Advertisement

A new data envelopment analysis based approach for fixed cost allocation

  • Feng Li
  • Qingyuan Zhu
  • Liang Liang
Original Research

Abstract

In many real applications, there exist situations where some independent and decentralized entities will construct a common platform for production processes. A natural and essential problem for the common platform is to allocate the fixed cost or common revenue across these entities in an equitable way. Since there is no powerful central decision maker, each decision-making unit (DMU) might propose an allocation scheme that will favor itself, giving itself a minimal cost and/or a maximal revenue. It is clear that such allocations are egoistic and unacceptable to all DMUs except for the distributing DMU. In this paper, we will address the fixed cost allocation problem in this decentralized environment. For this purpose, we suggest a non-egoistic principle which states that each DMU should propose its allocation proposal in such a way that the maximal cost would be allocated to itself. Further, a preferred allocation scheme should assign each DMU at most its non-egoistic allocation and lead to efficiency scores at least as high as the efficiency scores based on non-egoistic allocations. To this end, we integrate a goal programming method with data envelopment analysis methodology to propose a new model under a set of common weights. The final allocation scheme is determined in such a way that the efficiency scores are maximized for all DMUs through minimizing the total deviation to goal efficiencies. Finally, both a numerical example from prior literature and an empirical study of nine truck fleets are provided to demonstrate the proposed approach.

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) Fixed cost allocation Non-egoistic principle Decentralized units Goal programming (GP) 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor of Annals of Operations Research and two anonymous referees for their kind work and valuable suggestions. This research was financially supported by the Science Funds for Creative Research Groups of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71121061), the Fund for International Cooperation and Exchange of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71110107024), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71271196 and 71671172), the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CX2040160004), and the Science Funds for Creative Research Groups of University of Science and Technology of China (No. WK2040160008). This paper was finished when Feng Li was visiting the State University of New York at Buffalo with the financial support from the China Scholarship Council (No. 201606340017), and Qingyuan Zhu was visiting University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign with financial support from the China Scholarship Council (No. 201606340054).

