IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijmore/v21y2022i3p355-379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating a multi-objective programming method with common weights for a two-stage efficiency evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Fatemeh Jalalkamali
  • Faranak Hosseinzadeh Saljooghi

Abstract

In this article, two stage data envelopment analysis (DEA) models are reviewed initially and then two methods of sum weighted and product in efficiency combination are presented. In this two models, the weight of intermediate data are presumed to be the same whereas the results of implementing these two models show different weights for intermediate data. Hence, in the second section, a multi-objective model for each stage, considering an ideal unit, is used which computes the intermediate data weight for two stages uniformly and the efficiency of stages are accordingly calculated. Furthermore, considering the homogeneous nature of input, intermediate and output data for all units, it seems allocating various weights for these factors, is not fair. Thus in Section 3, a model for evaluation of two stage process, considering a common weight for input, intermediate and output factors of different stages is presented and the stage and overall efficiency and inefficiency values for each decision making unit using common weight is calculated. Finally, the relationship of these two models with respect to previous models was investigated and the results were explained using some examples.

Suggested Citation

  • Fatemeh Jalalkamali & Faranak Hosseinzadeh Saljooghi, 2022. "Investigating a multi-objective programming method with common weights for a two-stage efficiency evaluation," International Journal of Mathematics in Operational Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(3), pages 355-379.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijmore:v:21:y:2022:i:3:p:355-379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=122220
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:ids:ijmore:v:21:y:2022:i:3:p:355-379. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=320 .

    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.