IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jnljam/v2011y2011i1n712194.html

The DEA and Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach to Departments′ Performances: A Pilot Study

Author

Listed:
  • Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh

Abstract

This paper processes a unification of Fuzzy TOPSIS and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to select the units with most efficiency. This research is a two‐stage model designed to fully rank the organizational alternatives, where each alternative has multiple inputs and outputs. First, the alternative evaluation problem is formulated by Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and separately formulates each pair of units. In the second stage, we use the opinion of experts to be applied into a model of group Decision‐Making (DM) called the Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS (IFT) method. The results of both methods are then multiplied to obtain the results. DEA and Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS ranking do not replace the DEA classification model; rather, it furthers the analysis by providing full ranking in the DEA context for all units by aggregate individual opinions of decision makers for rating the importance of criteria and alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh, 2011. "The DEA and Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach to Departments′ Performances: A Pilot Study," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2011(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jnljam:v:2011:y:2011:i:1:n:712194
    DOI: 10.1155/2011/712194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/712194
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2011/712194?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cook, Wade D. & Kress, Moshe & Seiford, Lawrence M., 1992. "Prioritization models for frontier decision making units in DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 319-323, June.
    2. 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.
    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. 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.
    5. Wade D. Cook & Moshe Kress, 1990. "A Data Envelopment Model for Aggregating Preference Rankings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(11), pages 1302-1310, November.
    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. Johnes, Jill & Johnes, Geraint, 1995. "Research funding and performance in U.K. University Departments of Economics: A frontier analysis," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 301-314, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Muhittin Oral & Ossama Kettani & Pascal Lang, 1991. "A Methodology for Collective Evaluation and Selection of Industrial R&D Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(7), pages 871-885, July.
    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. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh, 2012. "Evaluating Projects Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Group Decision Making," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2012(1).
    2. Aneirson Francisco da Silva & Rafael de Carvalho Miranda & Fernando Augusto Silva Marins & Erica Ximenes Dias, 2026. "An approach multiple criteria network data envelopment analysis model," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 1-24, June.

    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. 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.
    2. Reza Kiani Mavi & Sajad Kazemi & Jay M. Jahangiri, 2013. "Developing Common Set of Weights with Considering Nondiscretionary Inputs and Using Ideal Point Method," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2013(1).
    3. Jie Wu & Junfei Chu & Qingyuan Zhu & Pengzhen Yin & Liang Liang, 2016. "DEA cross-efficiency evaluation based on satisfaction degree: an application to technology selection," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(20), pages 5990-6007, October.
    4. Wey, Wann-Ming & Peng, Ti-Ching, 2025. "Smart growth principles and airport-centered TOD: A framework for sustainable site selection," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Soltanifar, Mehdi & Shahghobadi, Saeid, 2013. "Selecting a benevolent secondary goal model in data envelopment analysis cross-efficiency evaluation by a voting model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 65-74.
    6. 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.
    7. Podinovski, V. V., 2004. "Suitability and redundancy of non-homogeneous weight restrictions for measuring the relative efficiency in DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 380-395, April.
    8. Jie Wu & Junfei Chu & Qingyuan Zhu & Yongjun Li & Liang Liang, 2016. "Determining common weights in data envelopment analysis based on the satisfaction degree," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1446-1458, December.
    9. Mohammad Izadikhah & Reza Farzipoor Saen, 2019. "Solving voting system by data envelopment analysis for assessing sustainability of suppliers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 641-669, June.
    10. Wenli Liu & Ying-Ming Wang & Shulong Lv, 2017. "An aggressive game cross-efficiency evaluation in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 259(1), pages 241-258, December.
    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. Liang Liang & Jie Wu & Wade D. Cook & Joe Zhu, 2008. "The DEA Game Cross-Efficiency Model and Its Nash Equilibrium," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 1278-1288, October.
    13. Hashimoto, Akihiro, 1997. "A ranked voting system using a DEA/AR exclusion model: A note," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 600-604, March.
    14. 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.
    15. Tsou, Chi-Ming & Huang, Deng-Yuan, 2010. "On some methods for performance ranking and correspondence analysis in the DEA context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(3), pages 771-783, June.
    16. Lei Fang & C-Q Zhang, 2008. "Resource allocation based on the DEA model," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(8), pages 1136-1141, August.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. José L. Ruiz & Inmaculada Sirvent, 2017. "Fuzzy cross-efficiency evaluation: a possibility approach," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 111-126, March.
    20. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.

    More about this item

    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:wly:jnljam:v:2011:y:2011:i:1:n:712194. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/4185 .

    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.