Top

Sustainability Nexus Forum

Published in:

10-06-2021 | Original Paper

Upper and lower satisficing levels in efficiency analysis: a corporate social responsibility perspective

Authors: Malte L. Peters, Stephan Zelewski

Published in: Sustainability Nexus Forum | Issue 3-4/2021

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

The analysis of efficiency and especially the analysis of so-called eco-efficiency have been broadly considered within the scope of Sustainable Development (SD) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Moreover, upper satisficing levels for output factors and lower satisficing levels for input factors have been already discussed within this context. In particular, upper satisficing levels for output factors can be viewed as relevant from a CSR perspective, since they can be used to remove the incentive to produce unnecessary high output quantities in order to receive better efficiency scores. However, lower satisficing levels for output factors and upper satisficing levels for input factors have not been addressed in the discussion so far. In this paper, a data transformation model to simultaneously consider lower and upper satisficing levels for output factors as well as for input factors is presented. The proposed model takes up the idea of linear representation of logical constraints. Subsequently, the benefits and perils of this approach are discussed from a CSR perspective. It is shown that changes in efficiency scores or even in efficiency rank positions due to considering satisficing levels can be indicators of behavior that is desirable from a CSR perspective.

next article Mit Herz und Verstand: Rolle der internen Kommunikation für die Etablierung neuer Nachhaltigkeitsstrategien

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

https://www.lindo.com/index.php/products/lingo-and-optimization-modeling.

https://www.ibm.com/products/ilog-cplex-optimization-studio.

Aliakbarpoor Z, Izadikhah M (2012) Evaluation and ranking DMUs in the presence of both undesirable and ordinal factors in data envelopment analysis. Int J Autom Comput 9(6):609–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-012-0686-5CrossRef

Allen K (1999) DEA in the ecological context—an overview. In: Westermann G (ed) Data envelopment analysis in the service sector. Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp 203–235CrossRef

Arabi B, Doraisamy SM, Emrouznejad A, Khoshroo A (2017) Eco-efficiency measurement and material balance principle: an application in power plants Malmquist Luenberger Index. Ann Oper Res 255:221–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-1970-xCrossRef

Aras G, Crowther D (2009) Making sustainable development sustainable. Manag Decis 47(6):975–988. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910966686CrossRef

Bansal A, Singh RK, Issar S, Varkey J (2014) Evaluation of vendors ranking by EATWOS approach. J Adv Manage Res 11(3):290–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-02-2014-0009CrossRef

Becchetti L, Trovato G (2011) Corporate social responsibility and firm efficiency: a latent class stochastic frontier analysis. J Prod Anal 36(3):231–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-011-0207-5CrossRef

Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6):429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8CrossRef

Chaudhri V (2016) Corporate social responsibility and the communication imperative: perspectives from CSR managers. Int J Bus Commun 53(4):419–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488414525469CrossRef

Clarke KA (2020) Logical constraints: the limitations of QCA in social science research. Polit Anal 28(4):552–568. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2020.7CrossRef

Cook KA, Romi AM, Sánchez D, Sánchez JM (2019) The influence of corporate social responsibility on investment efficiency and innovation. J Bus Finance Account 46(3/4):494–537. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.12360CrossRef

Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Tone K (2007) Data envelopment analysis—A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRef

Dahlsrud A (2008) How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Mgmt 15(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.132CrossRef

Dakpo KH, Jeanneaux P, Latruffe L (2016) Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric framework. Eur J Oper Res 250(2):347–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.07.024CrossRef

Davutyan N, Bilsel M (2014) Efficiency of Turkish provincial general hospitals with mortality as undesirable output. In: Osman IH, Anouze AL, Emrouznejad A (eds) Handbook of research on strategic performance management and measurement using data envelopment analysis. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 426–436CrossRef

Dyckhoff H (2018) Multi-criteria production theory: foundation of nonfinancial and sustainability performance evaluation. J Bus Econ 88(7–8):851–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0885-1CrossRef

Dyckhoff H, Allen K (2001) Measuring ecological efficiency with data envelopment analysis (DEA). Eur J Oper Res 132(2):312–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00154-5CrossRef

Dyllick T, Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ 11(2):130–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.323CrossRef

Dyson RG, Allen R, Camanho AS, Podinovski VV, Sarrico CS, Shale EA (2001) Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. Eur J Oper Res 132(2):245–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00149-1CrossRef

Elkington J (1997) Cannibals with forks—the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone, Oxford

Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK, Pasurka C (1989) Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: a nonparametric approach. Rev Econ Stat 71(1):90–98CrossRef

Görçün ÖF (2020) Efficiency analysis of Black sea container seaports: application of an integrated MCDM approach. Marit Policy Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1783467CrossRef

Goswami M, Ghadge A (2020) A supplier performance evaluation framework using single and bi-objective DEA efficiency modelling approach: individual and cross-efficiency perspective. Int J Prod Res 58(10):3066–3089. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1629665CrossRef

Hall JK, Daneke GA, Lenox MJ (2010) Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. J Bus Ventur 25(5):439–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.002CrossRef

Hou CE, Lu WM, Hung SW (2019) Does CSR matter? Influence of corporate social responsibility on corporate performance in the creative industry. Ann Oper Res 278:255–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2626-9CrossRef

Hu X, Liu C (2017) Slacks-based data envelopment analysis for eco-efficiency assessment in the Australian construction industry. Constr Manag Econ 35(11–12):693–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2017.1325963SCrossRef

Hutton RB, Cox DB, Clouse ML, Gaensbauer J, Banks BD (2007) The role of sustainable development in risk assessment and management for multinational corporations. Multinatl Bus Rev 15(1):89–111

Jiraporn P, Jiraporn N, Boeprasert A, Chang K (2014) Does corporate social responsibility (CSR) improve credit ratings? Evidence from geographic identification. Financ Manage 43(3):505–531. https://doi.org/10.1111/fima.12044CrossRef

Kordrostami S, Amirteimoori A (2005) Un-desirable factors in multi-component performance measurement. Appl Math Comput 171(2):721–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2005.01.081CrossRef

Kumar N, Singh A, Verma A, Sonal T (2016) Measuring efficiency of IPL players using EATWOS. Int J Advanced Prod Ind Eng 1(2):13–16

Leleu H (2013) Shadow pricing of undesirable outputs in nonparametric analysis. Eur J Oper Res 231(2):474–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.05.028CrossRef

Liu W, Sharp J (1999) DEA models via goal programming. In: Westermann G (ed) Data envelopment analysis in the service sector. Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp 79–101CrossRef

Liu W, Zhou Z, Ma C, Liu D, Shen W (2015) Two-stage DEA models with undesirable input-intermediate-outputs. Omega 56:74–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.03.009CrossRef

Liu WB, Meng W, Li XX, Zhang DQ (2010) DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs. Ann Oper Res 173:177–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-009-0587-3CrossRef

Manning S, Reinecke J (2016) A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions. Res Policy 45(3):618–633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.11.007CrossRef

van Marrewijk M (2003) Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. J Bus Ethics 44(2–3):95–105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023331212247CrossRef

Monastyrenko E (2017) Eco-efficiency outcomes of mergers and acquisitions in the European electricity industry. Energy Policy 107:258–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.04.030CrossRef

Munro V (2013) Stakeholder preferences for particular corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities and social initiatives (SIs)—CSR initiatives to assist corporate strategy in emerging and frontier markets. J Corp Citizsh (51):72–105. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jcorpciti.51.72

Özbek A (2015a) Analysis of private pension companies in Turkey by EATWOS. Eur J Bus Manage 7(26):31–43

Özbek A (2015b) Efficiency analysis of non-governmental organizations based in Turkey. Int Bus Res 8(9):95–104. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v8n9p95CrossRef

Özbek A (2015c) Efficiency analysis of the Turkish red crescent between 2012 and 2014. Int J Econ Finance 7(9):322–334. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v7n9p322CrossRef

Özbek A (2016) Efficiency analysis of gold mining companies through financial statements. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci 6(10):273–290. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i10/2357CrossRef

Peters ML, Zelewski S (2006) Efficiency analysis under consideration of Satisficing levels for output quantities. In: Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Production and Operations Management Society—Operations Management in the New World Uncertainties, CD-ROM-Proceedings Boston

Peters ML, Zelewski S (2016a) Opportunities and risks of satisficing levels in efficiency analyses from the perspective of sustainable development. Umweltwirtschaftsforum 24(2/3):195–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-016-0409-4CrossRef

Peters ML, Zelewski S (2016b) Benefits and risks of satisficing levels for input and output quantities in efficiency analyses from a corporate social responsibility perspective. Int J Manage Sustain 5(12):94–101. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.11/2016.5.12/11.12.94.101CrossRef

Peters ML, Zelewski S (2018a) Some thoughts on operationalizing the concept of sufficiency in efficiency analysis. Int J Manage Sustain 7(1):63–71. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.11.2018.71.63.71CrossRef

Peters ML, Zelewski S (2018b) Adapting the efficiency analysis technique with input and output Satisficing (EATWIOS) for the consideration of lower and upper satisficing levels. Working Report No. 44. Institute of Production and Industrial Information Management, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen

Peters ML, Zelewski S, Bruns AS (2012) Extended version of EATWOS concerning Satisficing levels for input quantities. In: Blecker T, Kersten W, Ringle CM (eds) Pioneering supply chain design—A comprehensive insight into emerging trends, technologies and applications. Eul, Lohmar, Köln, pp 303–318

Sarkis J, Cordeiro JJ (2012) Ecological modernization in the electrical utility industry: an application of a bads–goods DEA model of ecological and technical efficiency. Eur J Oper Res 219(2):386–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2011.09.033CrossRef

Scheel H (2001) Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations. Eur J Oper Res 132(2):400–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00160-0CrossRef

Sueyoshi T, Goto M (2011) Measurement of returns to scale and damages to scale for DEA-based operational and environmental assessment: how to manage desirable (good) and undesirable (bad) outputs? Eur J Oper Res 211(1):76–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2010.11.013CrossRef

Wojcik V, Dyckhoff H, Gutgesell S (2017) The desirable input of undesirable factors in data envelopment analysis. Ann Oper Res 259:461–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2523-2CrossRef

Wu J, Zhu Q, Chu J, An Q, Liang L (2016) A DEA-based approach for allocation of emission reduction tasks. Int J Prod Res 54(18):5618–5633. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.1194537CrossRef

Yaisawarng S, Klein JD (1994) The effects of sulfur dioxide controls on productivity change in the U.S. electric power industry. Rev Econ Stat 76(3):447–460. https://doi.org/10.2307/2109970CrossRef

Yan H, Hooker JN (1999) Tight representation of logical constraints as cardinality rules. Math Program 85(2):363–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s101070050061CrossRef

Yan H, Yu Z, Cheng TCE (2003) A strategic model for supply chain design with logical constraints: formulation and solution. Comput Oper Res 30(14):2135–2155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0548(02)00127-2CrossRef

Yang L, Zhang X (2018) Assessing regional eco-efficiency from the perspective of resource, environmental and economic performance in China: A bootstrapping approach in global data envelopment analysis. J Clean Prod 173:100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.166CrossRef

Yu Y, Hu H, Zhang Y, Yin Z (2019) Metafrontier eco-efficiency and its convergence analysis for China: a multidimensional heterogeneity perspective. Emerg Mark Finance Trade 55(7):1531–1549. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2018.1559142CrossRef

Zanella A, Camanho AS, Dias TG (2015) Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 245(2):517–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.03.036CrossRef

Zhang J, Liu Y, Chang Y, Zhang L (2017) Industrial eco-efficiency in China: a provincial quantification using three-stage data envelopment analysis. J Clean Prod 143:238–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.123CrossRef

Zhou Z, Liu W (2015) DEA models with undesirable inputs, intermediates, and outputs. In: Zhu J (ed) Data envelopment analysis—A handbook of models and methods. Springer, Boston, New York, Dordrecht, pp 415–446 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7553-9_15CrossRef

Zhu J (ed) (2016) Data envelopment analysis—a handbook of empirical studies and applications. Springer, New York https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7684-0CrossRef

Title: Upper and lower satisficing levels in efficiency analysis: a corporate social responsibility perspective
Authors: Malte L. Peters
Stephan Zelewski
Publication date: 10-06-2021
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Sustainability Nexus Forum / Issue 3-4/2021
Print ISSN: 2948-1619
Electronic ISSN: 2948-1627
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-021-00511-x