References

  1. Amirteimoori, A., & Kordrostami, S. (2005). Allocating fixed costs and target setting: A DEA-based approach. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 171(1), 136–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amirteimoori, A., & Tabar, M. M. (2010). Resource allocation and target setting in data envelopment analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(4), 3036–3039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. An, Q., Chen, H., Wu, J., & Liang, L. (2015). Measuring slacks-based efficiency for commercial banks in China by using a two-stage DEA model with undesirable output. Annals of Operations Research, 235(1), 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, T. R., & Sharp, G. P. (1997). A new measure of baseball batters using DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 73, 141–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Asmild, M., Paradi, J. C., & Pastor, J. T. (2009). Centralized resource allocation BCC models. Omega, 37(1), 40–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Avellar, J. G., Milioni, A. Z., & Rabello, T. N. (2007). Spherical frontier DEA model based on a constant sum of inputs. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58(9), 1246–1251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Avellar, J. G., Milioni, A. Z., Rabello, T. N., & Simão, H. P. (2010). On the redistribution of existing inputs using the spherical frontier DEA model. Pesquisa Operacional, 30(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beasley, J. E. (2003). Allocating fixed costs and resources via data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 198–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bougnol, M. L., & Dulá, J. H. (2006). Validating DEA as a ranking tool: An application of DEA to assess performance in higher education. Annals of Operations Research, 145(1), 339–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Butler, T. W., & Li, L. (2005). The utility of returns to scale in DEA programming: An analysis of Michigan rural hospitals. European Journal of Operational Research, 161(2), 469–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen, Y., Wang, J., Zhu, J., Sherman, H. D., & Chou, S. Y. (2017). How the Great Recession affects performance: a case of Pennsylvania hospitals using DEA. Annals of Operations Research.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s1047.Google Scholar
  14. Cook, W. D., & Kress, M. (1999). Characterizing an equitable allocation of shared costs: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 119(3), 652–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2005). Allocation of shared costs among decision making units: A DEA approach. Computers & Operations Research, 32(8), 2171–2178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data envelopment analysis: History, models, and interpretations. In W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on data envelopment analysis (pp. 1–39). US: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ding, T., Chen, Y., Wu, H., & Wei, Y. (2017). Centralized fixed cost and resource allocation considering technology heterogeneity: A DEA approach. Annals of Operations Research.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2414-6.Google Scholar
  18. Du, J., Cook, W. D., Liang, L., & Zhu, J. (2014). Fixed cost and resource allocation based on DEA cross-efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 235(1), 206–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Emrouznejad, A., Parker, B. R., & Tavares, G. (2008). Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: A survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 42(3), 151–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Emrouznejad, A., & Yang, G. L. (2016a). A framework for measuring global Malmquist–Luenberger productivity index with CO2 emissions on Chinese manufacturing industries. Energy, 115, 840–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Emrouznejad, A., & Yang, G. L. (2016b). CO2 emissions reduction of Chinese light manufacturing industries: A novel RAM-based global Malmquist–Luenberger productivity index. Energy Policy, 96, 397–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fang, L. (2013). A generalized DEA model for centralized resource allocation. European Journal of Operational Research, 228(2), 405–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fang, L. (2015). Centralized resource allocation based on efficiency analysis for step-by-step improvement paths. Omega, 51, 24–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fang, L. (2016). Centralized resource allocation DEA models based on revenue efficiency under limited information. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 67(7), 945–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fang, L., & Li, H. (2015). Centralized resource allocation based on the cost–revenue analysis. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 85, 395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fang, L., & Zhang, C. Q. (2008). Resource allocation based on the DEA model. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(8), 1136–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Guedes, E. C. C., Milioni, A. Z., de Avellar, J. V. G., & Silva, R. C. (2012). Adjusted spherical frontier model: allocating input via parametric DEA. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 63(3), 406–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hatami-Marbini, A., Tavana, M., Agrell, P. J., Lotfi, F. H., & Beigi, Z. G. (2015). A common-weights DEA model for centralized resource reduction and target setting. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 79, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., Hatami-Marbini, A., Agrell, P. J., Aghayi, N., & Gholami, K. (2013). Allocating fixed resources and setting targets using a common-weights DEA approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 64(2), 631–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., Nematollahi, N., Behzadi, M. H., Mirbolouki, M., & Moghaddas, Z. (2012). Centralized resource allocation with stochastic data. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 236(7), 1783–1788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., Noora, A. A., Jahanshahloo, G. R., Gerami, J., & Mozaffari, M. R. (2010). Centralized resource allocation for enhanced Russell models. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 235(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jahanshahloo, G. R., Lotfi, F. H., Shoja, N., & Sanei, M. (2004). An alternative approach for equitable allocation of shared costs by using DEA. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 153(1), 267–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jahanshahloo, G. R., Sadeghi, J., & Khodabakhshi, M. (2017). Proposing a method for fixed cost allocation using DEA based on the efficiency invariance and common set of weights principles. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 85(2), 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jouida, S. B., Krichen, S., & Klibi, W. (2017). Coalition-formation problem for sourcing contract design in supply networks. European Journal of Operational Research, 257(2), 539–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Khodabakhshi, M., & Aryavash, K. (2014). The fair allocation of common fixed cost or revenue using DEA concept. Annals of Operations Research, 214(1), 187–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lei, X., Li, Y., Xie, Q., & Liang, L. (2015). Measuring Olympics achievements based on a parallel DEA approach. Annals of Operations Research, 226(1), 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Li, F., Liang, L., Li, Y., & Emrouznejad, A. (2018a). An alternative approach to decompose the potential gains from mergers. Journal of the Operational Research Society.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2017.1409867.
