IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v73y1997i0p323-33810.1023-a1018989414181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Derivation of the Maximin Efficiency Ratio model from the maximum decisional efficiency principle

Author

Listed:
  • M.D. Troutt

Abstract

The Maximin Efficiency Ratio (MER) model was originally proposed as a common weights model for further prioritization of the DEA efficient subset of DMUs. Theoretical support for it in that context was based on principles of group decision making proposed earlier by P.L. Yu. Subsequently, the model has been found useful for one-step ranking of the full set of DMUs, albeit without theoretical support in that context. This paper provides a derivation of the MER model in a way which is potentially suitable for either context by use of the Maximum Decisional Efficiency (MDE) principle for aggregating expert estimates. This approach provides theoretical support for the MER model by demonstrating that it is a Maximum Likelihood procedure under certain plausible assumptions. It is necessary to assume that all the DMUs desire to maximize their own efficiency ratio computed on a common weights basis. However, this context is not vacuous since top management will typically wish to evaluate all divisions, projects, individuals, etc., respectively, on a common standard. This paper seeks to extend the frontiers of DEA by supposing the existence of a common performance measure for the DMUs. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Suggested Citation

  • M.D. Troutt, 1997. "Derivation of the Maximin Efficiency Ratio model from the maximum decisional efficiency principle," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 73(0), pages 323-338, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:73:y:1997:i:0:p:323-338:10.1023/a:1018989414181
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1018989414181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1018989414181
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1018989414181?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ruiz, José L. & Sirvent, Inmaculada, 2016. "Common benchmarking and ranking of units with DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-9.
    2. Zeng, Shouzhen & Streimikiene, Dalia & Baležentis, Tomas, 2017. "Review of and comparative assessment of energy security in Baltic States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 185-192.
    3. Troutt, Marvin D. & Leung, T. W., 2003. "Enhanced bisection strategies for the Maximin Efficiency Ratio model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 545-553, February.
    4. Liang, Liang & Wu, Jie & Cook, Wade D. & Zhu, Joe, 2008. "Alternative secondary goals in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 1025-1030, June.
    5. Karasakal, Esra & Aker, Pınar, 2017. "A multicriteria sorting approach based on data envelopment analysis for R&D project selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 79-92.
    6. I. Contreras & S. Lozano & M. A. Hinojosa, 2021. "A bargaining approach to determine common weights in DEA," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 2181-2201, September.

    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:spr:annopr:v:73:y:1997:i:0:p:323-338:10.1023/a:1018989414181. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.