Chapter 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.2 The Second Stage Efficiency Analysis
4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics
Table 4-6: The input, output variables of the Second stage
Source: Summarized by this study
Notes:
M1 = Net Sales, M2 = Operating profit, Y1 = Earning Per Share,
Y2 = Equity Per Share, Y3 =Turnover per share, Y4 =Cash flow per Share, Y5 = Revenue Per person, Y6 = Each business interests
4.2.2 Efficiency Analysis
In the second stage of the analysis efficiency, this study will take output variables of the first stage become the input variables of the second stage and take the Earning per share, Equity per share, Turnover per share, Cash flow per share, Revenue per person and Each business interests is output variables, using DEA-CCR model analysis, the analysis results shown in table 4-7. From table 4-7, in the efficiency evaluation of the second stage, the strength efficiency companies of the relative efficiency value is equal to 1, respectively SFC and CCDC, HTCC, HCD&CC, WGDC, HCC, CDC, FECC and KPCC 9 companies (31,03%), on behalf of the input and output in the current period is the best configuration, in the market have a better efficiency. The remaining 20 companies obviously inefficient units (68,97% ).
From the foregoing, through the second stage of DEA analysis results, the marketing efficiency gets the same efficiency with business efficiency of such 29 Real Estate companies.
Table 4-7: The second stage evaluation model of computing efficiency value
DMU TE PTE SE RTS
RDC 0.248 0.270 0.921 Decreasing
SFC 1 1 1 Constant
DCC 0.564 0.951 0.593 Decreasing
PCC 0.184 0.916 0.201 Decreasing
YSC&DC 0.415 0.589 0.705 Decreasing
CCDC 1 1 1 Constant
HSC 0.465 1 0.465 Decreasing
HTCC 1 1 1 Constant
HPREDC 0.293 0.837 0.350 Decreasing
HCD&CC 1 1 1 Constant
WGDC 1 1 1 Constant
HCC 1 1 1 Constant
CDC 1 1 1 Constant
HHCC 0.369 1 0.369 Decreasing
FCDC 0.397 0.515 0.771 Decreasing
CREDC 0.108 0.109 0.984 Decreasing
GD&CC 0.065 0.169 0.387 Decreasing
KTPC 0.666 1 0.666 Decreasing
HDC 0.287 1 0.287 Decreasing
SBBC 0.130 0.130 0.999 Decreasing
SREDC 0.293 0.307 0.955 Decreasing
NAC&DC 0.441 1 0.441 Decreasing
FECC 1 1 1 Constant
FLDC 0.095 0.353 0.268 Decreasing
KPCC 1 1 1 Constant
HiCC 0.103 0.642 0.160 Decreasing
SDC 0.502 0.505 0.994 Decreasing
CHCC 0.497 1 0.497 Decreasing
KCC 0.177 0.314 0.564 Decreasing
Average 0.528 0.745 0.710 -
Source: Summarized by this study
Because as mentioned before TE= PTE*SE, so in the second stage efficiency analysis, so this study also apply DEA-Solver software with CCR model to calculated TE and BCC model to calculated PTE, to obtain the scale efficiency (SE) and scale reward situation, to learn more about the reasons of the management inefficiency. In the second stage, the result of return to scale increase, constant and decrease sorting by table 4-7. In the table 4-7, 29 real estate companies’ the average pure technical efficiency is 0.745, indicate the market performance is bad, the average scale efficiency is 0.710, this result also mean the market efficiency is not good, the reason from both of pure technology and scale technology. So management department should choose the appropriate inputs combine to create maximum the output effect.
