Document Type : Research Paper


Department of Industrial Engineering, University of ShahidBahonar, Kerman, Iran


One of the major problems in organizations is resource limitation, so the main goal of each union is to maximize the usage of their recourses and improve its efficiency. Universities as a main body of each countries educational system have an important role in developing a country. Therefore, assessing the efficiency of universities and improving the quality of them are important goals. The method of the data envelopment analysis (DEA) can rank the efficiency while the number of indicators does not exceed the specific amount. But in measurement of the universities’ efficiency, main intention is toward considering a comprehensive set of indicators and in this case discrimination power of the DEA method decreases and its results are unacceptable. In this study, we present a combined model of the joint multiple layer DEA (MLDEA) model and weight restrictions method in order to try to eliminate the weakness of the mentioned method. Educational units of ShahidBahonar University of Kerman are evaluated and ranked as a case study. Empirical results shows the efficiency of presented model based on discrimination power, weight allocating and possibility of implementing this model in evaluating the function of activities, which have many indicators along with hierarchical structure.


[1]                 Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E. (1987). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research,Vol. 2, No. 6, pp. 429-444.
[2]                 Lin, T. T., Lee, C. C. and Chiu, T. F. (2009). Application of DEA in analyzing a bank’s operating performance. Expert Systems with Applications,Vol. 36, No. 5, pp.8883-8891.
[3]                 Ertay, T. and Ruan, D. (2005). Data envelopment analysis based decision model for optimal operator allocation in CMS. European Journal of Operational Research,Vol. 164, No. 3, pp. 800-810.
[4]                 Ben-Arieh, D. and Gullipalli, D. K. (2012). Data Envelopment Analysis of clinics with sparse data: Fuzzy clustering approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 63, No. 1, pp. 13-21.
[5]                 Meng, W., Zhang, Qi, L. and Liu, W. (2008). Two-level DEA approaches in research evaluation. Omega,Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 950-957.
[6]                 Kao, CH. (2008). A linear formulation of the two-level DEA model.Omega,Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 958-962.
[7]                 Shen, Y.,Hermans, E.,Ruan, D., Wets, G., Brijs, T. andVanhoof, K. (2011).A generalized multiple layer data envelopment analysis model for hierarchical structure assessment: A case study in road safety performance evaluation.Expert Systems with Applications,Vol. 38, No. 12, pp. 15262-15272.
[8]                 Allen, R., Athanassopoulos, A., Dyson, R.G. and Thanassoulis, E. (1997). Weights restrictions and value judgments in data envelopment analysis: evolution, development, and future direction.Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 73,                                                                                 pp. 13-34.
[9]                 Meza, L.A. andLins, M.P.E. (2002). Review of methods for increasing discrimination in data envelopment analysis.Annals of Operations Research,Vol. 116, No. 1-4, pp. 225-242.
A. Pakzad and A. Naderi /IJRIE 3(4) (2014) 21-40        40
[10]             Tyagi, P.,Prasad Yadav, SH. and Singh, S.P. (2009). Relative performance of academic departments using DEA with sensitivity analysis.Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 168-177.
[11]             Abbott, M. and Doucouliagos, C. (2003). The  efficiency  of Australian universities:  a data envelopment analysis.Economics of Education Review, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 89-97.
[12]             Avkiran, N.K. (2001). Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian universities through data envelopment analysis.Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 57-80.
[13]             Johnes, J. and Yu, L. (2008).Measuring  the  research  performance  of  Chinese higher education institutions using data envelopment analysis.China Economic Review,Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 679-696.
[14]           Beasley, J. (1995). Determining teaching and research efficiencies.Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 441-452.
[15]             Kuah, C.T. and Wong, K.Y. (2011). Efficiency assessment of universities through data envelopment analysis.Procedia computer science, Vol. 3,pp. 499-506.
[16]             Banker, R.D.,Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis.Management Science, Vol. 30, No. 9, pp. 1078-1092.
[17]             Thompson, R.G., Singleton, F., Thrall, R. andSmith, B. (1986).Comparative site evaluations for locating high-energy physics lab in Texas.Interfaces,Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 35-49.
[18]             Saaty, T.L. (1980).The analytic hierarchy process, New York: McGraw-Hill.
[19]             Kong, W.H. and Fu, T.T. (2012).Assessing the performance of business colleges in Taiwan using data envelopment analysis and student based value-added performance indicators.Omega,Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 541-549.
[20]             Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A.,Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A. and Giovannini, E. (2005).Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide, OECD Statistics Working Papers, STD/DOC 3.
[21]             Takamura, Y. and Tone, K.A. (2003).Comparative site evaluation study  for relocating Japanese government agencies out of Tokyo.Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 85-102.
[22]             Roll, Y., Cook, W. and Golany, B. (1991).Controlling factor weights in DEA. IIE Transactions,Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 2-9.
[23]             Roll, Y.and Golany, B. (1993).Alternative methods of treating factor weights in DEA.Omega,Vol. 21,No. 1, pp. 99-109.