Porter’ın Beş Güç Modeli’ne Göre Jenerik Rekabet Stratejisi Seçimi: AHP, WASPAS ve EDAS Yöntemleri ile Bir Uygulama

Year 2024, Volume: 16 Issue: 1, 74 - 92, 31.01.2024

Şeyma Nur Aydın , Aşır Özbek

https://doi.org/10.29137/umagd.1299126

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Günümüzün karmaşık ve dinamik piyasa koşullarında, firmaların rekabet avantajını elde etmesi için faaliyet gösterdikleri endüstriyi tanımaları ve stratejilerini buna göre belirlemeleri gerekir. Michael Porter’ın Beş Güç Modeli, herhangi bir endüstrinin yapısını anlamak ve rekabet kaynaklarını tespit etmek için bugün pek çok firmanın tercih ettiği bir analizdir. Ancak başarıya ulaşmak ve bunun sürdürülebilirliğini sağlamak için sadece rekabet ortamını analiz etmek yeterli değildir. Aynı zamanda endüstride yer alan güçler karşısında doğru stratejiye karar verilmesi de gereklidir. Bu çalışmada, iş ve inşaat makineleri sektöründe faaliyet gösteren bir firma için, çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ile en uygun jenerik stratejisi belirlenmiştir. Rekabet ortamının tanımlanması için Porter’ın Beş Güç Modeli’nden yararlanılmış ve kriterlerin sınıflandırılması bu modele göre yapılmıştır. Kriterlerin ağırlıklandırılması için AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) yöntemi, stratejilerin değerlendirilmesi için ise WASPAS (Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment) ve EDAS (Evaluation based on Distance from Average Solution) yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Her iki yöntemin de sonuçlarına göre, firma için en uygun stratejinin odaklanma stratejisi olduğu görülmüştür.

Keywords

Beş Güç Modeli, Jenerik Rekabet Stratejisi, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme, Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi, WASPAS, EDAS

Selection of Generic Competitive Strategy According to Porter's Five Forces Model: An Application with AHP, WASPAS and EDAS Methods

Abstract

In today's complex and dynamic market conditions, companies need to know the industry they operate in and determine their strategies accordingly in order to gain competitive advantage. Michael Porter's Five Forces Model is an analysis preferred by many companies today to understand the structure of any industry and identify sources of competition. However, to achieve success and ensure its sustainability, simply analyzing the competitive environment is not enough. It is also necessary to decide on the right strategy against the forces in the industry. In this study, the most appropriate generic strategy was determined using multi-criteria decision-making methods for a company operating in the construction equipment industry. Porter's Five Forces Model was used to define the competitive environment and the criteria were classified according to this model. AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method was used to weight the criteria, and WASPAS (Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment) and EDAS (Evaluation based on Distance from Average Solution) methods were used to evaluate the strategies. According to the results of both methods, it was seen that the most appropriate strategy for the company was the focus strategy.

Keywords

Five Forces Model, Generic Competitive Strategy, Multi-Criteria Decision Making, Analytical Hierarchy Process, WASPAS, EDAS

References

• Aggarwal, A., Choudhary, C., & Mehrotra, D. (2018). Evaluation of smartphones in Indian market using EDAS. Procedia Computer Science, 132, 236-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.05.193
• Akan, O., Allen, R. S., Helms, M. M., & Spralls III, S. A. (2006). Critical tactics for implementing Porter's generic strategies. Journal of Business Strategy, 27(1), 43-53.
• Aslan, H. M. (2017). AHP-ARAS Hibrit yöntemi ile lojistik işletmelerinin en uygun araç seçimi. The Journal of Operations Research, Statistics, Econometrics and Management Information Systems , 5(2), 271-282. doi:10.17093/alphanumeric.339476
• Bascetin, A. (2007). A decision support system using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for the optimal environmental reclamation of an open-pit mine. Environmental Geology, 52, 663-672. doi 10.1007/s00254-006-0495-7
• Bayram, E. (2021). Türkiye’deki katılım bankalarının CRITIC temelli EDAS yöntemiyle performans değerlendirmesi. Finansal Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 13(24), 55-72. doi: 10.14784/marufacd.87917
• Can, G. F., & Kargı, Ş. (2019). Sektörlerin iş sağlığı ve güvenliği yönünden risk seviyelerinin CRITIC-EDAS entegrasyonu ile değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 30(1), 15-31.
• Chakraborty, S., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2014). Applications of WASPAS method in manufacturing decision making. Informatica, 25(1), 1-20.
• Chakraborty, S., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antucheviciene, J. (2015a). Applications of WASPAS method as a multi-criteria decision-making tool. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 49(1), 5-22.
• Chakraborty, S., Bhattacharyya, O., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antucheviciene, J. (2015b). Application of WASPAS method as an optimization tool in non-traditional machining processes. Information Technology and Control, 44(1), 77-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.itc.44.1.7124
• Chandio, I. A., Matori, A. N. B., WanYusof, K. B., Talpur, M. A. H., Balogun, A. L., & Lawal, D. U. (2013). GIS-based analytic hierarchy process as a multicriteria decision analysis instrument: a review. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 6, 3059-3066. doi: 10.1007/s12517-012-0568-8
• Chatterjee, P., Banerjee, A., Mondal, S., Boral, S., & Chakraborty, S. (2018). Development of a hybrid meta-model for material selection using design of experiments and EDAS method. Engineering Transactions, 66(2), 187-207.
• Dağdeviren, M., & Eren, T. (2001). Tedarikçi firma seçiminde analitik hiyerarşi prosesi ve 0-1 hedef programlama yöntemlerinin kullanılması. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 41-52.
• Datta, Y. (2010). A critique of Porter's cost leadership and differentiation strategies. Chinese Business Review, 9(4), 37. doi:10.17265/1537-1506/2010.04.004
• Fan, J. P., Li, Y. J., & Wu, M. Q. (2019). Technology selection based on EDAS cross-efficiency evaluation method. IEEE Access, 7, 58974-58980.
• Franek, J., & Kresta, A. (2013). Competitive strategy decision making based on the five forces analysis with ahp/anp approach. in: A. Kocourek (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference “Liberec Economic Forum” (pp. 135-145), Liberec: Technical University of Liberec.
• Handayani, N., Heriyani, N., Septian, F., & Alexander, A. D. (2023). Multı-crıterıa decısıon makıng usıng the waspas method for onlıne englısh course selectıon. Jurnal Teknoinfo, 17(1), 260-270.
• Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Ebadi Torkayesh, A., Ecer, F., Turskis, Z., & Šaparauskas, J. (2021). International market selection: a MABA based EDAS analysis framework. Oeconomia Copernicana, 12(1), 99-124. doi: 10.24136/oc.2020.005
• Hendro, T., Megawati, S., & Noor, Y. L. (2020). Competıtıve strategy for housıng sector usıng swot and analytıcal hıerarchy process: A case study of royale sawangan resıdence. RJOAS, 8(104). doi 10.18551/rjoas.2020-08.21
• Hodgkinson, I. R. (2013). Are generic strategies ‘fit for purpose’in a public service context?. Public Policy and Administration, 28(1), 90-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0952076712440301
• Hosseinzadeh, M., Vesal, S. M., Shamsaddini, R., & Kamel, A. (2013). Prioritizing competitive strategies in Iranian SME's based on AHP approach in severe economic sanctions. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(16), 48. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v8n16p48
• Irk, E.., & Döven, M. S. (2018). Firmaların uyguladıkları rekabet stratejileri ve bu karara etki eden faktörler. İşletme Bilimi Dergisi, 6(1), 135-162. doi: 10.22139/jobs.361855
