Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Utility-based two-stage models with fairness concern

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Central European Journal of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper studies the impact of social comparison and fairness concerns on the efficiency of a two-stage process. The decision maker of each stage cares about not only the absolute score of his efficiency, but also the relative status when comparing with the other. By incorporating the utility theory and the concept of fairness, an efficiency-based Neumann–Morgenstern cardinal utility is defined to compose of basic utility from his self-efficiency and additional utility from the fairness concern of the other’s efficiency. Utility-based two-stage models are proposed to optimize the utilities of the stages rather than only the efficiencies instead. We characterize the concern of fairness as advantageous and disadvantageous inequity based on equitable outcome comparison. By investigating the non-cooperating relationship between two stages, we show that the stage dominating the process has the incentive to optimize his efficiency without ignoring that of the other, which is contrary to the conventional situation. In addition, the coefficients of equitable outcome and inequity significantly affect the efficiencies of both stages. We further investigate the cooperation between two stages and find that the efficiencies of the stages vary with the coefficients of unfairness perceptions. Numerical analysis verifies the validity of the proposed models and identifies the impacts of the coefficients of equitable outcome and inequity on the stages’ and overall efficiencies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bolton GE, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: a theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Am Econ Rev 91(1):166–193

  • Carrell MR, Dittrich JE (1978) Equity theory: the recent literature, methodological considerations, and new directions. Acad Manag Rev 3(2):202–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6):429–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Cook WD, Li N, Zhu J (2009) Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA. Eur J Oper Res 196(3):1170–1176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Cook WD, Zhu J (2010) Deriving the DEA frontier for two-stage processes. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):138–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Zhu J (2004) Measuring information technology’s indirect impact on firm performance. Inf Technol Manag 5(1–2):9–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman JL (1979) Efficiency, utility, and wealth maximization. Hofstra L Rev 8:509

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook WD, Liang L, Zhu J (2010) Measuring performance of two-stage network structures by DEA: a review and future perspective. Omega 38(6):423–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsten D, Kumar N (2003) Profits in the pie of the beholder. Harv Bus Rev 81(5):22–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Corsten D, Kumar N (2005) Do suppliers benefit from collaborative relationships with large retailers? An empirical investigation of efficient consumer response adoption. J Mark 69:80–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui TH, Raju JS, Zhang ZJ (2007) Fairness and channel coordination. Manag Sci 53(8):1303–1314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du J, Liang L, Chen Y, Cook WD, Zhu J (2011) A bargaining game model for measuring performance of two-stage network structures. Eur J Oper Res 210(2):390–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsberg D (1954) Classic and current notions of “measurable utility”. Econ J 64(255):528–556

  • Fehr E, Gächter S (2002) Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature 415(6868):137–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ 114(3):817–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier GL (1983) Interorganizational exchange behavior in marketing channels: a broadened perspective. J Mark 47(4):68–78

  • Geyskens I, Steenkamp J-BE, Kumar N (1998) Generalizations about trust in marketing channel relationships using meta-analysis. Int J Res Mark 15(3):223–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett SC (1994) Is relational exchange possible in the absence of reputations and repeated contact? J Law Econ Organ 10(2):360–389

  • Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler R (1986) Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: entitlements in the market. Am Econ Rev 76(4):728–741

  • Kao C, Hwang S-N (2008) Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: an application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. Eur J Oper Res 185(1):418–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kao C, Hwang S-N (2010) Efficiency measurement for network systems: IT impact on firm performance. Decis Support Syst 48(3):437–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang L, Cook WD, Zhu J (2008) DEA models for two—stage processes: game approach and efficiency decomposition. Nav Res Logist (NRL) 55(7):643–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang L, Yang F, Cook WD, Zhu J (2006) DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation. Ann Oper Res 145(1):35–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macneil IR (1980) The new social contract: an inquiry into modern contractual relations. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann S, Wüstemann H (2010) Efficiency and utility: an evolutionary perspective. Int J Soc Econ 37(9):676–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy R (1985) How to handle channel conflict. High Tech Mark 7:31–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner RA (1979) Utilitarianism, economics, and legal theory. J Legal Stud 8:103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahoo BK, Zhu J, Tone K, Klemen BM (2014) Decomposing technical efficiency and scale elasticity in two-stage network DEA. Eur J Oper Res 233(3):584–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiford LM, Zhu J (1999) Profitability and marketability of the top 55 US commercial banks. Manag Sci 45(9):1270–1288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strotz RH (1953) Cardinal utility. Am Econ Rev 43(2):384–397

  • Wu Y, Loch CH, Heyden LVd (2008) A model of fair process and its limits. Manuf Serv Oper Manag 10(4):637–653

    Google Scholar 

  • Zha Y, Liang L (2010) Two-stage cooperation model with input freely distributed among the stages. Eur J Oper Res 205(2):332–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 71371008, 71001093), Major International (Regional) Joint Research Projects (Grant No. 71110107024) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China for Innovative Research Groups (Grant No. 71121061).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, University of Science of Technology of China, 96 Jinzhai Road, Hefei, 230026, Anhui, China

    Yong Zha, Jun Wang, Nannan Liang & Chuiri Zhou

Authors
  1. Yong Zha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nannan Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chuiri Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuiri Zhou.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (doc 61 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zha, Y., Wang, J., Liang, N. et al. Utility-based two-stage models with fairness concern. Cent Eur J Oper Res 24, 877–900 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-015-0425-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-015-0425-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation