Financial efficiency of companies operating in the Kosovo food sector: DEA and DEAHP
Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) evaluates a large number of input and output variables using mathematical programming techniques and analyzes the effectiveness of similar decision making units (DMU). Unlike traditional methods, the most important advantage of DEA is that the weights of input and output variables can be defined by the analyzer. In this study, the limitations of the DEA weights were determined using the AHP, which considers expert opinion. In addition, an alternative judgment scale was used for the Saaty judgment scale, which is used as a standard in the AHP method, and thus a more sensitive analysis was performed. There have been studies dealing with the comparison of judgment scales, but few studies on consistency sensitivity are needed. This point has also been addressed in this study. Subsequently, the financial efficiency of 27 companies operating in the food sector in Kosovo was evaluated with the weightrestricted DEA model, first created using the unweighted DEA model and then the AHP model, and the two models were compared. This paper is the first one of its kind since there are no previous studies regarding the examination of the financial efficiency of companies operating in the Kosovo food sector based on the DEAHP method.
[1] Ulucan, A. (2002). Data Envelopment Analysis Approach in Effieiency Measurement of ISO500 Companies: Evaluations Using Different Input Output Components and Different Returns to Scale. Ankara University SBF Journal, 57(2), 185-202.
[2] Oruc, K. O. (2008). Efficiency measurements in fuzzy environment by using data envelopment analysis and an application at universities. Süleyman Demirel University, Doctoral dissertation.
[3] Ozden, U. H. (2008). Efficiency evaluation of foundation universities in Turkey by using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 37(2), 167-185.
[4] Sinuany‐Stern, Z., Mehrez, A., Hadad, Y. (2000). An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units, International Transactions in Operational Research, 2(7), 109-124.
[5] Lee, S. K., Mogi, G., Shin, S. C., Kim, J. W. (2007). An AHP/DEA integrated model for measuring the relative efficiency of energy efficiency technologies. In IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.
[6] Korpela, J., Lehmusvaara, A., Nisonen, J. (2007). Warehouse operator selection by combining AHP and DEA methodologies. International Journal of Production Economics, 108(1-2), 135-142.
[7] Sevkli, M., Koh, S. L., Zaim, S., Demirbag, M., Tatoglu, E. (2008). Hybrid analytical hierarchy process model for supplier selection. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 1(108), 122-142.
[8] Wang, Y. M., Liu, J., Elhag, T. M. (2008). An integrated AHP–DEA methodology for bridge risk assessment. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54(3), 513-525.
[9] Erpolat, S., Cinemre, N. (2011). Notebook selection in a hybrid approach: data envelopment analysis based on analytic hierarchy process. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 40(2), 207-225.
[10] Lin, M. I., Lee, Y. D., Ho T. N.(2011). Applying integrated DEA/AHP to evaluate the economic performance of local governments in China. European Journal of Operational Research. 209(2), 129-140.
[11] Keskin, B., Ulas, E. (2017). Does privatization affect airports performance? A comparative analysis with AHP-TOPSIS and DEA. New Trends in Finance and Accounting. Springer, 335-345.
[12] Çetin, K., Tuzkaya, G., Vayvay, O. (2020). A mathematical model for personnel task assignment problem and an application for banking sector. AnInternational Journal of Optimization and Control: Theories & Applications (IJOCTA), 10(2), 147-158.
[13] Pradhan, S., Olfati, M. and Gokulananda, P. (2019). Integrations and applications of Analytic Hierarchy Process with Data Envelopment Analysis- a literature review. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. 11(2), 228-268.
[14] Banker, R. D. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., Thrall, R. M., Zhu, J. (2004). Returns to scale in different DEA models. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(2), 345-362.
[15] Kocakoç, I.D. (2003). Veri zarflama analizi’ndeki ağırlık kısıtlamalarının belirlenmesinde analitik hiyerarşi sürecinin kullanımı, Dokuz Eylul Unıversıty Faculty of Economıcs And Admınıstratıve Scıences Journal, 18(2).
[16] Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Rhodes E. (1987). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444.
[17] Cooper, W. W., Seiford, M. L. and Zhu, J. (2004). Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1-39.
[18] Ozdemir, Y., Alcan, P., Basligil, H., Cakrak, D. (2018). A hybrid QFD-AHP methodology and an application for heating systems in Turkey. An International Journal of Optimization and Control: Theories & Applications (IJOCTA), 8(1), 117-126.
[19] Lootsma, F.A. (1988). Numerical scaling of human judgement in pairwise-comparison methods for fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis. In Mathematical models for decision support. Springer, F48, 57-88.
[20] Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1-72.
[21] Salo, A. A., Hämäläinen, R. P. (1997). On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis, 6(6), 309-319.
[22] Harker, P., Vargas, L. (1987). The Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 33(11), 1383-1403.
[23] Doğan, N. Ö., Gencan, S. (2014). Performance assessment using DEA/AHP integrated method: an application on public hospitals in Ankara. Gazi University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 16(2), 88-112.
[24] Ramanathan, R. (2006). Data envelopment analysis for weight derivation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process. Computers & Operations Research, 5(33), 307.
[25] Yıldırım, B. C. (2019). A New pairwise comparison scale for analytic hierarchy pprocess. Master's thesis of Social Sciences of Middle East Technical University.
[26] Garuti, C., & Salomon, V. A. (2012). Compatibility indices between priority vectors. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 4(2), 152-160.
[27] Saaty, T. L., Peniwati, K. (2013). Group decisionmaking: Drawing out and reconciling differences. Pittsburgh: PA: RWS Publications.
[28] B. Srdjevic, (2005). Combining Different Prioritization Methods in The Analytic Hierarchy Process Synthesis. Computers & Operations Research, 32, 1897-1919.
[29] Scheel, H. Efficiency Measurement System (Ems). Holger Scheel’s Dea Page, [Online]. Available: http://www.wiso.unidortmund.de/lsfg/or/scheel/ems/. [Accessed 15 09 2019].