Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2020, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 21, 21 - 47, 30.06.2020
https://doi.org/10.36543/kauiibfd.2020.002

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135-144.
  • Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., & Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics 64(3), 351-374.
  • Börner, K., Dall'Asta, L., Ke, W., & Vespignani, A. (2005). Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co‐authorship teams. Complexity, 10(4), 57-67.
  • Cherven, K. (2015). Mastering Gephi network visualization: produce advanced network graphs in Gephi and gain valuable insights into your network datasets. Birmingham: Packt publishing.
  • Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges; diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • De Solla Price, D.J., & Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American psychologist, 21(11), 1011.
  • Degenne, A., ve Forsé, M. (1999). Introducing social networks. Sage.
  • Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of informetrics, 5(1), 187-203.
  • Everett, M. G., ve Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Extending centrality. Models and methods in social network analysis, 35(1), 57-76.
  • Fenner, T., Levene, M., Loizou, G., & Roussos, G. (2007). A stochastic evolutionary growth model for social networks. Computer Networks, 51(16), 4586-4595.
  • Garfield, E., & Merton, R. K. (1979). Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities (Vol. 8). New York: Wiley.
  • Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257-276). Springer, Dordrecht.
  • Gürsakal, N. (2009). Sosyal ağ analizi. Dora Yayıncılık, Bursa.
  • Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., ve Smith, M. A. (2010). Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. Morgan Kaufmann.
  • Lee, K.-H. ve Vachon, S. (2016). Business Value and Sustainability. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-43576-7.
  • Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information processing & management, 41(6), 1462-1480.
  • McFadyen, M. A., ve Cannella, A. A. 2004. Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 735-746.
  • Newman, M. E. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 98(2), 404-409.
  • Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5200-5205.
  • Rodriguez, M. A., & Pepe, A. (2008). On the relationship between the structural and socioacademic communities of a coauthorship network. Journal of Informetrics, 2(3), 195-201.
  • Ross, D. F. (2003). Introduction to e-supply chain management: engaging technology to build market-winning business partnerships. Boca Raton, Fla: St. Lucie Press.
  • Soni, G. ve Kodali, R. (2012). A critical review of empirical research methodology in supply chain management. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(6), 753-779. doi:10.1108/17410381211253326
  • Tsvetovat, M., ve Kouznetsov, A. (2011). Social Network Analysis for Startups: Finding connections on the social web. " O'Reilly Media, Inc.".
  • Van Raan, A. F. (2005). Measuring science. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 19-50). Springer
  • Wagner, C. S. (2008). The new invisible college: Science for development. Brookings Institution Press.
  • Wellman, B. (1983). Network analysis: Some basic principles. Sociological theory, 155-200.
  • Yin, L. C., Kretschmer, H., Hanneman, R. A., & Liu, Z. Y. (2006). Connection and stratification in research collaboration: An analysis of the COLLNET network. Information Processing & Management, 42(6), 1599-1613.

TEDARİK ZİNCİRİ ALANYAZINI ROTASI: LİSANSÜSTÜ ÇALIŞMALARIN EVRİMİ

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 21, 21 - 47, 30.06.2020
https://doi.org/10.36543/kauiibfd.2020.002

Öz

Bu çalışmada,
Türkiye’de yazılmış ve başlığında “tedarik zinciri” ifadesi geçen 461 adet
tezin genel durumu sosyal ağ analizi ile analiz edilmiştir. Tezlerin 354'ü
yüksek lisans ve 107'si doktora tezidir. Analiz neticesinde en çok kullanılan
anahtar kelimenin “performans değerlendirme” olduğu görülmüştür. “Lojistik
sektörü”, “risk yönetimi” ve “yeşil tedarik zinciri yönetimi” anahtar
kelimelerinin izlediği gözlemlenmiştir. İlgili alanda en çok teze sahip olan
üniversitenin İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır.
Çalışmada ayrıca çalışılan konuların seyrini görebilmek için dönemsel olarak
analizler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Dönemler 1999-2003, 2004-2008, 2009-2013 ve
2014-2018 olarak belirlenmiştir. 1999-2003 dönemi incelendiğinde bilişim
teknolojilerinin çalışmalarda ön planda olduğu tespit edilmiştir. 2004-2008
dönemi incelendiğinde çalışmaların ağırlıklı olarak lojistik sektörü üzerine
olduğu bulgusu elde edilmiştir. 2009-2013 dönemi incelendiğinde tedarik zinciri
ağı ve işletme performansı kavramları ön plana çıkmaktadır. 2014-2018 dönemi
incelendiğinde performans değerlendirme, yeşil tedarik zinciri yönetimi ve risk
yönetimi kavramlarının ön planda olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Genel olarak
üniversitelerin günceli takip etmekte oldukları tespit edilmiştir.

