SELECTING EFFICIENT DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION STRATEGIES IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: A NOVEL FRACTAL FUZZY-BASED DECISION-MAKING PERSPECTIVE

Authors

  • Adem Ersin Bayra School of Law, Istanbul Medipol University
  • Nihat Bulut School of Law, Istanbul Medipol University
  • Serhat Yüksel School of Business, Istanbul Medipol University
  • Serkan Eti IMU Vocational School, Istanbul Medipol University
  • Hasan Dinçer School of Business, Istanbul Medipol University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.n4.4633

Keywords:

Public Sector Digital Transformation, Decision Making Models, Public Administration Efficiency, Fuzzy Logic Approaches, Strategic Prioritization

Abstract

Digital transformation is increasingly viewed as a central mechanism for improving efficiency and service quality in public administration, yet public organizations often face difficulties in systematically prioritizing digital reform initiatives. The main challenge lies in evaluating alternative strategies under conditions of limited resources, institutional constraints, and uncertainty. Although the existing literature provides extensive discussions on digital government and public sector innovation, it offers relatively limited guidance on how decision makers can objectively compare and rank digital transformation strategies using integrated and transparent analytical frameworks. In response to this gap, this study aims to develop a comprehensive decision-making model to support the prioritization of digital transformation strategies that enhance public sector efficiency. The proposed hybrid framework integrates the COWEB technique for determining criteria importance, the RATGOS approach for ranking strategic alternatives, and generalized fractal fuzzy sets to more effectively manage ambiguity in expert judgments. Evaluation criteria and strategic alternatives are identified through a detailed literature review and expert consultations. The results indicate that implementation complexity is the most influential criterion, while the adoption of AI based public service applications represents the most effective strategy. The study provides original methodological contributions and practical insights to support feasible, consistent, and sustainable digital transformation decisions in public administration.

References

Alshibani, S., Singhal, A. B., Gupta, B., Papa, A., & Del Giudice, M. (2026). Prioritizing interoperable AI-driven solutions for sustainable circular economy in the public sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 224, 124513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124513

Anshari, M., Hamdan, M., Ahmad, N., & Ali, E. (2025). Public service delivery, artificial intelligence and the sustainable development goals: trends, evidence and complexities. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 16(1), 163-181.

Cao, J., & Ma, L. (2025). Digital transformation, administrative burden, and citizen–state interactions: A case of the old age allowance policy in China. Review of Policy Research, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.70063

Casalini, F., & Zavolokina, L. (2025). From private platforms to public value: An exploratory analysis of privately-owned public service digital platforms in Italy. Government Information Quarterly, 42(4), 102090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102090

Choi, S., Kang, H., Kim, N., & Kim, J. (2025). How does artificial intelligence improve human decision-making? Evidence from the AI-powered Go program. Strategic Management Journal, 46, 1523–1554. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3694

Daniel, C., & Pettit, C. (2025). The use of urban analytics in strategic planning – A case study of the greater Sydney region plan. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 117, 102249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2025.102249

de Fine Licht, K., & Folland, A. (2025). AI in public decision-making: A philosophical and practical framework for assessing and weighing harm and benefit. Public Administration, 103(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70029

De la Cruz, M., Tan, E., Muñoz, P., & Casas, C. (2025). Unlocking the value of data governance in developing countries: A framework for public administration. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 91(6), e12411. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.70043

Eti, S., Karaman, F., Yüksel, S., Dinçer, H., & Yaylalı, İ. (2025). Introducing the comparative weighting evaluation based on the best criteria method: a multi-fuzzy framework for aviation fuel efficiency. Scientific Reports.

Feng, N., & Chandra, Y. (2025). Accountability in government use of AI: Citizen concerns and preferences. Public Administration 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70030

Gregory, M. (2025). Deciding with dignity: Automated decision-making, the rule of law, and procedural disrespect. Ratio Juris, 38(3), 172–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.70007

Guan, B., & Yu, Y. (2025). Debunking the Digital Myth: Can Digital Governance Embedding Enhance Local Governments' Environmental Governance Efficiency? The Role of Implementation Burden. Governance, 38, e70063. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70063

Gules-Guctas, E. (2025). How do algorithmic decision-making systems used in public benefits determinations fail? Insights from legal challenges. Public Administration Review, 85(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70043

Henning, A., & Langenbach, P. (2025). Bridging the human-AI fairness gap: How providing reasons enhances the perceived fairness of public decision-making. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 22(4), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.70019

Hillo, J., Vento, I., & Erkkilä, T. (2025). Algorithmic governance: Experimental evidence on citizens' and public administrators' legitimacy perceptions of automated decision-making. Public Administration 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70028

Ingaggiati, M., Guerci, M., Barbato, G., & Ruffini, R. (2025). The bureaucracy versus post-bureaucracy paradox in public administration: A historical perspective on the selection and training of public managers. Public Administration, 103(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.13074

Jørring, L., Justesen, L., & Plesner, U. (2025). Tensions in time-saving technologies: Adjusting work rhythms in the digitalized public sector frontline. Government Information Quarterly, 42, 102058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102058

Kalema, N. L. (2024). The ‘Digital Transformation for Development’ anti-politics machine: A case study on global digital development governance and public-sector digital transformation in Uganda. Policy & Internet, 16(4), 750–763. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.436

Kou, G., Yüksel, S., Eti, S., Dinçer, H., & Acar, M. (2025). Fractal Fuzzy-Based Multi-criteria Assessment of Sustainability in Rare Earth Use for Hydrogen Storage. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 18(1), 210.

