Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Data envelopment analysis model with decision makers’ preferences: a robust credibility approach

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is one of the widely used methods to measure the efficiency scores of decision making units (DMUs). Conventional DEA is unable to consider both uncertainty in data and decision makers’ (DMs) judgments in the evaluations. This study, to address the shortcomings of the conventional DEA, proposes a new best worst method (BWM)- robust credibility DEA (BWM-RCDEA) model to estimate the efficiency scores of DMUs considering DMs’ preferences and uncertain data, simultaneously. First, to handle uncertainty in input and output variables, fuzzy credibility model has been applied. Additionally, uncertainty in constructing fuzzy sets is modeled using robust optimization with fuzzy perturbation degree. In this paper, two new types of RCDEA models are proposed: RCDEA model with exact perturbation in fuzzy inputs and outputs and RCDEA model with fuzzy perturbation in fuzzy inputs and outputs. In addition, to deal with flexibility of weights and incorporating DMs’ judgement into the RCDEA model, a bi-objective BWM-RCDEA model is introduced. Finally, the proposed bi-objective model is solved using min–max approach. To illustrate the usefulness and capability of the proposed model, efficiency scores of 39 distribution companies in Iran is investigated and results are analyzed and discussed. Finally, based on the results, recommendations have been made for policy makers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alem, D. J., & Morabito, R. (2012). Production planning in furniture settings via robust optimization. Computers & Operations Research, 39(2), 139–150.

