Advertisement

Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 248, Issue 1–2, pp 93–121 | Cite as

An illustration of multiple-stakeholder perspective using a survey across Australia, China and Japan

  • Necmi Kemal Avkiran
Original Paper

Abstract

The primary objective of the article is to illustrate how to develop a multiple stakeholder perspective (MSP) on a common set of financial ratios using a cross-country survey and reflect this information in a single comparative bank performance estimate. Data Envelopment Analysis brings together the varying perspectives of five key stakeholders, namely, regulators, shareholders, customers, bank managers and employees. I develop the MSP approach by taking advantage of a recent online survey of stakeholder perceptions on key financial ratios across the major trading partners Australia, China and Japan. Insights gained through MSP can guide regulatory vigor, promotional or public relations activities, raising of equity capital in overseas markets and other cross-border operations such as positioning an institution’s international presence in a host country.

Keywords

Multiple stakeholders Ranking Data envelopment analysis Regulation Marketing Banking 

JEL Classification

G21 C67 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Professor Ali Emrouznejad for managing the submission and the anonymous referees for encouraging me to revise the original submission.

References

  1. Andersen, P., & Petersen, N. C. (1993). A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 39, 1261–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avkiran, N. K. (1999). The evidence on efficiency gains: The role of mergers and the benefits to the public. Journal of Banking and Finance, 23, 991–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Avkiran, N. K. (2000). Rising productivity of Australian trading banks under deregulation 1986–1995. Journal of Economics and Finance, 24, 122–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avkiran, N. K. (2006). Developing foreign bank efficiency models for DEA grounded in finance theory. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 40, 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Avkiran, N. K. (2009). Removing the impact of environment with units-invariant efficient frontier analysis: An illustrative case study with intertemporal panel data. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 37, 535–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Avkiran, N. K. (2011). Association of DEA super-efficiency estimates with financial ratios: Investigating the case for Chinese banks. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 39, 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Avkiran, N. K., & Mizuno, M. (2013). Stakeholder perspectives on bank performance: A preliminary survey across Australia, China and Japan. JASSA (The Finsia Journal of Applied Finance), Winter(Issue 2), 30–35.Google Scholar
  8. Avkiran, N. K., & Morita, H. (2010). Benchmarking firm performance from a multiple-stakeholder perspective with an application to Chinese banking. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 38, 501–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Avkiran, N. K., & Thoraneenitiyan, N. (2010). Purging data before productivity analysis. Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 294–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Avkiran, N. K., & Turner, L. (1996). Upward evaluation of branch manager’s competence: How to develop a measure in-house. Asia-Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 34(3), 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Avkiran, N. K., & Zhu, Y. (forthcoming in 2016). Pitching DEA against SFA in the context of Chinese domestic versus foreign banks. In the book by Springer entitled. Handbook of operations analytics using data envelopment analysis.Google Scholar
  12. Banker, R. D., & Natarajan, R. (2008). Evaluating contextual variables affecting productivity using data envelopment analysis. Operations Research, 56(1), 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1078–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Beyond strategic planning to organizational learning: Lifeblood of the individualized corporation. Strategy and Leadership, 26, 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bhattacharyya, A., Lovell, C. A. K., & Sahay, P. (1997). The impact of liberalization on the productive efficiency of Indian commercial banks. European Journal of Operational Research, 98, 332–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brockett, P. L., Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Huang, Z. M., & Sun, D. B. (1997). Data transformations in DEA cone ratio envelopment approaches for monitoring bank performances. European Journal of Operational Research, 98, 250–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: An application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Management Science, 27, 668–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Coelli, T. J., Prasada, R. D. S., O’Donnell, C. J., & Battese, G. E. (2005). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Cook, W., & Zhu, J. (2010). Context-dependent performance standards in DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 173, 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cooper, W. W., Park, K. S., & Pastor, J. T. (2001). The range adjusted measure (RAM) in DEA: A response to the comment by Steinmann and Zweifel. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 15, 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cooper, W. W., Ruefli, T. W., Deng, H., Wu, J., & Zhang, Z. (2008). Are state-owned banks less efficient? A long- vs. short-run data envelopment analysis of Chinese Banks. International Journal of Operational Research, 3, 533–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2007). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-Solver software (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Handbook on data envelopment analysis (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Garcia-Cestona, M., & Surroca, J. (2008). Multiple goals and ownership structure: Effects on the performance of Spanish savings banks. European Journal of Operational Research, 187, 582–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gelade, G., & Gilbert, P. (2003). Work climate and organizational effectiveness: The application of data envelopment analysis in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 482–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greenley, G. E., & Foxall, G. R. (1997). Multiple stakeholder orientation in UK companies and the implications for company performance. Journal of Management Studies, 34, 259–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. International Monetary Fund. (2011). People’s Republic of China: Financial system stability assessment, IMF Country report no. 11/321.Google Scholar
  29. KPMG. (2007). Retail banking in China: New frontiers. March, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  30. Llewellyn, D. T. (2005). Competition and profitability in European banking: Why are British banks so profitable? Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, 34(3), 279–311.Google Scholar
  31. London, M., & Smither, J. W. (1995). Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations and performance related outcomes? Theory Based Applications and Directions for Research, Personnel Psychology, 48, 803–839.Google Scholar
  32. Lozano, S., & Villa, G. (2010). Gradual technical and scale efficiency improvement in DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 173, 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miller, S. M., & Noulas, A. G. (1996). The technical efficiency of large bank production. Journal of Banking and Finance, 20, 495–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Olesen, O. B., Petersen, N. C., & Podinovski, V. V. (2015). Efficiency analysis with ratio measures. European Journal of Operational Research, 245, 446–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2008). Foreign banks in China. June, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  36. Regional Banks Association of Japan. (2011). Regional banks in Japan. March 31.Google Scholar
  37. Sturm, J. E., & Williams, B. (2004). Foreign bank entry, deregulation and bank efficiency: Lessons from the Australian experience. Journal of Banking and Finance, 28, 1775–1799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sueyoshi, T., & Sekitani, K. (2009). An occurrence of multiple projections in DEA-based measurement of technical efficiency: Theoretical comparison among DEA models from desirable properties. European Journal of Operational Research, 196, 764–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tone, K. (2001). A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 130, 498–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tone, K. (2002). A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 143, 32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2010). Dynamic DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 38(3–4), 145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yang, X., & Morita, H. (2013). Efficiency improvement from multiple perspectives: An application to Japanese banking industry. OMEGA—The International Journal of Management Science, 41(3), 501–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UQ Business SchoolThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations