4.4 Article

Fuzzy clustering of homogeneous decision making units with common weights in data envelopment analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT & FUZZY SYSTEMS
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 813-832

Publisher

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/JIFS-200962

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis; fuzzy DEA; non-homogeneous; clustering; common set of weights (CSW)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to address non-homogeneous decision-making units in complex organizations through clustering techniques for further efficiency analysis. It proposes a common set of weights model to develop an identical weight vector for all decision-making units.
Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is the most popular mathematical approach to assess efficiency of decision-making units (DMUs). In complex organizations, DMUs face a heterogeneous condition regarding environmental factors which affect their efficiencies. When there are a large number of objects, non-homogeneity of DMUs significantly influences their efficiency scores that leads to unfair ranking of DMUs. The aim of this study is to deal with non-homogeneous DMUs by implementing a clustering technique for further efficiency analysis. This paper proposes a common set of weights (CSW) model with ideal point method to develop an identical weight vector for all DMUs. This study proposes a framework to measuring efficiency of complex organizations, such as banks, that have several operational styles or various objectives. The proposed framework helps managers and decision makers (1) to identify environmental components influencing the efficiency of DMUs, (2) to use a fuzzy equivalence relation approach proposed here to cluster the DMUs to homogenized groups, (3) to produce a common set of weights (CSWs) for all DMUs with the model developed here that considers fuzzy data within each cluster, and finally (4) to calculate the efficiency score and overall ranking of DMUs within each cluster.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available