Skip to main content
Log in

Multi-Stage data envelopment analysis congestion model

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Operational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper develops a multi-stage data envelopment analysis congestion model to measure the efficiency and congestion of supply chain. Congestion is said to occur when the output that is maximally possible can be increased by reducing one or more inputs without improving any other input or output. There are no models dealing with supply chain congestion, however we modify one stage Fare, Grosskopf and Lovell approach that proceeds in two stages into multi-stage data envelopment analysis models.We first examine closed loop serial supply chain processes where each stage has its own inputs and at the same time uses carryover inputs from the previous stage. This is the case for all the intermediate stages but not for the polar stages. For instance, the first stage that constitute the supplier stage do not have any carryover inputs as it is the polar stage of the closed loop supply chain. We show that breaking down the production processes of supply networks for evaluation can generate more practical insights in how to eliminate inefficiency in the supply.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ballou R, Stephen M, Mukherjee A (2000) New managerial challenges from supply chain opportunities. Ind Mark Manag 29(1):7–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Blackwell RD (1997) Supply chain strategy: its impact on shareholder value. Int J Logist Manag 10(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brockett P, Cooper W, Shin H, Wang Y (1998) Inefficiency and congestion in chinese production before and the 1978 economic reforms. Socio Econ Plan Sci 32:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brynes P, Fare R, Grosskopf S (1984) Measuring productive efficiency: an application to illinois strip mines. Manag Sci 30:671–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brynes P, Fare R, Grosskopf S, Lovell C (1988) The effect of union on productivity: us surface mining of coal. Manag Sci 34:1037–1053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Castelli L, Pesenti R, Ukovich W (2001) Dea-like models for efficiency evaluations of specialized and interdependent units. Eur J Oper Res 132:274–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1979) Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res 3:339–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen CM (2009) A network-dea model with efficiency measures to incorporate the dynamic effect in production networks. Eur J Oper Res 194(3):687–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen CM, Dalen JV (2010) Measuring dynamic efficiency: theories and an integrated methodology. Eur J Oper Res 203(3):749–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chopra S, Meindl P (2004) Supply chain management. Pearson Prentice-Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cooper W, Seiford L, Zhu Z (2004) Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cooper W, Thompson R, Thrall R (1996) Introduction: extension and new developments in dea. Ann Oper Res 66:3–45

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cooper WW, Gu B, Li S (2001) Comparisons and evaluation of alternative approaches to the treatment of congestion in dea. Eur J Oper Res 132(4):62–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Davenport T, Short J (1990) The new industrial engineering: information technology and business process re-design. Sloan Manag Rev 4(31):11–27

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fare R, Grosskopf S (1983) Measuring congestion in production. Zeitschrift fur Nationalokonomie 43:257–271

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fare R, Grosskopf S (1998) Congestion: a note. Socio Econ Plan Sci 33:21–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fare R, Grosskopf S, Lovell C (1985) The measurement of efficiency of production. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Kao C, Hwang SN (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 

  20. Liang L, Wade DC, Zhu J (2008) Dea models for two-stage processes: game approach and efficiency decomposition. Naval Res Logist 55(7):643–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Quanling W, Hong Y (2009) Weak congestion in output additive data envelopment analysis. Socio Econ Plan Sci 43:40–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tone K, Sahoo B (2004) Degree of scale economies and congestion: a unified dea approach. Eur J Oper Res 158:755–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2009) Network dea: a slacks-based measure approach. Eur J Oper Res 197(1):243–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tyndall F, Kamauff GW (1998) Global supply chain management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wei Q, Yan H (2004) Congestion and returns to scale in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 153:641–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This project was supported by Korea Maritime University. The authors like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mithun J. Sharma or Song Jin Yu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sharma, M.J., Yu, S.J. Multi-Stage data envelopment analysis congestion model. Oper Res Int J 13, 399–413 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-012-0128-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-012-0128-8

Keywords

Navigation