Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility

Super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) model is obtained when a decision making unit (DMU) under evaluation is excluded from the reference set. Because of the possible infeasibility of super-efficiency DEA model, the use of super-efficiency DEA model has been restricted to the situations where constant returns to scale (CRS) are assumed. It is shown that one of the input-oriented and output-oriented super-efficiency DEA models must be feasible for a any efficient DMU under evaluation if the variable returns to scale (VRS) frontier consists of increasing, constant, and decreasing returns to scale DMUs. We use both input- and output-oriented super-efficiency models to fully characterize the super-efficiency. When super-efficiency is used as an efficiency stability measure, infeasibility means the highest super-efficiency (stability). If super-efficiency is interpreted as input saving or output surplus achieved by a specific efficient DMU, infeasibility does not necessary mean the highest super-efficiency.     

Super-efficiency infeasibility and zero data in DEA

Lee et al. (2011) and Chen and Liang (2011) develop a data envelopment analysis (DEA) model to address the infeasibility issue in super-efficiency models. In this paper, we point out that their model is feasible when input data are positive but can be infeasible when some of input is zero. Their model is modified so that the new super-efficiency DEA model is always feasible when data are non-negative. Note that zero data can make the super-efficiency model under constant returns to scale (CRS) infeasible. Our discussion is based upon variable returns to scale (VRS) and can be applied to CRS super-efficiency models.     

A new non-oriented model for classifying flexible measures in DEA

In conventional data envelopment analysis (DEA), measures are classified as either input or output. However, in some real cases there are variables which act as both input and output and are known as flexible measures. Most of the previous suggested models for determining the status of flexible measures are oriented. One important issue of these models is that unlike standard DEA, even under constant returns to scale the input- and output-oriented model may produce different efficiency scores. Also, can be expected a flexible measure is selected as an input variable in one model but an output variable in the other model. In addition, in all of the previous studies did not point to variable returns to scale (VRS), but the VRS assumption is prevailed on many real applications. To deal with these issues, this study proposes a new non-oriented model that not only selects the status of each flexible measure as an input or output but also determines returns to scale status. Then, the aggregate model and an extension with the negative data related to the proposed approach are presented.     

Bridging the gap between the constant and variable returns-to-scale models: selective proportionality in data envelopment analysis

In data envelopment analysis (DEA), the use of constant returns-to-scale (CRS) models requires the assumption of full proportionality between all inputs and outputs. Often such proportionality cannot be assumed, although there may be a subset of outputs proportional to a subset of inputs. By using the variable returns-to-scale (VRS) model, this information is effectively ignored and the efficiency of units is overestimated. This paper develops a hybrid approach that combines the assumption of CRS with respect to the selected sets of inputs and outputs, while preserving the VRS assumption with respect to the remaining indicators. The resulting hybrid returns-to-scale models exhibit better discrimination than the VRS model. In certain cases, their discrimination surpasses that of the CRS model, an example of which is given.     

DEA model with shared resources and efficiency decomposition

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) has proved to be an excellent approach for measuring performance of decision making units (DMUs) that use multiple inputs to generate multiple outputs. In many real world scenarios, DMUs have a two-stage network process with shared input resources used in both stages of operations. For example, in hospital operations, some of the input resources such as equipment, personnel, and information technology are used in the first stage to generate medical record to track treatments, tests, drug dosages, and costs. The same set of resources used by first stage activities are used to generate the second-stage patient services. Patient services also use the services generated by the first stage operations of housekeeping, medical records, and laundry. These DMUs have not only inputs and outputs, but also intermediate measures that exist in-between the two-stage operations. The distinguishing characteristic is that some of the inputs to the first stage are shared by both the first and second stage, but some of the shared inputs cannot be conveniently split up and allocated to the operations of the two stages. Recognizing this distinction is critical for these types of DEA applications because measuring the efficiency of the production for first-stage outputs can be misleading and can understate the efficiency if DEA fails to consider that some of the inputs generate other second-stage outputs. The current paper develops a set of DEA models for measuring the performance of two-stage network processes with non splittable shared inputs. An additive efficiency decomposition for the two-stage network process is presented. The models are developed under the assumption of variable returns to scale (VRS), but can be readily applied under the assumption of constant returns to scale (CRS). An application is provided.     