4.2.3 Efficiency Improvement
At the second stage of the DEA analysis, also there are total 20 companies not equal 1, indicates relatively inefficiency, and in the marketing there is still space for improvement. This study also use the slack analysis of the CCR model, against the second stage of each assessment unit of input, output variables and provide improvement advice and the relevant suggestions as the table 4-8:
Table 4-8: The second stage for improvement suggestions of input, output
DMU Score
M1 M2 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6
S-1 S-2 S+1 S+2 S+3 S+4 S+5 S+6
RDC 0.248 0.000 0.000 6.508 42.292 38.158 0.000 6254.858 0.000
SFC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
DCC 0.564 0.000 0.000 31.264 903.432 0.000 0.000 0.000 45.633 PCC 0.184 0.000 0.000 0.000 47.375 0.000 0.000 0.000 438.439 YSC&DC 0.415 0.000 0.106 0.000 51.537 0.000 0.000 11807.848 0.000
CCDC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
HSC 0.465 0.000 0.000 10.590 304.904 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
HTCC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
HPREDC 0.293 0.000 0.000 3.406 10.594 20.193 0.000 4297.597 0.000 HCD&CC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
WGDC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
HCC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
CDC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 HHCC 0.369 0.000 0.219 0.000 21.877 0.000 0.000 29657.785 0.000 FCDC 0.397 0.000 0.000 4.949 30.112 26.571 0.000 6881.740 0.000 CREDC 0.108 0.000 0.000 3.803 22.904 24.558 0.000 2660.403 0.000 GD&CC 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.150 13.170 0.000 0.000 0.000 377.060 KTPC 0.666 0.000 0.000 61.172 1654.282 38.722 0.000 0.000 0.000 HDC 0.287 0.000 0.000 3.856 5.739 22.059 0.000 11119.606 0.000 SBBC 0.130 0.000 0.000 1.004 0.000 4.528 0.000 1740.256 0.000 SREDC 0.293 0.000 0.000 2.254 15.206 13.457 0.000 0.000 0.000 NAC&DC 0.441 0.000 0.000 0.791 154.337 0.000 0.000 81761.721 3155.728
FECC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
FLDC 0.095 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.948 0.000 0.444 1439.058 0.000
KPCC 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
HiCC 0.103 0.000 0.000 2.849 33.511 21.226 0.000 5681.319 0.000
SDC 0.502 0.000 0.000 1.231 2.811 8.431 0.006 59.812 0.000
CHCC 0.497 0.000 0.742 0.000 133.283 0.000 0.000 78334.600 0.000 KCC 0.177 0.000 0.000 1.731 5.891 13.315 0.117 702.293 0.000
Source: Summarized by this study
Notes:
M1 = Net Sales, M2 = Operating profit, Y1 = Earning Per Share,
Y2 = Equity Per Share, Y3 =Turnover per share, Y4 =Cash flow per Share, Y5 = Revenue Per person, Y6 = Each business interests
Following the table 4-8 and Appendix D we can see, the improvement suggestion of inefficiency DMU as RDC in Net Sales have to decrease 5.162 billion NTD, Operating profit have to decrease 1.415 billion NTD, Earning Per share have increase to 6.508 billion NTD, Equity Per Share increase to 42.292 billion NTD, Revenue per person increase to 6254.858 billion NTD... So can be relatively efficient, and by parity of reasoning. But according to the original data (Appendix B) example as the Cashflow per share of SFC company is minus 1.14 (-1.14) NTD and according to the improvement suggestions of (Appendix D) this company have to increase 1.14 NTD, the DCC company with Cashflow per share is minus 0.68 (-0.68) NTD also increase 0.68 NTD to get efficiency in business.
4.2.4 Sensitivity Analysis
The same with the first stage, at this second sensitivity analysis also removing one variable (input or output) to find out the result with which variables got the important affect to the others, affect to the marketing efficiency of real estate companies. And this study also use the DEA-CCR model as an analyzing tool:
Table 4- 9: The first stage Sensitivity analysis removing variables
DMU CCR M1 M2 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6
RDC 0.248 0.242 0.237 0.248 0.248 0.248 0.230 0.248 0.233
SFC 1 0.867 1 1 1 0.984 1 1 0.867
DCC 0.564 0.407 0.407 0.564 0.564 0.535 0.564 0.406 0.564 PCC 0.184 0.114 0.114 0.183 0.184 0.137 0.184 0.173 0.184 YSC&DC 0.415 0.336 0.415 0.415 0.415 0.407 0.369 0.415 0.350
CCDC 1 1 0.515 1 1 1 0.228 1 1
HSC 0.465 1 0.328 0.465 0.465 0.450 0.465 0.217 0.465
HTCC 1 0.743 0.685 1 1 0.947 1 0.720 1
HPREDC 0.293 0.285 0.281 0.293 0.293 0.293 0.272 0.293 0.275
HCD&CC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
WGDC 1 0.963 1 1 1 1 0.770 1 1
HCC 1 1 0.317 1 1 0.439 1 1 1
CDC 1 0.667 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
HHCC 0.369 0.295 0.369 0.369 0.369 0.362 0.353 0.369 0.297 FCDC 0.397 0.392 0.333 0.394 0.397 0.387 0.278 0.384 0.360 CREDC 0.108 0.106 0.104 0.108 0.108 0.108 0.101 0.108 0.103 GD&CC 0.065 0.030 0.026 0.066 0.065 0.035 0.064 0.065 0.066 KTPC 0.666 0.666 0.655 0.628 0.666 0.618 0.609 0.667 0.628 HDC 0.287 0.279 0.262 0.287 0.287 0.287 0.222 0.287 0.258 SBBC 0.130 0.128 0.108 0.131 0.130 0.131 0.085 0.131 0.116 SREDC 0.293 0.293 0.271 0.296 0.293 0.296 0.255 0.296 0.283 NAC&DC 0.441 0.026 0.111 0.441 0.441 0.034 0.441 0.441 0.441
FECC 1 0.951 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.949
FLDC 0.095 0.087 0.094 0.095 0.095 0.093 0.095 0.095 0.087
KPCC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
HiCC 0.103 0.100 0.099 0.103 0.103 0.103 0.098 0.103 0.097
SDC 0.502 0.500 0.501 0.502 0.502 0.502 0.502 0.502 0.500 CHCC 0.497 0.327 0.497 0.496 0.497 0.489 0.470 0.497 0.339 KCC 0.177 0.171 0.175 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.171 Average 0.528 0.482 0.445 0.530 0.528 0.489 0.480 0.504 0.508
N.E 9 5 6 9 9 6 7 8 7
Source: Summarized by this study
Notes:
M1 = Net Sales, M2 = Operating profit, Y1 = Earning Per Share,
Y2 = Equity Per Share, Y3 =Turnover per share, Y4 =Cash flow per Share, Y5 = Revenue Per person, Y6 = Each business interests
N.E = Number of efficiency
The largest change for the average value (15.72%) happens when the input operating profit has been removed from list of variables. And indicate this variable is most important factor that affect to marketing efficiency at the second stage. The Cash flow Per Share variable is the second factor makes a big affect to efficiency (9.9%), the Turnover per Share (7.4%), Revenue per Person (4.5%), Each business interests (3.8%). Others variables only make small changes when they were taken out of list variables.
4.2.5 Sorting
In the second stage of this study also apply the DEA model with CCR is calculated by a set of weight which is “best” for each DMU, CCW is calculated of weights which is “better”
for all DMU, not for each DMU and AR is calculated by a set of weight which is “better” for each DMU.
Table 4- 10: The comparison of efficiency value at the second stage
DMU CCR CCW AR100 AR20 AR5 AR1
RDC 0.248 0.005 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.220
SFC 1 0.021 0.981 0.976 0.963 0.859
DCC 0.564 0.010 0.445 0.443 0.437 0.403
PCC 0.184 0.004 0.121 0.121 0.120 0.114
YSC&DC 0.415 0.014 0.318 0.311 0.293 0.236
CCDC 1 0.024 0.231 0.229 0.229 0.228
HSC 0.465 0.015 0.362 0.361 0.355 0.325
HTCC 1 0.016 0.759 0.756 0.744 0.678
HPREDC 0.293 0.008 0.270 0.270 0.269 0.260
HCD&CC 1 0.018 1 1 1 0.999
WGDC 1 0.051 0.551 0.542 0.518 0.433
HCC 1 0.012 0.352 0.351 0.345 0.315
CDC 1 1 1 1 1 1
HHCC 0.369 0.009 0.340 0.334 0.319 0.265
FCDC 0.397 0.011 0.276 0.276 0.276 0.271
CREDC 0.108 0.002 0.101 0.101 0.101 0.099
GD&CC 0.065 0.001 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.026
KTPC 0.666 0.012 0.650 0.650 0.650 0.649
HDC 0.287 0.009 0.220 0.220 0.220 0.210
SBBC 0.130 0.004 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.082
SREDC 0.293 0.008 0.255 0.255 0.255 0.255
NAC&DC 0.441 0.004 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.025
FECC 1 0.020 1 1 1 0.920
FLDC 0.095 0.003 0.092 0.092 0.092 0.087
KPCC 1 0.047 1 1 1 0.991
HiCC 0.103 0.003 0.097 0.097 0.097 0.093
SDC 0.502 0.013 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.495
CHCC 0.497 0.011 0.450 0.435 0.394 0.286
KCC 0.177 0.004 0.175 0.175 0.175 0.169
N.E 9 1 4 4 4 1
Source: Summarized by this study
Notes: N.E= Number of efficiency
Figure 4-2: Comparison of efficiency value between CCR, CCW and AR at the Second stage So from the second stage on the CCR model there are 9 companies got the efficiency equal 1 is SFC, CCDC, HTCC, HCD&CC, WGDC, HCC, CDC, FECC and KPCC, on the CCW only CDC company has efficiency equal 1 while others companies have a very small efficiency value, that is because the input of CDC companies is a very tiny number, so it makes a strong affect to others companies on CCW model. So with the inputs is very small but the CDC company already has a large efficiency in market while others companies did not or just a very small profit. And with the AR model on the decrease from AR20, AR5 with 4 companies get efficiency is HCD&CC, CDC, FECC and KPCC, on AR1 just only CDC companies has efficiency value equals to 1. So we can see all three models CCR, CCW and AR1 the CDC company already has efficiency of three models although the input at the second stage is very small, this proved market efficiency of the CDC company is very well.
0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000
RDC SFC DCC PCC YSC&DC CCDC HSC HTCC HPREDC HCD&CC WGDC HCC CDC HHCC FCDC CREDC GD&CC KTPC HDC SBBC SREDC NAC&DC FECC FLDC KPCC HiCC SDC CHCC KCC
CCR CCW AR20 AR5 AR1