A hybrid fuzzy MCDM method for measuring the performance of publicly held pharmaceutical companies
Maximizing shareholders’ value has always been an indispensable goal for publicly traded companies. Shareholders value is highly dependent on the operating expenses, profit margin, return on investment and the overall performance in public companies. We propose a hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method for measuring the performance of publicly held companies in the Pharmaceutical industry. The proposed method helps investors choose a proper portfolio of stocks in the presence of environmental turbulence and uncertainties. The proposed method is composed of three distinct but inter-related phases. In the pre-screening phase, a set of financial and non-financial evaluation criteria are selected based on the balanced scorecard (BSC) approach. In the efficiency measurement phase, the DEMATEL method is used first to determine the inter-relationships among the BSC perspectives. A fuzzy ANP method is used next to determine the relative importance of the criteria based on the resulting DEMATEL interactive network. In the third step, two different fuzzy data envelopment analysis (DEA) methods are used to evaluate the relative efficiency of the decision making units (DMUs). The fuzzy DEA models are modified by using the relative importance of the criteria and the precedence relations among the input and output weights as additional constraints. Finally, the modified fuzzy DEA models are used to calculate the relative efficiency scores of the DMUs. In the ranking phase, an integration method grounded in the Shannon’s entropy concept is used to combine different efficiency scores and calculate the final ranking of the DMUs. The method proposed in this study is used to evaluate the performance of publicly held pharmaceutical companies actively trading on the Swiss Stock Exchange (SSE).
KeywordsPerformance evaluation Balanced scorecard DEMATEL Fuzzy ANP Fuzzy DEA
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and the editor for their insightful comments and suggestions.
- Bulgurcu, B. (2012). Application of TOPSIS technique for financial performance evaluation of technology firms in Istanbul Stock Exchange Market. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 62, 1033–1040.Google Scholar
- Dubois, D., & Prade, H. (1980). Fuzzy sets and systems theory and applications. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Centre.Google Scholar
- Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1973). Perceptions of the world problematic: Communication procedure, communicating with those bearing collective responsibility. Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Centre.Google Scholar
- Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. (1992). The balanced scorecard measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79.Google Scholar
- Khalili-Damghani, K., Taghavifard, M., Olfat, L., & Feizi, K. (2011). A hybrid approach based on fuzzy DEA and simulation to measure the efficiency of agility in supply chain: Real case of dairy industry. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 6, 163–172.Google Scholar
- Khalili-Damghani, K., & Tavana, M. (2013). A new fuzzy network data envelopment analysis model for measuring the performance of agility in supply chains. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. doi: 10.1007/s00170-013-5021-y.
- Khalili-Damghani, K., Sadi-Nezhad, S., & Hosseinzadeh-Lotfi, F. (2014). Imprecise DEA models to assess the agility of supply chains. Supply Chain Management under Fuzziness: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 313, 167–198.Google Scholar
- Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.Google Scholar
- Tavana, M., Khalili-Damghani, K., & Abtahi, A. R. (2013a). A hybrid fuzzy group decision support framework for advanced-technology prioritization at NASA. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 480–491.Google Scholar
- Tavana, M., Khalili-Damghani, K., & Sadi-Nezhad, S. (2013b). A fuzzy group data envelopment analysis model for high-technology project selection: A case study at NASA. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 66, 10–23.Google Scholar
- Tzeng, G. H., Chen, F. H., & Hsu, T. S. (2011). A balanced scorecard approach to establish a performance evaluation and relationship model for hot spring hotels based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DEMATEL and ANP. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 908–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wu, H. Y., Tzeng, G. H., & Chen, Y. H. (2009). A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6), 10135–10147.Google Scholar