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.     

Selecting symmetric weights as a secondary goal in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation

In data envelopment analysis (DEA), the cross-efficiency evaluation method introduces a cross-efficiency matrix, in which the units are self and peer evaluated. A problem that possibly reduces the usefulness of the cross-efficiency evaluation method is that the cross-efficiency scores may not be unique due to the presence of alternate optima. So, it is recommended that secondary goals be introduced in cross-efficiency evaluation. In this paper we propose the symmetric weight assignment technique (SWAT) that does not affect feasibility and rewards decision making units (DMUs) that make a symmetric selection of weights. A numerical example is solved by our proposed method and its solution is compared with those of alternative approaches.     

On the DEA total weight flexibility and the aggregation in cross-efficiency evaluations

This paper discusses the DEA total weight flexibility in the context of the cross-efficiency evaluation. The DMUs in DEA are often assessed with unrealistic weighting schemes in their attempt to achieve the best ratings in their self-evaluation. We claim here that in a peer-appraisal like the cross-efficiency evaluation the cross-efficiencies provided by such weights cannot play the same role as those obtained with more reasonable weights. To address this issue, we propose to calculate the cross-efficiency scores by means of a weighted average of cross-efficiencies, instead of with the usual arithmetic mean, so the aggregation weights reflect the disequilibrium in the profiles of DEA weights that are used. Thus, the cross-efficiencies provided by profiles with large differences in their weights, especially those obtained with zero weights, would be attached lower aggregation weights (less importance) than those provided by more balanced profiles of weights.     

A generalized DEA model for centralized resource allocation

In this paper, we introduced a new generalized centralized resource allocation model which extends Lozano and Villa’s and Asmild et al.’s models to a more general case. In order to uncover the sources of such total input contraction in the generalized centralized resource allocation model, we applied the structural efficiency to further decompose it into three components: the aggregate technical efficiency, the aggregate allocative efficiency and re-transferable efficiency components. The proposed models are not only flexible enough for the central decision-maker to adjust the inputs and outputs to achieve the total input contraction but also identify the sources of such total input contraction, thereby giving rise to an important interpretation and understanding of the generalized centralized resource allocation model. Finally, an empirical example is used to illustrate the approach.     

Allocating the fixed cost as a complement of other cost inputs: A DEA approach

In cost allocation problem, traditional DEA approaches allocate the fixed cost among a group of decision making units (DMUs), and treat the allocated cost as an extra input of each DMU. If costs except for the fixed cost are regarded as inputs in the cost allocation problem, then it is obvious that the fixed cost is a complement of other inputs rather than an extra independent input. Therefore it is necessary to combine the allocated cost with other cost measures in cost allocation problem. Based on this observation, this paper investigates the relationship between the allocated cost and the DEA efficiency score and develops a DEA-based approach to allocate the fixed cost among various DMUs. An example of allocating advertising expenditure between a car manufacturer and its dealers is presented to illustrate the method proposed in this paper.     

A new DEA ranking system based on changing the reference set

This research proposes a new ranking system for extreme efficient DMUs (Decision Making Units) based upon the omission of these efficient DMUs from reference set of the inefficient DMUs. We state and prove some facts related to our model. A numerical example where the proposed method is compared with traditional ranking approaches is shown.     

Centralized resource allocation with stochastic data

Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is a technique based on mathematical programming for evaluating the efficiency of homogeneous Decision Making Units (DMUs). In this technique inefficient DMUs are projected on to the frontier which constructed by the best performers. Centralized Resource Allocation (CRA) is a method in which all DMUs are projected on to the efficient frontier through solving just one DEA model. The intent of this paper is to present the Stochastic Centralized Resource Allocation (SCRA) in order to allocate centralized resources where inputs and outputs are stochastic. The concept discussed throughout this paper is illustrated using the aforementioned example.     

Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation

Cook and Kress (1990), using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) as their starting point, proposed a procedure to rank order the candidates in a preferential election. Notionally, each candidate is permitted to choose the most favourable weights to be applied to his/her standings (first place, second place, etc. votes) in the usual DEA manner with the additional ‘assurance region’ restriction that the weight for a j place vote should be more than that for a j +1 amount. We consider that this freedom to choose weights is essentially illusory when maximum discrimination between the candidates is sought, in which case the weights used to evaluate and rank the candidates are as if imposed externally at the outset. To avoid this, we present an alternative procedure which retains Cook and Kress' central idea but where, as well as using each candidate's rating of him/herself, we now make use of each candidate's ratings of all the candidates. We regard the so-called cross-evaluation matrix as the summary of a self- and peer-rating process in which the candidates seek to interpret the voters preferences as favourably for themselves, relative to the other candidates, as possible. The problem then becomes one of establishing an overall rating for each candidate from these individual ratings. For this, for each candidate, we use a weighted average of all the candidates ratings of that candidate, where the weights themselves are in proportion to each candidate's overall rating. The overall ratings are therefore proportional to the components of the principal (left-hand) eigenvector of the cross-evaluation matrix. These ideas are then applied to the selection of R & D projects to comprise an R & D program, thus indicating thier wider applicability.     

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.     

Super-efficiency DEA in the presence of infeasibility

It is well known that super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach can be infeasible under the condition of variable returns to scale (VRS). By extending of the work of Chen (2005), the current study develops a two-stage process for calculating super-efficiency scores regardless whether the standard VRS super-efficiency mode is feasible or not. The proposed approach examines whether the standard VRS super-efficiency DEA model is infeasible. When the model is feasible, our approach yields super-efficiency scores that are identical to those arising from the original model. For efficient DMUs that are infeasible under the super-efficiency model, our approach yields super-efficiency scores that characterize input savings and/or output surpluses. The current study also shows that infeasibility may imply that an efficient DMU does not exhibit super-efficiency in inputs or outputs. When infeasibility occurs, it can be necessary that (i) both inputs and outputs be decreased to reach the frontier formed by the remaining DMUs under the input-orientation and (ii) both inputs and outputs be increased to reach the frontier formed by the remaining DMUs under the output-orientation. The newly developed approach is illustrated with numerical examples.     

Allocating fixed costs or resources and setting targets via data envelopment analysis

In many applications of data envelopment analysis (DEA), there is often a fixed cost or input resource which should be imposed on all decision making units (DMUs). Cook and Zhu [W.D. Cook, J. Zhu, Allocation of shared costs among decision making units: A DEA approach, Computers and Operations Research 32 (2005) 2171-2178] propose a practical DEA approach for such allocation problems. In this paper, we prove that when some special constraints are added, Cook and Zhu’s approach probably has no feasible solution. The research of this paper focuses on two main aspects: to obtain a new fixed costs or resources allocation approach by improving Cook and Zhu’s approach, and to set fixed targets according to the amount of fixed resources shared by individual DMUs. When such special constraints are attached, our model is proved to be able to achieve a feasible costs or resources allocation. Numerical results for an example from the literature are presented to illustrate our approach.     

DEA based auctions

We discuss the design of a multi-dimensional procurement mechanism that combines Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and auction theory. The mechanism selects an agent to provide a project characterized by multiple attributes. The optimal configuration of the multiple attributes is settled endogenously by trading off the costs to the provider with the benefits to the acquirer. This is done within a context of asymmetric information and strategic behavior as well as possibly correlated costs. The mechanism makes it individually rational and incentive compatible to participate and reveal costs, and the outcome is socially optimal (allocatively efficient).     

Super-efficiency DEA in the presence of infeasibility: One model approach

A two-stage procedure is developed by Lee et al. (2011) [European Journal of Operational Research doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2011.01.022] to address the infeasibility issue in super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) models. We point out that their two-stage procedure can be solved in a single DEA-based model.     

A DEA approach for fair allocation of common revenue

An issue of considerable importance, how to allocate a common revenue in an equitable manner across a set of competing entities. This paper introduces a new approach to obtaining allocation common revenue on all decision making units (DMUs) in such a way that the relative efficiency is not changed. In this method for determining allocation common revenue dose not need to solving any linear programming. A numerical example is provided to illustrate the results of the analysis.     

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.     

Validating DEA as a ranking tool: An application of DEA to assess performance in higher education

There is a general interest in ranking schemes applied to complex entities described by multiple attributes. Published rankings for universities are in great demand but are also highly controversial. We compare two classification and ranking schemes involving universities; one from a published report, ‘Top American Research Universities’ by the University of Florida's TheCenter and the other using DEA. Both approaches use the same data and model. We compare the two methods and discover important equivalences. We conclude that the critical aspect in classification and ranking is the model. This suggests that DEA is a suitable tool for these types of studies.     

Equivalence in two-stage DEA approaches

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a linear programming problem approach for evaluating the relative efficiency of peer decision making units (DMUs) that have multiple inputs and outputs. DMUs can have a two-stage structure where all the outputs from the first stage are the only inputs to the second stage, in addition to the inputs to the first stage and the outputs from the second stage. The outputs from the first stage to the second stage are called intermediate measures. This paper examines relations and equivalence between two existing DEA approaches that address measuring the performance of two-stage processes.     

Centralized resource allocation for enhanced Russell models

This paper proposes a centralized resource allocation (CRA) model for the enhanced Russell model. All the DMUs can be easily projected onto the efficient frontier by solving only one model. This projection can be made by transforming the proposed model to a linear programming problem. In this paper, instead of non-radially increasing or decreasing the inputs or outputs individually, we increase or decrease non-radially all of the inputs and outputs at the same time. By solving a single model, we can provide targets for all DMUs. By the proposed approximation, different targets can be found for all DMUs, as compared to those obtained by the previous approximations. The proposed model can be developed to CRA models. Finally, an applied example emphasizes the importance of the proposed model.     

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.     

Ranking decision-making units using common weights in DEA

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a linear programming technique that is used to measure the relative efficiency of decision-making units (DMUs). Liu et al. (2008) [13] used common weights analysis (CWA) methodology to generate a CSW using linear programming. They classified the DMUs as CWA-efficient and CWA-inefficient DMUs and ranked the DMUs using CWA-ranking rules. The aim of this study is to show that the criteria used by Liu et al. are not theoretically strong enough to discriminate among the CWA-efficient DMUs with equal efficiency. Moreover, there is no guarantee that their proposed model can select one optimal solution from the alternative components. The optimal solution is considered to be the only unique optimal solution. This study shows that the proposal by Liu et al. is not generally correct. The claims made by the authors against the theorem proposed by Liu et al. are fully supported using two counter examples.