Efficiency Analysis of Commercial Bank Branches Using a Common Set of Weights in DEA

Authors

  • Seyyed Moein Hessam Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Business Administration, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.48314/ijorai.v1i2.62

Abstract

This study investigates the operational efficiency of 375 commercial bank branches during the fiscal year 2017 by employing advanced Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) methodologies. Each branch is considered a Decision Making Unit (DMU) consuming multiple inputs to generate outputs. To address the multi-dimensional nature of performance evaluation, both the lexicographic method and a weighted linearized approximation of the Common Set of Weights (CSW) DEA model are applied. The lexicographic approach prioritizes objectives sequentially, reflecting decision-makers' preferences, while the weighted linearized model allows simultaneous consideration of all objectives with adjustable importance weights. The weighted model mitigates computational and feasibility challenges inherent in the lexicographic approach, enabling efficient analysis of large-scale data. The results provide valuable insights into relative branch efficiency, identify best-performing units, and offer a practical framework for resource allocation and performance improvement in the banking sector.     

Keywords:

Data envelopment analysis, Common set of weights, Bank branch performance

References

  1. [1] Mozaffari, M. R., Mohammadi, S., Wanke, P. F., & Correa, H. L. (2021). Towards greener petrochemical production: Two-stage network data envelopment analysis in a fully fuzzy environment in the presence of undesirable outputs. Expert systems with applications, 164, 113903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113903
  2. [2] Ostovan, S., Mozaffari, M. R., Jamshidi, A., & Gerami, J. (2020). Evaluation of two-stage networks based on average efficiency using DEA and DEA-R with fuzzy data. International journal of fuzzy systems, 22(5), 1665–1678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-020-00896-9
  3. [3] Gerami, J., Mozaffari, M. R., Wanke, P. F., & Correa, H. L. (2022). Improving information reliability of non-radial value efficiency analysis: An additive slacks based measure approach. European journal of operational research, 298(3), 967–978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.07.036
  4. [4] Wanke, P., Ostovan, S., Mozaffari, M. R., Gerami, J., & Tan, Y. (2022). Stochastic network DEA-R models for two-stage systems. Journal of modelling in management, 18(3), 842–875. https://doi.org/10.1108/JM2-10-2021-0256
  5. [5] Gerami, J., Mozaffari, M. R., & Wanke, P. F. (2020). A multi-criteria ratio-based approach for two-stage data envelopment analysis. Expert systems with applications, 158, 113508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113508
  6. [6] Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., Noora, A. A., Jahanshahloo, G. R., Jablonsky, J., Mozaffari, M. R., & Gerami, J. (2009). An MOLP based procedure for finding efficient units in DEA models. Central european journal of operations research, 17(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-008-0071-1
  7. [7] Lotfi, F. H., Jahanshahloo, G. R., Mozaffari, M. R., & Gerami, J. (2011). Finding DEA-efficient hyperplanes using MOLP efficient faces. Journal of computational and applied mathematics, 235(5), 1227–1231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2010.08.007
  8. [8] Kamyab, P., Mozaffari, M. R., Gerami, J., & Wankei, P. F. (2021). Two-stage incentives system for commercial banks based on centralized resource allocation model in DEA-R. International journal of productivity and performance management, 70(2), 427–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-11-2018-0396
  9. [9] Olfati, M., Krömer, P., Fanati Rashidi, S., Mirjalili, S., & Snášel, V. (2025). A goal programming-based algorithm for solving multi objective optimization problems: M. Olfati et al. Annals of operations research, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-025-06646-0
  10. [10] Mozaffari, M. R., Gerami, J., Wanke, P. F., Kamyab, P., & Peyvas, M. (2022). Ratio-based data envelopment analysis: An interactive approach to identify benchmark. Results in control and optimization, 6, 100081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rico.2021.100081
  11. [11] Sohrabi, A., Gerami, J., & Mozaffari, M. R. (2021). A novel inverse DEA-R model for inputs/output estimation. Journal of mathematical extension, 16(8), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.30495/JME.2022.2047
  12. [12] Rashidi, S. F., Olfati, M., Mirjalili, S., Platoš, J., & Snášel, V. (2025). A comprehensive DEA-based framework for evaluating sustainability and efficiency of vehicle types: Integrating undesirable inputs and social-environmental indicators. Cleaner engineering and technology, 27, 100989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2025.100989
  13. [13] Mozaffari, M. R., Ostovan, S., & Fernandes Wanke, P. (2020). A hybrid genetic algorithm-ratio DEA approach for assessing sustainable efficiency in two-echelon supply chains. Sustainability, 12(19), 8075. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198075
  14. [14] Tamaddon, L., Jahanshahloo, G. R., Lotfi, F. H., Mozaffari, M. R., & Gholami, K. (2009). Data envelopment analysis of missing data in crisp and interval cases. International journal of mathematical analysis, 3(17–20), 955–969. https://B2n.ir/pj6945
  15. [15] Khoshnava, A., & Mozaffari, M. R. (2015). Fully fuzzy transportation problem. Journal of new researches in mathematics, 1(3), 42-54. (In Persian). https://www.sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/53002220150304.pdf
  16. [16] Despotis, D. K. (2002). Improving the discriminating power of DEA: Focus on globally efficient units. Journal of the operational research society, 53(3), 314–323. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601253
  17. [17] Kao, C., & Hung, H. (2005). Data envelopment analysis with common weights: The compromise solution approach. Journal of the operational research society, 56(10), 1196–1203. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601924
  18. [18] Jahanshahloo, G. R., Memariani, A., Lotfi, F. H., & Rezai, H. Z. (2005). A note on some of DEA models and finding efficiency and complete ranking using common set of weights. Applied mathematics and computation, 166(2), 265–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2004.04.088
  19. [19] Chen, Y. W., Larbani, M., & Chang, Y. P. (2009). Multiobjective data envelopment analysis. Journal of the operational research society, 60(11), 1556–1566. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2009.92
  20. [20] Saati, S., Hatami-Marbini, A., Agrell, P. J., & Tavana, M. (2012). A common set of weight approach using an ideal decision making unit in data envelopment analysis. Journal of industrial and management optimization, 8(3), 623–637. http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/jimo.2012.8.623
  21. [21] Chiang, C. I., Hwang, M. J., & Liu, Y. H. (2011). Determining a common set of weights in a DEA problem using a separation vector. Mathematical and computer modelling, 54(9–10), 2464–2470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2011.06.002
  22. [22] Sajedinejad, A., & Chaharsooghi, S. K. (2018). Multi-criteria supplier selection decisions in supply chain networks: A multi-objective optimization approach. Industrial engineering & management systems, 17(3), 392–406. https://doi.org/10.7232/iems.2018.17.3.392
  23. [23] Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European journal of operational research, 2(6), 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8

Downloads

Published

2025-06-08

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): International Journal of Operations Research and Artificial Intelligence (IJORAI)

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Hessam, S. M. . (2025). Efficiency Analysis of Commercial Bank Branches Using a Common Set of Weights in DEA. International Journal of Operations Research and Artificial Intelligence , 1(2), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.48314/ijorai.v1i2.62

Similar Articles

1-10 of 20

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.