IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v56y2005i10d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Data envelopment analysis with common weights: the compromise solution approach

Author

Listed:
  • C Kao

    (National Cheng Kung University)

  • H-T Hung

    (National Cheng Kung University)

Abstract

A characteristic of data envelopment analysis (DEA) is to allow individual decision-making units (DMUs) to select the factor weights that are the most advantageous for them in calculating their efficiency scores. This flexibility in selecting the weights, on the other hand, deters the comparison among DMUs on a common base. In order to rank all the DMUs on the same scale, this paper proposes a compromise solution approach for generating common weights under the DEA framework. The efficiency scores calculated from the standard DEA model are regarded as the ideal solution for the DMUs to achieve. A common set of weights which produces the vector of efficiency scores for the DMUs closest to the ideal solution is sought. Based on the generalized measure of distance, a family of efficiency scores called ‘compromise solutions’ can be derived. The compromise solutions have the properties of unique solution and Pareto optimality not enjoyed by the solutions derived from the existing methods of common weights. An example of forest management illustrates that the compromise solution approach is able to generate a common set of weights, which not only differentiates efficient DMUs but also detects abnormal efficiency scores on a common base.

Suggested Citation

  • C Kao & H-T Hung, 2005. "Data envelopment analysis with common weights: the compromise solution approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(10), pages 1196-1203, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:56:y:2005:i:10:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601924
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601924
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601924?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. Per Andersen & Niels Christian Petersen, 1993. "A Procedure for Ranking Efficient Units in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1261-1264, October.
    2. 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, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 73-91.
    3. Halme, Merja & Korhonen, Pekka, 2000. "Restricting weights in value efficiency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 175-188, October.
    4. 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.
    5. P. L. Yu, 1973. "A Class of Solutions for Group Decision Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(8), pages 936-946, April.
    6. Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 1997. "Scaling units via the canonical correlation analysis in the DEA context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 629-637, August.
    7. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
    8. 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, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 245-259, July.
    9. Doyle, John R., 1995. "Multiattribute Choice for the Lazy Decision Maker: Let the Alternatives Decide!," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 87-100, April.
    10. Merja Halme & Tarja Joro & Pekka Korhonen & Seppo Salo & Jyrki Wallenius, 1999. "A Value Efficiency Approach to Incorporating Preference Information in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 103-115, January.
    11. Stewart, TJ, 1994. "Data envelopment analysis and multiple criteria decision making: A response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 205-206, March.
    12. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W., 1984. "The non-archimedean CCR ratio for efficiency analysis: A rejoinder to Boyd and Fare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 333-334, March.
    13. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2001. "Extended DEA-Discriminant Analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 324-351, June.
    14. Li, Xiao-Bai & Reeves, Gary R., 1999. "A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 507-517, June.
    15. Roll, Y & Golany, B., 1993. "Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 99-109, January.
    16. Sinuany-Stern, Zilla & Friedman, Lea, 1998. "DEA and the discriminant analysis of ratios for ranking units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 470-478, December.
    17. Thompson, Russell G. & Langemeier, Larry N. & Lee, Chih-Tah & Lee, Euntaik & Thrall, Robert M., 1990. "The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 93-108.
    18. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 1999. "DEA-discriminant analysis in the view of goal programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 564-582, June.
    19. Lahdelma, Risto & Hokkanen, Joonas & Salminen, Pekka, 1998. "SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 137-143, April.
    20. Kao, Chiang & Chi Yang, Yong, 1992. "Reorganization of forest districts via efficiency measurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 356-362, May.
    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, 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.
    2. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
    3. Kanematsu, Simon Y. & Carvalho, Ney P. & Martinhon, Carlos A. & Almeida, Mariana R., 2020. "Ranking using η-efficiency and relative size measures based on DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    4. T Joro & E-J Viitala, 2004. "Weight-restricted DEA in action: from expert opinions to mathematical models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(8), pages 814-821, August.
    5. Afsharian, Mohsen & Ahn, Heinz & Harms, Sören Guntram, 2021. "A review of DEA approaches applying a common set of weights: The perspective of centralized management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 3-15.
    6. Kang, Hee Jay & Kim, Changhee & Choi, Kanghwa, 2024. "Combining bootstrap data envelopment analysis with social networks for rank discrimination and suitable potential benchmarks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 312(1), pages 283-297.
    7. M I Gonzalez-Bravo, 2007. "Prior-Ratio-Analysis procedure to improve data envelopment analysis for performance measurement," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(9), pages 1214-1222, September.
    8. Adler, Nicole & Yazhemsky, Ekaterina, 2010. "Improving discrimination in data envelopment analysis: PCA-DEA or variable reduction," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 273-284, April.
    9. Yang, Chyan & Liu, Hsian-Ming, 2012. "Managerial efficiency in Taiwan bank branches: A network DEA," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 450-461.
    10. Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2016. "Common benchmarking and ranking of units with DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-9.
    11. Lampe, Hannes W. & Hilgers, Dennis, 2015. "Trajectories of efficiency measurement: A bibliometric analysis of DEA and SFA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 1-21.
    12. Sarrico, C. S. & Dyson, R. G., 2004. "Restricting virtual weights in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 17-34, November.
    13. Ahti Salo & Antti Punkka, 2011. "Ranking Intervals and Dominance Relations for Ratio-Based Efficiency Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 200-214, January.
    14. I. Contreras & S. Lozano & M. A. Hinojosa, 2021. "A bargaining approach to determine common weights in DEA," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 2181-2201, September.
    15. Helmi Hammami & Thanh Ngo & David Tripe & Dinh-Tri Vo, 2022. "Ranking with a Euclidean common set of weights in data envelopment analysis: with application to the Eurozone banking sector," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 675-694, April.
    16. Hosein Arman & Abdollah Hadi‐Vencheh, 2021. "Restricting the relative weights in data envelopment analysis," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 4127-4136, July.
    17. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2018. "Assessing well-being in European regions. Does government quality matter?," Working Papers 2018/06, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    18. Tavana, Madjid & Ebrahimnejad, Ali & Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J. & Mansourzadeh, Seyed Mehdi & Matin, Reza Kazemi, 2018. "A hybrid DEA-MOLP model for public school assessment and closure decision in the City of Philadelphia," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 70-89.
    19. 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.
    20. Dariush Khezrimotlagh & Wade D. Cook & Joe Zhu, 2021. "Number of performance measures versus number of decision making units in DEA," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 303(1), pages 529-562, August.

    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:pal:jorsoc:v:56:y:2005:i:10:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601924. 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.palgrave-journals.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.