Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
The aim of this study is to measure the market and financial performance of the paper industry firms listed in Borsa Istanbul by adopting multiple attribute utility theory (MAUT) which is one of the most widely used multi-criterion decision-making (MCDM) methods. The performance of the firms is assessed for the period between 2011 and 2013. The weights of evaluation criteria are determined by applying entropy, which is an objective weighting method. In the analysis, the firms are ranked by integrating entropy-based MAUT method. According to the analysis results, Kartonsan has the highest performance rate for all the years, whereas Viking has shown the poorest performance except for the year 2011. During the period, Mondi and Olmuksan, which are acquired by foreign investors, have shown relatively stable performance; however, the performance rate of Kaplamin is unstable. The only firm that has a rising performance trend during the period is Alkim. On the other hand, the sample is also analyzed by using equal weighted MAUT.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Butler, J., Morrice, D. J., & Mullarkey, P. W. (2001). A multiple attribute utility theory approach to ranking and selection. Management Science, 47(6), 800–816. CrossRef
Chen, S. J. J., Hwang, C. L., Beckmann, M. J., & Krelle, W. (1992). Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. New York: Springer. CrossRef
Elliott, R. (2012). Ancient writing materials. The encyclopedia of new testament textual criticism. [online] Accessed December 4, 2015, from http://waltzmn.brainout.net/WritingMaterials.html
Erol, I., Sencer, S., & Sari, R. (2011). A new fuzzy multi-criteria framework for measuring sustainability performance of a supply chain. Ecological Economics, 70(6), 1088–1100. CrossRef
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications, a state of the art survey. New York: Springer. CrossRef
Ishizaka, A., & Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-criteria decision analysis: Methods and software. Chichester: Wiley. CrossRef
Islamoglu, M., Apan, M., & Oztel, A. (2015). An evaluation of the financial performance of REITs in Borsa Istanbul: A case study using the entropy-based TOPSIS method. International Journal of Financial Research, 6(2), 124–138. CrossRef
Islamoglu, M., & Çelik, N. (2015). Financial performance determinants of paper and paper products firms listed in Borsa Istanbul. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 7(4), 233–243. CrossRef
Johansson, H. J., Mchugh, P., Pendlebury, A. J., & Wheeler, W. A., III. (1993). Business process reengineering: Breakpoint strategies for market dominance. New York: Wiley.
Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.
Konuskan, O., & Uygun, O. (2014). Çok Nitelikli Karar Verme (Maut) Yöntemi ve Bir Uygulaması [Evaluation and selection of smart phones using integrated Maut and entropy techniques]. In Second International Symposium on Innovative Technologies in Engineering and Science, Karabuk University. [online] Accessed December 4, 2015, from http://www.isites.info/pastconferences/isites2014/isites2014/papers/A1-ISITES2014ID237.pdf
Lagoudis, I. N., Lalwani, C. S., & Naim, M. M. (2006). Ranking of factors contributing to higher performance in the ocean transportation industry: A multi-attribute utility theory approach. Maritime Policy and Management, 33(4), 345–369. CrossRef
Olson, D. L. (1995). Decision aids for selection problems. New York: Springer.
Özarslan, D. D., Altay, M. C., Arabaci, M. C., Altay, H. F., & Sivri, N. (2011). Effects of high economic importance of industrial branches on human life quality and environment. International Journal of Electronics, Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, 2(1), 86–91.
Sandalcılar, A. R. (2012). Relationship between paper consumption and economic growth in Turkey: Cointegration and causality analysis. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2), 1–15.
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Sopadang, A., Cho, B. R., & Leonard, M. (2002). Development of the hybrid weight assessment system for multiple quality attributes. Quality Engineering, 15(1), 75–89. CrossRef
Suslick, S. B., & Furtado, R. (2001). Quantifying the value of technological, environmental and financial gain in decision models for offshore oil exploration. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 32(2), 115–125. CrossRef
Turkoglu, M. N., & Uygun, O. (2014). VİKOR-MAUT Yöntemleri Kullanılarak Çukurova Bölgesel Havaalanı Yeri Seçimi [Çukurova regional airport site selection with Vikor and Maut methods]. In Second International Symposium on Innovative Technologies in Engineering and Science, Karabuk University. [online] Accessed December 4, 2015, from http://www.isites.info/pastconferences/isites2014/isites2014/papers/B6-ISITES2014ID240.pdf
Wang, T. C., & Hsu, J. C. (2004). Evaluation of the business operation performance of the listing companies by applying TOPSIS method. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 2. IEEE.
Weber, M., & Borcherding, K. (1993). Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 67(1), 1–12. CrossRef
Xu, S. Q., Hu, Z. G., Liu, Q., Huang, H., & Pu, J. P. (2004). Multi-objective decision analysis of diversion standards based on entropy. China Rural Water and Hydropower, 8, 45–47.
Zeleny, M. (1974). Linear multi objective programming. Berlin: Springer. CrossRef
Zeleny, M., & Cochrane, J. L. (Eds.). (1973). Multiple criteria decision making. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
Zietsman, J., Rilett, L. R., & Kim, S. J. (2006). Transportation corridor decision-making with multi-attribute utility theory. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 7(2–3), 254–266. CrossRef
Zou, Z. H., Yi, Y., & Sun, J. N. (2006). Entropy method for determination of weight of evaluating indicators in fuzzy synthetic evaluation for water quality assessment. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 18(5), 1020–1023. CrossRef
- An Assessment of the Paper Industry Firms Listed in Borsa Istanbul Using Entropy-Based MAUT Method
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Frankfurt School