Kriz Bölgelerinde Sosyal Girişimcilik Projelerinin Çok Kriterli Karar Verme ile Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2022, Issue: 41, 457 - 470, 30.11.2022

Jamil Hallak , Pınar Özkurt , Sidar Ağduk

https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.1198943

Abstract

Bu makalenin amacı, sosyal girişimcilik projelerinin değerlendirilme sürecinde insani yardım aktörlerinin dikkate alınması gereken faktörlere yönelik tutumlarını ve uygulanması gereken metodolojiyi araştırmaktır. Bu doğrultuda, kriz bölgelerinde kullanılan mevcut yola yönelik tutumlar hakkında çevrimiçi bir anket yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar, aktörlerin çoğunluğunun toplam ağırlıklı modelin metodolojisini kullandığını ve daha deneyimli aktörlerin daha az deneyimli aktörlere kıyasla daha fazla kriter içerme eğiliminde olduğunu göstermektedir. Makale, değerlendirmeyi daha etkin bir şekilde yürütebilmeleri için insani yardım aktörleri arasında daha fazla farkındalık yaratılması gerektiği sonucuna varmaktadır. Bu alandaki çalışmaların etkinliğini arttırmak için daha özel bir politikanın oluşturulması ve eğitimin yerinde yürütülmesi tavsiye edilmektedir.

Keywords

Sosyal, Girişimcilik, Proje Değerlendirme, Kriz Bölgesi, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme

Social Entrepreneurial Projects Evaluation in Crisis Areas Through Multi-Criteria Decision Making

Abstract

The aim of this article is to examine humanitarian actors’ attitudes towards the factors that should be considered and the methodology that should be applied in the evaluation process of social entrepreneurial projects. In line with this, an online questionnaire was conducted on attitudes towards the current way utilized in the crisis areas. The results indicate that the majority of actors are using the methodology of the sum weighted model and the more-experienced actors are tending to include more criteria compared with the less-experienced actors. The article concludes that more awareness should be raised among the humanitarian actors to enable them to conduct the evaluation more effectively. In order to develop the effectiveness of the studies in this area, it is recommended that a more dedicated policy should be created and training should be conducted in place.

Keywords

Social, Entrepreneurial, Projects Evaluation, Crisis Areas, Multi Criteria Decision Making

References

• Akram, T. (2001). A Prolegomenon to the Economics of Net Entry and Net Exit Patterns of Bangladesh's Manufacturing Industries. Available at SSRN 262646. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.262646
• Amiri, M. P. (2010). Project Selection for Oil-Fields Development by using the AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(9), 6218-6224. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.103
• Arias, J. A. V., Restrepo, I. M., & Restrepo, A. M. (2015). Factores Explicativos de las Intenciones Emprendedoras en Estudiantes Universitarios. Espacios, 36(05).
• Aruldoss, M., Lakshmi, T. M., & Venkatesan, V. P. (2013). A Survey on Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods and Its Applications. American Journal of Information Systems, 1(1), 31-43. doi: 10.12691/ajis-1-1-5
• Aspelund, A., Berg-Utby, T., & Skjevdal, R. (2005). Initial Resources' Influence on New Venture Survival: A Longitudinal Study of New Technology-Based Firms. Technovation, 25(11), 1337-1347. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2004.06.004
• Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei–Skillern, J. (2006). Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship: Same, Different, or Both?. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00107.x
• Barba-Sánchez, V., & Atienza-Sahuquillo, C. (2017). Entrepreneurial motivation and Self-Employment: Evidence from Expectancy Theory. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(4), 1097-1115. doi: 10.1007/s11365-017-0441-z
• Bikse, V., & Riemere, I. (2013). The Development of Entrepreneurial Competences for Students of Mathematics and the Science Subjects: The Latvian Experience. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 82, 511-519. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.301
• Bresciani, S., & Eppler, M. J. (2013, July). Knowledge Visualization for Social Entrepreneurs. In 2013 17th International Conference on Information Visualisation (pp. 319-324). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/IV.2013.41
• Durmuşoğlu, Z. D. U. (2018). Assessment of Techno-Entrepreneurship Projects by using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Technology in Society, 54, 41-46. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.02.001
• Echeverri-Sánchez, L., Valencia-Arias, A., Benjumea-Arias, M., & Toro, A. B. D. (2018). Factores que Inciden en la Intención Emprendedora del Estudiantado Universitario: Un Análisis Cualitativo. Revista Electrónica Educare, 22(2), 160-178. doi: 10.15359/ree.22-2.10
• Fishburn, P. C. (1967). Additive Utilities with Incomplete Product Sets: Application to Priorities and Assignments. Operations Research, 15(3), 537-542. doi: 10.1287/opre.15.3.537
• Gandhi, T., & Raina, R. (2018). Social Entrepreneurship: The Need, Relevance, Facets and Constraints. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 8(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1186/s40497-018-0094-6
• Humanitarian Programme Cycle. (2022). Humanitarian Needs Overview Syrian Arab Republic. Available at: www.unocha.org/syria. (Accessed: 11 July 2022).
• International Labour Organization. (2017). Promoting Social Entrepreneurship and Social Capital. A Practice Guide to Supporting Social Entrepreneurship and Inclusiveness in Rural Communities. Available at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---africa/---ro-abidjan/---sro-cairo/documents/publication/wcms_589097.pdf. (Accessed: 11 July 2022).
• Kaçaroğlu, M. O., & Organ, A. (2020). Evaluation of Factors Affecting Sustainability of Social Entrepreneurship by AHP Method. Alanya Academic Review Journal, 4(1), 157-171. doi: 10.29023/alanyaakademik.634788
• Lee, H., Lee, J., & Shim, K. (2016). Entrepreneurial Characteristics: A Systematic Literature Review. In 20th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, PACIS 2016. Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems.
• Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 5(2), 29–39. doi: 10.48558/TSAV-FG11
• Moein, R. (2014). Investigation and Prioritization of Social Entrepreneurship Components based on Tourism Industry Development Approach using TOPSIS Technique. International Journal of Scientific Management and Development, 2(11), 602-612.
• Mukherjee, K., & Bera, A. (1995). Application of Goal Programming in Project Selection Decision—A Case Study from the Indian Coal Mining Industry. European Journal of Operational Research, 82(1), 18-25. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(94)00197-K
• Nasip, S., Amirul, S. R., Sondoh Jr, S. L., & Tanakinjal, G. H. (2017). Psychological Characteristics and Entrepreneurial Intention: A Study among University Students in North Borneo, Malaysia. Education + Training, 59(78), 825-840. doi: 10.1108/ET-10-2015-0092
• Qin, X. S., Huang, G. H., Chakma, A., Nie, X. H., & Lin, Q. G. (2008). A MCDM-Based Expert System for Climate-Change Impact Assessment and Adaptation Planning–A Case Study for the Georgia Basin, Canada. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(3), 2164-2179. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2007.02.024
• Salazar-Carvajal, P. F., Herrera-Sánchez, I. M., Rueda-Méndez, S., & León-Rubio, J. M. (2014). El Efecto de la Conservación de Recursos Sobre la Intención Emprendedora en el Contexto de Crisis Económica: el rol Moderador de la Autoeficacia y la Creatividad. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 30(2), 549-559. doi: 10.6018/analesps.30.2.159281
• Santalova, M. S., Lesnikova, E. P., & Chudakova, E. A. (2015). Expert Models for the Evaluation of Innovative Entrepreneurial Projects. Asian Social Science, 11(20), 119-126. doi: 10.5539/ass.v11n20p119
• Solana González, P., Vanti, A. A., & Rudolfo Kreutz, R. (2022). Decision-Making Process by Multi-Criteria Hierarchical Analysis for the Appraisal of Entrepreneurial Projects. REMIPE - Revista de Micro e Pequenas Empresas e Empreendedorismo da Fatec-Osasco, 8(1), 3-23. doi: 10.21574/remipe.v8i1.374
• Thompson, J. L. (2002). The World of the Social Entrepreneur. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 15(5), 412-431. doi: 10.1108/09513550210435746
• Triantaphyllou, E. (2000). Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. In: Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Applied Optimization, vol 44. Springer, Boston, MA. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-3157-6_2
• Valencia, J., Macias, J., & Valencia, A. (2015). Formative Research in Higher Education: Some Reflections. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 940-945. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.562
• Velasquez, M., & Hester, P. T. (2013). An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. International Journal of Operations Research, 10(2), 56-66.
• Zahra, S. A. (2021). International Entrepreneurship in the Post Covid World. Journal of World Business, 56(1), 101143. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101143
• Zahra, S. A., & Wright, M. (2016). Understanding the Social Role of Entrepreneurship. Journal of Management Studies, 53(4), 610-629. doi: 10.1111/joms.12149