  • Alizadeh, A., & Omrani, H. (2019). An integrated multi response Taguchi-neural network-robust data envelopment analysis model for CO2 laser cutting. Measurement, 131, 69–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R., Athanassopoulos, A., Dyson, R. G., & Thanassoulis, E. (1997). Weights restrictions and value judgments in data envelopment analysis: Evolution, development and future directions. Annals of Operations Research, 73, 13–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amini, M., Dabbagh, R., & Omrani, H. (2019). A fuzzy data envelopment analysis based on credibility theory for estimating road safety. Decision Science Letter. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2019.1.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azadeh, A., Haghighi, S. M., Zarrin, M., & Khaefi, S. (2015). Performance evaluation of Iranian electricity distribution units by using stochastic data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 73, 919–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Tal, A., & Nemirovski, A. (2000). Robust solutions of linear programming problems contaminated with uncertain data. Mathematical Programming, 88(3), 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2004). The price of robustness. Operations Research, 52(1), 35–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çelen, A. (2013). Efficiency and productivity (TFP) of the Turkish electricity distribution companies: An application of two-stage (DEA & Tobit) analysis. Energy Policy, 63, 300–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çelen, A., & Yalçın, N. (2012). Performance assessment of Turkish electricity distribution utilities: An application of combined FAHP/TOPSIS/DEA methodology to incorporate quality of service. Utilities Policy, 23, 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Huang, Z. M. (1990). Polyhedral cone-ratio DEA models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks. Journal of Econometrics, 46(1–2), 73–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., Cook, W. D., & Lim, S. (2019). Preface: DEA and its applications in operations and data analytics. Annals of Operations Research, 278(1), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Degl’Innocenti, M., Kourtzidis, S. A., Sevic, Z., & Tzeremes, N. G. (2017). Investigating bank efficiency in transition economies: A window-based weight assurance region approach. Economic Modelling, 67, 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, D., & Prade, H. (1978). Operations on fuzzy numbers. International Journal of Systems Sciences, 9(6), 613–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyson, R. G., & Thanassoulis, E. (1988). Reducing weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 39(6), 563–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahimi, B., & Khalili, M. (2018). A new integrated AR-IDEA model to find the best DMU in the presence of both weight restrictions and imprecise data. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 125, 357–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emrouznejad, A., & Tavana, M. (2014). Performance measurement with fuzzy data envelopment analysis, studies in fuzziness and soft computing. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Emrouznejad, A., Tavana, M., & Hatami-Marbini, A. (2014). The state of the art in fuzzy data envelopment analysis. In A. Emrouznejad & M. Tavana (Eds.), Performance measurement with fuzzy data envelopment analysis published in studies in fuzziness and soft computing (pp. 1–48). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Emrouznejad, A., & Yang, G. L. (2018). A survey and analysis of the first 40 years of scholarly literature in DEA: 1978–2016. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 61, 4–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fasanghari, M., Amalnick, M. S., Anvari, R. T., & Razmi, J. (2015). A novel credibility-based group decision making method for enterprise architecture scenario analysis using data envelopment analysis. Applied Soft Computing, 32, 347–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, P. (2009). Fuzzy data envelopment analysis and its application to location problems. Information Sciences, 179(6), 820–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, P., & Tanaka, H. (2001). Fuzzy DEA: A perceptual evaluation method. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 119(1), 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatami-Marbini, A., Emrouznejad, A., & Tavana, M. (2011). A taxonomy and review of the fuzzy data envelopment analysis literature: Two decades in the making. European Journal of Operational Research, 214(3), 457–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatami-Marbini, A., & Saati, S. (2018). Efficiency evaluation in two-stage data envelopment analysis under a fuzzy environment: A common-weights approach. Applied Soft Computing, 72, 156–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatami-Marbini, A., Tavana, M., Emrouznejad, A., & Saati, S. (2012). Efficiency measurement in fuzzy additive data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 10(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 203(3), 761–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. H., Kim, W. C., & Fabozzi, F. J. (2018). Recent advancements in robust optimization for investment management. Annals of Operations Research, 266(1), 183–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, P. L., Potter, A., Beynon, M., & Beresford, A. (2015). Evaluating the efficiency performance of airports using an integrated AHP/DEA-AR technique. Transport Policy, 42, 75–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Cho, Y., & Ko, M. (2020). Robust optimization model for R&D project selection under uncertainty in the automobile industry. Sustainability, 12(23), 10210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lertworasirikul, S., Fang, S. C., Joines, J. A., & Nuttle, H. L. W. (2003a). Fuzzy data envelopment analysis: A credibility approach. In J. L. Verdegay (Ed.), Fuzzy sets based heuristics for optimization studies in fuzziness and soft computing. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lertworasirikul, S., Fang, S. C., Joines, J. A., & Nuttle, H. L. (2003b). Fuzzy data envelopment analysis (DEA): A possibility approach. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 139(2), 379–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X., & Liu, B. (2006). A sufficient and necessary condition for credibility measures. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(5), 527–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, B., & Liu, Y. K. (2002). Expected value of fuzzy variable and fuzzy expected value models. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 10(4), 445–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. T. (2008). A fuzzy DEA/AR approach to the selection of flexible manufacturing systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54(1), 66–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. T. (2014). Restricting weight flexibility in fuzzy two-stage DEA. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 74, 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y. K., & Liu, B. (2003). Fuzzy random variables: A scalar expected value operator. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 2(2), 143–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mi, X., Tang, M., Liao, H., Shen, W., & Lev, B. (2019). The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what’s next? Omega. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2019.01.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omrani, H. (2013). Common weights data envelopment analysis with uncertain data: A robust optimization approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 66(4), 1163–1170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omrani, H., Adabi, F., & Adabi, N. (2017). Designing an efficient supply chain network with uncertain data: A robust optimization—data envelopment analysis approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 68(7), 816–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omrani, H., Alizadeh, A., & Emrouznejad, A. (2018). Finding the optimal combination of power plants alternatives: A multi response Taguchi-neural network using TOPSIS and fuzzy best-worst method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 203, 210–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omrani, H., Alizadeh, A., & Naghizadeh, F. (2020). Incorporating decision makers’ preferences into DEA and common weight DEA models based on the best–worst method (BWM). Soft Computing, 24(6), 3989–4002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petridis, K., Ünsal, M. G., Dey, P., & Örkcü, H. H. (2019). A novel network data envelopment analysis model for performance measurement of Turkish electric distribution companies. Energy, 174, 985–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peykani, P., Mohammadi, E., Emrouznejad, A., Pishvaee, M. S., & Rostamy-Malkhalifeh, M. (2019). Fuzzy data envelopment analysis: An adjustable approach. Expert Systems with Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei, J. (2016). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega, 64, 126–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roll, Y., Cook, W. D., & Golany, B. (1991). Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis. IIE Transactions, 23(1), 2–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadjadi, S. J., & Omrani, H. (2008). Data envelopment analysis with uncertain data: An application for Iranian electricity distribution companies. Energy Policy, 36(11), 4247–4254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadjadi, S. J., Omrani, H., Abdollahzadeh, S., Alinaghian, M., & Mohammadi, H. (2011a). A robust super-efficiency data envelopment analysis model for ranking of provincial gas companies in Iran. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 10875–10881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadjadi, S. J., Omrani, H., Makui, A., & Shahanaghi, K. (2011b). An interactive robust data envelopment analysis model for determining alternative targets in Iranian electricity distribution companies. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(8), 9830–9839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saeidi-Mobarakeh, Z., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Navabakhsh, M., & Amoozad-Khalili, H. (2020). A bi-level and robust optimization-based framework for a hazardous waste management problem: A real-world application. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salahi, M., Torabi, N., & Amiri, A. (2016). An optimistic robust optimization approach to common set of weights in DEA. Measurement, 93, 67–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarıca, K., & Or, I. (2007). Efficiency assessment of Turkish power plants using data envelopment analysis. Energy, 32(8), 1484–1499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, J. K. (1992). A fuzzy systems approach in data envelopment analysis. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 24(8–9), 259–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shabanpour, H., Yousefi, S., & Saen, R. F. (2017). Future planning for benchmarking and ranking sustainable suppliers using goal programming and robust double frontiers DEA. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 50, 129–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soltanzadeh, E., & Omrani, H. (2018). Dynamic network data envelopment analysis model with fuzzy inputs and outputs: An application for Iranian Airlines. Applied Soft Computing, 63, 268–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soyster, A. L. (1973). Convex programming with set-inclusive constraints and applications to inexact linear programming. Operation Research, 21, 1154–1157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavana, M., Khanjani Shiraz, R., Hatami-Marbini, A., Agrell, P. J., & Paryab, K. (2012). Fuzzy stochastic data envelopment analysis with application to base realignment and closure (BRAC). Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 12247–12259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavassoli, M., Faramarzi, G. R., & Saen, R. F. (2015). Ranking electricity distribution units using slacks-based measure, strong complementary slackness condition, and discriminant analysis. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 64, 1214–1220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavassoli, M., Ketabi, S., & Ghandehari, M. (2020). Developing a network DEA model for sustainability analysis of Iran’s electricity distribution network. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 122, 106187.

  • Thompson, R. G., Singleton, F. D., Jr., Thrall, R. M., & Smith, B. A. (1986). Comparative site evaluations for locating a high-energy physics lab in Texas. Interfaces, 16(6), 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toloo, M., & Mensah, E. K. (2019). Robust optimization with nonnegative decision variables: A DEA approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, 313–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triantis, K., & Girod, O. (1998). A mathematical programming approach for measuring technical efficiency in a fuzzy environment. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 10(1), 85–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vafadarnikjoo, A., Tavana, M., Botelho, T., & Chalvatzis, K. (2020). A neutrosophic enhanced best–worst method for considering decision-makers’ confidence in the best and worst criteria. Annals of Operations Research, 289(2), 391–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. M., Chin, K. S., & Poon, G. K. K. (2008). A data envelopment analysis method with assurance region for weight generation in the analytic hierarchy process. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 913–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, H., Yu, D., Yin, S., & Xia, B. (2018). Possibility-based robust design optimization for the structural-acoustic system with fuzzy parameters. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 102, 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1978). Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(1), 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, H., Guo, S., & Zhao, H. (2019). Comprehensive assessment for battery energy storage systems based on fuzzy-MCDM considering risk preferences. Energy, 168, 450–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, H. J. (1978). Fuzzy programming and linear programming with several objective functions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(1), 45–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, H. J. (2001). Fuzzy sets theory and its applications (4th ed.). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zohrehbandian, M., Makui, A., & Alinezhad, A. (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, 61(4), 604–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The article was prepared within the framework of the Basic Research Program at HSE University. The authors would like to thank the Editor and the Guest Editor of Annals of Operations Research, and three anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions. As results this paper has been improved substantially.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Urmia University of Technology, Urmia, Iran

    Hashem Omrani

  2. Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Arash Alizadeh

  3. Aston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK

    Ali Emrouznejad

  4. National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Ali Emrouznejad & Tamara Teplova

Authors
  1. Hashem Omrani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arash Alizadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ali Emrouznejad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tamara Teplova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HO Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. AA Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. AE Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. TT Investigation, Software, Validation, Writing—review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hashem Omrani.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Omrani, H., Alizadeh, A., Emrouznejad, A. et al. Data envelopment analysis model with decision makers’ preferences: a robust credibility approach. Ann Oper Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04262-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04262-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation