Quality assessment of corporates’ sustainability web pages from accessibility, usability and security perspectives: Türkiye evidence

Öz

Corporate sustainability web pages reflect strategies to mitigate environmental impact, crucial for long-term business continuity. In this manner, ensuring accessibility, usability, and security in these pages is essential. This article evaluates the quality of sustainability web pages of corporates from accessibility, usability, and security perspectives. Our sample consists of 71 Turkish companies and the analysis was conducted on their sustainability web pages using TAW, GTmetrix, SUCURI, Google Mobile-Friendly, and Dead Link Checker automatic online testing tools. Thus, the results show indicate a necessity to enhance the overall quality of sustainability web pages among Turkish corporations. The findings of this research also address the major problems and serve as constructive feedback for web administrators and developers, guiding them towards enhancements in accessibility, usability, and security aspects of these web pages. Therefore, this research seeks to provide valuable insights into the performance of these web pages, thereby contributing to the advancement of corporate sustainability communication and transparency.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Human-computer interaction
• web accessibility
• web usability
• web evaluation tools
• corporate web pages

Şirketlerin sürdürülebilirlik web sayfalarının erişilebilirlik, kullanılabilirlik ve güvenlik perspektiflerinden kalite değerlendirmesi: Türkiye örneği

Öz

Kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik web sayfaları, uzun vadeli iş sürekliliği için çok önemli olan çevresel etkiyi azaltma stratejilerini yansıtmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, bu sayfalarda erişilebilirlik, kullanılabilirlik ve güvenlik gibi kriterlerin sağlanması oldukça önemlidir. Bu makale, kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik web sayfalarının kalitesini erişilebilirlik, kullanılabilirlik ve güvenlik perspektiflerinden değerlendirmektedir. Örneklemimiz 71 Türk şirketinden oluşmaktadır ve analiz, TAW, GTmetrix, SUCURI, Google Mobile-Friendly ve Dead Link Checker otomatik çevrimiçi test araçları kullanılarak sürdürülebilirlik web sayfaları üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sonuçlar, Türk şirketleri arasında sürdürülebilirlik web sayfalarının genel kalitesinin artırılması gerektiğini göstermektedir. Bu araştırmanın bulguları aynı zamanda temel sorunları ele almakta ve web yöneticileri ve geliştiricileri için yapıcı bir geri bildirim işlevi görerek onları bu web sayfalarının erişilebilirlik, kullanılabilirlik ve güvenlik yönlerinde iyileştirmeler yapmaya yönlendirmektedir. Dolayısıyla bu araştırma, söz konusu web sayfalarının performansına ilişkin değerli bilgiler sunmayı ve böylece kurumsal sürdürülebilirlik iletişimi ve şeffaflığının ilerlemesine katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnsan-bilgisayar etkileşimi
• web erişebilirliği
• web kullanılabilirliği
• web değerlendirme araçları
• kurumsal web sayfaları

Kaynakça

1. Adams, C.A. and Frost, G. (2004) The Development of Corporate Web-Sites and implications for Ethical, Social and Environmental Reporting through these Media.
2. Adepoju, S.A., Shehu, I.S. and Bake, P. (2016) Accessibility Evaluation and Performance Analysis of e-Government Websites in Nigeria, Journal of Advances in Information Technology, 7(1), 49–53. Available at: https://doi.org/10.12720/jait.7.1.49-53.
3. Agrawal, G., Kumar, D., Singh, M. and Dani, D. (2019) Evaluating accessibility and usability of airline websites, in Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer Verlag, 392–402. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9939-8_35.
4. Akgül, Y. (2018) Banking Websites in Turkey: an Accessibility, Usability and Security Evaluation, Journal of Business Research - Turk, 10(1), 782–796. Available at: https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2018.396.
5. Akgül, Y. (2021) Accessibility, usability, quality performance, and readability evaluation of university websites of Turkey: a comparative study of state and private universities, Universal Access in the Information Society, 20(1), 157–170. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00715-w.
6. AkgüL, Y. and Vatansever, K. (2016) Web Accessibility Evaluation of Government Websites for People with Disabilities in Turke’, Journal of Advanced Management Science, 201–210. Available at: https://doi.org/10.12720/joams.4.3.201-210.
7. Alhadreti, O. (2021) An Accessibility Evaluation of the Websites of Top-ranked Hospitals in Saudi Arabia, International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(1), 692–698. Available at: https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120180.
8. Alsaeedi, A. (2020) Comparing web accessibility evaluation tools and evaluating the accessibility of webpages: Proposed frameworks, Information (Switzerland), 11(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/info11010040.

