IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wut/journl/v33y2023i4p189-200id11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing telecommunication contractor firms using a hybrid DEA-BWM method

Author

Listed:
  • Omid Valizadeh
  • Mojtaba Ghiyasi

Abstract

Telecommunication companies have an important role in technology development, so evaluating the performance of these companies has been an interest of managers. This article uses a hybrid method using data envelopment analysis (DEA) and the best-worst method (BWM) to measure the performance of communication companies. The hybrid DEA-BWM method is used for the weight determination and performance assessment of 17 telecommunication contractor firms in the Khorsan Razavi province of Iran. We considered four inputs: gross losses, sales cost, legal reserve, and fixed assets. On the other side, three outputs including operation income, operation profit, and retained earnings are considered as outputs. Considering the input-output parameters and using the hybrid method by seven selected criteria, we rank all contractor firms. We found that the BPM firm has the best performance while and GKS firm is found as the firm with the weakest performance. Compared with the classical DEA methods, we found more reliable results with higher discrimination power, using the hybrid DEA-BWM.

Suggested Citation

  • Omid Valizadeh & Mojtaba Ghiyasi, 2023. "Assessing telecommunication contractor firms using a hybrid DEA-BWM method," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(4), pages 189-200.
    • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:33:y:2023:i:4:p:189-200:id:11
    DOI: 10.37190/ord230411
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ord.pwr.edu.pl/assets/papers_archive/ord2023vol33no4_11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.37190/ord230411?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreas Dellnitz & Madjid Tavana & Rajiv Banker, 2023. "A novel median-based optimization model for eco-efficiency assessment in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(2), pages 661-690, March.
    2. Khalili, M. & Camanho, A.S. & Portela, M.C.A.S. & Alirezaee, M.R., 2010. "The measurement of relative efficiency using data envelopment analysis with assurance regions that link inputs and outputs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(3), pages 761-770, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Hashem Omrani & Arash Alizadeh & Ali Emrouznejad & Zeynab Oveysi, 2023. "A novel best‐worst‐method two‐stage data envelopment analysis model considering decision makers' preferences: An application in bank branches evaluation," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 3593-3610, October.
    5. M Zohrehbandian & A Makui & A Alinezhad, 2010. "A compromise solution approach for finding common weights in DEA: an improvement to Kao and Hung's approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(4), pages 604-610, April.
    6. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    8. Cheaitou, Ali & Larbi, Rim & Al Housani, Bashayer, 2019. "Decision making framework for tender evaluation and contractor selection in public organizations with risk considerations," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    9. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    10. C Kao & H-T Hung, 2005. "Data envelopment analysis with common weights: the compromise solution approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(10), pages 1196-1203, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    2. Omrani, Hashem & Valipour, Mahsa & Emrouznejad, Ali, 2021. "A novel best worst method robust data envelopment analysis: Incorporating decision makers’ preferences in an uncertain environment," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    3. Helmi Hammami & Thanh Ngo & David Tripe & Dinh-Tri Vo, 2022. "Ranking with a Euclidean common set of weights in data envelopment analysis: with application to the Eurozone banking sector," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 675-694, April.
    4. 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.
    5. Kim, Nam Hyok & He, Feng & Kwon, O Chol, 2023. "Combining common-weights DEA window with the Malmquist index: A case of China’s iron and steel industry," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    6. Chris Tofallis, 2024. "Objective Weights for Scoring: The Automatic Democratic Method," Papers 2409.02087, arXiv.org.
    7. Milan Ranđelović & Jelena Stanković & Kristijan Kuk & Gordana Savić & Dragan Ranđelović, 2018. "An Approach to Determining the Importance of Model Criteria in Certifying a City as Business-Friendly," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 156-165, April.
    8. Seyed Saeed Hosseinian & Hamidreza Navidi & Abas Hajfathaliha, 2012. "A New Linear Programming Method for Weights Generation and Group Decision Making in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 233-254, May.
    9. Lin, Ming-Ian & Lee, Yuan-Duen & Ho, Tsai-Neng, 2011. "Applying integrated DEA/AHP to evaluate the economic performance of local governments in China," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 209(2), pages 129-140, March.
    10. Marianela Carrillo & Jesús M. Jorge, 2017. "DEA-Like Efficiency Ranking of Regional Health Systems in Spain," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 1133-1149, September.
    11. Mohammad Pakkar, 2015. "An integrated approach based on DEA and AHP," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 153-169, January.
    12. Jesús Peiró‐Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo & Vicente Rios, 2020. "Well‐being in European regions: Does government quality matter?," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(3), pages 555-582, June.
    13. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2015. "Efficiency of the banking system in Vietnam under financial liberalization," OSF Preprints qsf6d, Center for Open Science.
    14. Rezaeiani, M.J. & Foroughi, A.A., 2018. "Ranking efficient decision making units in data envelopment analysis based on reference frontier share," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 665-674.
    15. Kanematsu, Simon Y. & Carvalho, Ney P. & Martinhon, Carlos A. & Almeida, Mariana R., 2020. "Ranking using η-efficiency and relative size measures based on DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    16. Mohsen Afsharian & Heinz Ahn, 2017. "Multi-period productivity measurement under centralized management with an empirical illustration to German saving banks," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 39(3), pages 881-911, July.
    17. Afsharian, Mohsen & Ahn, Heinz & Harms, Sören Guntram, 2021. "A review of DEA approaches applying a common set of weights: The perspective of centralized management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 3-15.
    18. Omrani, Hashem & Valipour, Mahsa & Jafari Mamakani, Saeid, 2019. "Construct a composite indicator based on integrating Common Weight Data Envelopment Analysis and principal component analysis models: An application for finding development degree of provinces in Iran," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    19. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Emili Tortosa-Ausina, 2020. "The Geography of Well-being in Colombia," Working Papers 2020/03, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    20. Jie Wu & Junfei Chu & Qingyuan Zhu & Pengzhen Yin & Liang Liang, 2016. "DEA cross-efficiency evaluation based on satisfaction degree: an application to technology selection," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(20), pages 5990-6007, 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:wut:journl:v:33:y:2023:i:4:p:189-200:id:11. 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: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iopwrpl.html .

    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.