Benchmarking and target setting with expert preferences: An application to the evaluation of educational performance of Spanish universities

European Journal of Operational Research

Volumn 242, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 594-605

  Ruiz, José L ^a   Segura, Jose V ^a   Sirvent, Inmaculada ^a  

^a MIGUEL HERNÁNDEZ UNIVERSITY   (Spain)

Author keywords

Benchmarking; Closest targets; DEA; Educational performance; Higher education

Indexed keywords

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

BEST PRACTICES; CLOSEST TARGETS; DEA MODELS; EDUCATIONAL PERFORMANCE; EXPERT OPINION; HIGHER EDUCATION; PRIOR KNOWLEDGE; TARGET SETTING;

BENCHMARKING;

EID: 84920706753     PISSN: 03772217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.10.014     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abbott, M., & Doucouliagos, C. (2003). The efficiency of Australian universities: A data envelopment analysis. Economics of Education Review, 22, 89-97.
2. Adler, N., Liebert, V., & Yazhemsky, E. (2013). Benchmarking airports from a managerial perspective. Omega, 41(2), 442-458.
3. Agasisti, T., & Dal Bianco, A. (2009). Reforming the university sector: Effects on teaching efficiency-Evidence from Italy. Higher Education, 57, 477-498.
4. Andrejić, M., Bojović, N., & Kilibarda, M. (2013). Benchmarking distribution centres using Principal Component Analysis and Data Envelopment Analysis: A case study of Serbia. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), 3926-3933.
5. Aparicio, J, Ruiz, J. L., & Sirvent, I. (2007). Closest targets and minimum distance to the Pareto-efficient frontier in DEA. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 28(3), 209-218.
6. Archibald, R. B., & Feldman, D. H. (2008). Graduation rates and accountability: Regressions versus production frontiers. Research in Higher Education, 49(1), 80-100.
7. Avkiran, N. K. (2001). Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian universities through data envelopment analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 35(1), 57-80.
8. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1078-1092.
9. Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E., & Zaim, S. (2013). Measuring the relative efficiency of quality management practices in Turkish public and private universities. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(12), 1810-1830.
10. Breu, T. M., & Raab, R. L. (1994). Efficiency and perceived quality of the nation's top 25 national universities and national liberal arts colleges: An application of data envelopment analysis to higher education. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 28(1), 33-45.
11. Brockett, P. L., Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Huang, Z. M., & Sun, D. B. (1997). Data transformation in DEA cone ratio envelopment approaches for monitoring bank performances. European Journal of Operational Research, 98, 250-268.
12. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444.
13. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Thrall, R. M. (1991). A structure for classifying and characterizing efficiency and inefficiency in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 2(3), 197-237.
14. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Huang, Z. M., & Sun, D. B. (1990). Polyhedral cone-ratio DEA models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks. Journal of Econometrics, 46, 73-91.
15. Cherchye, L., Moesen, W., Rogge, N., & Puyenbroeck, T. V. (2006). An introduction to 'benefit of the doubt' composite indicators. Social Indicators Research, 82(1), 111-145.
16. Cook, W. D., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2004). Models for performance benchmarking: Measuring the effect of e-business activities on banking performance. Omega, 32(4), 313-322.
17. Cook, W. D., Tone, K., & Zhu, J. (2014). Data envelopment analysis: Prior to choosing a model. Omega, 44, 1-4.
18. Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2007). Classifying inputs and outputs in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 180(2), 692-699.
19. Cooper, W. W., Ruiz, J. L., & Sirvent, I. (2011). Choices and uses of DEA weights. In W. W. Cooper, L. W. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis (pp. 93-126) Springer.
20. Costa, R. (2012). Assessing intellectual capital efficiency and productivity: An application to the Italian yacht manufacturing sector. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(8), 7255-7261.
21. Dai, X., & Kuosmanen, T. (2014). Best-practice benchmarking using clustering methods: Application to energy regulation. Omega, 42(1), 179-188.
22. Daraio, C., & Simar, L. (2007). Conditional nonparametric frontier models for convex and nonconvex technologies: A unifying approach. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 28(1-2), 13-32.
