IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v327y2025i1p203-217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moral hazard in data envelopment analysis benchmarking

Author

Listed:
  • Tao, Xiangyang
  • Peng, Qiaoyu

Abstract

This paper delves into the concept of moral hazard in data envelopment analysis (DEA) benchmarking. The moral hazard issue emerges when decision-making units (DMUs) conceal their actions in the application of best practices, driven by the costs involved and the possibility of incomplete reimbursement. This issue remains unexplored in DEA benchmarking because previous studies assume that applying best practices is straightforward once these practices have been identified. Therefore, we postulate the presence of information asymmetry pertaining to the optimal production possibilities of DMUs, and regard applying best practices in benchmarking as a moral hazard issue. To address this issue, we formulate an incentive game and propose efficient contracts, where DEA Russell-like measures are first employed to describe DMUs’ effort levels. We prove applying best practices is the dominate strategy equilibrium of the incentive game with the implementation of efficient contracts. By exploring moral hazard in DEA benchmarking, this paper recommends the managers to incorporate considerations of information asymmetry when embarking on benchmarking activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Tao, Xiangyang & Peng, Qiaoyu, 2025. "Moral hazard in data envelopment analysis benchmarking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 327(1), pages 203-217.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:327:y:2025:i:1:p:203-217
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2025.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221725003571
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2025.05.001?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

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:ejores:v:327:y:2025:i:1:p:203-217. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.