سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

ابراهیمی, امیر, سلیمانی دامنه, رضا, شول, عباس. (1402). ترسیم مرز کارایی در ساختارهای دومرحله‌ای: رویکرد ورودی - خروجی‌محور شعاعی و غیرشعاعی. , 13(3), 195-222. doi: 10.48308/jimp.13.3.195
امیر ابراهیمی; رضا سلیمانی دامنه; عباس شول. "ترسیم مرز کارایی در ساختارهای دومرحله‌ای: رویکرد ورودی - خروجی‌محور شعاعی و غیرشعاعی". , 13, 3, 1402, 195-222. doi: 10.48308/jimp.13.3.195
ابراهیمی, امیر, سلیمانی دامنه, رضا, شول, عباس. (1402). 'ترسیم مرز کارایی در ساختارهای دومرحله‌ای: رویکرد ورودی - خروجی‌محور شعاعی و غیرشعاعی', , 13(3), pp. 195-222. doi: 10.48308/jimp.13.3.195
ابراهیمی, امیر, سلیمانی دامنه, رضا, شول, عباس. ترسیم مرز کارایی در ساختارهای دومرحله‌ای: رویکرد ورودی - خروجی‌محور شعاعی و غیرشعاعی. , 1402; 13(3): 195-222. doi: 10.48308/jimp.13.3.195

ترسیم مرز کارایی در ساختارهای دومرحله‌ای: رویکرد ورودی - خروجی‌محور شعاعی و غیرشعاعی

چشم‌انداز مدیریت صنعتی
دوره 13، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 51، 1402، صفحه 195-222    اصل مقاله (1020.87 K)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48308/jimp.13.3.195
نویسندگان
امیر ابراهیمی1؛ رضا سلیمانی دامنه* 2؛ عباس شول3
1کارشناسی ارشد، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه ولی‌عصر (عج) رفسنجان، رفسنجان، ایران.
2استادیار، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه ولی‌عصر (عج) رفسنجان، رفسنجان، ایران.
3دانشیار، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه ولی‌عصر (عج) رفسنجان، رفسنجان، ایران.
چکیده
مدل­‌های اولیه تحلیل پوششی داده‌­ها به ­دلیل دیدگاه جعبه سیاه و بی­‌توجهی به فرایندهای داخلی، برای ارزیابی ساختارهای دومرحله‌­ای مناسب نیستند. در این ساختارها ترسیم مرز کارایی و تعیین عادلانه مقدار بهینه متغیرها مهم‌­ترین چالش است. در بسیاری از مدل­‌های دومرحله‌­ای موجود مرز کارایی ترسیم نشده است و یا مقدار بهینه متغیرهای میانی توسط یکی از دو مرحله تعیین می­‌شود. این امر به محاسبه اشتباه کارایی مرحله دیگر و کارایی کل منجر می­‌شود. درواقع در این مدل­‌ها ضعف عملکرد یک مرحله به کاهش کارایی مرحله دیگر منجر خواهد شد. در این پژوهش با ثابت­‌ نگه­داشتن متغیرهای میانی در سطح فعلی و با یک رویکرد ورودی-خروجی­‌محور، مدل­‌های شعاعی و غیرشعاعی در شرایط بازده به مقیاس ثابت و متغیر توسعه داده شده است؛ سپس با استفاده از قضایای ریاضی اعتبار مدل‌­ها اثبات و نشان داده شده که در مدل­‌های پیشنهادی عملکرد واحدها در مراحل با واحدی روی مرز کارایی مقایسه می­‌شود و مدل‌­ها با رساندن مراحل به مرز کارایی، کل ساختار را کارا می­‌کنند. از مدل­‌های پیشنهادی در یک مطالعه کاربردی برای ارزیابی پایداری 9 زنجیره تأمین شرکت­‌های تولیدکننده رب گوجه استفاده شد. نتایج کارایی آن­ها با چهار مدل و همچنین مقدار بهینه متغیرهای واحدهای ناکارا در هر یک از این مدل­‌ها بیان شده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
کارایی؛ ارزیابی عادلانه؛ تحلیل پوششی داده‌های دومرحله‌ای؛ پایداری زنجیره تأمین؛ مدل‌های غیرشعاعی
عنوان مقاله [English]
Deriving the Efficiency Frontier for Two-Stage Structures: Input – Output Oriented Approach of Radial and Non-Radial
نویسندگان [English]
Amir Ebrahimi1؛ Reza Soleymani-Damaneh2؛ Abbas Shoul3
1MA, Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Vali-e-Asr University of Rafsanjan, Rafsanjan, Iran.
2Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Vali-e-Asr University of Rafsanjan, Rafsanjan, Iran.
