A secondary goal in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation: A "one home run is much better than two doubles" criterion

被引:29
作者
Davtalab-Olyaie, Mostafa [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kashan, Fac Math Sci, Dept Appl Math, Kashan, Iran
关键词
Data envelopment analysis; cross-efficiency evaluation; MODELS; SELECTION;
D O I
10.1080/01605682.2018.1457482
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is a mathematical programming approach for assessing the relative efficiency of decision making units (DMUs). The cross-efficiency evaluation is an extension of DEA that provides a ranking method and eliminates unrealistic DEA weighting schemes on weight restrictions, without requiring a prior information. The cross-efficiency evaluation may have some shortages, e.g. the cross-efficiency scores may not be unique due to the presence of several optima. To rectify this issue, several secondary goals have been proposed in the literature. Some scholars have proposed several cross-efficiency evaluations based on maximising (minimising) the total deviation from their ideal point as an aggressive (benevolent) perspective. In some cases, minimising (maximising) the number of DMUs that achieve their target efficiencies, is more important than maximising (minimising) the total deviation from the ideal point. We propose some alternative models for the cross-efficiency evaluation based on the cardinality of the set of "satisfied DMUs", i.e. the DMUs that achieve their maximum efficiencies. For aggressive (benevolent) cross-efficiency evaluation, among all the optimal weights for a specific unit, we choose the weights which can maximise its efficiency, and at the same time minimise (maximise) the number of satisfied units. We demonstrate how the proposed method can be implemented and illustrate the method using two examples.
引用
收藏
页码:807 / 816
页数:10
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Ranking ranges in cross-efficiency evaluations [J].
Alcaraz, Javier ;
Ramon, Nuria ;
Ruiz, Jose L. ;
Sirvent, Inmaculada .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2013, 226 (03) :516-521
[2]   The fixed weighting nature of a cross-evaluation model [J].
Anderson, TR ;
Hollingsworth, K ;
Inman, L .
JOURNAL OF PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS, 2002, 17 (03) :249-255
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1986, NEW DIRECTIONS PROG, DOI DOI 10.1002/EV.1441
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2013, EXPERT SYST APPL
[5]   SOME MODELS FOR ESTIMATING TECHNICAL AND SCALE INEFFICIENCIES IN DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS [J].
BANKER, RD ;
CHARNES, A ;
COOPER, WW .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1984, 30 (09) :1078-1092
[6]   MEASURING EFFICIENCY OF DECISION-MAKING UNITS [J].
CHARNES, A ;
COOPER, WW ;
RHODES, E .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1978, 2 (06) :429-444
[7]   An assessment of technical efficiency and cross-efficiency in Taiwan's electricity distribution sector [J].
Chen, TY .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2002, 137 (02) :421-433
[8]   Optimizing the rank position of the DMU as secondary goal in DEA cross-evaluation [J].
Contreras, I. .
APPLIED MATHEMATICAL MODELLING, 2012, 36 (06) :2642-2648
[9]   DEA Cobb-Douglas frontier and cross-efficiency [J].
Cook, W. D. ;
Zhu, J. .
JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2014, 65 (02) :265-268
[10]   EFFICIENCY AND CROSS-EFFICIENCY IN DEA - DERIVATIONS, MEANINGS AND USES [J].
DOYLE, J ;
GREEN, R .
JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 1994, 45 (05) :567-578