
 
models. These entities, often called decisions 
making units (DMU
s
), perform the same function by 
trans- forming multiple inputs into multiple outputs. 
A main advantage of DEA is that it does not require 
any prior assumptions on the underlying functional 
relationships between inputs and outputs (Seiford 
and Thrall, 1990). It is therefore a nonparametric 
approach. In addition, DEA is a data-driven frontier 
analysis technique that floats a piecewise linear 
surface to rest on top of the empirical observations 
(Cooper et al., 2004). 
Since the work by Charnes et al. (1978), DEA 
has rapidly grown into an exciting and fruitful field, 
in which operations research and management 
science (OR/MS) researchers, economists, and 
experts from various application areas have played 
their respective roles (Førsund and Sarafoglou, 
2002, 2005). For DEA beginners, Ramanathan 
(2003) provided an excellent introductory material. 
The more comprehensive DEA expositions can be 
found in the recent publication by Cooper et al. 
(2006). In the sections that follow, we shall briefly 
introduce the basic DEA methodology. 
Assume that there are K DMU
s
, e.g. electricity 
distribution utilities, to be evaluated that covert N 
inputs to M outputs. Further assume that DMU
k
 
consumes x
nk
>=0 of input n to produce y
mk
>=0 of 
output m and each DMU has at least one positive 
input and one positive output (Fare et al., 1994b; 
Cooper et al., 2004). Based on the efficiency 
concept. in engineering, the efficiency of a DMU, 
says DMU
o
 (o=1,2,...,K), can be estimated by the 
ratio of its virtual output(weighted combination of 
outputs) to its virtual input(weighted combination of 
inputs). To avoid the arbitrariness in assigning the 
weights for inputs and outputs, Charnes et al. (1978) 
developed an optimization model known as the CCR 
in ratio form to determine the optimal weights for 
DMU
o
 by maximizing its ratio of virtual output to 
virtual input while keeping the ratios for all the 
DMU
s
 not more than one. 
2.2  Basic AHP Methodology 
Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP) is theorized by 
U.S. Operations Research Professor Saaty TL. It is a 
simple, flexible and practical method for multiple 
criteria decisions making. It is based on a hierarchy 
of multi-objective, subjective judgments based on a 
range of options for calculating the relative 
importance, followed by a top down basis, through 
the decision-makers for each sub-index layer and 
index layer provided by the importance of subjective 
judgments in pairs, for each unit down to the 
pairwise comparison matrix to establish. 
Comparison of first through calculating the feature 
vector matrix elements get the same level on a level 
for the relative importance of the same unit, and then 
in accordance with the order from the bottom up 
Yici, calculate aggregate importance, end up ranking 
value of each option. AHP process was people's 
thinking process by fully reflect the preferences of 
decision makers, decision makers experience will be 
quantified, so as to provide decision makers with 
quantitative forms of decisions making. But its 
limitations can not be ignored: it relies heavily on 
people's experience, subjective factors is large, it can 
only rule out the thought process up to the serious 
non-compliance, but can not rule out the possible 
existence of individual decision-makers A serious 
one-sidedness. 
2.3  Evaluation of the Significance 
of AHP-DEA 
The above method of DEA-AHP method described 
shows, DEA methods for assessing the results of the 
program is totally dependent on the objective 
evaluation of indicator data, without considering the 
preferences of decision makers, and can only be 
divided into units based on the dichotomy of 
decision-making both active and inactive Part of 
effective decision-making unit of the information 
given is too small, can not be a reasonable sort; and 
simple AHP, due to the characteristics of semi-
qualitative semi-quantitative determined by its lack 
of strict objectivity, subjective factors, too. Taking 
into account the practical problems of evaluation 
reflects the degree of importance among may vary, 
so the decision makers in order to reflect the 
preferences of the different level of evaluation, so 
that the evaluation of a more comprehensive and 
reasonable, considering the above two methods the 
author Advantages and disadvantages in use of data 
envelopment analysis and analytic hierarchy process 
method are combined to establish the subjective and 
objective integrated multi-objective comprehensive 
evaluation model. The model make up the traditional 
method of data envelopment analysis does not 
consider the lack of decision-makers preferences, 
and overcome the many levels of analysis and 
decision making the current weakness of 
subjectivity, the evaluation results more 
comprehensive and more realistic. 
 
 
ICEIS 2011 - 13th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
528