Dört Avrupa Ülkesi İşgücü Verimlilik Analizi: Mikro Düzey Bir Karşılaştırma

İşgücü verimliliği, tüm dünyada sosyal, ekonomik ve eğitim düzeyi gibi geniş bir yelpazede çeşitli faktörlere bağlı olarak değişkenlik gösteren bir göstergedir. Bu nedenle, ülkeler arasında karşılaştırmalı bir analiz yapmak zordur. Bu çalışmada, dört ülkenin (Türkiye, Çek Cumhuriyeti, Fransa ve Birleşik Krallık – UK) 2010 ve 2019 yılı işgücü verimlilik düzeyleri AHP (Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci) ve ORESTE (Organization, Rangement Et Synthese De Donnes Relationnels) yöntemleri ile ölçümlenmiş, karşılaştırılmış ve sıralanmıştır. Rasyonel bir değerlendirme yapabilmek adına, bu dört ülkede faaliyet gösteren Toyota Üretim Tesisleri verileri kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, Çek Cumhuriyeti’nin 2010 ve 2019 yıllarında en yüksek işgücü verimlilik düzeyine sahip ve bu süreçte en istikrarlı ülke olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca, Fransa dışında incelenen tüm ülkelerin 2008 finansal kriz sonrası (2010) işgücü verimlilik oranları 2019 yılı verimlilik oranlarından daha düşük çıkmıştır. Devamsızlık ve operasyonel verimlilik göstergelerinde ise Türkiye, diğer ülkelere kıyasla, 2010 yılında en iyi performansı sergileyen ülke olmuştur ve bu sonuç bu göstergeler bazında bu dönemde işgücünün görece daha iyi yönetildiğinin bir göstergesidir. Diğer yandan bu dönemde Türkiye’de talep çok ciddi oranda düşmüş ve toplam çalışan sayısının üretim rakamları ile paralel seyretmesi sürecinde güçlükler yaşanmıştır.

A Workforce Efficiency Analysis of Four European Countries: A Micro Level Comparison

Workforce efficiency around the world varies based on broad conditions, such as sociocultural, economic, and educational factors. Consequently, comparing workforce efficiencies between countries is difficult. In this study, the workforce efficiency levels of four countries (Turkey, Czech Republic, France, and UK) are measured, compared, and ranked based on data from 2010 and 2019 via the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Organization, Rangement Et Synthese De Donnes Relationnels (ORESTE) methodology. To make an equitable comparison, the data from four Toyota automotive manufacturing plants are utilised. Results demonstrate that the Czech Republic is the steadiest country: it earned first-place position for both 2010 and 2019 in workforce efficiency. Additionally, the workforce efficiencies of all countries just after financial crisis (in 2010) was worse than 2019, with the exception of France in 2019. In terms of the ratio between attendance and operation productivity, Turkey in 2010 was the best plant, which reveals that the workforce in Turkey plant during the 2008 financial crisis was managed well comparing the Czech Republic, France, and UK. However, demand reduction was serious, and the total number of employee of plant had difficulty following the production volume.

