SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Alanya Akademik Bakış / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

ERP Software Program Selection with Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods

Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile ERP Yazılım Programı Seçimi

Ayşe Kübra Kanmaz(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ, İŞLETME BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0002-6194-115X
İrfan Ertuğrul(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5283-191X
Pages
357–373
Publication Date
2025-05-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal that the most important criteria for businesses in ERP software selection are functional suitability, reliability, and usability.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are fundamental elements that play a decisive role in the success of businesses.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of this study is to identify which criteria businesses prioritize when selecting ERP software within the framework of ISO/IEC 25010 software quality standards, and accordingly, which ERP software they prefer.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal that the most important criteria for businesses in ERP software selection are functional suitability, reliability, and usability.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kurumsal Kaynak Planlama (ERP) · Bulanık SWARA · Bulanık CoCoSo

Abstract

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are fundamental elements that play a decisive role in the success of businesses. The aim of this study is to identify which criteria businesses prioritize when selecting ERP software within the framework of ISO/IEC 25010 software quality standards, and accordingly, which ERP software they prefer. In the research, the criteria that are decisive in the ERP software selection process were weighted using the fuzzy SWARA method, and these criteria were analyzed using the fuzzy CoCoSo method. The findings reveal that the most important criteria for businesses in ERP software selection are functional suitability, reliability, and usability. As a result of the evaluations, DİA and SAP have been identified as the most suitable options among the five ERP software commonly used in Turkey. These findings emphasize how important it is for businesses to correctly determine their strategic priorities when selecting ERP software.

Özet

Kurumsal Kaynak Planlama (ERP) sistemleri, işletmelerin başarısında belirleyici rol oynayan temel unsurlardan biridir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, işletmelerin ERP yazılımı seçerken ISO/IEC 25010 yazılım kalite standartları çerçevesinde hangi kriterleri öncelikli olarak değerlendirdiğini ve buna göre hangi ERP yazılımını tercih ettiğini belirlemektir. Araştırmada, ERP yazılımı seçim sürecinde belirleyici olan kriterler bulanık SWARA yöntemi ile ağırlıklandırılmış ve bu kriterler bulanık CoCoSo yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, işletmelerin ERP yazılımı seçiminde en önemli kriterlerin fonksiyonel uygunluk, güvenilirlik ve kullanılabilirlik olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Değerlendirmeler sonucunda, Türkiye'de yaygın olarak kullanılan beş ERP yazılımı arasından DİA ve SAP en uygun seçenekler olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu bulgular, işletmelerin ERP yazılımı seçiminde stratejik önceliklerini doğru belirlemelerinin ne kadar önemli olduğunu vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kanmaz, A. K., Ertuğrul, İ. (2025). ERP Software Program Selection with Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. Alanya Akademik Bakış, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 357–373. https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.1474663

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (60)

  1. Agarwal, S., Kant, R., & Shankar, R. (2020). Evaluating solutions to overcome humanitarian supply chain management barriers: A hybrid fuzzy SWARA–fuzzy WASPAS approach. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 46, 101524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101838
  2. Ansari, Z. N., Kant, R., & Shankar, R. (2020). Evaluation and ranking of solutions to mitigate sustainable remanufacturing supply chain risks: A hybrid fuzzy SWARA–fuzzy COPRAS framework approach. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 13(6), 473–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2020.1758973
  3. Avkar İnal, A., & Avunduk, H. (2023). ISO 9001 kalite güvence sistemindeki 2015 revizyonunun yöneticilerin algılamaları üzerine etkisi. Journal of Business in the Digital Age, 6(Özel Sayı), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.46238/jobda.1258477
  4. Alper, İ. (2021). Kurumsal kaynak planlaması (ERP) ve Bulut ERP [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Pamukkale Üniversitesi].
  5. Ayçin, E. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme, bilgisayar uygulamalı çözümler. Nobel Kitabevi.
  6. Brzozowski, M., & Birfer, I. (2017). Applications of MCDM methods in the ERP system selection process in enterprises. Handel Wewnętrzny, 3(368), 40–52.
  7. Bueno, S., & Salmeron, J. L. (2008). Fuzzy modeling enterprise resource planning tool selection. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 30(3), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2007.08.001
  8. Chang, M. K., Cheung, W., Cheng, C. H., & Yeung, H. Y. J. (2008). Understanding ERP system adoption from the user’s perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 113(1), 928–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.08.011
  9. Chen, I. J. (2001). Planning for ERP systems: Analysis and future trend. Business Process Management Journal, 7(5), 374–386. https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150110406768
  10. Çakır, E. (2016). Kentsel dönüşüm kapsamında müteahhit (yüklenici) firmanın bütünleşik SWARA-VIKOR yöntemiyle seçilmesi. In Proceedings of XVII. International Symposium on Econometrics, Operations Research and Statistics (pp. 881–896).
  11. De La Paz, J. V. B. (2023). An approach to select an open-source ERP for SMEs based on Industry 4.0 and digitization considering the SHERPA and WASPAS methods. In Innovation and Competitiveness in Industry 4.0 Based on Intelligent Systems (pp. 123–143). Springer International Publishing.
  12. Demir, G., Damjanović, M., Matović, B., & Vujadinović, R. (2022). Toward sustainable urban mobility by using fuzzy-FUCOM and fuzzy-CoCoSo methods: The case of the SUMP Podgorica. Sustainability, 14(9), 5589. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14094972
  13. Dweiri, F. T., & Kablan, M. M. (2006). Using fuzzy decision making for the evaluation of the project management internal efficiency. Decision Support Systems, 42(2), 712–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2005.04.001
  14. Ecer, F. (2016). ARAS yöntemi kullanılarak kurumsal kaynak planlaması yazılımı seçimi. Uluslararası Alanya İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 89–98.
  15. Ecer, F., & Pamucar, D. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection: A novel integrated fuzzy best worst method (F-BWM) and fuzzy CoCoSo with Bonferroni (CoCoSo’B) multi-criteria model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, 121886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121981
  16. Erdal, H., Kurtay, K. G., Dağıstanlı, H. A., & Altundaş, A. (2023). Evaluation of anti-tank guided missiles: An integrated fuzzy entropy and fuzzy Cocoso multi-criteria methodology using technical and simulation data. Applied Soft Computing, 137, 110623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110145
  17. Fernández-Portillo, L. A., Yazdaní, M., Estepa-Mohedano, L., & Sisto, R. (2023). Prioritisation of strategies for the adoption of organic agriculture using BWM and fuzzy Cocoso. Soft Computing, 27, 13871–13902.
  18. Gürbüz, T., Alptekin, S. E., & Alptekin, G. I. (2021). A hybrid MCDM methodology for ERP selection problem with interacting criteria. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.006
  19. Hinduja, A., & Pandey, M. (2019). An integrated intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM approach to select cloud-based ERP system for SMEs. International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, 18, 1875–1908. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622019500378
  20. İnal, A. A., & Avunduk, H. (2023). Iso 9001 kalite güvence sistemindeki 2015 revizyonunun yöneticilerin algılamaları üzerine etkisi. Journal of Business in The Digital Age, 6(Özel Sayı), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.46238/jobda.1258477
  21. Jafarnejad, A., Ansari, M., Youshanlouei, H. R., & Mood, M. (2012). A hybrid MCDM approach for solving the ERP system selection problem with application to steel industry. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, 8, 54–73.
  22. Karsak, E. E., & Özoğul, C. O. (2009). An integrated decision making approach for ERP system selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 660–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.09.016
  23. Kaya, S. K., & Ergünel, N. (2020). Futuristic airport: A sustainable airport design by integrating hesitant fuzzy SWARA and hesitant fuzzy sustainable quality function deployment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123880
  24. Kazançoğlu, Y., & Burmaoğlu, S. (2013). ERP software selection with MCDM: Application of TODIM method. International Journal of Information Systems (IJBIS), 13(4), 435-452. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBIS.2013.055300
  25. Keçek, G., & Yıldırım, E. (2010). Kurumsal kaynak planlama (ERP) sisteminin analitik hiyerarşi süreci (AHP) ile seçimi: Otomotiv sektöründe bir uygulama. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 193-211.
  26. Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). Journal of business economics and management, 11(2), 243-258.
  27. Keskinkılıç, M., & İpkin, M. (2023). İşletmelerde ERP uygulamalarının dijital dönüşüm sürecine katkıları. Aurum Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 49-74.
  28. Laï, H., Liao, H., Long, Y., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2022). A hesitant Fermatean fuzzy CoCoSo method for group decision-making and an application to blockchain platform evaluation. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 24(6), 2643-2661.
  29. Mavi, R. K., Goh, M., & Zarbakhshnia, N. (2017). Sustainable third-party reverse logistic provider selection with fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy MOORA in plastic industry. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 91(5-8), 2401-2418.
  30. Maruf, M., & Özdemir, K. (2021). Türkiye’deki ticari bankalara ait web sitelerinin performanslarının SWARA ve ARAS yöntemi ile sıralanması. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 18(Yönetim ve Organizasyon Özel Sayısı), 1514-1537. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.888184
  31. Miller, G., & Sprague, L. (1975). Behind the growth in materials requirements planning. Harvard Business Review, 83-91.
  32. Moon, Y. B. (2007). Enterprise resource planning (ERP): A review of the literature. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 4(3), 235. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMED.2007.012679
  33. Narang, M., Joshi, M. C., Bisht, K., & Pal, A. (2022). Stock portfolio selection using a new decision-making approach based on the integration of fuzzy CoCoSo with Heronian mean operator. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 5(1), 90-112.
  34. Naveed, Q. N., Islam, S., Qureshi, M. R. N. M., Aseere, A. M., Rasheed, M. A. A., & Fatima, S. (2021). Evaluating and ranking of critical success factors of cloud enterprise resource planning adoption using MCDM approach. IEEE Access, 9, 156880–156893.
  35. Özdağoğlu, A., Keleş, M. K., & Işıldak, B. (2021). Bulanık SWARA ve bulanık MARCOS yöntemleriyle sivil havacılıkta kabin memuru seçimi. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(2), 284-302.
  36. Özgül, Ö. (2006). Bir işletme için TOPSIS ve AHP ile ERP yazılımın seçimi [Yüksek lisans tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi].
  37. Pamucar, D., & Görçün, Ö. F. (2022). Evaluation of the European container ports using a new hybrid fuzzy LBWA-COCOSO’B techniques. Expert Systems with Applications, 203, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117463Get rights and content
  38. Peng, J. J., Chen, X. G., Tan, H., Sun, J. Y., Long, Q. Q., & Jiang, L. L. (2024). A heterogeneous picture fuzzy SWARA-MARCOS evaluation framework based on a novel cross-entropy measure. International Journal of Systems Science, 55(8), 1528-1552. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207721.2024.2312881
  39. Perçin, S. (2019). An integrated fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy AD approach for outsourcing provider selection. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 30(2), 531-552.
  40. Puška, A., Štilić, A., & Stević, Ž. (2023). A comprehensive decision framework for selecting distribution center locations: A hybrid improved fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy CRADIS approach. Computation, 11(4), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/computation11040073
  41. Rangel, L. A. D., Gomes, L. F. A. M., & Cardoso, F. P. (2011). An application of the TODIM method to the evaluation of broadband internet plans. Pesquisa Operacional, 31(2), 235-249. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-74382011000200003
  42. Rani, P., Mishra, A. R., Krishankumar, R., Mardani, A., Cavallaro, F., Soundarapandian, K., & Balasubramanian, K. (2020). Hesitant fuzzy SWARA-complex proportional assessment approach for sustainable supplier selection (HF-SWARA-COPRAS). Symmetry, 12(7), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12071152
  43. Ren, R. X., Liao, H. C., Al-Barakati, A., & Cavallaro, F. (2019). Electric vehicle charging station site selection by an integrated hesitant fuzzy SWARA-WASPAS method. Transformations in Business & Economics, 18(2), 103-123.
  44. Senapati, T., & Yager, R. R. (2021). Cubic intuitionistic WASPAS technique and its application in multi-criteria decision-making. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 12(8), 8823-8833.
  45. Stević, Ž., Das, D. K., Tešić, R., Vidas, M., & Vojinović, D. (2022). Objective criticism and negative conclusions on using the fuzzy SWARA method in multi-criteria decision making. Mathematics, 10(4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10040635
  46. Şahin, Y., & Karağül, K. (2022). FUCOM ve COPRAS yöntemleriyle ERP yazılımı seçimi. 4th International Conference on Applied Engineering and Natural Sciences (10-13), Konya.
  47. Şengül, D., & Çağıl, G. (2020). Bulanık SWARA ve bulanık analitik hiyerarşi prosesi yöntemi ile iş değerlemesi. Dicle Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Mühendislik Dergisi, 11(3), 965-976. https://doi.org/10.24012/dumf.715363
  48. Thanh, N. V. (2022). Designing a MCDM model for selection of an optimal ERP software in organization. Systems, 10, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10040095
  49. Temur, G. T., & Bolat, B. (2018). A robust MCDM approach for ERP system selection under uncertain environment based on worst case scenario. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31, 405–425.
  50. Ulutaş, A., Karakuş, C. B., & Topal, A. (2020). Location selection for logistics center with fuzzy SWARA and COCOSO methods. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 38(4), 4693-4709.
  51. Ulutaş, A., Popović, G., Radanov, P., Stanujkić, D., & Karabasević, D. (2021). A new hybrid fuzzy PSI-PIPRECIA-COCOSO MCDM based approach to solving the transportation company selection problem. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 27(5), 1227-1249. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2021.15058
  52. Vatansever, K., & Uluköy, M. (2013). Kurumsal kaynak planlaması sistemlerinin bulanık AHP ve bulanık MOORA yöntemleriyle seçimi: Üretim sektöründe bir uygulama. CBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2), 274-293.
  53. Yarlıkas, S., & Pak, Y. (2023). Bulanık SWARA yöntemi ile işletmelerin blockchain teknolojisini tercih etmelerinde etkili olan faktörlerin değerlendirilmesi. İktisadi-İdari Bilimlerde Araştırma ve Değerlendirmeler. Gece Kitaplığı Yayınevi.
  54. Yazdani, M., Mohammed, A., Bai, C., & Labib, A. (2021). A novel hesitant-fuzzy-based group decision approach for outsourcing risk. Expert Systems with Applications, 184, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115517
  55. Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2019). A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision, 57(9), 2501-2519.
  56. Yenilmezel, S., & Ertuğrul, İ. (2022). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ile bir mermer fabrikası için kesintisiz güç kaynağı seçimi. Aksaray Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(3), 251-266.
  57. Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Vilutiene, T. (2005). Simulation of multi-criteria selection of buildings maintenance contractor using the game theory. Computer Modelling and New Technologies, 9(2), 7-16.
  58. Zolfani, S. H., & Saparauskas, J. (2013). New application of SWARA method in prioritizing sustainability assessment indicators of energy system. Engineering Economics, 24(5), 408-414. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.24.5.4526
  59. Mavvo. (2025, Ocak 21). Top 5 bulut ERP programı. https://mavvo.com.tr/blog/top-5-bulut-erp-programi/
  60. ISO. (2024, Eylül 10). IS0 25010. https://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-standards/iso-25010