Comparative evaluation of performance of national R&D programs with heterogeneous objectives: A DEA approach

The strategic importance of performance evaluation of national R&D programs is highlighted as the resource allocation draws more attention in R&D policy agenda. Due to the heterogeneity of national R&D programs' objectives, however, it is intractably difficult to relatively evaluate multiple programs and, consequently, few studies have been conducted on the performance comparison of the R&D programs. This study measures and compares the performance of national R&D programs using data envelopment analysis (DEA). Since DEA allows each DMU to choose the optimal weights of inputs and outputs which maximize its efficiency, it can mirror R&D programs' unique characteristics by assigning relatively high weights to the variables in which each program has strength. Every project in every R&D program is evaluated together based on the DEA model for comparison of efficiency among different systems. Kruskal-Wallis test with a post hoc Mann-Whitney U test is then run to compare performance of R&D programs. Two alternative approaches to incorporating the importance of variables, the AR model and output integration, are also introduced. The results are expected to provide policy implications for effectively formulating and implementing national R&D programs.

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

[2]  Srinivas Talluri,et al.  Faster, better, cheaper: A study of NPD project efficiency and performance tradeoffs , 2006 .

[3]  Trinidad Gómez,et al.  Análisis de la eficiencia de los grupos de investigación por ramas de conocimiento , 2010 .

[4]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Applied data envelopment analysis , 1991 .

[5]  Laurens Cherchye,et al.  An Introduction to ‘Benefit of the Doubt’ Composite Indicators , 2007 .

[6]  Ramu Ramanathan,et al.  An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis , 2003 .

[7]  E. Wang,et al.  Relative efficiency of R&D activities: A cross-country study accounting for environmental factors in the DEA approach , 2007 .

[8]  Bronwyn H. Hall,et al.  The Economics and Econometrics of Innovation , 2000 .

[9]  M. Kocher,et al.  Measuring productivity of research in economics: A cross-country study using DEA , 2006 .

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

[11]  Yong-Tae Park,et al.  An international comparison of R&D efficiency: DEA approach , 2005 .

[12]  Kiyong Om,et al.  Evaluation of national R&D projects in Korea , 1996 .

[13]  M. Jones,et al.  UK Accountants' Perceptions of Research Journal Quality , 1996 .

[14]  B. M. Gupta,et al.  Assessment of impact of AICTE funding on R&D and educational development , 2005, Scientometrics.

[15]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Peer review and bibliometric indicators of scientific performance: A comparison of cum laude doctorates with ordinary doctorates in physics , 1987, Scientometrics.

[16]  A. Charnes,et al.  Data Envelopment Analysis Theory, Methodology and Applications , 1995 .

[17]  A. Raan,et al.  A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review , 1993 .

[18]  James D. Adams,et al.  Research Productivity in a System of Universities , 1996 .

[19]  Jyrki Wallenius,et al.  Value efficiency analysis of academic research , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[20]  Frederic M. Scherer,et al.  The propensity to patent , 1983 .

[21]  William W. Cooper,et al.  SHORT COMMUNICATION: MEASURING EFFICIENCY OF DECISION MAKING UNITS , 1979 .

[22]  A. Zhang,et al.  A study of the R&D efficiency and productivity of Chinese firms , 2003 .

[23]  Samuel B. Graves,et al.  R&D productivity: A global multi-industry comparison , 1996 .

[24]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[25]  Joseph C. Paradi,et al.  Marginal Rates and Two-dimensional Level Curves in DEA , 1998 .

[26]  Joseph C. Paradi,et al.  Knowledge worker performance analysis using DEA: an application to engineering design teams at Bell Canada , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

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

[28]  K. Bi,et al.  An AHP/DEA method for measurement of the efficiency of R&D management activities in universities , 2004 .

[29]  Toshiyuki Sueyoshi,et al.  A unified framework for the selection of a Flexible Manufacturing System , 1995 .

[30]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming , 1990 .

[31]  Kaoru Tone,et al.  A comparative site evaluation study for relocating Japanese government agencies out of Tokyo , 2003 .

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

[33]  Avraham Shtub,et al.  Constructing and evaluating balanced portfolios of R&D projects with interactions: A DEA based methodology , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..