PDF

___

Aguado, R., Martinez, J., & Cermelli, M. (2013). “A dynamic analysis of regional R&D efficiency. The case of Italian and Spanish regions”, ERSA conference papers, European Regional Science Association, 13, 423,
Brundage, M. P., Bernstein, W. Z., Morris, K. C., & Horst, J. A. (2017). “Using graph-based visualizations to explore key performance indicator relationships for manufacturing production systems”, Procedia Cirp, 61, 451-456.
Calcagnini, G., & Travaglini, G. (2014). “A time series analysis of labor productivity. Italy versus the European countries and the US”, Economic modelling, 36, 622-628.
Chatterjee, P., & Chakraborty, S. (2014). “Flexible manufacturing system selection using preference ranking methods: A comparative study”, International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 5(2), 315-338.
Delhaye, C., Teghem, J., & Kunsch, P. (1991). “Application of the ORESTE method to a nuclear waste management problem”, International Journal of Production Economics, 24(1-2), 29-39.
Deliktas, E., & Günal, G. G. (2016). “Economic growth and input use efficiency in low, upper-middle and high incomed countries (1991-2011): a data envelopment analysis”, Procedia economics and finance, 38, 308-317.
Demirkol, İ. (2021). “International Supplier Selection Using AHP Method”, Third Sector Social Economic Review, 56(1), 353-370.
European Automobile Manufacturers Association web page. https://www.acea.be/.
Fallahi, F., Sojoodi, S., & M Aslaninia, N. (2010). “Determinants of labor productivity in manufacturing firms of Iran: Emphasizing on labor education and training”, 27699. Online at https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen. de/27699
Filippini, M., & Tosetti, E. (2014). “Stochastic Frontier Models for Long Panel Data Sets: Measurement of the Underlying Energy Efficiency for the OECD Countries”, CER-ETH–Center of Economic Research at ETH Zurich Working Paper, 14, 198.
Ghali, K. H., & El-Sakka, M. I. (2004). “Energy use and output growth in Canada: a multivariate cointegration analysis”, Energy economics, 26(2), 225-238.
Givescu, O. (2007). “The ORESTE’s method in the multicriteria’s decision process for the management of tourism field”, Economia. Seria Management, 10(1), 37-51.
Gnanavelbabu, A., & Arunagiri, P. (2018). “Ranking of MUDA using AHP and Fuzzy AHP algorithm”, Materials Today: Proceedings, 5(5), 13406-13412.
Helleno, A. L., de Moraes, A. J. I., & Simon, A. T. (2017). “Integrating sustainability indicators and Lean Manufacturing to assess manufacturing processes: Application case studies in Brazilian industry”, Journal of cleaner production, 153, 405-416.
Hu, J. L., & Wang, S. C. (2006). “Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China”, Energy policy, 34(17), 3206-3217.
ILO. (2020). Driving up productivity (ACT/ EMP), ILO Cataloguing in Publication, Switzerland.
Jafari, H. (2013). “Identification and prioritization of grain discharging operations risks by using ORESTE method”, American Journal of Public Health Research, 1(8), 214-220.
Jain,T.R. (2006). Principles of Economics. New Delhi, V. K. Publishers
Kamasheva, A., Kolesnikova, J., Karasik, E., Salyakhov, E. (2013). “Discrimination and Inequality in the Labour Market”, Procedia Economic and finance, 5, 386-392
Kang, N., Zhao, C., Li, J., & Horst, J. A. (2016). “A Hierarchical structure of key performance indicators for operation management and continuous improvement in production systems”, International Journal of Production Research, 54(21), 6333-6350.
Kotulic, R., Vozarova, I. K., Nagy, J., Huttmanova, E., & Vavrek, R. (2015). “Performance of the Slovak economy in relation to labor productivity and employment”, Procedia economics and finance, 23, 970-975.
Leeneer, I. & Pastijn, H. (2002). “Selecting Land Mine Detection Strategies by Means of Outranking Mcdm Techniques”, European Journal of Operational Research, 139. 327–338
Mandavgade, N. K., Kalbande, V. N., Bilawane, R. R., Kanojiya, M. T., & Padole, C. U. (2021). “AHP for ranking effect of qualitative factors in uncertainty measurement of material testing”, Materials Today: Proceedings.
Ødegaard, F., & Roos, P. (2014). “Measuring the contribution of workers' health and psychosocial workenvironment on production efficiency”, Production and Operations Management, 23(12), 2191- 2208.
Özcan, E. C., Ünlüsoy, S., & Eren, T. (2017). “A combined goal programming–AHP approach supported with TOPSIS for maintenance strategy selection in hydroelectric power plants”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 78, 1410-1423.
Pastijn, H., & Leysen, J. (1989). “Constructing an outranking relation with ORESTE”, In Models and methods in multiple criteria decision making (pp. 1255-1268). Pergamon.
Piesse J., & Thirtle C. (2000). “A Stochastic Frontier Approach to Firm Level Efficiency, Technological Change and Productivity during the Early Transition in Hungary”, Journal of Comparative Economics, vol. 28, 473-501.
Roubens, M. (1978). “Agrigation des prkfkrences en prCsence de preordres totaux sur l’ensemble des actions et d’une relation de prCf&rence du type (IPQ) sur les points de vue”. Presented at Tab/e Ronde SW I’AgrPgation des Pr$+ences, MCDM Wkshp, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Sargent, J. R., Sullivan, K. T., & Hanna, A. S. (2003). “Absenteeism and turnover impact on labor productivity for electrical contractors”. In Construction Research Congress: Wind of Change: Integration and Innovation (pp. 1-8).
Swarnakar, V., Singh, A. R., & Tiwari, A. K. (2020). “Assessment of manufacturing process through lean manufacturing and sustainability indicators: case studies in Indian perspective”, In Emerging Trends in Mechanical Engineering (pp. 253-263). Springer, Singapore.
Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGrawHill, New York.
Sedghiyan, D., Ashouri, A., Maftouni, N., Xiong, Q., Rezaee, E., & Sadeghi, S. (2021). “Prioritization of renewable energy resources in five climate zones in Iran using AHP, hybrid AHP-TOPSIS and AHP-SAW methods”, Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 44, 101045.
Sonar, H. C., & Kulkarni, S. D. (2021). “An Integrated AHP-MABAC Approach for Electric Vehicle Selection”, Research in Transportation Business & Management, 100665.
Song, M., Zhang, L., An, Q., Wang, Z., & Li, Z. (2013). “Statistical analysis and combination forecasting of environmental efficiency and its influential factors since China entered the WTO: 2002–2010–2012”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 42, 42-51.
Ülengin, F., Önsel, Ş., Aktas, E., Kabak, Ö., & Özaydın, Ö. (2014). “A decision support methodology to enhance the competitiveness of the Turkish automotive industry”, European Journal of Operational Research, 234(3), 789-801.
Yerlikaya, M. A., & ARIKAN, F. (2016). KOBİ’lere sağlanan desteklerin performans etkinlik sıralarının Promethee ve Oreste yöntemleri ile belirlenmesi”, Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(4).
Zhang, Z. H., & Liu, R. J. (2011). “Empirical research on construction efficiency assessment based on data envelopment analysis”, Journal of Engineering Management, 3.
Zhang, W., Sun, H., Woodcock. (2017). “Valuing productivity loss due to absenteeism: firm-level evidence from a Canadian linked employer-employee survey”, Health Econ Rev 7, 3.
Zhou, P., Ang, B. W., & Poh, K. L. (2008). “A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies”, European journal of operational research, 189(1), 1-18.