A linear programming framework for free disposal hull technologies and cost functions: Primal and dual models

The free disposal hull (FDH) model, introduced by Deprins et al. [The Performance of Public Enterprises Concepts and Measurements, Elsevier, 1984], is based on a representation of the production technology given by observed production plans, imposing strong disposability of inputs and outputs but without the convexity assumption. In its traditional form, the FDH model assumes implicitly variable returns to scale (VRS) and the model was solved by a mixed integer linear program (MILP). The MILP structure is often used to compare the FDH model to data envelopment analysis (DEA) models although an equivalent FDH LP model exists (see Agrell and Tind [Journal of Productivity Analysis 16 (2) (2001) 129]). More recently, specific returns to scale (RTS) assumptions have been introduced in FDH models by Kerstens and Vanden Eeckaut [European Journal of Operational Research 113 (1999) 206], including non-increasing, non-decreasing, or constant returns to scale (NIRS, NDRS, and CRS, respectively). Podinovski [European Journal of Operational Research 152 (2004) 800] showed that the related technical efficiency measures can be computed by mixed integer linear programs. In this paper, the modeling proposed here goes one step further by introducing a complete LP framework to deal with all previous FDH models.     

The impossibility of convex constant returns-to-scale production technologies with exogenously fixed factors

The extensions to the variable (VRS) and the constant (CRS) returns-to-scale models developed by Banker and Morey are considered among the main approaches to the incorporation of exogenously fixed factors in models of data envelopment analysis (DEA). Recently, Syrjänen showed that the Banker and Morey CRS technology is not convex. Taking into account that its subset VRS technology is explicitly assumed convex, this observation leads to difficulties with explaining the fundamental production assumptions of the CRS extension. Motivated by the example of Syrjänen, the contribution of this paper is twofold. First, we show that the nonconvex Banker and Morey CRS technology is nevertheless a suitable reference technology for the assessment of scale efficiency. Second, we ask if a convex technology could be constructed that would “correct” the nonconvexity of the CRS technology of Banker and Morey. The answer to this is negative: one consequence of assuming both convexity and ray unboundness with fixed exogenous factors is that we can always “mix-and-match” discretionary and nondiscretionary factors taken from different units, arriving at totally unrealistic production plans. This demonstrates that generally there exists no meaningful convex CRS technology with exogenously fixed factors that can be used in its own right, apart from its use as a reference technology in the measurement of scale efficiency.     

Competition strategy and efficiency evaluation for decision making units with fixed-sum outputs

This paper develops a DEA (data envelopment analysis) model to accommodate competition over outputs. In the proposed model, the total output of all decision making units (DMUs) is fixed, and DMUs compete with each other to maximize their self-rated DEA efficiency score. In the presence of competition over outputs, the best-practice frontier deviates from the classical DEA frontier. We also compute the efficiency scores using the proposed fixed sum output DEA (FSODEA) models, and discuss the competition strategy selection rule. The model is illustrated using a hypothetical data set under the constant returns to scale assumption and medal data from the 2000 Sydney Olympics under the variable returns to scale assumption.     

A comment on “Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility”

In a recent paper by Chen [Chen, Y., 2005. Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility. European Journal of Operational Research 161 (1), 447–468], he deals with the infeasibility of super-efficiency DEA models in variable returns to scale (VRS) technology. He provides a necessary and sufficient condition for simultaneous infeasibility of input- and output-oriented super-efficiency DEA models in VRS case, then he claims that both of these models are infeasible only for a rare situation. In this paper, we present some counterexamples and comments to the contention by Chen.     

The linear formulation of the ZSG-DEA models with different production technologies

The zero sum gains data envelopment analysis models (ZSG-DEA models) are non-linear. In this paper, we first show that the ZSG-DEA models can be transformed to linear or parametric linear models and discuss the feasible domains of the parameters. Second, we show that the linear formulations of ZSG-DEA models under the equal output reduction strategy and the proportional output reduction strategy in a single output case are equivalent to the output-oriented super-efficiency model under variable returns-to-scale (VRS) assumption. As a matter of course, the models may encounter infeasibility. Third, we propose the linear transformations of ZSG-DEA models under constant returns-to-scale (CRS) assumption and compare them with the VRS models. In the end, we evaluate the participant countries at the Olympic Games by the linear equivalent models with multiple outputs under different weight restrictions. Our results are compared with the efficiencies obtained from the original ZSG-DEA model with an aggregated output under both CRS and VRS assumptions. It is found that the original method with aggregated output tends to underestimate the efficiencies of DMUs.     

