Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation

European Journal of Operational Research

Volumn 90, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 461-472

  Green, Rodney H ^a   Doyle, John R ^a   Cook, Wade D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BATH   (United Kingdom)

^b YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cross efficiency; Cross evaluation; Data envelopment analysis; DEA; Ranking; Voting

Indexed keywords

EFFICIENCY; EIGENVALUES AND EIGENFUNCTIONS; EVALUATION; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; RATING; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT;

CROSS EFFICIENCY; CROSS EVALUATION; DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; PREFERENCE VOTING; PROJECT RANKING; RANK ORDER; RANKING; VOTING;

OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

EID: 0030146150     PISSN: 03772217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0377-2217(95)00039-9     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Ali, A.I., Cook, W.D., and Seiford, L.M. (1991), "Strict vs weak ordinal relations for multipliers in data envelopment analysis", Management Science 37/6, 733-738.
2. Arrow, K.J. (1951), Social Choice and Individual Values, Yale University Press, New Haven and London.
3. Atkinson, K.E., (1978), An Introduction to Numerical Analysis, Wiley, New York.
4. Borda, J.C. (1781), Memoire sur les Elections au Scrutin, Histoire de l'Académie Royale Scientifique, Paris.
5. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E. (1978), "Measuring efficiency of decision making units", European Journal Operational Research 2/6, 429-444.
6. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Huang, Z.M., and Sun, D.B. (1990), "Polyhedral cone-ratio DEA models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks", Journal of Econometrics 46, 73-91.
7. Cook, W.D., and Kress, M. (1990), "A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings", Management Science 36/11, 1302-1310.
8. Cook, W.D., and Kress, M. (1992), Ordinal Information and Preference Structures, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
9. French, S. (1986), Decision Theory, Ellis Horwood, Chichester.
10. Golany, B. (1988), "A note on including ordinal relations among multipliers in data envelopment analysis", Management Science 34/8, 1029-1033.
11. Kendall, M.G. (1962), Rank Correlation Methods, 3rd ed., Griffin, London.
12. Kettani, O., and Oral, M. (1990), "Equivalent formulations of nonlinear integer problems for efficient optimization", Management Science 36/1, 115-119.
13. Oral, M., Kettani, O., and Lang, P. (1991), "A methodology for collective evaluation and selection of industrial R&D projects", Management Science 37/7, 871-883.
14. Roberts, F.S. (1976), Discrete Mathematical Models, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
15. Roll, Y., and Golany, B. (1993), "Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA", Omega 21/1, 99-109.
16. Saaty, T.L. (1977), "A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures", Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15, 234-281.
17. Saaty, T.L. (1994), "Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic hierarchy process", European Journal of Operational Research 74/3, 426-447.
18. Sexton, T.R., Silkman, R.H., and Hogan, A.J. (1986), "Data envelopment analysis: critique and extensions", in: R.H. Silkman (ed.) Measuring Efficiency: An Assessment of Data Envelopment Analysis, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
19. Thompson, R.G., Singleton, Jr., F.D., Thrall, R.M., and Smith, B.A. (1986), "Comparative site evaluations for locating a high-energy physics lab in Texas", Interfaces 16/6, 35-49.
20. Tideman, T.N. (1976), "The capabilities of voting rules in the absence of coalitions", Policy and Politics 4, 23-44.
21. Wei, T.H. (1952), The Algebraic Foundation of Ranking Theory, Unpublished Thesis, Cambridge University