IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/operea/v23y2023i3d10.1007_s12351-023-00783-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Closest target setting with minimum improvement costs considering demand and resource mismatches

Author

Listed:
  • Fangqing Wei

    (Hefei University of Technology)

  • Yanan Fu

    (Hefei University of Technology)

  • Feng Yang

    (University of Science and Technology of China)

  • Chun Sun

    (University of Science and Technology of China)

  • Sheng Ang

    (Hefei University of Technology)

Abstract

Data envelopment analysis models can be used to measure efficiency performance and yield an improvement target for the evaluated decision-making units. However, such models have not considered market factors. Demand fulfillment and resource management also matter in production. Sales losses due to insufficient stock or inventory holding costs happen when the production output of a factory is lower or higher than the market demand. Moreover, the cost of purchasing to cover shortages of a necessary resource or disposing of a surplus resource happens when the resource amount is lower or higher than the level required for production. In this study, we adopt the definition of penalized output used to quantify the mismatch between demand level and actual output, and we propose the concept of penalized input to deal further with mismatches between owned resources and actual input. We then develop an extended closest target setting model with both penalized input and penalized output to find a projection on the demand-truncated frontier with minimum improvement costs. Finally, two simple numerical examples are used to demonstrate the applicability and practicality of the proposed approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Fangqing Wei & Yanan Fu & Feng Yang & Chun Sun & Sheng Ang, 2023. "Closest target setting with minimum improvement costs considering demand and resource mismatches," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1-29, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:operea:v:23:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s12351-023-00783-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s12351-023-00783-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12351-023-00783-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12351-023-00783-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ke Wang & Chia-Yen Lee & Jieming Zhang & Yi-Ming Wei, 2018. "Operational performance management of the power industry: a distinguishing analysis between effectiveness and efficiency," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 513-537, September.
    2. Du, Juan & Liang, Liang & Chen, Yao & Bi, Gong-bing, 2010. "DEA-based production planning," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 105-112, February.
    3. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    4. Pendharkar, Parag C., 2015. "Cost minimizing target setting heuristics for making inefficient decision-making units efficient," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1-12.
    5. Kao, Chiang & Hwang, Shiuh-Nan, 2008. "Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 418-429, February.
    6. Kristiaan Kerstens & Ignace Van de Woestyne, 2021. "Cost functions are nonconvex in the outputs when the technology is nonconvex: convexification is not harmless," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 305(1), pages 81-106, October.
    7. Xu Wang & Kuan Lu & Jianming Shi & Takashi Hasuike, 2020. "A New MIP Approach on the Least Distance Problem in DEA," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 37(06), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Maria Silva Portela & Pedro Borges & Emmanuel Thanassoulis, 2003. "Finding Closest Targets in Non-Oriented DEA Models: The Case of Convex and Non-Convex Technologies," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 251-269, April.
    9. Frances Frei & Patrick Harker, 1999. "Projections Onto Efficient Frontiers: Theoretical and Computational Extensions to DEA," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 275-300, June.
    10. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Golany, B. & Seiford, L. & Stutz, J., 1985. "Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 91-107.
    11. Briec, W. & Lemaire, B., 1999. "Technical efficiency and distance to a reverse convex set," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 178-187, April.
    12. Lee, Chia-Yen & Johnson, Andrew L., 2012. "Two-dimensional efficiency decomposition to measure the demand effect in productivity analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(3), pages 584-593.
    13. Chen, Yao & Cook, Wade D. & Li, Ning & Zhu, Joe, 2009. "Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1170-1176, August.
    14. Lee, Chia-Yen & Johnson, Andrew L., 2014. "Proactive data envelopment analysis: Effective production and capacity expansion in stochastic environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 537-548.
    15. Morita, Hiroshi & Hirokawa, Koichiro & Zhu, Joe, 2005. "A slack-based measure of efficiency in context-dependent data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 357-362, August.
    16. Lee, Chia-Yen, 2016. "Most productive scale size versus demand fulfillment: A solution to the capacity dilemma," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 954-962.
    17. W. Briec & J. B. Lesourd, 1999. "Metric Distance Function and Profit: Some Duality Results," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 15-33, April.
    18. Juan Aparicio & José Ruiz & Inmaculada Sirvent, 2007. "Closest targets and minimum distance to the Pareto-efficient frontier in DEA," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 209-218, December.
    19. Sebastián Lozano & Gabriel Villa, 2010. "Gradual technical and scale efficiency improvement in DEA," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 123-136, January.
    20. Jiawei Li & Qingbo Huang & Yan Li, 2021. "Stepwise Improvement for Environmental Performance of Transportation Industry in China: A DEA Approach Based on Closest Targets," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-15, March.