  39. Li, F., Song, J., Dolgui, A., & Liang, L. (2017). Using common weights and efficiency invariance principles for resource allocation and target setting. International Journal of Production Research, 55(17), 4982–4997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Li, F., Zhu, Q., & Chen, Z. (2018b). Allocating a fixed cost across the decision making units with two-stage network structures. Omega.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2018.02.009.
  41. Li, F., Zhu, Q., & Liang, L. (2018c). Allocating a fixed cost based on a DEA-game cross efficiency approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 96, 196–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Li, F., Zhu, Q., & Zhuang, J. (2018d). Analysis of fire protection efficiency in the United States: A two-stage DEA-based approach. OR Spectrum, 40(1), 23–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Li, Y., Yang, M., Chen, Y., Dai, Q., & Liang, L. (2013). Allocating a fixed cost based on data envelopment analysis and satisfaction degree. Omega, 41(1), 55–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Li, Y., Yang, F., Liang, L., & Hua, Z. (2009). Allocating the fixed cost as a complement of other cost inputs: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(1), 389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Liang, L., Yang, F., Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2006). DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation. Annals of Operations Research, 145(1), 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lin, R. (2011a). Allocating fixed costs or resources and setting targets via data envelopment analysis. Applied Mathematics Computation, 217(13), 6349–6358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lin, R. (2011b). Allocating fixed costs and common revenue via data envelopment analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 218(7), 3680–3688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lin, R., & Chen, Z. (2016). Fixed input allocation methods based on super CCR efficiency invariance and practical feasibility. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 40(9), 5377–5392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lin, R., Peng, Y. Y. (2011). A fixed cost allocation approach with DEA super efficiency invariance. In International conference on electronics, communications and control (ICECC), 2011 (pp. 622–625). IEEE.Google Scholar
  50. Lozano, S. (2014). Nonradial approach to allocating fixed costs and common revenue using centralized DEA. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 13(01), 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lozano, S., & Adenso-Diaz, B. (2017). Network DEA-based biobjective optimization of product flows in a supply chain. Annals of Operations Research.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s1047.Google Scholar
  52. Lozano, S., & Villa, G. (2004). Centralized resource allocation using data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 22(1), 143–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lozano, S., & Villa, G. (2005). Centralized DEA models with the possibility of downsizing. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(4), 357–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lozano, S., Villa, G., & Adenso-Dıaz, B. (2004). Centralised target setting for regional recycling operations using DEA. Omega, 32(2), 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lozano, S., Villa, G., & Brännlund, R. (2009). Centralised reallocation of emission permits using DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 193(3), 752–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lozano, S., Villa, G., & Canca, D. (2011). Application of centralised DEA approach to capital budgeting in Spanish ports. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 60(3), 455–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Milioni, A. Z., de Avellar, J. V. G., & Gomes, E. G. (2011a). An ellipsoidal frontier model: Allocating input via parametric DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 209(2), 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Milioni, A. Z., de Avellar, J. V. G., Rabello, T. N., & De Freitas, G. M. (2011b). Hyperbolic frontier model: A parametric DEA approach for the distribution of a total fixed output. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62(6), 1029–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mostafaee, A. (2013). An equitable method for allocating fixed costs by using data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(3), 326–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sherman, H. D., & Zhu, J. (2006). Benchmarking with quality-adjusted DEA (Q-DEA) to seek lower-cost high-quality service: Evidence from a US bank application. Annals of Operations Research, 145(1), 301–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Si, X., Liang, L., Jia, G., Yang, L., Wu, H., & Li, Y. (2013). Proportional sharing and DEA in allocating the fixed cost. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 219(12), 6580–6590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Silva, R. C., & Milioni, A. Z. (2012). The adjusted spherical frontier model with weight restrictions. European Journal of Operational Research, 220(3), 729–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Silva, R. C., Milioni, A. Z., & Teixeira, J. E. (2017). The general hyperbolic frontier model: Establishing fair output levels via parametric DEA. Journal of the Operational Research Society.  https://doi.org/10.1057/s41274-017-0278-4.Google Scholar
  64. Wu, J., Zhu, Q., Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2016). Best cooperative partner selection and input resource reallocation using DEA. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 67(9), 1221–1237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yang, G. L., Yang, J. B., Xu, D. L., & Khoveyni, M. (2017). A three-stage hybrid approach for weight assignment in MADM. Omega, 71, 93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yang, F., Yuan, Q., Du, S., & Liang, L. (2016). Reserving relief supplies for earthquake: a multi-attribute decision making of China Red Cross. Annals of Operations Research, 247(2), 759–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Yu, M. M., Chen, L. H., & Hsiao, B. (2016). A fixed cost allocation based on the two-stage network data envelopment approach. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1817–1822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zhu, W., Zhang, Q., & Wang, H. (2017). Fixed costs and shared resources allocation in two-stage network DEA. Annals of Operations Research.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2599-8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business AdministrationSouthwestern University of Finance and EconomicsChengduChina
  2. 2.School of ManagementUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina
  3. 3.Department of Business AdministrationUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA
  4. 4.School of ManagementHefei University of TechnologyHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations