Data Envelopment Analysis: From Normative to Descriptive Performance Evaluation
Series:
Nadia Vazquez Novoa
The question of modern performance evaluation has been extensively discussed in the literature, leading to a call for models including non-optimizing behaviors of decision makers and non-financial performance criteria. A promising management instrument is data envelopment analysis (DEA), which enables the aggregation of financial and non-financial indicators into a single measure. This work contributes to a better understanding of DEA from two perspectives: (i) it offers a normative solution to the zero-value weight problem and (ii) it provides the first experimental results on behavioral DEA based on an original taxonomy of cognitive biases related to performance evaluation. Behavioral DEA is a completely new research area which yields plenty of research opportunities.
Book (EPUB)
- ISBN:
- 978-3-631-72474-3
- Availability:
- Available
- Subjects:
Prices
Currency depends on your shipping address
- Frankfurt am Main, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien, 2017. XVII pp., 281 pp., 40 b/w ill., 50 b/w tab.
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Table of contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Abbreviations
- Symbols
- 1.1 Motivation
- 1.2.1 Normative DEA and value judgment
- 1.2.2 Descriptive DEA, heuristics and biases
- 1.3 Structure of the thesis
- 2.1.1 Relative performance measurement
- 2.1.2 DEA methodology
- 2.2.1 Managerial problems resulting from flexible weights
- 2.2.2 Value judgment in DEA
- 2.3.1 Motivation for dealing with weight asymmetry
- 2.3.2 The balance score βo
- 2.3.3 Numerical example
- 2.3.4 Managerial implications of BDEA
- 2.3.5 Relative balance of DMUs: summary, criticism and further research
- 3.1 A brief history of research on managerial decision making
- 3.2.1 Normative and descriptive choice models
- 3.2.2 Heuristics for choice tasks
- 3.3.1 Brunswik’s lens model for judgment
- 3.3.2 Heuristics for estimation and classification tasks
- 3.4.1 Normative method: Bayesian inference
- 3.4.2 Heuristics for probabilistic judgment
- 3.5.1 Emotions and mood
- 3.5.2 Social preferences and fairness perception
- 4.1 Behavioral research in management accounting
- 4.2.1 Behavioral operations management
- 4.2.2 Behavioral operations research
- 4.3.1 Review of taxonomies of biases
- 4.3.2 Taxonomy of biases for performance evaluation
- 4.4.1 Descriptive research in performance evaluation
- 4.4.2 DEA-based behavioral performance evaluation
- 5.1.1 Performance markers in choice tasks
- 5.1.2 Relative performance evaluation and the halo effect
- 5.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 5.3.1 Participants and design
- 5.3.2 Case materials
- 5.3.3 Procedure
- 5.4.1 The role of DEA scores as a performance marker
- 5.4.2 Bonus for non-financial performance: a self-generated anchor
- 5.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 5.5 Discussion
- 6.1 The decoy effect in choice tasks
- 6.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 6.3.1 Participants and design
- 6.3.2 Case materials
- 6.3.3 Procedure
- 6.4.1 The decoy effect in a performance evaluation context
- 6.4.2 Using DEA as a debiasing mechanism
- 6.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 6.5 Discussion
- 7. Summary and future research
- References
- A) DEA publications in accounting journals
- B) Most productive BAR authors (1962–2012)
- C) Behavioral papers in OM and multidisciplinary journals
- D) Students as surrogates for managers
- E) Vignette Halo effect
- F) Vignette Decoy effect
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Table of contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Abbreviations
- Symbols
- 1.1 Motivation
- 1.2.1 Normative DEA and value judgment
- 1.2.2 Descriptive DEA, heuristics and biases
- 1.3 Structure of the thesis
- 2.1.1 Relative performance measurement
- 2.1.2 DEA methodology
- 2.2.1 Managerial problems resulting from flexible weights
- 2.2.2 Value judgment in DEA
- 2.3.1 Motivation for dealing with weight asymmetry
- 2.3.2 The balance score βo
- 2.3.3 Numerical example
- 2.3.4 Managerial implications of BDEA
- 2.3.5 Relative balance of DMUs: summary, criticism and further research
- 3.1 A brief history of research on managerial decision making
- 3.2.1 Normative and descriptive choice models
- 3.2.2 Heuristics for choice tasks
- 3.3.1 Brunswik’s lens model for judgment
- 3.3.2 Heuristics for estimation and classification tasks
- 3.4.1 Normative method: Bayesian inference
- 3.4.2 Heuristics for probabilistic judgment
- 3.5.1 Emotions and mood
- 3.5.2 Social preferences and fairness perception
- 4.1 Behavioral research in management accounting
- 4.2.1 Behavioral operations management
- 4.2.2 Behavioral operations research
- 4.3.1 Review of taxonomies of biases
- 4.3.2 Taxonomy of biases for performance evaluation
- 4.4.1 Descriptive research in performance evaluation
- 4.4.2 DEA-based behavioral performance evaluation
- 5.1.1 Performance markers in choice tasks
- 5.1.2 Relative performance evaluation and the halo effect
- 5.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 5.3.1 Participants and design
- 5.3.2 Case materials
- 5.3.3 Procedure
- 5.4.1 The role of DEA scores as a performance marker
- 5.4.2 Bonus for non-financial performance: a self-generated anchor
- 5.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 5.5 Discussion
- 6.1 The decoy effect in choice tasks
- 6.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 6.3.1 Participants and design
- 6.3.2 Case materials
- 6.3.3 Procedure
- 6.4.1 The decoy effect in a performance evaluation context
- 6.4.2 Using DEA as a debiasing mechanism
- 6.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 6.5 Discussion
- 7. Summary and future research
- References
- A) DEA publications in accounting journals
- B) Most productive BAR authors (1962–2012)
- C) Behavioral papers in OM and multidisciplinary journals
- D) Students as surrogates for managers
- E) Vignette Halo effect
- F) Vignette Decoy effect
1. Introduction
Chapter
- Subjects:
Prices
Chapter Price
Currency depends on your shipping address
Extract
← XVIII | 1 →
1. Introduction
1.1 Motivation
Many different activities are necessary for the proper functioning of any organization, but one of them is essential: performance evaluation.2 Performance evaluation provides valuable information for decision facilitating and decision influencing, as it reveals the degree of success of the organization and has consequences on motivation, fairness perception and organizational behaviors.3 For this reason, it is one of the central topics in management accounting research, which has the goal of identifying and developing the most appropriate management techniques for each circumstance.4
Performance evaluation has been influenced by the paradigm of the homo oeconomicus, who is defined as a self-interested and optimizer (i.e., value-maximizer) agent. Yet these assumptions have been shown to be inadequate for describing real human behavior. As a consequence, future-oriented research in management accounting and control has been called to accept the idea of a decision maker with limited capacity and a non-optimizing behavior.5 This requires, in the first place, a thorough analysis of existing and emerging management control techniques in order to understand how managers use them and to which extent these methods contribute to decision facilitation. In a second step, existing instruments may be improved or adapted and new techniques may be developed.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.
Or login to access all content.- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Table of contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Abbreviations
- Symbols
- 1.1 Motivation
- 1.2.1 Normative DEA and value judgment
- 1.2.2 Descriptive DEA, heuristics and biases
- 1.3 Structure of the thesis
- 2.1.1 Relative performance measurement
- 2.1.2 DEA methodology
- 2.2.1 Managerial problems resulting from flexible weights
- 2.2.2 Value judgment in DEA
- 2.3.1 Motivation for dealing with weight asymmetry
- 2.3.2 The balance score βo
- 2.3.3 Numerical example
- 2.3.4 Managerial implications of BDEA
- 2.3.5 Relative balance of DMUs: summary, criticism and further research
- 3.1 A brief history of research on managerial decision making
- 3.2.1 Normative and descriptive choice models
- 3.2.2 Heuristics for choice tasks
- 3.3.1 Brunswik’s lens model for judgment
- 3.3.2 Heuristics for estimation and classification tasks
- 3.4.1 Normative method: Bayesian inference
- 3.4.2 Heuristics for probabilistic judgment
- 3.5.1 Emotions and mood
- 3.5.2 Social preferences and fairness perception
- 4.1 Behavioral research in management accounting
- 4.2.1 Behavioral operations management
- 4.2.2 Behavioral operations research
- 4.3.1 Review of taxonomies of biases
- 4.3.2 Taxonomy of biases for performance evaluation
- 4.4.1 Descriptive research in performance evaluation
- 4.4.2 DEA-based behavioral performance evaluation
- 5.1.1 Performance markers in choice tasks
- 5.1.2 Relative performance evaluation and the halo effect
- 5.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 5.3.1 Participants and design
- 5.3.2 Case materials
- 5.3.3 Procedure
- 5.4.1 The role of DEA scores as a performance marker
- 5.4.2 Bonus for non-financial performance: a self-generated anchor
- 5.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 5.5 Discussion
- 6.1 The decoy effect in choice tasks
- 6.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 6.3.1 Participants and design
- 6.3.2 Case materials
- 6.3.3 Procedure
- 6.4.1 The decoy effect in a performance evaluation context
- 6.4.2 Using DEA as a debiasing mechanism
- 6.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 6.5 Discussion
- 7. Summary and future research
- References
- A) DEA publications in accounting journals
- B) Most productive BAR authors (1962–2012)
- C) Behavioral papers in OM and multidisciplinary journals
- D) Students as surrogates for managers
- E) Vignette Halo effect
- F) Vignette Decoy effect
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Acknowledgments
- Table of contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Abbreviations
- Symbols
- 1.1 Motivation
- 1.2.1 Normative DEA and value judgment
- 1.2.2 Descriptive DEA, heuristics and biases
- 1.3 Structure of the thesis
- 2.1.1 Relative performance measurement
- 2.1.2 DEA methodology
- 2.2.1 Managerial problems resulting from flexible weights
- 2.2.2 Value judgment in DEA
- 2.3.1 Motivation for dealing with weight asymmetry
- 2.3.2 The balance score βo
- 2.3.3 Numerical example
- 2.3.4 Managerial implications of BDEA
- 2.3.5 Relative balance of DMUs: summary, criticism and further research
- 3.1 A brief history of research on managerial decision making
- 3.2.1 Normative and descriptive choice models
- 3.2.2 Heuristics for choice tasks
- 3.3.1 Brunswik’s lens model for judgment
- 3.3.2 Heuristics for estimation and classification tasks
- 3.4.1 Normative method: Bayesian inference
- 3.4.2 Heuristics for probabilistic judgment
- 3.5.1 Emotions and mood
- 3.5.2 Social preferences and fairness perception
- 4.1 Behavioral research in management accounting
- 4.2.1 Behavioral operations management
- 4.2.2 Behavioral operations research
- 4.3.1 Review of taxonomies of biases
- 4.3.2 Taxonomy of biases for performance evaluation
- 4.4.1 Descriptive research in performance evaluation
- 4.4.2 DEA-based behavioral performance evaluation
- 5.1.1 Performance markers in choice tasks
- 5.1.2 Relative performance evaluation and the halo effect
- 5.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 5.3.1 Participants and design
- 5.3.2 Case materials
- 5.3.3 Procedure
- 5.4.1 The role of DEA scores as a performance marker
- 5.4.2 Bonus for non-financial performance: a self-generated anchor
- 5.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 5.5 Discussion
- 6.1 The decoy effect in choice tasks
- 6.2 Hypotheses and predictions
- 6.3.1 Participants and design
- 6.3.2 Case materials
- 6.3.3 Procedure
- 6.4.1 The decoy effect in a performance evaluation context
- 6.4.2 Using DEA as a debiasing mechanism
- 6.4.3 Supplemental analysis
- 6.5 Discussion
- 7. Summary and future research
- References
- A) DEA publications in accounting journals
- B) Most productive BAR authors (1962–2012)
- C) Behavioral papers in OM and multidisciplinary journals
- D) Students as surrogates for managers
- E) Vignette Halo effect
- F) Vignette Decoy effect