STEEP ANALİZİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİRLİK İLE MUHASEBE VE DENETİM UYGULAMALARINA İLİŞKİN ENTEGRASYON STRATEJİLERİNİN ARALIK DEĞERLİ Q-RUNG ORTHOPAIR BULANIK ORTAMDA ÖNCELİKLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Bu çalışma, sürdürülebilirlik ile muhasebe ve denetim uygulamalarının entegrasyon stratejilerini önceliklendirmek amacıyla IVq-ROF tabanlı CRITIC ve CRADIS yöntemlerini kullanmaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında en etkili kriter K1 Entegrasyon Kolaylığı, en öncelikli strateji ise P3 Sektörle İş birlikleri ve Uygulamalı Deneyim Sağlamak olarak belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, sürdürülebilir muhasebe ve denetim uygulamalarının endüstriyel gelişime etkisi değerlendirildiğinde, E2 Küresel Rekabet ve Yatırımcı Talepleri faktörü en kritik dış çevresel unsur olarak öne çıkmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, tüm paydaşlar açısından sürdürülebilirlik entegrasyonunun stratejik önemini vurgulamaktadır. Özellikle işletmelerin, düzenleyicilerin ve yatırımcıların sürdürülebilir finansal raporlama ve denetim süreçlerine duyduğu ihtiyaç göz önüne alındığında, belirlenen stratejik önceliklerin kurumsal başarı ve uyum açısından kritik olduğu görülmektedir. Önerilen modelin en büyük avantajlarından biri, çok kriterli karar verme (ÇKKV) yöntemlerini bulanık mantık tabanlı bir çerçevede kullanarak belirsizliği daha iyi yönetmesi ve daha hassas sonuçlar üretmesidir. Bu sayede karar vericilere daha sağlam ve uygulanabilir stratejik yönlendirmeler sunulmaktadır. Çalışmanın yenilikçi yönü, IVq-ROF ortamında CRITIC ve CRADIS yöntemlerinin birlikte uygulanması ve bu yaklaşımın sürdürülebilir muhasebe-denetim stratejilerinde etkin bir analiz aracı olarak kullanılmasıdır. Sonuçlar, sürdürülebilirlik odaklı muhasebe ve denetim stratejilerinin endüstrinin rekabet gücünü artırmada kritik rol oynadığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, önerilen modelin sağlamlık testi sonuçları, metodolojinin güvenilirliğini ve karar verme süreçlerindeki doğruluğunu desteklemektedir. Bu bağlamda, çalışma sürdürülebilir finansal yönetim alanında akademik ve sektörel uygulamalar için değerli içgörüler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sürdürülebilirlik
• Muhasebe ve Denetim
• Entegrasyon Stratejileri
• STEEP Analizi
• IVq-ROF
• CRITIC
• CRADIS
• Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (ÇKKV).

PRIORITIZATION OF INTEGRATION STRATEGIES FOR SUSTAINABILITY AND ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING PRACTICES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF STEEP ANALYSIS IN A INTERVAL-VALUED Q-RUNG ORTHOPAIR FUZZY ENVIRONMENT

Öz

This study uses IVq-ROF-based CRITIC and CRADIS methods to prioritize the integration strategies of sustainability and accounting and auditing practices. Within the scope of the research, the most effective criterion was K1 Ease of Integration, and the most priority strategy was P3 Collaboration with the Sector and Providing Applied Experience. In addition, when the impact of sustainable accounting and auditing practices on industrial development is evaluated, the E2 Global Competition and Investor Demands factor has come to the fore as the most critical external environmental factor. The findings highlight the strategic importance of sustainability integration for all stakeholders. Given the need for sustainable financial reporting and auditing processes, especially by businesses, regulators, and investors, the strategic priorities identified appear critical to corporate success and compliance. One of the significant advantages of the proposed model is that it uses multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods in a fuzzy logic-based framework, better manages uncertainty, and produces more precise results. In this way, more robust and feasible strategic guidance is offered to decision-makers. The innovative aspect of the study is the application of CRITIC and CRADIS methods together in the IVq-ROF environment, and this approach is used as an effective analysis tool in sustainable accounting auditing strategies. The results show that sustainability-oriented accounting and auditing strategies are critical in increasing the industry's competitiveness. In addition, the robustness test results of the proposed model support the reliability of the methodology and its accuracy in decision-making processes. In this context, the study provides valuable insights into academic and sectoral practices in sustainable financial management.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sustainability
• Accounting and Auditing
• Integration Strategies
• STEEP Analysis
• IVq-ROF
• CRITIC
• CRADIS
• Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM).

