A Shapley value index on the importance of variables in DEA models

In many DEA applications, decision makers always confront with a problem, which is how to determine the importance of each input or output variable in performance measurement? This paper approaches this problem from a cooperative game point of view. First, we have defined an efficiency change ratio (ECR) to calculate the marginal impact of each variable on the efficiency evaluation, which compares the efficiency scores of the two radial DEA models differing in whether the given variable is included. Based upon a simple data example, this paper finds that it is not suitable to use ECR to determine the importance of each variable, for the value of the variable's ECR is very sensitive to the selected input set and output set. Then, this paper has defined a characteristic function of each coalition (input or output variable set) based upon ECR. The characteristic function is super-additive. Thus, we use Shapley value index as the solution of the cooperative game to determine the importance of the variable under evaluation. Finally, the proposed approach has been applied to a data set from prior DEA literature.

[1]  Ronald K. Klimberg.  A Multiple Objective Approach to Data Envelopment Analysis , 1995 .

[2]  John Maleyeff,et al.  Quantitative Models for Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking: DEA with Spreadsheets and DEA Excel Solver , 2005 .

[3]  Yongjun Li,et al.  Allocating the fixed cost as a complement of other cost inputs: A DEA approach , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Andrew Hughes,et al.  Sensitivity and dimensionality tests of DEA efficiency scores , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Quantitative Models for Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking: Data Envelopment Analysis with Spreadsheets and DEA Excel Solver , 2002 .

[6]  A. Charnes,et al.  Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1984 .

[7]  Cliff T. Ragsdale,et al.  Spreadsheet modeling and decision analysis , 1996 .

[8]  Janet M. Wagner,et al.  Stepwise selection of variables in data envelopment analysis: Procedures and managerial perspectives , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Quantitative models for performance evaluation and benchmarking , 2003 .

[10]  Yongjun Li,et al.  Increasing the discriminatory power of DEA in the presence of the undesirable outputs and large dimensionality of data sets with PCA , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[11]  W. Cooper,et al.  Some models and measures for evaluating performances with DEA: past accomplishments and future prospects , 2007 .

[12]  Larry Jenkins,et al.  A multivariate statistical approach to reducing the number of variables in data envelopment analysis , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  John E. Beasley,et al.  Restricting Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1990 .

[14]  Jesús T. Pastor,et al.  A Statistical Test for Nested Radial Dea Models , 2002, Oper. Res..

[15]  Mette Asmild,et al.  Theoretical perspectives of trade-off analysis using DEA , 2006 .

[16]  Lawrence M. Seiford,et al.  Recent developments in dea : the mathematical programming approach to frontier analysis , 1990 .

[17]  Lawrence M. Seiford,et al.  Data envelopment analysis: The evolution of the state of the art (1978–1995) , 1996 .

[18]  Joseph Sarkis,et al.  A comparative analysis of DEA as a discrete alternative multiple criteria decision tool , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[20]  Boaz Golany,et al.  Evaluation of deregulated airline networks using data envelopment analysis combined with principal component analysis with an application to Western Europe , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..