Ranking ranges in cross-efficiency evaluations

The existence of alternate optima for the DEA weights may reduce the usefulness of the cross-efficiency evaluation, since the ranking provided depends on the choice of weights that the different DMUs make. In this paper, we develop a procedure to carry out the cross-efficiency evaluation without the need to make any specific choice of DEA weights. The proposed procedure takes into consideration all the possible choices of weights that all the DMUs can make, and yields for each unit a range for its possible rankings instead of a single ranking. This range is determined by the best and the worst rankings that would result in the best and the worst scenarios of each unit across all the DEA weights of all the DMUs. This approach might identify good/bad performers, as those that rank at the top/bottom irrespective of the weights that are chosen, or units that outperform others in all the scenarios. In addition, it may be used to analyze the stability of the ranking provided by the standard cross-efficiency evaluation.

[1]  Jie Wu,et al.  Achievement and benchmarking of countries at the Summer Olympics using cross efficiency evaluation method , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  José L. Ruiz,et al.  On the choice of weights profiles in cross-efficiency evaluations , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Kwai-Sang Chin,et al.  A neutral DEA model for cross-efficiency evaluation and its extension , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[4]  Zilla Sinuany-Stern,et al.  Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context , 2002, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Kaoru Tone,et al.  Data Envelopment Analysis , 1996 .

[6]  Mohsen Rostamy-Malkhalifeh,et al.  A Review of Ranking Models in Data Envelopment Analysis , 2013, J. Appl. Math..

[7]  Kwai-Sang Chin,et al.  DEA models for minimizing weight disparity in cross-efficiency evaluation , 2012, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[8]  K. Chin,et al.  Some alternative models for DEA cross-efficiency evaluation , 2010 .

[9]  Feng Yang,et al.  Ranking DMUs by using interval DEA cross efficiency matrix with acceptability analysis , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Rodney H. Green,et al.  Efficiency and Cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, Meanings and Uses , 1994 .

[11]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Data envelopment analysis vs. principal component analysis: An illustrative study of economic performance of Chinese cities , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[13]  Nuria Ramón,et al.  Reducing differences between profiles of weights: A "peer-restricted" cross-efficiency evaluation , 2011 .

[14]  T. Sexton,et al.  Data Envelopment Analysis: Critique and Extensions , 1986 .

[15]  Wen-Min Lu,et al.  A closer look at the economic-environmental disparities for regional development in China , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[16]  Fabio Sciancalepore,et al.  Using a DEA-cross efficiency approach in public procurement tenders , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[18]  C. Moorehead.  All rights reserved , 1997 .

[19]  Jie Wu,et al.  Alternative secondary goals in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation , 2008 .