An Overview Of The Planned Obsolescence Paradigm: Evaluation Via Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods For The Sectors In Turkey

Öz

The purpose of the study is to determine the degree of influence and the order of priority of these criteria according to Planned obsolescence (PO) (marketing strategy). It is also to analyze the relationships between the determined variables and all possible sectors. The other purpose is to determine the order of prioritization of PO paradigm among sectors and to present the evaluation which is related to PO and to develop a model. Survey questions were prepared for the identified criteria of PO and experts of the sectors were asked and 150 experts from each sector were answered. A model was formed in order to make the sector prioritize by MCDM methods and to determine the sector which is most convenient for the PO. In MCDM, in order to save time, Expert Choice and Super Decisions were used which perform calculations and define the most convenient sector for PO based on AHP and ANP respectively.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Analytic Hierarchy Process
• Analytic Network Process
• Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods
• Planned Obsolescence

Planlı Eskitme Yaklaşımına Genel Bir Bakış: Türkiye’deki Sektörlere Yönelik Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleriyle Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Çalışma kapsamında planlı eskitme (PE) paradigmasına genel bir bakış sunulmaktadır. Çalışmanın temel amacı, üretim/hizmet sektörlerinde planlı eskitme yaklaşımına neden olan tüm kriterleri belirlemektir. Bu kriterlerin planlı eskitme pazarlama taktiğine bağlı etki derecelerini tespit etmek ve değişkenlerin öncelik sırasını ortaya koymaktır. Bu ilişki seviyelerine göre planlı eskitmeye sebep olan tüm kriterler tespit etmek, bu paradigmanın pazarlama taktiğin uygulanmasının sektörler arasındaki öncelik sırasını belirlemek ve bu pazarlama stratejine bağlı durumu ortaya koymaktır, bir model geliştirmektir. Tespit edilen değişenlere yönelik anket soruları hazırlanıp, sektördeki uzmanlara sorulmuştur. Her sektördeki 150 uzmandan yanıt alınmıştır. Çalışmanın amacına yönelik anket sonuçların analiz ve değerlendirmelerine bağlı ÇKKV yöntemleri kapsamında sektör öncelik sıralamasını yapmak ve PE paradigmasına en uygun sektörü belirlemek için model oluşturulmuş ve bir seçim problemi için AHS ve AAS yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Analiz değerlendirmeleri için ÇKKV yöntemlerinde zamandan tasarruf sağlamak amacıyla sırasıyla AHS ve AAS'ye göre hesaplamaları yapan ve en uygun sektörü seçen Expert Choice ve Super Decisions yazılım programları kullanılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci
• Analitik Ağ Süreci
• Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri
• Planlı Eskitme

Kaynakça

1. Akman, G., & Alkan, A. (2006). Tedarik zinciri yönetiminde bulanık AHP yöntemi kullanarak tedarikçilerin performansının ölçülmesi: Otomotiv yan sanayisinde bir uygulama. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 9.
2. Alias, M. A., Hashim, S. Z. M., & Samsudin, S. (2009). Using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for southern johor river ranking. International Journal of Advances in Soft Computing and its Applications, 1(1), 1-15. doi:http://home.ijasca.com/data/documents/IJASCA15.pdf
3. Allison, H. (1961). Framework for marketing strategy. California Management Review, 4(1), 79.
4. Al-Harbi, K. (2001). Application of AHP in project management. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 19-27.
5. Alonso, J., & Lamata, T. (2006). Consistency in the analytic hierarchy process: A new approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(4), 445–459.
6. Baran, P. A., & Sweezy P. M. (1966). Monopoly Capital: an essay on the American economic and social order. New York: Monthly Review Press.
7. Başlıgil, H. (1997-1998). Yayınlanmamış YBS ders notları. İstanbul: Makine Fakültesi, Y.T.Ü.
8. Beder, S. (2000). Selling the work ethic, from puritan pulpit to corporate PR. London: Zed Books.

9. Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
10. Brugha, C. (2004). Structure of multi-criteria decision-making. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(1), 1156–1168.
11. Bulow, J. (1986). An economic theory of planned obsolescence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101(4), 729–749.
12. Cuculoski, V. (2013). Obsolescence management of electronic and control systems. 3rd Australian Control Conference, AUCC 2013, 342-347.
13. Dagdeviren, M., & Yuksel, I., Kurt, M. (2008). A fuzzy analytic network process (ANP) model to identify faulty behavior risk (FBR) in work system. Safety Science, 46, 771-783.
14. Dannoritzer, C. (2010). Lightbulb conspiracy documentary. Norway. URL: http://freedomlightbulb.blogspot.com.tr/2012/05/lightbulb-conspiracy-documentary-by.html, 10.05.2014.
15. Daşdemir, İ., & Güngör, E. (2002). Çok boyutlu karar verme metotları ve ormancılıkta uygulama alanları. Bartın Orman Fakültesi V-Dergisi, 4, 2002.
16. Demaria, F., Schneider, F., Sekulova, F., & Martinez-Alier, J. (2013). What is degrowth? From an activist slogan to a social movement. Environmental Values, 22(2), 191-215.
17. Felek, S., Yulugkural, Y., & Aladag, Z. (2002). Mobil iletisim sektöründe pazar paylaşımının tahmininde AHP ve ANP yöntemlerinin kıyaslanması. Endüstri Mühendisliği Dergisi, 18, 6-22.
18. Gencer, C., & Gürpınar, D. (2007). Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31, 2475-2486.
19. Glenn, A. G. (2003). Preface by David Gordon, industrial strength design, how brooks Stevens Shaped your world. pp.300 URL: http://www.idsa.org/content/brooks-stevens-fidsa.
20. Gramatyka, P., Nowosielski R., & Sakiewicz P. (2007). Recycling of waste electrical and electronicequipment. Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, 20(1-2), 535-538.
21. Guiltinan, J. (2008). Creative destruction and destructive creations: Environmental ethics and planned obsolescence. Journal of Business Ethics, 19-28.
22. Holder, R. (1991). Response to holder’s comments on the analytic hierarchy process: Response to the response. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 42(10), 914–918. (Erişim:10.06.2015), http://athena.ecs.csus.edu/~grandajj/ME296J/SE_HW_3_AHP/HW3assignment/Response_to_Some_Comments_on_AHP_TLSaaty.pdf
23. Ishizaka, A., & Lusti, M. (2006). How to derive priorities in AHP: A comparative study. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 14(4), 387–400.
24. Ishizaka A., & Labib A. (2009). Analytic hierarchy process and expert choice: Benefits and limitations. ORInsight, 22(4), 201–220. doi:http://eprints.port.ac.uk/1770/1/ORI-preprint-AIshizaka.pdf
25. Joy, A., Sherry, J. F., Venkatesh, A., Wang, J., & Chan, R. (2012). Fast fashion, sustainability, and the ethical appeal of luxury brands. Fashion Theory, 16(3), 273-296.
26. Krajewski, M. (2014). The Great lighbulb conspiracy. IEEE spectrum, 51(10), 56–61. URL: http://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/history/the-great-lightbulb-conspiracy.
27. Kuppelwieser, V. G., Klaus, P., Manthiou, A., & Boujena, O. (2019). Consumer responses to planned obsolescence. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 47, 157–165.
28. Latouche, S. (2015). Usa e getta: Le follie dell'obsolescenza programmata [Use ant throw. The Madness of Planned Obsolescence].Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
29. Leonard, A. (2010). The story off stuff. Free Press A Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc. chapter 4-5, 126-188.
30. Levinthal, D. A., & Purohit, D. (1989). Durable goods and product obsolescence. Marketing Science, 8, 35-56.
31. London, B. (1932). Ending the depression through planned obsolescence. Wisconsin University, (Erişim:10.04.2014), http://www.murksneindanke.de/blog/download/London_(1932)_Ending_the_depression_through_ planned_obsolescence.pdf
32. Mahajan, M. (2015). Consumerism: A globalization concept. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 2(9), 245-248.
33. Meyer, A., Pretorius, L., & Pretorius, J. H. C. (2004). A model using an obsolescence mitigation timeline for managing component obsolescence of complex or long life systems. Document IEEE International Engineering Management Conference 3, 1310-131.
34. Nelson, R. (1959). The economics of invention: A survey of the literature, The Journal of Business, 32(2), 101-127.
35. Omkarprasad, V. and Sushil, K. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 169(1), 1–29. doi:http://www.fcmfmpep.org.br/disciplinas/turma1/MB-721/Aula03/AHP%20an%20overview%20of%20applications.pdf, 10.06.2015.
36. Orbach, B. Y. (2004). The Durapolist Puzzle: Monopoly power in durable-goods market. Yale Journal on Regulation, 21, 67-118.
37. Packard, V. (1960). The Waste Makers- Progress through Planned Obsolescence. URL: http://soilandhealth.org/wpcontent/uploads/0303critic/030320wastemakers/wastemakers.pdf
38. Planned obsolescence. The Economists. URL: https://archive.org/details/PlannedObsolescenceDocumentary. 10.05.2015
39. Planned obsolescence. The Economists. URL: http://www.economist.com/node/13354332-Planned obsolescence, Mar 23rd 2009, Online extra, 10.05.2015.
40. Rauscher, R. C., & Momtaz, S. (2014). Sustainable communities: A framework for planning: Case study of an Australian outer sydney growth area. Netherlands: Springer.
41. Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 9-26.
42. Saaty, T. (2003). Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary?. European Journal of Operational Research, 145(1), 85–91. URL: https://www.stat.uchicago.edu/~lekheng/meetings/mathofranking/ref/saaty1.pdf, 10.06.2015.
43. Saaty, T. (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234–281.
44. Sakiewicz, P., Nowosielski, R., Pilarczyk, W., & Cezarz, K. (2012). Selected engineering problems, institute of engineering processes automation and integrated manufacturing systems. 185-188.
45. Satyro, W. C., Sacomano, J. B., Contador, J. C., & Telles, R. (2018). Planned obsolescence or planned resource depletion?. A sustainable approach, Journal of Cleaner Production, 195, 744-752. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.222.
46. Stam, A., & Duarte, S. P. (2003) On multiplicative priority rating methods for AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 145(1), 92–108.
47. Stevens, B. (1960). Planned Obsolescence. The Rotarian, 96(2), 12. URL: http://storyofstuff.org/wpcontent/uploads/movies/scripts/Story%20of%20Stuff.pdf,20.04.2014. Vargas, L. (1990). An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 2–8.
48. Waldman, M. (1993). A new perspective on planned obsolescence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(1), 273-284.
49. Waldman, M. (1997). Eliminating the market for secondhand goods: An alternative explanation for leasing. Journal of Law and Economics, 40, 61–92.
50. Wang, Y-M., Chin, K-S., Poon, G. K. K., & Yang, J-B. (2009). Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 1195-1207.
51. Webber, S., Apostolou, B., & Hassell, J. M. (1996). The sensitivity of the analytic hierarchy process to alternative scale and cue presentations. European Journal of Operational Research, 96(2), 351–362.