Selecting and full ranking suppliers with imprecise data: A new DEA method

  • Mehdi TolooEmail author


Supplier selection, a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem, is one of the most important strategic issues in supply chain management (SCM). A good solution to this problem significantly contributes to the overall supply chain performance. This paper proposes a new integrated mixed integer programming ‐ data envelopment analysis (MIP‐DEA) model for finding the most efficient suppliers in the presence of imprecise data. Using this model, a new method for full ranking of units is introduced. This method tackles some drawbacks of the previous methods and is computationally more efficient. The applicability of the proposed model is illustrated, and the results and performance are compared with the previous studies.


Data envelopment analysis Imprecise data Supplier selection Full ranking method Uncertainly Best efficient unit 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Adler N, Friedman L, Stern ZS (2002) Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context. Eur J Oper Res 140:249–265CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amin GR, Toloo M (2007) Finding the most efficient DMUs in DEA: an improved integrated model. Comput Ind Eng 52(2):71–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amin GR, Gattoufi S, Rezaee Seraji E (2011) A maximum discrimination DEA method for ranking association rules in data mining. Int J Comput Math 88(11):2233–2245.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andersen P, Petersen NC (1993) A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 39(10):1261–1294CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bardhan I, Bowlin WF, Cooper WW, Sueyoshi T (1996) Models for efficiency dominance in data envelopment analysis. Part I: Additive models and MED measures. J Oper Res Soc Jpn 39:322–332MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cooper WW, Park KS, Yu G (1999) IDEA and AR-IDEA: Models for dealing with imprecise data in DEA. Manag Sci 45:597–607CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Despotis DK, Smirlis YG (2002) Data envelopment analysis with imprecise data. Eur J Oper Res 140(1):24–36Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ertay T, Ruan D, Tuzkaya UR (2006) Integrating data envelopment analysis and analytic hierarchy for the facility layout design in manufacturing systems. Inf Sci 176:237–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farzipoor Saen R (2007) Suppliers selection in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal data. Eur J Oper Res 183:741–747CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farzipoor Saen R (2011) Media selection in the presence of flexible factors and imprecise data. J Oper Res Soc 62:1695–1703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Golany B (1988) An interactive MOLP procedure for the extension of data envelopment analysis to effectiveness analysis. J Oper Res Soc 39(8):725–734CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Güneri AF, Ertay T, Yücel A (2011) An approach based on ANFIS input selection and modeling for supplier selection problem. Expert Syst Appl 38(12):14907–14917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ho W, Xu X, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):16–24CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karsak EE, Ahiska SS (2005) Practical common weight multi-criteria decision-making approach with an improved discriminating power for technology selection. Int J Prod Res 43(8):1537–1554CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kilincci O, Onal SA (2011) Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company. Expert Syst Appl 38(8):9656–9664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim SH, Park CG, Park KS (1999) An application of data envelopment analysis in telephone offices evaluation with partial data. Comput Oper Res 26:59–72Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lin CT, Chen CB, Ting YC (2011) An ERP model for supplier selection in electronics industry. Expert Syst Appl 38(3):1760–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sevkli M, Koh SCL, Zaim S, Demirbag M, Tatoglu E (2007) An application of data envelopment analytic hierarchy process for supplier selection: a case study of BEKO in Turkey. Int J Prod Res 45(9):1973–2003CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sinuany-Stern Z, Mehrez A, Barboy A (1994) Academic department efficiency via data envelopment analysis. Comput Oper Res 21(5):543–556CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sexton TR, Silkman RH, Hogan AJ (1986) Data envelopment analysis: Critique and extensions. In: Silkman RH (ed) Measuring efficiency: an assessment of data envelopment analysis. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 73–105Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Talluri S, Baker RC (2002) A multi-phase mathematical programming approach for effective supply chain design. Eur J Oper Res 141:544–558CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Toloo M (2012) On finding the most BCC-efficient DMU: a new integrated MIP-DEA model. Appl Math Model 36:5515–5520MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Toloo M, Nalchigar S (2009) A new integrated DEA model for finding most BCC-efficient DMU. Appl Math Model 33:597–604CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Toloo M, Sohrabi B, Nalchigar S (2009) A new method for ranking discovered rules from data mining by DEA. Expert Syst Appl 36:8503–8508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Toloo M, Nalchigar S (2011) A new DEA method for supplier selection in presence of both cardinal and ordinal data. Expert Syst Appl 38:14726–14731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Toloo M, Nalchigar S (2011) On ranking discovered rules of data mining by data envelopment analysis: some models with wider applications. In: Funatsu K, Hasegawa K (Eds) New fundamental technologies in data mining. InTech publisher 425–446. (Online available at:
  28. 28.
    Toloo M (2014) An epsilon-free approach for finding the most efficient unit in DEA. Appl Math Model 38:3182–3192.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Toloo M, Ertay T (2014) The most cost efficient automotive vendor with price uncertainty: a new DEA approach. Meas 52:135–144.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Toloo M, Kresta A (2014) Finding the best asset financing alternative: a DEA-WEO approach. Meas. DOI:
  31. 31.
    Toloo M (2014) The role of non-Archimedean epsilon in finding the most efficient unit: with an application of professional tennis players. Appl Math Modell.
  32. 32.
    Torgersen AM, Forsund FR, Kittelsen SAC (1996) Slack-adjusted efficiency measures and ranking of efficient units. J Prod Anal 7:379–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zhu J (2003) Imprecise data envelopment analysis (IDEA): a review and improvement with an application. Eur J Oper Res 144:513–529CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business AdministrationFaculty of Economics, Technical University of OstravaOstrava 1Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations