IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7981-d1146267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing a Controlling Model for Analyzing the Subjectivity of Enterprise Sustainability and Expert Group Judgments Using Fuzzy Triangular Membership Functions

Author

Listed:
  • Sándor Gáspár

    (Department of Investment, Finance and Accounting, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Páter Károly Str. 1, H-2100 Gödöllő, Hungary)

  • Zoltán Musinszki

    (Faculty of Economics Dean’s Office, University of Miskolc, Egyetemváros, H-3515 Miskolc, Hungary)

  • István Zsombor Hágen

    (Department of Investment, Finance and Accounting, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Páter Károly Str. 1, H-2100 Gödöllő, Hungary)

  • Ákos Barta

    (Department of Investment, Finance and Accounting, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Páter Károly Str. 1, H-2100 Gödöllő, Hungary)

  • Judit Bárczi

    (Doctoral School of Management and Business Administration, John von Neumann University, Izsáki Str. 10, H-6000 Kecskemét, Hungary)

  • Gergő Thalmeiner

    (Department of Investment, Finance and Accounting, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Páter Károly Str. 1, H-2100 Gödöllő, Hungary)

Abstract

The evaluation of sustainability is complex, involving several factors and expert opinions. In our research, we analyzed and evaluated the activities of a premium packaging material manufacturer with the participation of three relevant and professional groups. Various expectations have been defined in the form of plan values. From these plan values, we measured and evaluated the sustainability level of the company with the help of plan-fact ratios, fuzzy logic and triangular functions, enabling the subjective evaluation and integration of different opinions into the model. The purpose of our model is to support enterprise decision-making by taking into account sustainability aspects and the different expectations of interested parties. Our model helps identify intervention points and manages subjectivity in the field so that the decisions of enterprise managers better reflect the expectations and perspectives of those involved. The model we built is significantly different from previously used and developed indexes, as it functions as an enterprise-controlling model and index during sustainability evaluation. The developed model can also integrate company-specific and global sustainability indicators. Our research contributes to the development of sustainability evaluation methodology and the scientific examination of enterprise decision-making models. The controlling model we developed offers an integrated approach to managing the subjectivity of sustainability evaluation and the different expectations of stakeholder groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Sándor Gáspár & Zoltán Musinszki & István Zsombor Hágen & Ákos Barta & Judit Bárczi & Gergő Thalmeiner, 2023. "Developing a Controlling Model for Analyzing the Subjectivity of Enterprise Sustainability and Expert Group Judgments Using Fuzzy Triangular Membership Functions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-26, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7981-:d:1146267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7981/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7981/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Felix Kin Peng Hui & Lu Aye & Colin F. Duffield, 2019. "Engaging Employees with Good Sustainability: Key Performance Indicators for Dry Ports," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-11, May.
    2. Eleonora Bottani & Maria Carmen Gentilotti & Marta Rinaldi, 2017. "A Fuzzy Logic-Based Tool for the Assessment of Corporate Sustainability: A Case Study in the Food Machinery Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, April.
    3. Anne Toppinen & Ning Li & Anni Tuppura & Ying Xiong, 2012. "Corporate Responsibility and Strategic Groups in the Forest‐based Industry: Exploratory Analysis based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Framework," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 191-205, July.
    4. Osiro, Lauro & Lima-Junior, Francisco R. & Carpinetti, Luiz Cesar R., 2014. "A fuzzy logic approach to supplier evaluation for development," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 95-112.
    5. Michael Kühnen & Rüdiger Hahn, 2017. "Indicators in Social Life Cycle Assessment: A Review of Frameworks, Theories, and Empirical Experience," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 21(6), pages 1547-1565, December.
    6. Ivo Hristov & Antonio Chirico, 2019. "The Role of Sustainability Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in Implementing Sustainable Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Krajnc, Damjan & Glavic, Peter, 2005. "How to compare companies on relevant dimensions of sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 551-563, December.
    8. Ivete Delai & Sérgio Takahashi, 2011. "Sustainability measurement system: a reference model proposal," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(3), pages 438-471, August.
    9. Ivete Delai & Sérgio Takahashi, 2011. "Sustainability measurement system: a reference model proposal," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(3), pages 438-471, August.
    10. Daniel Ogachi & Lydia Bares & Zoltan Zeman, 2021. "Innovation and Scientific Research as a Sustainable Development Goal in Spanish Public Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-12, April.
    11. repec:eme:srjpps:v:6:y:2010:i:2:p:438-471 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Jonathan Pryshlakivsky & Cory Searcy, 2017. "A Heuristic Model for Establishing Trade-Offs in Corporate Sustainability Performance Measurement Systems," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 323-342, August.
    13. Morrow, David & Rondinelli, Dennis, 2002. "Adopting Corporate Environmental Management Systems:: Motivations and Results of ISO 14001 and EMAS Certification," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 159-171, April.
    14. Shamraiz Ahmad & Kuan Yew Wong & Babar Zaman, 2019. "A Comprehensive and Integrated Stochastic-Fuzzy Method for Sustainability Assessment in the Malaysian Food Manufacturing Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. George Mutugu Mwangi & Stella Despoudi & Oscar Rodriguez Espindola & Konstantina Spanaki & Thanos Papadopoulos, 2022. "A planetary boundaries perspective on the sustainability: resilience relationship in the Kenyan tea supply chain," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 319(1), pages 661-695, December.
    2. Ivo Hristov & Antonio Chirico & Francesco Ranalli, 2022. "Corporate strategies oriented towards sustainable governance: advantages, managerial practices and main challenges," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 26(1), pages 75-97, March.
    3. Chiuhsiang Joe Lin & Tariku Tamiru Belis & Dino Caesaron & Bernard C. Jiang & Tsai Chi Kuo, 2020. "Development of Sustainability Indicators for Employee-Activity Based Production Process Using Fuzzy Delphi Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-31, August.
    4. Ivo Hristov & Antonio Chirico, 2023. "The cultural dimension as a key value driver of the sustainable development at a strategic level: an integrated five-dimensional approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 7011-7028, July.
    5. Lise Tole & Gary Koop, 2013. "Estimating the impact on efficiency of the adoption of a voluntary environmental standard: an empirical study of the global copper mining industry," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 35-45, February.
    6. Olivier Boiral & Marie‐Christine Brotherton & Léo Rivaud & David Talbot, 2022. "Comparing the uncomparable? An investigation of car manufacturers' climate performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2213-2229, July.
    7. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "The If, How and Where of assessing sustainable resource use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 274-283.
    8. Domenica Lavorato & Palmira Piedepalumbo, 2023. "How Smart Technologies Affect the Decision-Making and Control System of Food and Beverage Companies—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Nurisyal Muhamad & Sofiah Md Auzair & Amizawati Mohd Amir & Md Daud Ismail, 2016. "Measuring Sustainability Performance Measurement System," EuroEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 3(12), pages 182-199, JUNE.
    10. Zanon, Lucas Gabriel & Munhoz Arantes, Rafael Ferro & Calache, Lucas Daniel Del Rosso & Carpinetti, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro, 2020. "A decision making model based on fuzzy inference to predict the impact of SCOR® indicators on customer perceived value," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    11. Ekaterina Khitilova, 2017. "The Suitability of Expert System Application in Czech Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 653-660.
    12. Amir Homayoun Sarfaraz & Amir Karbassi Yazdi & Thomas Hanne & Peter Fernandes Wanke & Raheleh Sadat Hosseini, 2023. "Assessing repair and maintenance efficiency for water suppliers: a novel hybrid USBM-FIS framework," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 1321-1342, September.
    13. Hörisch, Jacob & Ortas, Eduardo & Schaltegger, Stefan & Álvarez, Igor, 2015. "Environmental effects of sustainability management tools: An empirical analysis of large companies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 241-249.
    14. Alberto de la Calle & Inmaculada Freije & Aitor Oyarbide, 2021. "Digital Product–Service Innovation and Sustainability: A Multiple-Case Study in the Capital Goods Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-29, June.
    15. Xin Huang & Xianling Jiang & Wei Liu & Qian Chen, 2021. "Business Group-Affiliation and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Listed Companies in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Hayam Wahba, 2010. "How do institutional shareholders manipulate corporate environmental strategy to protect their equity value? A study of the adoption of ISO 14001 by Egyptian firms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(8), pages 495-511, December.
    17. Hannah Karlewski & Annekatrin Lehmann & Klaus Ruhland & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2019. "A Practical Approach for Social Life Cycle Assessment in the Automotive Industry," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-60, August.
    18. Simone Wurster, 2021. "Creating a Circular Economy in the Automotive Industry: The Contribution of Combining Crowdsourcing and Delphi Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, June.
    19. Andrea Chiarini, 2017. "Environmental Policies for Evaluating Suppliers' Performance Based on GRI Indicators," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 98-111, January.
    20. Joern Hoppmann & Alice Sakhel & Marcel Richert, 2018. "With a little help from a stranger: The impact of external change agents on corporate sustainability investments," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1052-1066, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7981-:d:1146267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.