Measuring balanced effectiveness and efficiency of German business schools’ research performance

The selection, aggregation and analysis of research performance data acquired by the Centre for Higher Education (CHE) as well as its assessment method identifying leading research business schools are controversially discussed in literature and praxis. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) provides an alternative method to aggregate research performance data. Thereby however, business schools can achieve high effectiveness or efficiency scores by taking into account only some and not all indicators considered as relevant, resulting in an incomplete picture of business schools’ research performance. In this paper we therefore measure and analyze a new key performance indicator, the balance score respective the specialization degree of a business school by using the new method Balanced-DEA. This indicator reflects to which extent the research performance of a business school is balanced or specialized relative to predefined virtual balanced reference points.

[1]  Alex Usher,et al.  A World of Difference: A Global Survey of University League Tables. Canadian Education Report Series. , 2006 .

[2]  Harold O. Fried,et al.  The Measurement of Productive Efficiency and Productivity Growth , 2008 .

[3]  Schneewittchen im Land der Klapperschlangen: Evaluation eines Evaluators , 2003 .

[4]  Heinz Ahn,et al.  Measuring the relative balance of DMUs , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Simon Marginson,et al.  To Rank or To Be Ranked: The Impact of Global Rankings in Higher Education , 2007 .

[6]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of decision making units , 1978 .

[7]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Improving envelopment in data envelopment analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[8]  Harald Dyckhoff,et al.  Empirische Produktionsfunktion betriebswirtschaftlicher Forschung: Eine Analyse der Daten des Centrums für Hochschulentwicklung , 2009 .

[9]  Stanko Dimitrov,et al.  Promoting symmetric weight selection in data envelopment analysis: A penalty function approach , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Marc Roubens,et al.  Advances in decision analysis , 1999 .

[11]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Weights restrictions and value judgements in Data Envelopment Analysis: Evolution, development and future directions , 1997, Ann. Oper. Res..

[12]  Harald Dyckhoff,et al.  Datenaggregation zur Leistungsbeurteilung durch Ranking: Vergleich der CHE- und DEA-Methodik sowie Ableitung eines Kompromissansatzes , 2007 .

[13]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  DEA and MCDA: Competing or Complementary Approaches? , 1999 .

[14]  R. Dyson,et al.  Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1988 .