3Associate Professor, Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Vali-e-Asr University of Rafsanjan, Rafsanjan, Iran.
چکیده [English]
Early models of data envelopment analysis are not suitable for evaluating two-stage structures due to the black box view and lack of attention to internal processes. In these structures, Deriving the efficiency frontier and fairly determining the optimal value of variables is the most important challenge. In many existing two-stage models, the efficiency frontier is not plotted or the optimal value of intermediate variables is determined by one of two steps. This leads to incorrect calculation of the efficiency of the next stage and the total efficiency. In fact, in these models, poor performance of one stage leads to reduced efficiency of the other stage. In this study, by keeping the intermediate variables constant at the current level and with an input-output oriented approach, radial and non-radial models were developed on a constant and variable returns to scale in terms of efficiency. Using mathematical relations, the validity of the models was proved and shown that in the proposed models, the performance of the units in steps is compared with a unit on the efficiency frontier, and the models make the whole structure efficient by bringing the steps to the efficiency frontier. The proposed models were used in an applied study to evaluate the sustainability of nine supply chains of tomato producers. Their performance results were expressed by four models as well as the optimal value of inefficient unit variables in each of these models.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Efficiency؛ Fairness Evaluation؛ Two-Stage DEA؛ Supply Chain Sustainability, Non-Oriented Models
مراجع
  1. An, Q., Chen, H., Xiong, B., Wu, J., Liang, L. (2017). Target intermediate products setting in a two-stage system with fairness concern. Omega, 73,49–59.
  2. Avkiran, N., Mccrystal, A. (2014). Dynamic network range-adjusted measure vs. dynamic network slacks-based measure. Journal of the Operations Research Society of japan, 57(1), 1-14.
  3. Badiezadeh, T., Farzipoor, R. & Samavati, T. (2017). Assessing sustainability of supply chains by double frontier network DEA: A big data approach, Computers and Operations Research, 98, 284-290.
  4. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units; European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429-444.
  5. Chen, Y., Cook, W. D., Kao, C. & Zhu, J. (2013). Network DEA Pitfalls: Divisional Efficiency and Frontier Projection under general network structures, European Journal of Operational Research,226, 507-515.
  6. Chen, Y., Cook, W. D., Li, N., & Zhu, J. (2009). Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA. European Journal of Operational Reaearch, 196, 1170-1176.
  7. Cook, W. D., Zhu, J., Bi, G. B., & Yang, F. (2010). Network DEA: Additive efficiency decomposition. European Journal of Operational Research, 207, 1122-1129.
  8. Cook, W. D., Liang, L. & Zhu, J. (2010). Measuring performance of two-stage network structures by DEA: A review and future perspective. Omega, 38, 423-430.
  9. Farrell, M. J. (1957). The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 120(3), 81-115.
  10. Flegl, M., Bandala, C., Juarez, I., Matus, E. (2022). Analysis of production and investment efficiency in the Mexican food industry: Application of two-stage DEA. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 40, 109-117.
  11. Fukuyama, H., & Weber, W.L. (2010). A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two stage system with bad outputs. Omega, 38, 398-409.
  12. Gharib, A., Azar, A., Moghbel, A., Dehghan, M. (2019).Designing Organizational Innovation Measuring Model with Dynamic Network DEA (Case Study: Iranian First Level Universities). The journal of Industrial Management Perspective, 9(33), 9-29. (In Persian)
  13. Guan, J. & Chen, K. (2012). Modeling the relative efficiency of national innovation systems. Research Policy, 41, 102-115.
  14. Halkos, G., Argyropoulou, G. (2021). Modeling energy and air pollution health damaging: a two-stage DEA approach. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 14, 1221-1231.
  15. Halkos, G.E., Tzeremes, N.G., & Kourtzidis, S. A. (2014). A unified classification of two-stage DEA models. Surveys in Operations Research and Management Science, 19(1), 1-16.
  16. Hassanzadeh, A. & Mostafaee, A. (2019). Measuring the efficiency of network structures: Link control approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 128, 437-446.
  17. Kahi, V. S., Yousefi, S., Shabanpour, H.,& Farzipoor, R. (2017). How to evaluate sustainability of supply chains? A dynamic network DEA approach. Industrial Management & Data Systems,117, 9, 1866-1869.
  18. Kao, C. (2009). Efficiency decomposition in network data envelopment analysis: A relational model. European Journal of Operational Research, 192, 949-962.
  19. Kao, C. (2014a). Efficiency decomposition for general multi-stage systems in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 232, 117-124.
  20. Kao, C. (2014b). Network data envelopment analysis: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 239(1), 1-16.
  21. Kao, C. (2016). Efficiency decomposition and aggregation in network data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 231, 1-9.
  22. Kao, C. (2018). A classification of slacks-based efficiency measures in network data envelopment analysis with an analysis of the properties possessed. European Journal of Operational Research, 270 (3), 1109-1121.
  23. Kao, C., & Hwang, S. N. (2008). Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: An application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. European Journal of Operational Research, 185, 418-429.
  24. Kao, C., & Hwang, S. N. (2010). Efficiency measurement for network systems: IT impact on firm performance. Decision Support Systems, 48, 437-446.
  25. Kao, C., & Hwang, S. N. (2011). Decomposition of technical and scale efficiencies in two-stage production systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 211, 515–519.
  26. Koronakos, G. (2019). A Taxonomy and Review of the Network Data Envelopment Analysis Literature. Machine Learing Paradigms, Learning and Analytics in Intelligent Systems, 1, 255-311.
  27. Li, H., Xiong, J., Xie, J., Zhou Z. & Zhang, J. (2019). A Unified Approach to Efficiency Decomposition for a Two-Stage Network DEA Model with Application of Performance Evaluation in Banks and Sustainable Product Design. Sustainability, 11, 4401.
  28. Moghaddas, Z., Tosarkani, B. M. & Yousefi, S. (2022). A Developmed Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Efficient Sustainable Supply Chain Network Design. Sustainability, 14(1), 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010262.
  29. Moutinho, V. & Madaleno, M. (2021). A Two-stage DEA Model to Evaluate the Technical Eco-Efficiency Indicator in the EU Countries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 3038.
  30. Soleymani-Damaneh, R., Momeni, M., Mostafaei, A. & Rostami, M. (2017). Developing of a Dynamic Network Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Performance Evaluating Banking Sector. The journal of Industrial Management Perspective, 7(1), 67-89. (In Persian)
  31. Su, Y. & Sun, W. (2018). Sustainability evaluation of the supply chain with undesired outputs and dual-role factors based on double frontier network DEA. Soft Computing, 22, 5525-5533.
  32. Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 243-252.
  33. Tone, T., & Tsutsui, M. (2014). Dynamic DEA with network structure: A slacks-based measure approach. Omega, 42, 124-131.
  34. Torabandeh, M. A., Dorri, B., Motameni, A., & Rabieh, M. (2021). Comparative-fuzzy Analysis of National Innovation Capability Based on Results of Dynamic Network DEA Model. The journal of Industrial Management Perspective, 11(42), 207-246. (In Persian)
  35. Tsai, M. C., Cheng, C. H., Nguyen, V. T., &Tsai, M. I. (2020). The Theoretical Relationship between the CCR Model and the Two-Stage DEA Model with an Application in the Efficiency Analysis of the Financial Industry. Symmetry, 12 (5) ,712. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12050712.
  36. Tsaples, G., Papathanasiou, J., Georgiou, A.,& Samaras, N. (2019). Assessing Multidimensional Sustainability of European Countries with a Novel Two-Stage DEA. Decision Support Systems, 348, 111-122.
  37. Wang, M., Chen, Y. & Zhou, Z. (2020). A Novel Stochastic Two-Stage DEA Model for Evaluating Industrial Production and Waste Gas Treatment Systems. Sustainability, 12, 2316.
  38. Wang, M., Huang, Y. & Li, D. (2021). Assessing the performance of industrial water resource utilization systems in China based on a tw0-stage DEA approach with game cross efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, 127722.
  39. Wen, Y., Hu, J., An, Q. & Ang, S. (2022). Cooperative performance evaluation among homogeneous parallel decision making units with coalition structures. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022. 10810.
  40. Wu, J., Xu, G., Zhu, Q., Zhang, C. (2021). Two-stage DEA models with fairness concern: Modelling and computational aspects. Omega, 105, 102521.
  41. Zha, Y., Wang, J., Liang, N.,& Zhou, C. (2016). Utility-based two-stage models with fairness concern. Cent Eur J Oper Res, 24(4), 877–900.
  42. Zhang, J., Wu, Q., &Zhou, Z. (2019). A two-stage DEA model for resource allocation in industrial pollution treatment and its application in China, Journal of Cleaner Production, 228, 29-39.
  43. Zhang, L., Zhao, L. & Zha, Y. (2021). Efficiency evaluation of Chinese regional industrial systems using a dynamic two-stage DEA approach. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 77, 101-131.
  44. Zhao, T., Xie, J., Chen, Y. & Liang, L. (2021). Coordination efficiency in two-stage network DEA: application to a supplier-manufacture sustainable supply chain. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 25(3), 1-22.
  45. Zhu, Q., Li, F., Wu, J., & Sun, J. (2020). Cross-efficiency evaluation in data envelopment analysis based on the perspective of fairness utility. Computer Industrial Engineering, 151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106926.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,805
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,359