Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Large-scale data envelopment analysis (DEA) implementation: a strategic performance management approach

  • Theoretical Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Operational Research Society

Abstract

We present one of the first large-scale implementations of data envelopment analysis (DEA) at the heart of a permanent performance management system in its third year of operation. The system evaluates more than 1000 field unit operations devoted to disaster relief, emergency communications, and life-saving skills training. The following research objectives were accomplished: (a) advanced a conceptual model for measuring performance in the nonprofit sector; (b) adapted a DEA formulation to account for differences in the operational environment of the field units, and included service quality, and effectiveness measures alongside traditional efficiency measures; and (c) created from scratch data collection (service quality and outcome achievement survey instruments) and report generation tools necessary for the deployment of evaluation results to the field in an user-friendly format for managers. While the suitability of DEA for real-life performance measurement is demonstrated, challenges of a DEA implementation are also discussed.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) (1992). Resolution encouraging the use of performance measurement and reporting by government organizations, Washington, DC (Adopted April 14).

  • Athanassopoulos A (1999). An optimization framework for the triad: capabilities, service quality and performance. In: Harker PT and Zenios SA (eds). Performance of Financial Institutions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: England, 312–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD and Morey RC (1986). The use of categorical variables in data envelopment analysis. Mngt Sci 12: 1613–1627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Charnes A and Cooper WW (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Mngt Sci 30: 1078–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boussofiane A, Dyson RG and Thanassoulis E (1991). Applied data envelopment analysis. Eur J Opl Res 52: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalos P and Cherian J (1995). An application of data envelopment analysis to public sector performance measurement and accountability. J Account Public Policy 14: 143–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW and Rhodes E (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: an application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Mngt Sci 27: 668–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook WD and Zhu J (2005). Modeling Performance Measurement: Applications and Implementation Issues in DEA. Springer: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyson RG (2000). Strategy, performance and operational research. J Opl Res Soc 51: 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gattoufi S, Oral M, Kumar A and Reisman A (2004). Content analysis of data envelopment analysis literature and its comparison with that of other OR/MS fields. J Opl Res Soc 55: 911–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) (1993). Public Law 103-62, January 5.

  • Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) (1994). Concept Statement No. 2 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board on Concepts Related to Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting. Norwalk, CT.

  • Kaplan RS (2001). Strategic performance measurement and management in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Mngt Leadership 11: 353–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan RS and Norton DP (1992). The balanced scorecard—measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus Rev 70: 47–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letts CW, Ryan WP and Grossman A (1999). High Performance Nonprofit Organizations: Managing Upstream for Greater Impact, 1st edn. Wiley: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light PC (2000). Making Nonprofits Work: A Report on the Tides of Nonprofit Management Reform. Aspen Institute and Brookings Institution Press: Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medina-Borja A (2002). A non-parametric approach to evaluate the performance of social service organizations. Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medina-Borja A and Triantis K (2001). A methodology to evaluate outcome performance in social services and government agencies. In: ASQ's Annual Quality Congress Proceedings. ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, pp 707–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medina-Borja A and Triantis K (2005). A conceptual framework to evaluate performance of social service nonprofit organizations. Int J Technol Mngt (forthcoming).

  • Medina-Borja A and Triantis K (2006). Measuring performance for non-profit social service organizations: a four-stage DEA approach to evaluate fundraising efficiency, capacity building, service quality, and effectiveness, Working Paper, Grado Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, VA, USA.

  • Moore MH (2003). The public value scorecard: a rejoinder and an alternative to ‘strategic performance measurement and management in non-profit organizations’ by Robert Kaplan. Working Paper no. 18, The Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations, The Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, May.

  • Moore S (1995). Efficiency in social work practice and administration. Social Work 40: 602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norreklit H (2000). The balanced scorecard—a critical analysis of some of its assumptions. Mngt Account Res 11: 65–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norreklit H (2003). The Balanced Scorecard: what is the score? a rethorical analysis of the balanced scorecard. Account, Organizations Soc 28: 591–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhan RC and Martin LL (1999). Comparative performance measurement: a primer on data envelopment analysis. Public Product Mngt Rev 22: 348–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paradi J and Schaffnit C (2004). Commercial branch performance evaluation and results communication in a Canadian bank—a DEA application. Eur J Opns Res 156: 719–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA and Berry LL (1988). SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring customer perceptions of service quality. J Retail 64: 12–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggiero J (1998). Non-discretionary inputs in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Opl Res 111: 461–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggiero J and Duncombe W (1995). On the measurement and causes of technical inefficiency in local public services. J Public Adminis Res Theory 5: 403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sola M and Prior D (2001). Measuring productivity and quality changes using data envelopment analysis: an application to Catalan hospitals. Fin Accountability Mngt 17: 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soteriou A and Zenios S (1999). Operations, quality, and profitability in the provision of banking services. Mngt Sci 45: 1221–1238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavares G (2004). A bibliography of data envelopment analysis (1978–2001). Rutgers University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd R and Ramanathan K (1994). Perceiving social needs, outcomes measurement and budgetary responsiveness in a nonprofit setting: some empirical evidence. Account Rev 69: 122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triantis K and Medina-Borja A (1996). Performance Measurement: The Development of Outcome Objectives for Armed Forces Emergency Services. American Red Cross Chapter Management Workbook, Center for Advanced Studies in Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, Falls Church, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Way of America (1996). Measuring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach. United Way of America: Washington, DC.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez, PR, USA

    A Medina-Borja

  2. School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA

    K S Pasupathy

  3. System Performance Laboratory, Virginia Tech, Northern Virginia Center, Falls Church, VA, USA

    K Triantis

Authors
  1. A Medina-Borja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K S Pasupathy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K Triantis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K Triantis.

Appendices

Appendix A: Performance report

Figure A1

figure 4

Figure A1

Appendix B: Trend analysis report

Figure A2

figure 5

Figure A2

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Medina-Borja, A., Pasupathy, K. & Triantis, K. Large-scale data envelopment analysis (DEA) implementation: a strategic performance management approach. J Oper Res Soc 58, 1084–1098 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602200

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602200

Keywords

Search

Navigation