Kaynakça

1. Adams, C. A., & Frost, G. R. (2008). Integrating sustainability reporting into management practices. Accounting Forum, 32(4), 288-302.
2. Alrasheedi, M., Mardani, A., Mishra, A. R., Streimikiene, D., Liao, H., & Al-nefaie, A. H. (2021). Evaluatingthe green growth indicators to achieve sustainable development: A novel extended interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy-combined compromise solution approach. Sustainable Development, 29(1), 120- 142. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2136
3. Aydın, S. (2020). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ve Uygulamaları. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları.
4. Bebbington, J., & Larrinaga, C. (2014). Accounting and sustainable development: An exploration. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(6), 395-413.
5. Büyüközkan, G., & Güleryüz, S. (2016). A new integrated intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM approach: Sustainable supplier selection based on triple bottom line approach. Sustainability, 8(10), 947.
6. De Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., & Unerman, J. (2017). Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1042-1067.
7. Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., & Papayannakis, L. (1995). Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method. Computers and Operations Research, 22(7).
8. Eccles, R. G., & Krzus, M. P. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. Wiley.

9. Gao, J., & Xu, Z. (2019). Differential calculus of interval-valued q-rung orthopair fuzzy functions and their applications. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 34(12), 3190-3219. https://doi.org/10.1002/ int.22190
10. García-Sánchez, I. M., Hussain, N., Khan, S. A., & Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2019). Impact of disclosure and assurance quality on the credibility of corporate social responsibility information. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(6), 1391-1414.
11. Gray, R. (2010). Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability... and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(1), 47-62.
12. Görçün, Ö. F., & Küçükönder, H. (2021). An integrated MCDM approach for evaluating the Ro-Ro marine port selection process: a case study in black Sea region. Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs, 13(3).
13. Güngör, B., & Tuna, A. (2019). STEEP analysis in strategic management and a case study. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(4), 735-754.
14. Hahn, R., & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 5-21.
15. Hopwood, A. G., Unerman, J., & Fries, J. (Eds.). (2010). Accounting for sustainability: Practical insights. Earthscan.
16. Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2017). The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting. Harvard Business School Research Paper.
17. Jabbour, C. J. C., & de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L. (2016). Green human resource management and green supply chain management: Linking two emerging agendas. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1824-1833.
18. Jeevaraj, S. (2021). Ordering of interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy sets and its applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115613
19. Joshi, B. P., Singh, A., Bhatt, P. K., & Vaisla, K. S. (2018). Interval valued q – rung orthopair fuzzy sets and their properties. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 35(5). https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-169806
20. Khanchel, I., & Lassoued, N. (2022). ESG Disclosure and the Cost of Capital: Is There a Ratcheting Effect over Time? Sustainability, 14(15), 9237. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159237
21. KPMG. (2020). The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020. Retrieved from www.kpmg.com.
22. Kolk, A. (2008). Sustainability, accountability and corporate governance: Exploring multinationals’ reporting practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(1), 1-15.
23. Li, X., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2019). A hybrid CRITIC-CRADIS approach for MCDM with interactive criteria. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2019, 1-13.
24. Lozano, R. (2015). A holistic perspective on corporate sustainability drivers. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(1), 32-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1325
25. Mamak Ekinci, Y., & Can, G. (2018). Bulanık mantık tabanlı çok kriterli karar verme modelleri. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları.
26. Maroun, W. (2020). A conceptual model for understanding corporate social responsibility assurance practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(1), 187-209, 10.1007/s10551.018.3909-z
27. Mathew, M., Chakrabortty, R. K., Ryan, M. J., Ljaz, M. F., Abdul, S., Khan, R., Technology, I., Associates, C., Korea, S., & Author, C. (2021). The Multi-Attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison (MABAC) method for decision-making under Interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy environment for green supplier selection. Preprints.Org, December.
28. Puška, A., Nedeljkovic, M., Prodanovic, R., Vladisavljevic, R., & Suzic, R. (2022). Market Assessment of Pear Varieties in Serbia Using Fuzzy. CRADIS and CRITIC methods, 12(139), 1-15.
29. Sarkis, J., & Dhavale, D. G. (2015). Supplier selection for sustainable operations: A triple-bottom-line approach using a Bayesian framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 166, 177-191. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.11.007
30. Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A.; Chua, W. F. (2009), “Assurance on Sustainability Reports: An International Comparison. The Accounting Review, 84(31), 937-967.
31. Tariq, A., Badir, Y., & Chonglerttham, S. (2019). Green innovation and performance: moderation analyses from Thailand. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(3), 446–467. https://doi.org/10.1108/ EJIM-07-2018-0148
32. Xu, Y. (2023). A two-stage multi-criteria decision-making method with interval-valued q-Rung Orthopair fuzzy technology for selecting bike-sharing recycling supplier. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2023.105827
33. Yager, R. R. (2016). Generalized Orthopair fuzzy sets. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 25(5), 1222–1230. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2016.260.4005
34. Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2020). State-of-art production multiple criteria decision making methods. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 26(5), 1-25.