IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v27y1999i6p637-645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance evaluation based on multiple attributes with nonparametric frontiers

Author

Listed:
  • Caporaletti, L. E.
  • Dulá, J. H.
  • Womer, N. K.

Abstract

Performance rating and comparison of a group of entities is frequently based on the values of several attributes. Such evaluations are often complicated by the absence of a natural or obvious way to weight the importance of the individual dimensions of the performance. This paper proposes a framework based on nonparametric frontiers to rate and classify entities described by multiple performance attributes into 'performers' and 'underperformers'. The method is equivalent to Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) with entities defined only by outputs. In the spirit of DEA, the weights for each attribute are selected to maximize each entity's performance score. This approach, however, results in a new linear program that is more direct and intuitive than traditional DEA formulations. The model can be easily understood and interpreted by practitioners since it conforms better to the practice of evaluating and comparing performance using standard specifications. We illustrate the model's use with two examples. The first evaluates the performance of employees. The second is an application in manufacturing where multiple quality attributes are used to assess and compare performance of different manufacturing processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Caporaletti, L. E. & Dulá, J. H. & Womer, N. K., 1999. "Performance evaluation based on multiple attributes with nonparametric frontiers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 637-645, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:27:y:1999:i:6:p:637-645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(99)00022-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    2. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Golany, B. & Seiford, L. & Stutz, J., 1985. "Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 91-107.
    3. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    4. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giannis Karagiannis, 2017. "On aggregate composite indicators," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(7), pages 741-746, July.
    2. Färe, Rolf & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2014. "Benefit-of-the-doubt aggregation and the diet problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 33-35.
    3. Karagiannis, Roxani & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2018. "Intra- and inter-group composite indicators using the BoD model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 44-51.
    4. Ravanos, Panagiotis & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2022. "Tricks with the BoD model and an application to the e-Government Development Index," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Karagiannis, Giannis, 2023. "Aggregating faculty members’ research effectiveness to the department or university level: Exact versus approximate solutions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. M-L Bougnol & J H Dulá & D Retzlaff-Roberts & N K Womer, 2005. "Nonparametric frontier analysis with multiple constituencies," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(3), pages 252-266, March.
    7. Giannis Karagiannis & Georgia Paschalidou, 2017. "Assessing research effectiveness: a comparison of alternative nonparametric models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(4), pages 456-468, April.
    8. Marie-Laure Bougnol & José Dulá, 2006. "Validating DEA as a ranking tool: An application of DEA to assess performance in higher education," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 339-365, July.
    9. Yang, Guo-liang & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling & Khoveyni, Mohammad, 2017. "A three-stage hybrid approach for weight assignment in MADM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 93-105.
    10. Greta Falavigna, 2006. "Models for Default Risk Analysis: Focus on Artificial Neural Networks, Model Comparisons, Hybrid Frameworks," CERIS Working Paper 200610, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    11. Garcia-Cestona, Miguel & Surroca, Jordi, 2008. "Multiple goals and ownership structure: Effects on the performance of Spanish savings banks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(2), pages 582-599, June.
    12. Karagiannis, Roxani & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2023. "Nonparametric estimates of price efficiency for the Greek infant milk market: Curing the curse of dimensionality with shannon entropy," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    13. Mohammad Izadikhah & Reza Farzipoor Saen, 2019. "Solving voting system by data envelopment analysis for assessing sustainability of suppliers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 641-669, June.
    14. Bougnol, M.-L. & Dulá, J.H. & Estellita Lins, M.P. & Moreira da Silva, A.C., 2010. "Enhancing standard performance practices with DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 33-45, February.
    15. Färe, Rolf & Karagiannis, Giannis & Hasannasab, Maryam & Margaritis, Dimitris, 2019. "A benefit-of-the-doubt model with reverse indicators," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(2), pages 394-400.
    16. I Horowitz, 2003. "Preference-neutral attribute weights in the journal-ranking problem," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(5), pages 452-457, May.
    17. Ying-Ming Wang & Ying Luo & Yi-Song Xu, 2013. "Cross-Weight Evaluation for Pairwise Comparison Matrices," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 483-497, May.
    18. N. Womer & M.-L. Bougnol & J. Dula & D. Retzlaff-Roberts, 2006. "Benefit-cost analysis using data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 229-250, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Zhao-Hua & Zeng, Hua-Lin & Wei, Yi-Ming & Zhang, Yi-Xiang, 2012. "Regional total factor energy efficiency: An empirical analysis of industrial sector in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 115-123.
    2. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
    3. Cherchye, L. & Post, G.T., 2001. "Methodological Advances in Dea," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-53-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    4. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    5. María Victoria Uribe‐Bohorquez & Jennifer Martínez‐Ferrero & Isabel‐María García‐Sánchez, 2019. "Women on boards and efficiency in a business‐orientated environment," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 82-96, January.
    6. Wu, Desheng (Dash) & Lee, Chi-Guhn, 2010. "Stochastic DEA with ordinal data applied to a multi-attribute pricing problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1679-1688, December.
    7. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul, 2018. "Technical, Allocative and Overall Efficiency: Inference and Hypothesis Testing," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2018018, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    8. Harald Dyckhoff & Katrin Allen, 1999. "Theoretische Begründung einer Effizienzanalyse mittels Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 411-436, May.
    9. Tarnaud, Albane Christine & Leleu, Hervé, 2018. "Portfolio analysis with DEA: Prior to choosing a model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-76.
    10. Yang, Guo-liang & Fukuyama, Hirofumi & Chen, Kun, 2019. "Investigating the regional sustainable performance of the Chinese real estate industry: A slack-based DEA approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 141-159.
    11. Kammoun Rabeb, 2018. "The Technical Efficiency of Tunisian Ports: Comparing Data Envelopment Analysis and Stochastic Frontier Analysis Scores," Logistics, Supply Chain, Sustainability and Global Challenges, Sciendo, vol. 9(2), pages 73-84, October.
    12. Zhimin Huang & Waiman Cheung & Huiwen Wang, 2006. "Cone dominance and efficiency in DEA," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 89-103, July.
    13. Reinhard Madlener & Carlos Henggeler Antunes & Luis C. Dias, 2006. "Multi-Criteria versus Data Envelopment Analysis for Assessing the Performance of Biogas Plants," CEPE Working paper series 06-49, CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich.
    14. Zhu, Joe, 2001. "Super-efficiency and DEA sensitivity analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(2), pages 443-455, March.
    15. Kristof De Witte & Rui Marques, 2010. "Designing performance incentives, an international benchmark study in the water sector," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 18(2), pages 189-220, June.
    16. Imanirad, Raha & Cook, Wade D. & Aviles-Sacoto, Sonia Valeria & Zhu, Joe, 2015. "Partial input to output impacts in DEA: The case of DMU-specific impacts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 837-844.
    17. Glover, Fred & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2009. "Contributions of Professor William W. Cooper in Operations Research and Management Science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 1-16, August.
    18. Ali, Agha Iqbal & Lerme, Catherine S. & Seiford, Lawrence M., 1995. "Components of efficiency evaluation in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 462-473, February.
    19. Eugenia Nissi & Massimiliano Giacalone & Carlo Cusatelli, 2019. "The Efficiency of the Italian Judicial System: A Two Stage Data Envelopment Analysis Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 395-407, November.
    20. Lovell, C. A. Knox & Pastor, Jesus T., 1999. "Radial DEA models without inputs or without outputs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 46-51, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:27:y:1999:i:6:p:637-645. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.