Advertisement

Modeling DMU’s Internal Structures: Cooperative and Noncooperative Approaches

  • Wade D. Cook
  • Liang Liang
  • Joe ZhuEmail author
Chapter
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 164)

Abstract

An important area of development in recent years in data envelopment analysis has been the applications wherein internal structures of DMUs are considered. For example, DMUs may consist of subunits or represent two-stage processes. One particular subset of such processes is those in which all the outputs from the first stage are the only inputs to the second stage. This chapter first reviews these models and discusses relations among various approaches. Our focus here is the approaches based upon either Stackelberg (leader–follower) or cooperative game concepts. We then examine the more general problem of an open multistage process where some outputs from a given stage may leave the system while others become inputs to the next stage. As well, new inputs can enter at any stage. We then discuss the modeling of this more general network structure.

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis Efficiency Game Intermediate measure Cooperative Two-stage 

References

  1. Castelli L, Pesenti R, Ukovich W. DEA-like models for the efficiency evaluation of hierarchically structured units. Eur J Oper Res. 2004;154(2):465–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Castelli L, Pesenti R, Ukovich W. A classification of DEA models when the internal structure of the decision making units is considered. Ann Oper Res. 2008;173:207–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res. 1978;2:429–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen C-M. A network-DEA model with new efficiency measures to incorporate the dynamic effect in production networks. Eur J Oper Res. 2009;194(3):687–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen Y, Zhu J. Measuring information technology’s indirect impact on firm performance. Inf Tech Manage J. 2004;5(1–2):9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen Y, Liang L, Yang F, Zhu J. Evaluation of information technology investment: a data envelopment analysis approach. Comput Oper Res. 2006;33(5):1368–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen Y, Cook WD, Li N, Zhu J. Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA. Eur J Oper Res. 2009;196:1170–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chilingerian J, Sherman HD. Health care applications: from hospitals to physician, from productive efficiency to quality frontiers. In: Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Zhu J, editors. Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Boston: Springer; 2004.Google Scholar
  9. Cook WD, Liang L, Zhu J. Measuring performance of two-stage network structures by DEA: a review and future perspective. Omega. 2010a;38:423–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cook WD, Zhu J, Bi G, Yang F. Network DEA: additive efficiency decomposition. Eur J Oper Res. 2010b;207(2):1122–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Färe R, Whittaker G. An intermediate input model of dairy production using complex survey data. J Agric Econ. 1995;46(2):201–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Färe R, Grosskopf S. Productivity and intermediate products: a frontier approach. Econ Lett. 1996;50:65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gaski JF. The theory of power and conflict in channels of distribution. J Mark. 1984;15:107–11.Google Scholar
  14. Huang ZM, Li SX. Co-Op advertising models in a manufacturing-retailing supply chain: a game theory approach. Eur J Oper Res. 2001;135:527–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kao C. Efficiency measurement for parallel production systems. Eur J Oper Res. 2009a;196(3):1107–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kao C. Efficiency decomposition in network DEA: a relational model. Eur J Oper Res. 2009b;192:949–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kao C, Hwang SN. Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: an application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. Eur J Oper Res. 2008;185(1):418–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liang L, Cook WD, Zhu J. DEA models for two-stage processes: game approach and efficiency decomposition. Nav Res Logist. 2008;55:643–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liang L, Yang F, Cook WD, Zhu J. DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation. Ann Oper Res. 2006;145(1):35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liang L, Li ZQ, Cook WD, Zhu J. DEA efficiency in two-stage networks with feed back. IIE Trans. 2011;43:309–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Seiford LM, Zhu J. Profitability and marketability of the top 55 US commercial banks. Manag Sci. 1999;45(9):1270–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sexton TR, Lewis HF. Two-stage DEA: an application to major league baseball. J Product Anal. 2003;19(2–3):227–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tone K, Tsutsui M. Network DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. Eur J Oper Res. 2009;197(1):243–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wang CH, Gopal R, Zionts S. Use of data envelopment analysis in assessing information technology impact on firm performance. Ann Oper Res. 1997;73:191–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhu J. Multi-factor performance measure model with an application to Fortune 500 companies. Eur J Oper Res. 2000;123(1):105–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Schulich School of BusinessYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  2. 2.School of ManagementUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHe FeiPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.School of BusinessWorcester Polytechnic InstituteWorcesterUSA

Personalised recommendations