    21. Walter Briec & Hervé Leleu, 2003. "Dual Representations of Non-Parametric Technologies and Measurement of Technical Efficiency," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 71-96, July.
    22. Bogetoft, Peter & Fare, Rolf & Obel, Borge, 2006. "Allocative efficiency of technically inefficient production units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 450-462, January.
    23. Aparicio, Juan & Pastor, Jesus T., 2014. "Closest targets and strong monotonicity on the strongly efficient frontier in DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 51-57.
    24. Asmild, Mette & Paradi, Joseph C. & Reese, David N. & Tam, Fai, 2007. "Measuring overall efficiency and effectiveness using DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 305-321, April.
    25. W. Briec, 1999. "Hölder Distance Function and Measurement of Technical Efficiency," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 111-131, April.
    26. Zhu, Joe, 2001. "Super-efficiency and DEA sensitivity analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(2), pages 443-455, March.
    27. Chia-Yen Lee & Andrew Johnson, 2015. "Effective production: measuring of the sales effect using data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 453-486, December.
    28. Tone, Kaoru, 2001. "A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(3), pages 498-509, May.
    29. Feifei Jin & Jinpei Liu & Ligang Zhou & Luis Martínez, 2021. "Consensus-Based Linguistic Distribution Large-Scale Group Decision Making Using Statistical Inference and Regret Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 813-845, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kao, Chiang, 2022. "Closest targets in the slacks-based measure of efficiency for production units with multi-period data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 1042-1054.
    2. Zhu, Qingyuan & Aparicio, Juan & Li, Feng & Wu, Jie & Kou, Gang, 2022. "Determining closest targets on the extended facet production possibility set in data envelopment analysis: Modeling and computational aspects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(3), pages 927-939.
    3. Aparicio, Juan & Garcia-Nove, Eva M. & Kapelko, Magdalena & Pastor, Jesus T., 2017. "Graph productivity change measure using the least distance to the pareto-efficient frontier in data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1-14.
    4. J. Vakili, 2017. "New Models for Computing the Distance of DMUs to the Weak Efficient Boundary of Convex and Nonconvex PPSs in DEA," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 34(06), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Juan Aparicio & Jesus T. Pastor & Jose L. Sainz-Pardo & Fernando Vidal, 2020. "Estimating and decomposing overall inefficiency by determining the least distance to the strongly efficient frontier in data envelopment analysis," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 747-770, June.
    6. Aparicio, Juan & Pastor, Jesus T., 2014. "Closest targets and strong monotonicity on the strongly efficient frontier in DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 51-57.
    7. Aparicio, Juan & Cordero, Jose M. & Pastor, Jesus T., 2017. "The determination of the least distance to the strongly efficient frontier in Data Envelopment Analysis oriented models: Modelling and computational aspects," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-10.
    8. Zhu, Qingyuan & Wu, Jie & Ji, Xiang & Li, Feng, 2018. "A simple MILP to determine closest targets in non-oriented DEA model satisfying strong monotonicity," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-8.
    9. Fangqing Wei & Junfei Chu & Jiayun Song & Feng Yang, 2019. "A cross-bargaining game approach for direction selection in the directional distance function," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 41(3), pages 787-807, September.
    10. Juan Aparicio & Magdalena Kapelko & Juan F. Monge, 2020. "A Well-Defined Composite Indicator: An Application to Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 299-323, July.
    11. Juan Aparicio & José L. Zofío & Jesús T. Pastor, 2023. "Decomposing Economic Efficiency into Technical and Allocative Components: An Essential Property," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 98-129, April.
    12. Sekitani, Kazuyuki & Zhao, Yu, 2023. "Least-distance approach for efficiency analysis: A framework for nonlinear DEA models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(3), pages 1296-1310.
    13. Lee, Chia-Yen, 2014. "Meta-data envelopment analysis: Finding a direction towards marginal profit maximization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(1), pages 207-216.
    14. J. Vakili & R. Sadighi Dizaji, 2021. "The closest strong efficient targets in the FDH technology: an enumeration method," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 91-105, April.
    15. Cook, Wade D. & Seiford, Larry M., 2009. "Data envelopment analysis (DEA) - Thirty years on," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(1), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Aparicio, Juan & Cordero, Jose M. & Gonzalez, Martin & Lopez-Espin, Jose J., 2018. "Using non-radial DEA to assess school efficiency in a cross-country perspective: An empirical analysis of OECD countries," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 9-20.
    17. Paradi, Joseph C. & Zhu, Haiyan & Edelstein, Barak, 2012. "Identifying managerial groups in a large Canadian bank branch network with a DEA approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 178-187.
    18. Mette Asmild & Tomas Baležentis & Jens Leth Hougaard, 2016. "Multi-directional productivity change: MEA-Malmquist," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 109-119, December.
    19. Fukuyama, Hirofumi & Weber, William L., 2010. "A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two-stage system with bad outputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 398-409, October.
    20. Tatiana Bencova & Andrea Bohacikova, 2022. "DEA in Performance Measurement of Two-Stage Processes: Comparative Overview of the Literature," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 5, pages 111-129.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:operea:v:23:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s12351-023-00783-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.