9. Al-Sakran, H.O. and Alsudairi, M.A. (2021) Usability and Accessibility Assessment of Saudi Arabia Mobile E-Government Websites, IEEE Access, 9, 48254–48275. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3068917.
10. Alsmadi, I. and Abu-Shanab, E. (2016) E-government website security concerns and citizens’ adoption, Electronic Government, an International Journal, 12(3), 243–255.
11. Bansal, P. and Song, H.C. (2017) Similar but not the same: Differentiating corporate sustainability from corporate responsibility, Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 105–149. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0095.
12. Barricelli, B. R., Casiraghi, E., Dattolo, A. and Rizzi, A. (2021) 15 Years of Stanca Act: Are Italian Public universities websites accessible?, Universal Access in the Information Society, 20(1), 185–200. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00711-0.
13. Bilal, M., Yu, Z., Song, S. and Wang, C. (2019) Evaluate Accessibility and Usability Issues of Particular China and Pakistan Government Websites, in In 2019 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data (ICAIBD). IEEE, 316–322.
14. Conte, F., Coppola, C., Sardanelli, D., Vollero, A. and Siano, A. (2022) Accessibility and social inclusion: an empirical investigation on the adoption of World Wide Web Consortium guidelines on corporate websites, SINERGIE, 89(107).
15. Csontos, B. and Heckl, I. (2021) Accessibility, usability, and security evaluation of Hungarian government websites, Universal Access in the Information Society, 20(1), 139–156. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00716-9.
16. Dawkins, J. (2005) Corporate responsibility: The communication challenge, Journal of Communication Management, 108–119. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/13632540510621362.
17. Free Broking Link Checking Tool-Dead Link Checker (no date). Available at: https:// www.deadlinkchecker.com/. Accessed 15 Oct 2021 (Accessed: 22 February 2024).
18. Dukes, L., Yuan, X. and Akowuah, F. (2013) A Case Study on Web Application Security Testing with Tools and Manual Testing. In 2013 Proceedings of IEEE Southeastcon. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/secon.2013.6567420.
19. Elisa, N. (2020) Usability, Accessibility and Web Security Assessment of E-government Websites in Tanzania, arXiv preprint arXiv: 2006.1425 [Preprint].
20. Fatima, K., Bawany, N.Z. and Bukhari, M. (2020) Usability and accessibility evaluation of banking websites, in 2020 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems, ICACSIS 2020. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 247–256. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACSIS51025.2020.9263083.
21. Fogli, D. and Guida, G. (2015) A practical approach to the assessment of quality in use of corporate web sites, Journal of Systems and Software, 99, 52–65. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.09.006.
22. Gonçalves, R., Rocha, T., Martins, J., Branco, F., and Au-Yong-Oliveira, M. (2018) Evaluation of e-commerce websites accessibility and usability: an e-commerce platform analysis with the inclusion of blind users, Universal Access in the Information Society, 17(3), 567–583. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0557-5.
23. Google Mobile Friendly Testing (no date). Available at: https://search.google.com/test/mobile-friendly (Accessed: 22 February 2024).
24. Gopinath, S., Senthooran, V., Lojenaa, N., and Kartheeswaran, T. (2016) Usability and accessibility analysis of selected government websites in Sri Lanka, in Proceedings - 2016 IEEE Region 10 Symposium, TENSYMP 2016. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 394–398. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/TENCONSpring.2016.7519439.
25. GTmetrix (2009) Website Performance Testing and Monitoring. Available at: https://gtmetrix.com/ (Accessed: 22 February 2024).
26. Hamid, S., Bawany, N.Z. and Zahoor, K. (2020) Assessing ecommerce websites: Usability and accessibility study, in 2020 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems, ICACSIS 2020. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 199–204. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACSIS51025.2020.9263162.
27. Ismail, A. and Kuppusamy, K.S. (2022) Web accessibility investigation and identification of major issues of higher education websites with statistical measures: A case study of college websites, Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences, 34(3), 901–911. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2019.03.011.
28. Ismail, A., Kuppusamy, K.S. and Paiva, S. (2020) Accessibility analysis of higher education institution websites of Portugal, Universal Access in the Information Society, 19(3), 685–700. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-019-00653-2.
29. Ismailova, R. and Inal, Y. (2017) Web site accessibility and quality in use: a comparative study of government Web sites in Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkey, Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(4), 987–996. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0490-z.
30. Ismailova, R. and Kimsanova, G. (2017) Universities of the Kyrgyz Republic on the Web: accessibility and usability, Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(4), 1017–1025. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0481-0.
31. Jasem, Z., AlMeraj, Z. and Alhuwail, D. (2022) Evaluating breast cancer websites targeting Arabic speakers: empirical investigation of popularity, availability, accessibility, readability, and quality, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 22(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01868-9.
32. Kamal, I. W., Alsmadi, I. M., Wahsheh, H. A. and Al-Kabi, M. N. (2016) Evaluating Web Accessibility Metrics for Jordanian Universities, International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 7(7), 113–122.