• Josiah, N. M., & Nygara, N. I. (2015). Assessment of the effect of cost leadership strategy on the performance of liquefied petroleum gas companies in Eldoret town, Uasin Gishu County, Kenya. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 4(4), 1-7.
• Karabasevic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G., & Brzakovic, M. (2018). An approach to personnel selection in the IT industry based on the EDAS method. Transformations in Business & Economics, 17, 54-65.
• Karaca, C., & Ulutaş, A. (2018). Entropi ve Waspas yöntemleri kullanılarak Türkiye için uygun yenilenebilir enerji kaynağının seçimi. Ege Academic Review, 18(3), 483-494. doi: 10.21121/eab.2018341150
• Karagiannopoulos, G. D., Georgopoulos, N., & Nikolopoulos, K. (2005). Fathoming Porter's five forces model in the internet era. info, 7(6), 66-76. doi 10.1108/14636690510628328
• Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Olfat, L., & Turskis, Z. (2015). Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS). Informatica, 26(3), 435-451. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2015.57
• Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Amiri, M., & Turskis, Z. (2016). Extended EDAS method for fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making: an application to supplier selection. International Journal of Computers Communications & Control, 11(3), 358-371.
• Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2017). Stochastic EDAS method for multi-criteria decision-making with normally distributed data. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 33(3), 1627-1638. doi:10.3233/JIFS-17184
• Kurt, M. M., & Yazıcıoğlu, O. (2021). Competitive strategy selection in retail E-Commerce using IF AHP & TOPSIS methodology. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 41(2), 2617-2637. doi:10.3233/JIFS-202010
• Lashgari, S., Antucheviciene, J., Delavari, A., & Kheirkhah, O. (2014). Using QSPM and WASPAS methods for determining outsourcing strategies. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 15(4), 729-743. doi:10.3846/16111699.2014.908789
• Lee, Y. H. (2012). A fuzzy analytic network process approach to determining prospective competitive strategy in China: a case study for multinational biotech pharmaceutical enterprises. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(1), 5-28. doi:10.3846/16111699.2011.620165
• Lee, Y. H., & Lee, Y. H. (2012). Integrated assessment of competitive-strategy selection with an analytical network process. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(5), 801-831. doi:10.3846/16111699.2011.620171
• Miç, P., & Antmen, Z. F. (2021). A Decision-Making Model Based on TOPSIS, WASPAS, and MULTIMOORA Methods for University Location Selection Problem. SAGE Open, 11(3). doi: 10.1177/21582440211040115
• Mohaghar, A., Fathi, M. R., Zarchi, M. K., & Omidian, A. (2012). A combined VIKOR-fuzzy AHP approach to marketing strategy selection. Business Management and Strategy, 3(1), 13. doi:10.5296/bms.v3i1.957
• Nanda, A. P., & Anggraeni, E. Y. (2022). Comparison of MAUT Method with WASPAS Method in IBN Lecturer Performance Assessment. International Journal of Information Technology & Computer Engineering (IJITC) ISSN: 2455-5290, 2(05), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.55529/ijitc.25.1.18
• Özbek, A., & Engür, M. (2018). EDAS yöntemi ile lojistik firma web sitelerinin değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 21(2), 417-429.
• Özbek, A., & Eren, T. (2012). Üçüncü parti lojistik (3PL) firmanın analitik hiyerarşi süreciyle (AHS) belirlenmesi. International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, 4(2), 46-54.
• Özbek, A., & Erol, E. (2016). Analitik hiyerarşi süreci ve vikor yöntemleriyle işgören seçimi: tekstil sektöründe bir uygulama. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(1), 93-108.
• Özbek, A., & Erol, E. (2018). AHS ve SWARA yöntemleri ile yem sektöründe iş sağlığı ve güvenliği kriterlerinin ağırlıklandırılması. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(2), 51-66.
• Özbek, A. (2019a). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ve excel ile problem çözümü. kavram – teori -uygulama. 2. Baskı, Ankara: Seçkin Akademik ve Mesleki Yayınlar.
• Özbek, A. (2019b). Türkiye’deki illerin EDAS Ve WASPAS yöntemleri ile yaşanabilirlik kriterlerine göre sıralanması. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(1), 177-200.
• Özbek, A., & Özbek, M. A. (2023). EDAS ve WASPAS yöntemleriyle tıbbi malzeme tedarikçisi belirleme. Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(1), 144-158. doi: 10.28948/ngumuh.1076387
• Porter, M. E. (1979). Harvard business review. How competitive forces shape strategy, 57, 137-145.