Combining the assumptions of variable and constant returns to scale in the efficiency evaluation of secondary schools

Our paper reports on the use of data envelopment analysis (DEA) for the assessment of performance of secondary schools in Malaysia during the implementation of the policy of teaching and learning mathematics and science subjects in the English language (PPSMI). The novelty of our application is that it makes use of the hybrid returns-to-scale (HRS) DEA model. This combines the assumption of constant returns to scale with respect to quantity inputs and outputs (teaching provision and students) and variable returns to scale (VRS) with respect to quality factors (attainment levels on entry and exit) and socio-economic status of student families. We argue that the HRS model is a better-informed model than the conventional VRS model in the described application. Because the HRS technology is larger than the VRS technology, the new model provides a tangibly better discrimination on efficiency than could be obtained by the VRS model. To assess the productivity change of secondary schools over the years surrounding the introduction of the PPSMI policy, we adapt the Malmquist productivity index and its decomposition to the case of HRS model.     

Use of DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection: An application to Korean stock market

We propose a way of using DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection. While cross efficiency is an approach developed for peer evaluation, we improve its use in portfolio selection. In addition to (average) cross-efficiency scores, we suggest to examine the variations of cross-efficiencies, and to incorporate two statistics of cross-efficiencies into the mean-variance formulation of portfolio selection. Two benefits are attained by our proposed approach. One is selection of portfolios well-diversified in terms of their performance on multiple evaluation criteria, and the other is alleviation of the so-called “ganging together” phenomenon of DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection. We apply the proposed approach to stock portfolio selection in the Korean stock market, and demonstrate that the proposed approach can be a promising tool for stock portfolio selection by showing that the selected portfolio yields higher risk-adjusted returns than other benchmark portfolios for a 9-year sample period from 2002 to 2011.     

A full-scale investigation of the directional returns to scale in data envelopment analysis

Returns to scale is considered as one of the important concepts in data envelopment analysis (DEA) which can be useful for deciding to increase or decrease the size of a particular decision making unit. Traditional returns to scale on the efficient surface of the production possibility set with variable returns to scale (VRS) technology is introduced as a ratio of proportional changes of output components to proportional changes of input components. However, a problem which may arise in the real world is the impossibility or undesirability of proportional change in the input or output components. One of the attempts which is made to solve the aforementioned problem is the work of Yang et al., 2014. They have introduced the “directional returns to scale” in the DEA framework and have proposed some procedures to estimate and measure it. In this paper, the introduced directional returns to scale is investigated from a new perspective based on the defining hyperplanes of the production possibility set with VRS technology. We propose some algebraic equations and linear programming models which in addition to measuring the directional returns to scale, they enable us to analyse it. Moreover, we introduce the concepts of the best input and output direction vectors for expansion of input components or compression of output components, respectively, and propose two linear programming models in order to obtain these directions. The presented equations and models are demonstrated using a case study and numerical examples.     

A modified super-efficiency DEA model for infeasibility

The super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) model is obtained when a decision making unit (DMU) under evaluation is excluded from the reference set. This model provides for a measure of stability of the “efficient” status for frontier DMUs. Under the assumption of variable returns to scale (VRS), the super efficiency model can be infeasible for some efficient DMUs, specifically those at the extremities of the frontier. The current study develops an approach to overcome infeasibility issues. It is shown that when the model is feasible, our approach yields super-efficiency scores that are equivalent to those arising from the original model. For efficient DMUs that are infeasible under the super-efficiency model, our approach yields optimal solutions and scores that characterize the extent of super-efficiency in both inputs and outputs. The newly developed approach is illustrated with two real world data sets.     

Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA

Kao and Hwang (2008) [Kao, C., Hwang, S.-N., 2008. Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. European Journal of Operational Research 185 (1), 418–429] develop a data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach for measuring efficiency of decision processes which can be divided into two stages. The first stage uses inputs to generate outputs which become the inputs to the second stage. The first stage outputs are referred to as intermediate measures. The second stage then uses these intermediate measures to produce outputs. Kao and Huang represent the efficiency of the overall process as the product of the efficiencies of the two stages. A major limitation of this model is its applicability to only constant returns to scale (CRS) situations. The current paper develops an additive efficiency decomposition approach wherein the overall efficiency is expressed as a (weighted) sum of the efficiencies of the individual stages. This approach can be applied under both CRS and variable returns to scale (VRS) assumptions. The case of Taiwanese non-life insurance companies is revisited using this newly developed approach.     

DEA models for minimizing weight disparity in cross-efficiency evaluation

Cross-efficiency evaluation is a commonly used approach for ranking decision-making units (DMUs) in data envelopment analysis (DEA). The weights used in the cross-efficiency evaluation may sometimes differ significantly among the inputs and outputs. This paper proposes some alternative DEA models to minimize the virtual disparity in the cross-efficiency evaluation. The proposed DEA models determine the input and output weights of each DMU in a neutral way without being aggressive or benevolent to the other DMUs. Numerical examples are tested to show the validity and effectiveness of the proposed DEA models and illustrate their significant role in reducing the number of zero weights.     

Cross-efficiency aggregation in DEA models using the evidential-reasoning approach

Cross-efficiency in data envelopment analysis (DEA) models is an effective way to rank decision-making units (DMUs). The common methods to aggregate cross-efficiency do not consider the preference structure of the decision maker (DM). When a DM’s preference structure does not satisfy the “additive independence” condition, a new aggregation method must be proposed. This paper uses the evidential-reasoning (ER) approach to aggregate the cross-efficiencies obtained from cross-evaluation through the transformation of the cross-efficiency matrix to pieces of evidence. This paper provides a new method for cross-efficiency aggregation and a new way for DEA models to reflect a DM’s preference or value judgments. Additionally, this paper presents examples that demonstrate the features of cross-efficiency aggregation using the ER approach, including an empirical example of the evaluation practice of 16 basic research institutes in Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) in 2010 that illustrates how the ER approach can be used to aggregate the cross-efficiency matrix produced from DEA models.     

Fuzzy cross-efficiency evaluation: a possibility approach

Cross-efficiency evaluation is an extension of data envelopment analysis (DEA) aimed at ranking decision making units (DMUs) involved in a production process regarding their efficiency. As has been done with other enhancements and extensions of DEA, in this paper we propose a fuzzy approach to the cross-efficiency evaluation. Specifically, we develop a fuzzy cross-efficiency evaluation based on the possibility approach by Lertworasirikul et al. (Fuzzy Sets Syst 139:379–394, 2003a) to fuzzy DEA. Thus, a methodology for ranking DMUs is presented that may be used when data are imprecise, in particular for fuzzy inputs and outputs being normal and convex. We prove some results that allow us to define “consistent” cross-efficiencies. The ranking of DMUs for a given possibility level results from an ordering of cross-efficiency scores, which are real numbers. As in the crisp case, we also develop benevolent and aggressive fuzzy formulations in order to deal with the alternate optima for the weights.     

Dominance relations and ranking of units by using interval number ordering with cross-efficiency intervals

This paper proposes an approach to the cross-efficiency evaluation that considers all the optimal data envelopment analysis (DEA) weights of all the decision-making units (DMUs), thus avoiding the need to make a choice among them according to some alternative secondary goal. To be specific, we develop a couple of models that allow for all the possible weights of all the DMUs simultaneously and yield individual lower and upper bounds for the cross-efficiency scores of the different units. As a result, we have a cross-efficiency interval for the evaluation of each unit. Existing order relations for interval numbers are used to identify dominance relations among DMUs and derive a ranking of units based on the cross-efficiency intervals provided. The approach proposed may also be useful for assessing the stability of the cross-efficiency scores with respect to DEA weights that can be used for their calculation.     

Context-dependent data envelopment analysis with cross-efficiency evaluation

To address some problems with the original context-dependent data envelopment analysis (DEA), this paper proposes a new version of context-dependent DEA; this version is based on cross-efficiency evaluations. One of the problems with the original context-dependent DEA is that the attractiveness and progress measures only represent the radial distance between the decision-making unit (DMU) under evaluation and the evaluation context. This representation only shows how distinct the DMU is from a single specific DMU on the evaluation context, not from the entire evaluation context overall. Another problem is that the magnitude of attractiveness and progress scores in the original context-dependent DEA may not have significant meanings. It may not be proper to say that a DMU is more attractive simply because it has a higher attractiveness score for the same reason that the performance of inefficient DMUs cannot be compared with one another simply based on their efficiency scores. We incorporate cross-efficiency evaluations into the context-dependent DEA to overcome the preceding shortcomings of the original context-dependent DEA. We also demonstrate the proposed model's appropriateness and usefulness with an illustrative example.