Kaynakça

  • Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135-144.
  • Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., & Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics 64(3), 351-374.
  • Börner, K., Dall'Asta, L., Ke, W., & Vespignani, A. (2005). Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co‐authorship teams. Complexity, 10(4), 57-67.
  • Cherven, K. (2015). Mastering Gephi network visualization: produce advanced network graphs in Gephi and gain valuable insights into your network datasets. Birmingham: Packt publishing.
  • Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges; diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • De Solla Price, D.J., & Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American psychologist, 21(11), 1011.
  • Degenne, A., ve Forsé, M. (1999). Introducing social networks. Sage.
  • Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of informetrics, 5(1), 187-203.
  • Everett, M. G., ve Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Extending centrality. Models and methods in social network analysis, 35(1), 57-76.
  • Fenner, T., Levene, M., Loizou, G., & Roussos, G. (2007). A stochastic evolutionary growth model for social networks. Computer Networks, 51(16), 4586-4595.
  • Garfield, E., & Merton, R. K. (1979). Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities (Vol. 8). New York: Wiley.
  • Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257-276). Springer, Dordrecht.
  • Gürsakal, N. (2009). Sosyal ağ analizi. Dora Yayıncılık, Bursa.
  • Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., ve Smith, M. A. (2010). Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. Morgan Kaufmann.
  • Lee, K.-H. ve Vachon, S. (2016). Business Value and Sustainability. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-43576-7.
  • Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information processing & management, 41(6), 1462-1480.
  • McFadyen, M. A., ve Cannella, A. A. 2004. Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 735-746.
  • Newman, M. E. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 98(2), 404-409.
  • Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5200-5205.
  • Rodriguez, M. A., & Pepe, A. (2008). On the relationship between the structural and socioacademic communities of a coauthorship network. Journal of Informetrics, 2(3), 195-201.
  • Ross, D. F. (2003). Introduction to e-supply chain management: engaging technology to build market-winning business partnerships. Boca Raton, Fla: St. Lucie Press.
  • Soni, G. ve Kodali, R. (2012). A critical review of empirical research methodology in supply chain management. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(6), 753-779. doi:10.1108/17410381211253326
  • Tsvetovat, M., ve Kouznetsov, A. (2011). Social Network Analysis for Startups: Finding connections on the social web. " O'Reilly Media, Inc.".
  • Van Raan, A. F. (2005). Measuring science. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 19-50). Springer
  • Wagner, C. S. (2008). The new invisible college: Science for development. Brookings Institution Press.
  • Wellman, B. (1983). Network analysis: Some basic principles. Sociological theory, 155-200.
  • Yin, L. C., Kretschmer, H., Hanneman, R. A., & Liu, Z. Y. (2006). Connection and stratification in research collaboration: An analysis of the COLLNET network. Information Processing & Management, 42(6), 1599-1613.
Toplam 27 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Bülent Yıldız 0000-0002-5368-2805

Şemsettin Çiğdem 0000-0001-9102-8153

Mehmet Seyhan Bu kişi benim 0000-0002-7943-4543

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2020
Kabul Tarihi 18 Şubat 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2020 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 21

Kaynak Göster

APA Yıldız, B., Çiğdem, Ş., & Seyhan, M. (2020). TEDARİK ZİNCİRİ ALANYAZINI ROTASI: LİSANSÜSTÜ ÇALIŞMALARIN EVRİMİ. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(21), 21-47. https://doi.org/10.36543/kauiibfd.2020.002

KAÜİİBFD, Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergi Yayıncılığı'nın kurumsal dergisidir.

KAÜİİBFD 2022 yılından itibaren Web of Science'a dahil edilerek, Clarivate ürünü olan Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) uluslararası alan endeksinde taranmaya başlamıştır. 

2025 Haziran sayısı makale kabul ve değerlendirmeleri devam etmektedir.