• Porter, M. E. (1998). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors : with a new introduction. New York, Free Press.
• Porter, M. E. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 86(1), 78.
• Pringle, J., & Huisman, J. (2011). Understanding universities in Ontario, Canada: An industry analysis Using Porter's five forces framework. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 41(3), 36-58.
• Renko, N., Sustic, I., & Butigan, R. (2011). Designing marketing strategy using the five competitive forces model by michael e. Porter-Case of Small Bakery in Croatia. International Journal of Management Cases, 13(3), 376-385.
• Riahi, A., & Moharrampour, M. (2016). Evaluation of strategic management in business with AHP case study: PARS house appliance. Procedia Economics and Finance, 36, 10-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30011-9
• Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3-5), 161-176.
• Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26.
• Saaty, T. L. (1994). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces, 24(6), 19-43.
• Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98.
• Saaty, T.L., & Vargas, L.G. (2012). The Seven Pillars of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. In: Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, 175. Springer, Boston, MA.
• Sheykhan, A., Zakeri, S., Abbasi, H., & Mousavi, M. H. (2014). A proposed framework for selection and prioritization of the best strategies: A hybrid SWOT analysis, fuzzy PROMETHEE II and Porter's generic strategies. Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 6(6), 313-320. doi:10.19026/rjees.6.5775
• Shin, N. (2001). Strategies for competitive advantage in electronic commerce. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 2(4), 164-171.
• Singh, R. K., & Modgil, S. (2020). Supplier selection using SWARA and WASPAS–a case study of Indian cement industry. Measuring Business Excellence. doi 10.1108/MBE-07-2018-0041
• Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Ghorabaee, M. K., & Turskis, Z. (2017). An extension of the EDAS method based on the use of interval grey numbers. Studies in Informatics and Control, 26(1), 5-12. doi: 10.24846/v26i1y201701
• Süt, N.İ., Hamurcu, M., & Eren, T. (2018). Analitik hiyerarşi süreci kullanılarak Ankara-Sivas yüksek hızlı tren hat güzergâhının değerlendirilmesi. Harran Üniversitesi Mühendislik Dergisi, 3(3), 22-30.
• Tanwar, R. (2013). Porter’s generic competitive strategies. Journal of Business and Management, 15(1), 11-17.
• Taş, M., Özlemiş, Ş. N., Hamurcu, M., & Eren, T. (2017). Ankara’da AHP ve PROMETHEE yaklaşımıyla monoray hat tipinin belirlenmesi. Ekonomi İşletme Siyaset ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 3(1), 65-89.
• Urosevic, S., Karabasevic, D., Stanujkic, D., & Maksimovic, M. (2017). An approach to personnel selectıon ın the tourısm ındustry based on the swara and the waspas methods. Economic Computation & Economic Cybernetics Studies & Research, 51(1).
• Valipour, H., Birjandi, H., & Honarbakhsh, S. (2012). The effects of cost leadership strategy and product differentiation strategy on the performance of firms. Journal of Asian Business Strategy, 2(1), 14-23.
• Vargas, L. G. (1990). An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 2-8.
• Widuri, R., & Sutanto, J. E. (2019). Differentiation strategy and market competition as determinants of earnings management. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, 69.
• Widyastuti, P. (2017). Enhancing Competitiveness Business Strategy Of Organic Vegetables Using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). DeReMa Jurnal Manajemen, 12(2), 256-68.
• Wu, C. S., Lin, C. T., & Lee, C. (2010). Optimal marketing strategy: A decision-making with ANP and TOPSIS. International Journal of Production Economics, 127(1), 190-196. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.05.013 Yücenur, G. N., & Ipekçi, A. (2021). SWARA/WASPAS methods for a marine current energy plant location selection problem. Renewable Energy, 163, 1287-1298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.08.131
• Zavadskas, E. K., Antucheviciene, J., Šaparauskas, J., & Turskis, Z. (2013). Multi-criteria assessment of facades’ alternatives: peculiarities of ranking methodology. Procedia Engineering, 57, 107-112.
• Zavadskas, E. K., Stevic, Z., Turskis, Z., & Tomasevic, M. (2019). A novel extended EDAS in Minkowski Space (EDAS-M) method for evaluating autonomous vehicles. Studies in Informatics and Control, 28(3), 255-264. https://doi.org/10.24846/v28i3y201902
• Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., & Zakarevicius, A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektronika ir elektrotechnika, 122(6), 3-6.