23. Dyson, R. G., Allen, R., Camanho, A. S., Podinovski, V. V., Sarrico, C. S., & Shale, E. A. (2001). Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 245-259.
24. Estrada, S. A., Song, H. S., Kim, Y. A., Namn, S. H., & Kang, S. C. (2009). A method of stepwise benchmarking for inefficient DMUs based on the proximity-based target selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(9), 11595-11604.
25. Flegg, A. T., & Allen, D. O. (2007). Does expansion cause congestion? The case of the older British universities, 1994-2004. Education Economics, 15(1), 75-102.
26. Golany, B. (1995). Evaluating efficiency-effectiveness-equality trade-offs: A data envelopment analysis approach. Management Science, 41(7), 1172-1184.
27. Hung, S. W., Lu, W. M., & Wang, T. P. (2010). Benchmarking the operating efficiency of Asia container ports. European Journal of Operational Research, 203(3), 706-713.
28. Izadi, H., Johnes, G., Oskrochi, R., & Crouchley, R. (2002). Stochastic frontier estimation of a CES cost function: The case of higher education in Britain. Economics of Education Review, 21, 63-71.
29. Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (2009). Higher education institutions' costs and efficiency: Taking the decomposition a further step. Economics of Education Review, 28, 107-113.
30. Johnes, J. (2006). Data envelopment analysis and its application to the measurement of efficiency in higher education. Economics of Education Review, 25, 273-288.
31. Johnes, J. (2008). Efficiency and productivity change in the English higher education sector from 1996/97 to 2004/5. The Manchester School, 76(6), 653-674.
32. Kuo, J. S., & Ho, Y. C. (2008). The cost efficiency impact of the university operation fund on public universities in Taiwan. Economics of Education Review, 27, 603-612.
33. Lee, H., Park, Y., & Choi, H. (2009). Comparative evaluation of performance of national R&D programs with heterogeneous objectives: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 196(3), 847-855.
34. Lozano, S., & Villa, G. (2005). Determining a sequence of targets in DEA. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(12), 1439-1447.
35. Portela, M. C. A. S., Borges, P. C., & Thanassoulis, E. (2003). Finding closest targets in non-oriented DEA models: The case of convex and non-convex technologies. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 19(2-3), 251-269.
36. Roll, Y., Cook, W. D., & Golany, B. (1991). Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis. IEEE Transactions, 23(1), 2-9.
37. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process McGraw-Hill International Book Company.
38. Shang, J., & Sueyoshi, T. (1995). A unified framework for the selection of a flexible manufacturing system. European Journal of Operational Research, 85(2), 297-315.
39. Takamura, Y., & Tone, K. (2003). A comparative site evaluation study for relocating Japanese government agencies out of Tokyo. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 37(2), 85-102.
40. Thanassoulis, E., Kortelainen, M., Johnes, G., & Johnes, J. (2011). Costs and efficiency of higher education institutions in England: A DEA analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62 (7), 1282-1297.
41. Thanassoulis, E., Portela, M. C. A. S., & Allen, R. (2004). Incorporating value judgments in DEA. In W. W. Cooper, L. W. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
42. Thompson, R. G., Dharmapala, P. S., Rothenberg, L. J., & Thrall, R. M. (1996). DEA/AR efficiency and profitability of 14 major oil companies in US exploration and production. Computers and Operations Research, 23(4), 357-373.
43. Thrall, R. M. (1996). Duality, classification and slacks in DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 66, 109-138.
44. Tone, K. (2010). Variations on the theme of slacks-based measure of efficiency in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 200(3), 901-907.
45. Wong, Y. -H. B., & Beasley, J. E. (1990). Restricting weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41(9), 829-835.
46. Worthington, A. C., & Lee, B. L. (2008). Efficiency, technology and productivity change in Australian universities, 1998-2003. Economics of Education Review, 27(3), 285-298.
47. Yang, J. -B., Wong, B. Y. H., Xu, D. -L., & Stewart, T. J. (2009). Integrating DEA-oriented performance assessment and target setting using interactive MOLP methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 195(1), 205-222.
48. Zanella, A., Camanho, A. S., & Dias, T. G. (2013). Benchmarking countries' environmental performance. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(3), 426-438.
49. Zhu, J. (1996). Data envelopment analysis with preference structure. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47(1), 136-150.