Kühler, J., Polzer, T., Proeller, I., Kuhlmann, S., & Marienfeldt, J. (2025). Unpacking approaches to digitalization strategy. Public Administration, 103(3), 773–785. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.13070

Lidén, K. (2026). Ethics and the governance of digital data in humanitarian action. Disasters, 50(1), e70018. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.70018

Lindgren, I., & Madsen, C. Ø. (2025). Digital first? Understanding citizens' communication needs in digital public encounters. Social Policy & Administration 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.70017

Loefflad, C., Chen, M., & Grossklags, J. (2025). Citizen involvement in algorithmic regulation: How awareness and participation shape public opinion, civic behaviors, and social trust. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2025(1), 9184190. https://doi.org/10.1155/hbe2/9184190

Muhammad, A. S., Hammed, S., Shishah, W., & Isiaku, L. (2025). Strategic enablers of sustainable AI-driven public service transformation in Nigeria: a fuzzy DEMATEL-based model. Technological Sustainability, 4(4), 380-401.

Mwita, K. M., & Kitole, F. A. (2025). Potential benefits and challenges of artificial intelligence in human resource management in public institutions. Discover Global Society, 3(1), 35.

Odularu, O. I. (2025). A review on the germaneness of libraries in sustaining information technology services: rethinking towards futuristic strategies implementation. Library Management, 46(1/2), 109-131.

Papadopoulos, T., Alexopoulos, C., & Charalabidis, Y. (2025). Evaluating chatbot architectures for public service delivery: balancing functionality, safety, ethics, and adaptability. Frontiers in Political Science, 7, 1601440.

Parnell, G. S., Bresnick, T. A., Johnson, E. R., Tani, S. N., & Specking, E. (2025). Handbook of Decision Analysis (2. baskı). John Wiley & Sons.

Rizk, A., & Lindgren, I. (2025). Automated decision-making in public administration: Changing the decision space between public officials and citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 42(3), 102061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102061

Rulandari, N., & Silalahi, A. D. K. (2025). Resolving the Effectiveness-Efficiency Paradox in AI-Enabled Public Services: Insights From the Resource-Based View and Public Value Theory. Journal of Public Affairs, 25(3), e70067. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.70067

Shirwa, A. M., Hassan, A. M., Hassan, A. Q., & Kilinc, M. (2025). A cooperative governance framework for sustainable digital transformation in construction: The role of digital enablement and digital strategy. Results in Engineering, 25, 104139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104139

Toro-Maureira, S., Olivares, A., Sáez-Vergara, R., Valenzuela, S., Valenzuela, M., & Correa, T. (2025). The missing link: Identifying digital intermediaries in e-government. Public Administration Review 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70033

Uster, A. (2025). Governmental implementation of information and communication technology at the local level: Digital co‐production during a crisis. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 84(1), 69-101.

Wang, G., Zhang, Z., Xie, S., & Guo, Y. (2025). Province of origin, decision-making bias, and responses to bureaucratic versus algorithmic decision-making. Public Administration Review, 85(6), 1738–1756. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13928

Xu, S., Liu, J., Li, S., & Zheng, Y. (2025). Barriers to and mechanism for open government data use by the private sectors: A grounded theory approach. Government Information Quarterly, 42(3), 102044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102044

Yaylalı, İ., Yüksel, S., Eti, S., & Dinçer, H. (2025). Role of internal audits in strengthening environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance for sustainable corporate growth. Quality & Quantity, 1-22.

Yüksel, S., Eti, S., Dinçer, H., Meral, H., Umar, M., & Gökalp, Y. (2025). A novel fuzzy decision-making approach to pension fund investments in renewable energy. Financial Innovation, 11(1), 18.

Zhang, W., Yu, Y., & Dai, S. (2025). AI-enabled workforce: performance improvements in public sector tasks of varying innovative work behavior. Public Management Review, 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2025.2559862

Downloads

Published

2026-02-20

How to Cite

Bayra, A. E., Bulut, N., Yüksel, S., Eti, S., & Dinçer, H. (2026). SELECTING EFFICIENT DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION STRATEGIES IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: A NOVEL FRACTAL FUZZY-BASED DECISION-MAKING PERSPECTIVE. Veredas Do Direito, 23, e234633. https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.n4.4633

Issue

Vol. 23 (2026): Veredas do Direito, v. 23, 2026

Section

Articles

License

I (we) submit this article which is original and unpublished, of my (our) own authorship, to the evaluation of the Veredas do Direito Journal, and agree that the related copyrights will become exclusive property of the Journal, being prohibited any partial or total copy in any other part or other printed or online communication vehicle dissociated from the Veredas do Direito Journal, without the necessary and prior authorization that should be requested in writing to Editor in Chief. I (we) also declare that there is no conflict of interest between the articles theme, the author (s) and enterprises, institutions or individuals.

I (we) recognize that the Veredas do Direito Journal is licensed under a CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.

 

Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0