Multistage network DEA: Decomposition and aggregation weights of component performance

Abstract Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a technique for measuring the performance of peer decision making units (DMUs) that have multiple performance metrics. If the performance is viewed as efficiency, then the DEA frontier can be viewed as a production function along with the performance metrics characterized as inputs and outputs. However, DEA can be used as a benchmarking tool where the DEA frontier represents best practice frontier. A significant body of work has been directed at problem settings where the DMU is characterized by multistage or network processes. The current paper first examines weighted additive performance of two-stage process and then extends the methodology to examine general network structures. Under the condition of isolating the impact of stage weights on the overall performance, we propose a new overall performance as convex linear combination of multi-stage performance and prove that the existence of maximum score for the resulting new overall performance. We illustrate our findings through numerical and empirical data sets.

[1]  John S. Liu,et al.  Data envelopment analysis 1978-2010: A citation-based literature survey , 2013 .

[2]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Data envelopment analysis : a handbook on the modeling of internal structures and networks , 2014 .

[3]  Chiang Kao,et al.  Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Lawrence M. Seiford,et al.  Data envelopment analysis (DEA) - Thirty years on , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Joseph C. Paradi,et al.  A survey on bank branch efficiency and performance research with data envelopment analysis , 2013 .

[6]  Yongjun Li,et al.  DEA Models for Extended Two-Stage Network Structures , 2012 .

[7]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Programming with linear fractional functionals , 1962 .

[8]  John S. Liu,et al.  Research fronts in data envelopment analysis , 2016 .

[9]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Decomposition weights and overall efficiency in two-stage additive network DEA , 2017, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Joe Zhu,et al.  DEA models for two‐stage processes: Game approach and efficiency decomposition , 2008 .

[11]  Dimitris K. Despotis,et al.  Composition versus decomposition in two-stage network DEA: a reverse approach , 2016 .

[12]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Network DEA: Additive efficiency decomposition , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Walter Ukovich,et al.  DEA-like models for the efficiency evaluation of hierarchically structured units , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[14]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  L. Seiford,et al.  Profitability and Marketability of the Top 55 U.S. Commercial Banks , 1999 .

[16]  Dimitris K. Despotis,et al.  A network DEA approach for series multi-stage processes☆ , 2016 .

[17]  Sheng Ang,et al.  Pitfalls of decomposition weights in the additive multi-stage DEA model ☆ , 2016 .

[18]  Hamid Noori,et al.  A new methodology for evaluating sustainable product design performance with two-stage network data envelopment analysis , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  R. Färe,et al.  PRODUCTIVITY AND INTERMEDIATE PRODUCTS: A FRONTIER APPROACH , 1995 .

[20]  William L. Weber,et al.  A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two-stage system with bad outputs , 2010 .

[21]  Kaoru Tone,et al.  Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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