33. Karaim, N.A. and Inal, Y. (2019) Usability and accessibility evaluation of Libyan government websites, Universal Access in the Information Society, 18(1), 207–216. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0575-3.
34. Kaur, A., Diksha Dani and Gaurav Agrawal (2017) Evaluating the accessibility, usability and security of Hospitals websites: An exploratory study, in. 2017 7th international conference on cloud computing, data science & engineering-confluence. IEEE, 674–680.
35. Kesswani, N. and Kumar, S. (2016) Accessibility analysis of websites of educational institutions, Perspectives in Science, 8, 210–212. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pisc.2016.04.031.
36. Kurt, S. (2017) Accessibility of Turkish university Web sites, Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(2), 505–515. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-016-0468-x.
37. Kuzma, J., Law, J., Bell, V. and Williams, N. (2017) A study of global hospital websites for accessibility compliance, European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 6(06), 15–28.
38. Leitner, M.L., Strauss, C. and Stummer, C. (2016) Web accessibility implementation in private sector organizations: motivations and business impact, Universal Access in the Information Society, 15(2), 249–260. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0380-1.
39. Macakoğlu, Ş.S. and Peker, S. (2023) Accessibility evaluation of university hospital websites in Turkey, Universal Access in the Information Society, 22(3), 1085–1093. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00886-8.
40. Macakoğlu, Ş.S., Peker, S. and Medeni, İ.T. (2023) Accessibility, usability, and security evaluation of universities’ prospective student web pages: a comparative study of Europe, North America, and Oceania, Universal Access in the Information Society, 22(2), 671–683. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00869-9.
41. Nielsen, A.E. and Thomsen, C. (2009) Investigating CSR communication in SMEs: a case study among Danish middle managers, Business ethics: A European review, 18(1), 83–93.
42. Nielsen, J. (2000) Designing Web Usability.
43. Nour, R. (2022) An Assessment of Accessibility and Usability of Saudi Online FinTech Services for People with Disabilities, Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine, 2022. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8610844.
44. Oyefolahan, I. O., Sule, A. A., Adepoju, S. A. and Babakano, F. J. (2019) Keeping with the Global Trends: An Evaluation of Accessibility and Usability of Nigerian Banks Websites, International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business, 11(2), 44–53. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5815/ijieeb.2019.02.06.
45. Pădure, M. and Independentei, S. (2019) Exploring the differences between five accessibility evaluation tools Costin Pribeanu Academy of Romanian Scientists. Available at: www.totalvalidator.com.
46. Paul, S. and Das, S. (2020) Accessibility and usability analysis of Indian e-government websites, Universal Access in the Information Society, 19(4), 949–957. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-019-00704-8.
47. Ratnasingam, P. (2002) The importance of technology trust in Web services security, Information Management and Computer Security, 10(5), 255–260. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/09685220210447514.
48. Rowbottom, N. and Lymer, A. (2009) Exploring the use of online corporate sustainability information, Accounting Forum, 33(2),176–186. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2009.01.003.
49. Singh, H. and Singh, A. (2020) Factors influencing web accessibility of corporate information: Indian evidence, International Journal of e-Business Research, 16(3), 1–19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEBR.2020070101.
50. Sucuri (2007) Complete Website Security, Protection & Monitoring’. Available at: https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/ (Accessed: 22 February 2024).
51. TAW (2009) Web Accessibility and W3C Standardization Service. Available at: https://www.tawdis.net/index (Accessed: 22 February 2024).
52. Venkatesh, V. and Agarwal, R. (2006) Turning visitors into customers: A usability-centric perspective on purchase behavior in electronic channels, Management Science, 52(3), 367–382. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0442.
53. Verkijika, S.F. and De Wet, L. (2020) Accessibility of South African university websites, Universal Access in the Information Society, 19(1), 201–210. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0632-6.
54. WCAG 2.0 (2008) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. Available at: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ (Accessed: 26 February 2024).
55. Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) | W3C (2005). Available at: https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/ (Accessed: 26 February 2024).
56. Jun, T. W., Xiang, L. Z., Ismail, N. A., Goy, W. and Yi, R. (2021) Usability evaluation of social media websites, International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science, 3(01), 216–221. Available at: https://web.wechat.com/.
57. Yerlikaya, Z. and Durdu, P.O. (2017) Evaluation of accessibility of university websites: A case from turkey, in Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer Verlag, 663–668. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58753-0_94.
58. Youngblood, N.E. and MacKiewicz, J. (2012) A usability analysis of municipal government website home pages in Alabama, Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 582–588. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.12.010.
59. Zarish, S.S., Habib, S. and Islam Muhammed (2019) Analyzing Usability of Educational Websites Using Automated Tools, In 2019 International Conference on Computer and Information Sciences (ICCIS), 1–4.