satisfaction. These accounts represent perceived effects rather than verified performance outcomes. Data security, inaccurate outputs, infrastructure, cost, skills shortages, and resistance were the main barriers. Participants' accounts linked perceived efficiency gains to organizational readiness, data quality, trustworthy use, and human oversight. Firms are therefore advised to assess AI readiness and test limited-scope applications through secure, human-supervised pilots.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artificial Intelligence
• Metal Kitchenware Sector
• AI Readiness
• Trustworthy AI
• Business Efficiency
• Qualitative Research

Kaynakça

1. Agostinho, C., Dikopoulou, Z., Lavasa, E., Perakis, K., Pitsios, S., Branco, R., Reji, S., Hetterich, J., Biliri, E., Lampathaki, F., Rodríguez Del Rey, S. ve Gkolemis, V. (2023). Explainability as the key ingredient for AI adoption in Industry 5.0 settings. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 1264372. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1264372
2. Ahangar, M. N., Farhat, Z. A. ve Sivanathan, A. (2025). AI trustworthiness in manufacturing: Challenges, toolkits, and the path to Industry 5.0. Sensors, 25(14), Article 4357. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25144357
3. Arroyabe, M. F., Arranz, C. F. A., Fernandez de Arroyabe, I. ve Fernandez de Arroyabe, J. C. (2024). Analyzing AI adoption in European SMEs: A study of digital capabilities, innovation, and external environment. Technology in Society, 79, Article 102733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102733
4. Ayinaddis, S. G. (2025). Artificial intelligence adoption dynamics and knowledge in SMEs and large firms: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 10(3), Article 100682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2025.100682
5. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
6. Barua, D. A., Sami, S. A. ve Barua, L. (2025). Leveraging artificial intelligence for smart production management in Industry 4.0. Scientific Reports, 15(1), Article 41559. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-25413-6
7. Binsaeed, R. H., Yousaf, Z., Grigorescu, A., Samoila, A., Chitescu, R. I. ve Nassani, A. A. (2023). Knowledge sharing key issue for digital technology and artificial intelligence adoption. Systems, 11(7), Article 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11070316
8. Braun, V. ve Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

9. Cohen, W. M. ve Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
10. Creswell, J. W. ve Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
11. Dang, Q. ve Li, G. (2026). Unveiling trust in AI: The interplay of antecedents, consequences, and cultural dynamics. AI & Society, 41(1), 669-692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02477-6
12. Enholm, I. M., Papagiannidis, E., Mikalef, P. ve Krogstie, J. (2022). Artificial intelligence and business value: A literature review. Information Systems Frontiers, 24(5), 1709-1734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10186-w
13. Ficzere, D., Hollósi, G., AlMahasneh, R. ve Varga, P. (2025). Challenges of AI adoption in Industry 5.0: Understanding transition barriers. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 59(27), 232-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2025.12.108
14. Gadekallu, T. R., Maddikunta, P. K. R., Boopathy, P., Deepa, N., Chengoden, R., Victor, N., Wang, W., Wang, W., Zhu, Y. ve Dev, K. (2025). XAI for Industry 5.0—Concepts, opportunities, challenges, and future directions. IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, 6, 2706-2729. https://doi.org/10.1109/OJCOMS.2024.3473891
15. Holmström, J. (2022). From AI to digital transformation: The AI readiness framework. Business Horizons, 65(3), 329-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.03.006
16. Kallio, H., Pietilä, A.-M., Johnson, M. ve Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031
17. Kovič, K., Tominc, P., Prester, J. ve Palčič, I. (2024). Artificial intelligence software adoption in manufacturing companies. Applied Sciences, 14(16), Article 6959. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14166959
18. Lincoln, Y. S. ve Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
19. Merriam, S. B. ve Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
20. Mikalef, P., Lemmer, K., Schaefer, C., Ylinen, M., Fjørtoft, S. O., Torvatn, H. Y., Gupta, M. ve Niehaves, B. (2022). Enabling AI capabilities in government agencies: A study of determinants for European municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4), Article 101596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101596
21. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
22. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE.
23. Shabur, M. A., Shahriar, A. ve Ara, M. A. (2025). From automation to collaboration: Exploring the impact of Industry 5.0 on sustainable manufacturing. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), Article 341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01201-0
24. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. ve Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z