Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Fuzzy Logic Approach for Corporate Performance Evaluation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Intelligent Manufacturing and Service System Informatics (IMSS 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ((LNME))

  • 371 Accesses

Abstract

Today’s brutal competition environment has made it a necessity for businesses to evaluate their performance in order to maintain their existence and gain sustainable competitive advantage. The current environment does not allow businesses that do not perform performance evaluations a chance to survive. Therefore, corporate performance evaluation is a multi-criteria, complex and uncertain real-life problem that is vital for businesses. Corporate performance should be measured multi-dimensionally, but performance indicators of these dimensions may not always be expressed with a numerical value or may have uncertainty. In this case, the closest results are obtained by using fuzzy logic. Based on the current importance of the subject, a fuzzy model has been developed for the evaluation of corporate performance in this study. The outputs of the model are total enterprise performance, corporate reputation and financial output. Although the number of inputs used for each output varies, the inputs used in the model are the environment, customers, society, government, competitors, suppliers, business processes and sustainability. The application of the model is demonstrated with a case study using the fuzzy logic toolbox of the MATLAB program. Performance values for “Total Enterprise Performance”, “Corporate Reputation” and “Financial Output” were obtained as 16.9, 16.9 and 20.8, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Trumpp, C., Endrikat, J., Zopf, C., Guenther, E.: Definition, conceptualization, and measurement of corporate environmental performance: a critical examination of a multidimensional construct. J. Bus. Ethics 126, 185–204 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Barnabe, F.: A “system dynamics-based balanced scorecard” to support strategic decision making: insights from a case study. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 60(5), 446–473 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chytas, P., Glykas, M., Valiris, G.: A proactive balanced scorecard. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 31, 460–468 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Searcy, C.: Updating corporate sustainability performance measurement systems. Meas. Bus. Excell. 15(2), 44–56 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hester, P.T., Meyers, T.J.: Multi-Criteria performance measurement for public and private sector enterprises. In applications of management science, pp. 183–206. Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Watts, T., McNair-Connolly, C.J.: New performance measurement and management control systems. J. Appl. Acc. Res. 13(3), 226–241 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Shaik, M., Abdul-Kader, W.: Performance measurement of reverse logistics enterprise: a comprehensive and integrated approach. Meas. Bus. Excell. 16(2), 23–34 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bai, C., Dhavale, D., Sarkis, J.: Integrating fuzzy c-means and TOPSIS for performance evaluation: an application and comparative analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(9), 4186–4196 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Draghici, A., Popescu, A.D., Gogan, L.M.: A proposed model for monitoring organizational performance. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 124, 544–551 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shaik, M.N., Abdul-Kader, W.: Comprehensive performance measurement and causal-effect decision making model for reverse logistics enterprise. Comput. Ind. Eng. 68, 87–103 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Elbanna, S., Eid, R., Kamel, H.: Measuring hotel performance using the balanced scorecard: a theoretical construct development and its empirical validation. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 51, 105–114 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pirozzi, M.G., Ferulano, G.P.: Intellectual capital and performance measurement in healthcare organizations: an integrated new model. J. Intellect. Cap. 17(2), 320–350 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Valenzuela, L., Maturana, S.: Designing a three-dimensional performance measurement system (SMD3D) for the wine industry: a Chilean example. Agric. Syst. 142, 112–121 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Yaghoobi, T., Haddadi, F.: Organizational performance measurement by a framework integrating BSC and AHP. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 65(7), 959–976 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ponte, D., Pesci, C., Camussone, P.F.: Between mission and revenue: measuring performance in a hybrid organization. Manag. Audit. J. 32(2), 196–214 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Modak, M., Pathak, K., Ghosh, K.K.: Performance evaluation of outsourcing decision using a BSC and Fuzzy AHP approach: a case of the Indian coal mining organization. Resour. Policy 52, 181–191 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Abubakar, A., Hilman, H., Kaliappen, N.: New tools for measuring global academic performance. SAGE Open 8(3), 1–10 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hussain, T., Edgeman, R., Eskildsen, J., Shoukry, A.M., Gani, S.: Sustainable enterprise excellence: attribute-based assessment protocol. Sustainability 10(11), 4097 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fechete, F., Nedelcu, A.: Performance management assessment model for sustainable development. Sustainability 11(10), 2779 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Longaray, A.A., Ensslin, L., Dutra, A., Ensslin, S., Brasil, R., Munhoz, P.: Using MCDA-C to assess the organizational performance of industries operating at Brazilian maritime port terminals. Operat. Res. Perspect. 6, 100109 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu, J.-W.: Developing GAHP concepts for measurement of travel agency organizational performance. Soft. Comput. 24(11), 8051–8059 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Machado, M.C., Mendes, E.F., Telles, R., Sampaio, P.: Towards a new model for SME self-assessment: a Brazilian empirical study. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 31(9–10), 1041–1059 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mamabolo, A., Myres, K.: Performance measurement in emerging market social enterprises using a balanced scorecard. J. Soc. Entrepreneurship 11(1), 65–87 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang, C.N., Tibo, H., Nguyen, H.A.: Malmquist productivity analysis of top global automobile manufacturers. Mathematics 8(4), 580 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Taşkan, B., Karatop, B.: Development of the field of organizational performance during the industry 4.0 period. Int. J. Res. Ind. Eng. 11(2), 134–154 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Juric, M.B., et al.: Design principles for process-driven architectures using oracle bpm and soa suite 12c. Packt Publishing (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Simpson, J., Taylor, J.: Corporate governance ethics and csr. Kogan Page (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Page-Tickell, R.: Learning & development. Kogan Page (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Whipple, B.: Trust in transition: navigating organizational change. American Society for Training & Development (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kulkarni, S.P.: Environmental ethics and information asymmetry among organizational stakeholders. J. Bus. Ethics 27, 215–228 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mus Alparslan University, Mus, 49250, Turkey

    Buşra Taşkan

  2. Istanbul University Cerrahpasa, Istanbul, 34500, Turkey

    Buket Karatop

  3. Istanbul Gelisim University, Istanbul, 34310, Turkey

    Cemalettin Kubat

Authors
  1. Buşra Taşkan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Buket Karatop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cemalettin Kubat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Buşra Taşkan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Türkiye

    Zekâi Şen

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, Sakarya University, Serdivan, Sakarya, Türkiye

    Özer Uygun

  3. Faculty of Applied Sciences, Sakarya University of Applied Sciences, Kaynarca, Sakarya, Türkiye

    Caner Erden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Taşkan, B., Karatop, B., Kubat, C. (2024). A Fuzzy Logic Approach for Corporate Performance Evaluation. In: Şen, Z., Uygun, Ö., Erden, C. (eds) Advances in Intelligent Manufacturing and Service System Informatics. IMSS 2023. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6062-0_69

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6062-0_69

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-6061-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-6062-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation