IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v39y2011i6p634-641.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing differences between profiles of weights: A "peer-restricted" cross-efficiency evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Ramón, Nuria
  • Ruiz, José L.
  • Sirvent, Inmaculada

Abstract

This paper deals with the selection of the profiles of weights to be used in cross-efficiency evaluations. In an attempt to prevent unrealistic weighting schemes, one of the issues of main interest that we address here is that of the zero weights, since their use implies that some of the variables considered are excluded from the assessments to be made. In the calculation of cross-efficiency scores, we propose to ignore the profiles of weights of the DMUs that cannot make a choice of non-zero weights among their alternate optima. The different units are therefore assessed in a peer-evaluation that does not consider the profiles of weights of some inefficient DMUs. This approach is referred to as "peer-restricted" cross-efficiency evaluation. Aside from avoiding zero weights, the choice of weights that we make also seeks to reduce the differences between the weights profiles selected as much as possible. Thus, in the "peer-restricted" cross-efficiency evaluation in the present paper we also try to avoid that the different DMUs attach very different weights to the same variable. Finally, we extend this approach to derive a common set of weights by exploiting the idea of similarity between profiles of weights.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2011. "Reducing differences between profiles of weights: A "peer-restricted" cross-efficiency evaluation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 634-641, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:39:y:2011:i:6:p:634-641
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(11)00007-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Morais, Paulo & Camanho, Ana S., 2011. "Evaluation of performance of European cities with the aim to promote quality of life improvements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 398-409, August.
    2. Liu, John S. & Lu, Wen-Min, 2010. "DEA and ranking with the network-based approach: a case of R&D performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 453-464, December.
    3. Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2010. "A multiplier bound approach to assess relative efficiency in DEA without slacks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(1), pages 261-269, May.
    4. Chen, Tser-yieth, 2002. "An assessment of technical efficiency and cross-efficiency in Taiwan's electricity distribution sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(2), pages 421-433, March.
    5. Wang, Ying-Ming & Chin, Kwai-Sang, 2010. "Some alternative models for DEA cross-efficiency evaluation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 332-338, November.
    6. Roll, Y & Golany, B., 1993. "Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 99-109, January.
    7. Avkiran, Necmi K., 2011. "Association of DEA super-efficiency estimates with financial ratios: Investigating the case for Chinese banks," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 323-334, June.
    8. Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2010. "On the choice of weights profiles in cross-efficiency evaluations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1564-1572, December.
    9. Shang, Jen & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 1995. "A unified framework for the selection of a Flexible Manufacturing System," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 297-315, September.
    10. Chang, Shyr-Juh & Hsiao, Hsing-Chin & Huang, Li-Hua & Chang, Hsihui, 2011. "Taiwan quality indicator project and hospital productivity growth," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 14-22, January.
    11. Paradi, Joseph C. & Rouatt, Stephen & Zhu, Haiyan, 2011. "Two-stage evaluation of bank branch efficiency using data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 99-109, January.
    12. Wang, Ying-Ming & Chin, Kwai-Sang, 2011. "The use of OWA operator weights for cross-efficiency aggregation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 493-503, October.
    13. Liang, Liang & Wu, Jie & Cook, Wade D. & Zhu, Joe, 2008. "Alternative secondary goals in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 1025-1030, June.
    14. Du, Juan & Liang, Liang & Chen, Yao & Bi, Gong-bing, 2010. "DEA-based production planning," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 105-112, February.
    15. Kao, Chiang, 2010. "Malmquist productivity index based on common-weights DEA: The case of Taiwan forests after reorganization," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 484-491, December.
    16. 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.
    17. Pasiouras, Fotios & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2010. "Empirical research in the EU banking sector and the financial crisis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 239-240, October.
    18. Cook, Wade D. & Zhu, Joe, 2007. "Within-group common weights in DEA: An analysis of power plant efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 207-216, April.
    19. Green, Rodney H. & Doyle, John R. & Cook, Wade D., 1996. "Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 461-472, May.
    20. Stewart, Theodor J., 2010. "Goal directed benchmarking for organizational efficiency," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 534-539, December.
    21. Wu, Jie & Liang, Liang & Chen, Yao, 2009. "DEA game cross-efficiency approach to Olympic rankings," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 909-918, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zanella, Andreia & Camanho, Ana S. & Dias, Teresa G., 2015. "Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 517-530.
    2. repec:wsi:apjorx:v:34:y:2017:i:05:n:s0217595917500270 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:spr:annopr:v:261:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2562-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2016. "Common benchmarking and ranking of units with DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-9.
    5. Alcaraz, Javier & Ramón, Nuria & Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2013. "Ranking ranges in cross-efficiency evaluations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(3), pages 516-521.
    6. Liu, John S. & Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Lu, Wen-Min, 2016. "Research fronts in data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 33-45.
    7. Ruiz, José L., 2013. "Cross-efficiency evaluation with directional distance functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 181-189.
    8. Atici, Kazim Baris & Podinovski, Victor V., 2015. "Using data envelopment analysis for the assessment of technical efficiency of units with different specialisations: An application to agriculture," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 72-83.
    9. repec:eee:jomega:v:74:y:2018:i:c:p:82-91 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2012. "On the DEA total weight flexibility and the aggregation in cross-efficiency evaluations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 732-738.

    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:jomega:v:39:y:2011:i:6:p:634-641. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.