General Multi-Stage Systems

  • Chiang Kao
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 240)


The preceding two chapters discussed systems with two divisions connected in series. Intuitively, the two-stage system should be able to be extended to multiple stages to suit more general cases. As a matter of fact, many real world systems have a multi-stage structure, with assembly lines as typical examples, where raw materials go through a number of work stations to become the final products. The meaning of multi-stage system in this context is rather vague, because a stage may have several divisions connected in different structures. What it refers to in the conventional network DEA is a system composed of a number of divisions connected in series, with only one division in each stage. In this regard, the term series system may be more appropriate, and in this chapter these two terms will be used interchangeably when there is no ambiguity.


  1. Amirteimoori A, Kordrostami S (2005) DEA-like models for multi-component performance measurement. Appl Math Comput 163:735–743Google Scholar
  2. Amirteimoori A, Shafiei M (2006) Measuring the efficiency of interdependent decision making sub-units in DEA. Appl Math Comput 173:847–855Google Scholar
  3. Chang CC (2015) Influences of knowledge spillover and utilization on the NIS performance: a multi-stage efficiency perspective. Qual Quant 49:1945–1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Charnes A, Cooper WW (1962) Programming with linear fractionals. Nav Res Logist Q 9:181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kao C (2014a) Efficiency decomposition for general multi-stage systems in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 232:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kao C (2014b) Efficiency decomposition in network data envelopment analysis with slacks-based measure. Omega 45:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kao C (2014c) Network data envelopment analysis: a review. Eur J Oper Res 239:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kao C, Liu ST (2014) Multi-period efficiency measurement in data envelopment analysis: the case of Taiwanese commercial banks. Omega 47:90–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kawaguchi H, Tone K, Tsutsui M (2014) Estimation of the efficiency of Japanese hospitals using a dynamic and network data envelopment analysis model. Health Care Manag Sci 17:101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kordrostami S, Amirteimoori A (2005) Undesirable factors in multi-component performance measurement. Appl Math Comput 171:721–729Google Scholar
  11. Lee CY, Johnson AL (2012) Two-dimensional efficiency decomposition to measure the demand effect in productivity analysis. Eur J Oper Res 216:584–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Li Y, Wang YZ, Cui Q (2015) Evaluating airline efficiency: an application of virtual frontier network SBM. Transport Res E Logist Transport Rev 81:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mallikarjun S (2015) Efficiency of US airlines: a strategic operating model. J Air Trans Manag 43:46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Matthews K (2013) Risk management and managerial efficiency in Chinese banks: a network DEA framework. Omega 41:207–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Medina-Borja A, Triantis K (2014) Modeling social services performances: a four-stage DEA approach to evaluate fundraising efficiency, capacity building, service quality, and effectiveness in the nonprofit sector. Ann Oper Res 221:285–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mirhedayatian SM, Azadi M, Saen RF (2014) A novel network data envelopment analysis model for evaluating green supply chain management. Int J Prod Econ 147:544–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Momeni E, Tavana M, Mirzagoltabar H, Mirhedayatian SM (2014) A new fuzzy network slacks-based DEA model for evaluating performance of supply chains with reverse logistics. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27:793–804Google Scholar
  18. Nouri J, Lotfi FH, Borgheipour H, Atabi F, Sadeghzadeh SM, Moghaddas Z (2013) An analysis of the implementation of energy efficiency measures in the vegetable oil industry of Iran: a data envelopment analysis approach. J Clean Prod 52:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Park KS, Park K (2009) Measurement of multiperiod aggregative efficiency. Eur J Oper Res 193:567–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Qin F, Zhang X, Zhou Q (2014) Evaluating the impact of organizational patterns on the efficiency of urban rail transit systems in China. J Transp Geogr 40:89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shafiee M, Lotfi FH, Saleh H (2014) Supply chain performance evaluation with data envelopment analysis and balanced scorecard approach. Appl Math Model 38:5092–5112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tone K, Sahoo BK (2003) Scale indivisibilities and production function in data envelopment analysis. Int J Prod Econ 84:165–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2009) Network DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. Eur J Oper Res 197:243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2010) Dynamic DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. Omega 38:3–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Troutt MD, Ambrose PJ, Chan CK (2001) Optimal throughput for multistage input-output processes. Int J Oper Prod Manag 21:148–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tsutsui M, Goto M (2009) A multi-division efficiency evaluation of U.S. electric power companies using a weighted slacks-based measure. Socio Econ Plan Sci 43:201–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wei QL, Chang TS (2011) Optimal system design series-network DEA models. J Oper Res Soc 62:1109–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wei QL, Yan H, Pang LY (2011) Composite network data envelopment analysis model. Int JInform Technol Decis Mak 10:613–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yang F, Du F, Liang L, Yang Z (2014) Forecasting the production abilities of recycling systems: a DEA based approach. J Appl Math. doi: 10.1155/2014/961468 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chiang Kao
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Information ManagementNational Cheng Kung UniversityTainanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations