DEA models for minimizing weight disparity in cross-efficiency evaluation

Journal of the Operational Research Society

Volumn 63, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 1079-1088

  Wang, Y M ^a   Chin, K S ^b   Wang, S ^c  

^a FUZHOU UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

cross efficiency evaluation; data envelopment analysis; DEA ranking; virtual disparity

Indexed keywords

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; EFFICIENCY;

CROSS-EFFICIENCY EVALUATION; DEA MODELS; DEA RANKING; INPUT AND OUTPUTS; NUMBER OF ZEROS; RANKING DECISIONS; VIRTUAL DISPARITY;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 84863441383     PISSN: 01605682     EISSN: 14769360     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/jors.2011.116     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Andersen P and Petersen NC (1993). A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 39: 1261-1264.
2. Anderson TR, Hollingsworth K and Inman L (2002). The fixed weighting nature of a cross-evaluation model. Journal of Productivity Analysis 17: 249-255. (Pubitemid 37131028)
3. Baker PC and Talluri S (1997). A closer look at the use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering 32: 101-108. (Pubitemid 127422472)
4. Bao CP, Chen TH and Chang SY (2008). Slack-based ranking method: An interpretation to the cross-efficiency method in DEA. Journal of the Operational Research Society 59: 860-862.
5. Charnes A, Cooper WW and Rhodes E (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 2: 429-444. (Pubitemid 9402758)
6. Chen TY (2002). An assessment of technical efficiency and crossefficiency in Taiwan's electricity distribution sector. European Journal of Operational Research 137: 421-433.
7. Cooper WW, Ruiz JL and Sirvent I (2007). Choosing weights from alternative optimal solutions of dual multiplier models in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research 180: 443-458. (Pubitemid 46123850)
8. Doyle J and Green R (1994). Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and uses. Journal of the Operational Research Society 45: 567-578.
9. Doyle JR and Green RH (1995). Cross-evaluation in DEA: Improving discrimination among DMUs. INFOR 33: 205-222.
10. Ertay T and Ruan D (2005). Data envelopment analysis based decision model for optimal operator allocation in CMS. European Journal of Operational Research 164: 800-810. (Pubitemid 40114599)
11. Green RH, Doyle JR and Cook WD (1996). Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research 90: 461-472. (Pubitemid 126369041)
12. Jahanshahloo GR, Lotfi FH, Jafari Y and Maddahi R (2011). Selecting symmetric weights as a secondary goal in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation. Applied Mathematical Modelling 35: 544-549.
13. Kao C and Hung HT (2005). Data envelopment analysis with common weights: The compromise solution approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society 56: 1196-1203. (Pubitemid 43090715)
14. Lam KF (2010). In the determination of weight sets to compute cross-efficiency ratios in DEA. Journal of the Operational Research Society 61: 134-143.
15. Liang L, Wu J, Cook WD and Zhu J (2008a). Alternative secondary goals in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation. International Journal of Production Economics 113: 1025-1030.
16. Liang L, Wu J, Cook WD and Zhu J (2008b). The DEA game cross-efficiency model and its Nash equilibrium. Operations Research 56: 1278-1288.
17. Lu WM and Lo SF (2007a). A closer look at the economicenvironmental disparities for regional development in China. European Journal of Operational Research 183: 882-894.
18. Lu WM and Lo SF (2007b). A benchmark-learning roadmap for regional sustainable development in China. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58: 841-849.
19. Oral M, Kettani O and Lang P (1991). A methodology for collective evaluation and selection of industrial R&D projects. Management Science 37: 871-885.
20. Ramón N, Ruiz JL and Sirvent I (2010). On the choice of weights profiles in cross-efficiency evaluations. European Journal of Operational Research 207: 1564-1572.
21. Ramón N, Ruiz JL and Sirvent I (2011). Reducing differences between profiles of weights: A 'peer-restricted' cross-efficiency evaluation. Omega 39: 634-641.
22. Sexton TR, Silkman RH and Hogan AJ (1986). Data envelopment analysis: Critique and extensions. In: Silkman RH (ed). Measuring Efficiency: An Assessment of Data Envelopment Analysis. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.
23. Shang J and Sueyoshi T (1995). A unified framework for the selection of flexible manufacturing system. European Journal of Operational Research 85: 297-315.
24. Sun S (2002). Assessing computer numerical control machines using data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Production Research 40: 2011-2039. (Pubitemid 34699711)
25. Sun S and LuWM(2005). A cross-efficiency profiling for increasing discrimination in Data Envelopment Analysis. INFOR 43: 51-60. (Pubitemid 40449655)
26. Talluri S and Sarkis J (1997). Extensions in efficiency measurement of alternate machine component grouping solutions via data envelopment analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 44: 299-304. (Pubitemid 127769859)
27. Tofallis C (1996). Improving discernment in DEA using profiling. Omega 24: 361-364. (Pubitemid 126164280)
28. Tofallis C (1997). Input efficiency profiling: An application to airlines. Computers & Operations Research 24: 253-258.
29. Wang YM and Chin KS (2010a). A neutral DEA model for cross-efficiency evaluation and its extension. Expert Systems with Applications 37: 3666-3675.
30. Wang YM and Chin KS (2010b). Some alternative models for DEA cross-efficiency evaluation. International Journal of Production Economics 128: 332-338.
31. Wang YM and Chin KS (2011). The use of OWA operator weights for cross-efficiency aggregation. Omega 39: 493-503.
32. Wong YHB and Beasley JE (1990). Restricting weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society 41: 829-835.
33. Wu D (2009). Performance evaluation: An integrated method using data envelopment analysis and fuzzy preference relations. European Journal of Operational Research 194: 227-235.
34. Wu J, Liang L, Wu D and Yang F (2008a). Olympics ranking and benchmarking based on cross efficiency evaluation method and cluster analysis: The case of Sydney 2000. International Journal of Enterprise Network Management 2: 377-392.
35. Wu J, Liang L, Yang F and Yan H (2008b). Bargaining game model in the evaluation of decision making units. Expert Systems with Applications 36: 4357-4362.
36. Wu J, Liang L, Zha Y and Yang F (2008c). Determination of crossefficiency under the principle of rank priority in cross-evaluation. Expert Systems with Applications 36: 4826-4829.
37. Wu J, Liang L and Zha YC (2008d). Determination of the weights of ultimate cross efficiency based on the solution of nucleolus in cooperative game. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice 28: 92-97. (Pubitemid 351849646)
38. Wu J, Liang L and Chen Y (2009a). DEA game cross-efficiency approach to Olympic rankings. Omega 37: 909-918.
39. Wu J, Liang L and Yang F (2009b). Achievement and benchmarking of countries at the Summer Olympics using cross efficiency evaluation method. European Journal of Operational Research 197: 722-730.
40. Wu J, Liang L and Yang F (2009c). Determination of the weights for the ultimate cross efficiency using Shapley value in cooperative game. Expert Systems with Applications 36: 872-876.
41. Wu J, Liang L and Zha YC (2009d). Preference voting and ranking using DEA game cross efficiency model. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 52: 105-111.
42. Yu MM, Ting SC and Chen MC (2010). Evaluating the cross-efficiency of information sharing in supply chains. Expert Systems with Applications 37: 2891-2897.