An evaluation of cross-efficiency methods: With an application to warehouse performance
Cross-efficiency measurement is an extension of Data Envelopment Analysis that allows for tie-breaking ranking of the Decision Making Units (DMUs) using all the peer evaluations. In this article we examine the theory of cross-efficiency measurement by comparing a selection of methods popular in the...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universidad Autónoma de Madrid |
| Repositorio: | Biblos-e Archivo. Repositorio Institucional de la UAM |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.uam.es:10486/701152 |
| Acesso em linha: | http://hdl.handle.net/10486/701152 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2021.126261 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | Cross-efficiency DEA Rank-order Warehouse Decision-making units Economía |
| Resumo: | Cross-efficiency measurement is an extension of Data Envelopment Analysis that allows for tie-breaking ranking of the Decision Making Units (DMUs) using all the peer evaluations. In this article we examine the theory of cross-efficiency measurement by comparing a selection of methods popular in the literature. These methods are applied to performance measurement of European warehouses. We develop a cross-efficiency method based on a rank-order DEA model to accommodate the ordinal nature of some key variables characterizing warehouse performance. This is one of the first comparisons of methods on a real-life dataset and the first time that a model allowing for qualitative variables is included in such a comparison. Our results show that the choice of model matters, as one obtains statistically different rankings from each one of them. This holds in particular for the multiplicative and game-theoretic methods whose results diverge from the classic method. From a managerial perspective, focused on the applicability of the methods, we evaluate them through a multidimensional metric which considers their capability to rank DMUs, their ease of implementation, and their robustness to sensitivity analyses. We conclude that standard weight-restriction methods, as initiated by Sexton et al. [48], perform as well as recently introduced, more sophisticated alternatives |
|---|