TEDARİK ZİNCİRİ VE ÜRÜN İNOVASYONU İLİŞKİSİ: İLK 1000 SANAYİ FİRMASI ÜZERİNDE BİR ÇALIŞMA

Year 2019, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 51 - 79, 16.05.2019

Şemsettin Çiğdem , Selim Erdoğan

Abstract

Bu çalışmada ürün inovasyonu, tedarik zinciri inovasyonu, tedarik
zinciri çevikliği, tedarik zinciri işbirliği, müşteri ilişkileri, bilgi
paylaşımı, bilgi kalitesi, rekabet yoğunluğu ve firma performansı
değişkenlerinin bazı demografik firma özelliklerine göre anlamlı farklılık
gösterip göstermediği araştırılmıştır. Bu amaçla Türkiye’nin ilk 1000 sanayi
firması anakütle olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu anakütleden alınan 398 örneklemden
anket ile veri toplanmıştır. Araştırmada öncelikle kullanılan değişkenlerin
yapı geçerliği ve güvenilirliği test edilmiştir. Ardından t testi ve ANOVA
testi ile araştırma hipotezleri test edilmiştir. Yapılan analizler neticesinde
ürün inovasyonu, tedarikçi inovasyonu, bilgi paylaşımı, firma performansı ve
rekabet yoğunluğunun geliştirilen yeni ürün sayısına göre anlamlı farklılık
gösterdiği bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Ürün inovasyonunun ve bilgi kalitesinin
çalışılan tedarikçi sayısına göre anlamlı farklılık gösterdiği tespit
edilmiştir. Tedarikçi inovasyonunun tedarikçi seçim kriterlerine göre anlamlı
farklılık gösterdiği bulgusu elde edilmiştir. Ürün inovasyonu ve firma
performansının firma çalışan sayısına göre anlamlı farklılık gösterdiği
bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Ürün inovasyonu, Tedarik zinciri, Tedarikçi inovasyonu

References

• Ageron, B., Lavastre, O. ve Spalanzani, A. (2013). Innovative supply chain practices: the state of French companies. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(3), 265-276.
• Andraski, J. C. (1998). Leadership and the realization of supply chain collaboration. Journal of Business Logistics; Hoboken, 19(2), 9-11.
• Ang, S. H. (2008). Competitive intensity and collaboration: impact on firm growth across technological environments. Strategic Management Journal, 29(10), 1057-1075.
• Avelar-Sosa, L., García-Alcaraz, J. L. ve Maldonado-Macías, A. A. (2019). Evaluation of Supply Chain Performance. Management and Industrial Engineering. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
• Bragg, S., Stone, R. ve van Geersdaele, J. (2011). Seven signs your supply chain needs a redesign – Strategy –. CSCMP’s Supply Chain Quarterly, 5(3). http://www.supplychainquarterly.com/topics/Strategy/201103redesign/ adresinden erişildi.
• Carr, A. (1999). Strategically managed buyer–supplier relationships and performance outcomes. Journal of Operations Management, 17(5), 497-519.
• Christopher, M. (2013). Logistics and Supply Chain Management ePub eBook. Pearson UK.
• Cui, A. S., Griffith, D. A. ve Cavusgil, S. T. (2005). The Influence of Competitive Intensity and Market Dynamism on Knowledge Management Capabilities of Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries. Journal of International Marketing, 13(3), 32-53.
• De Guimarães, J. C. F., Severo, E. A., Dorion, E. C. H., Coallier, F. ve Olea, P. M. (2016). The use of organisational resources for product innovation and organisational performance: a survey of the Brazilian furniture industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 180, 135–147.
• Duffy, R. ve Fearne, A. (2004). The Impact of Supply Chain Partnerships on Supplier Performance. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(1), 57-72.
• Fiala, P. (2005). Information sharing in supply chains. Omega, OR and its Applications, 33(5), 419-423.
• Fynes, B. ve Voss, C. (2002). The moderating effect of buyer‐supplier relationships on quality practices and performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(6), 589-613.
• Horvath, L. (2001). Collaboration: the key to value creation in supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 6(5), 205-207.
• Hugos, M. (2011). Essentials of supply chain management. Essentials series (3. ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
• Humphreys, P. K., Shiu, W. K. ve Chan, F. T. S. (2001). Collaborative buyer‐supplier relationships in Hong Kong manufacturing firms. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 6(4), 152-162.
• Hwang, D., Yang, M. G. M. ve Hong, P. (2015). Mediating effect of IT-enabled capabilities on competitive performance outcomes: An empirical investigation of ERP implementation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 36, 1–23.
• Ireland, R. ve Crum, C. (2005). Supply chain collaboration: how to implement CPFR and other best collaborative practices. Boca Raton, Fla: J. Ross Pub.
• Kafetzopoulos, D., Gotzamani, K. ve Gkana, V. (2015). Relationship between quality management, innovation and competitiveness. Evidence from Greek companies. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 26(8), 1177–1200.
• Kafetzopoulos, D., Gotzamani, K. ve Psomas, E. (2013). Quality systems and competitive performance of food companies. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 20(4), 463–483.
• Kannan, V. R. ve Choon Tan, K. (2006). Buyer‐supplier relationships: The impact of supplier selection and buyer‐supplier engagement on relationship and firm performance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 36(10), 755-775.
• Kaynak, H. (2003). The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance. Journal of operations management, 21(4), 405–435.
• Kim, M. ve Chai, S. (2017). The impact of supplier innovativeness, information sharing and strategic sourcing on improving supply chain agility: Global supply chain perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 187, 42-52.
• L. Sanders Jones, J. ve Linderman, K. (2014). Process management, innovation and efficiency performance: The moderating effect of competitive intensity. Business Process Management Journal, 20(2), 335-358.
• Lee, K.-H. ve Vachon, S. (2016). Business Value and Sustainability. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
• Li, S., Rao, S. S., Ragu-Nathan, T. S. ve Ragu-Nathan, B. (2005). Development and validation of a measurement instrument for studying supply chain management practices. Journal of Operations Management, 23(6), 618-641.
• Mamillo, D. (2015). Supply chain collaboration under uncertainty in the Albanian beer market. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 3(1), 99.
• Monczka, R. M. (Ed.). (2009). Purchasing and supply chain management (4th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western.
• Patyal, V. S. ve Koilakuntla, M. (2017). The impact of quality management practices on performance: an empirical study. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24(2), 511–535.
• Prajogo, D. I. ve Sohal, A. S. (2006). The integration of TQM and technology/R&D management in determining quality and innovation performance. Omega, 34(3), 296-312.
• Ross, D. F. (2003). Introduction to e-supply chain management: engaging technology to build market-winning business partnerships. Boca Raton, Fla: St. Lucie Press.
• Ross, D. F. (2016). Introduction to Supply Chain Management Technologies. CRC 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.
• Stank, T. P., Keller, S. B. ve Daugherty, P. J. (2001). Supply Chain Collaboration and Logistical Service Performance. Journal of Business Logistics, 22(1), 29-48.
• Yıldız, B. ve Ayteki̇n, M. (2018). Tedarikçi Kalite Yönetiminin Performans Üzerindeki Etkisinin Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli İle Analizi* Analysis of the Effect of Supplier Quality Management on Performance by Structural Equation Model. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 18(1), 413-439.
• Yıldız, B. ve Çetindaş, A. (2019). Stratejik Kaynak Kullanımının Firma Performansı Üzerindeki Etkisinde Tedarik Zinciri Çevikliğinin Aracı Rolü. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(4).