Advertisement

DECISION

pp 1–12 | Cite as

Do regulations and governance quality impact performance of MFIs in India?

  • K. P. Saraswathy Amma
  • Gopalakrishnan Kannan
  • Lakshmi ParthasarathyEmail author
Research Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

We explore the relationship between performance, regulations and governance quality of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) through a survey conducted among CxOs and board of directors of top 55 MFIs in India. We study the effect of AP ordinance (2010) (taken as a proxy for regulation), boardroom conflicts (taken as a proxy for governance quality) and the recent demonetization policy of Government of India on the performance of the MFIs in India. The results show that AP ordinance and boardroom conflicts have had a negative impact on the performance of the MFIs. As per public interest theory, regulations are good for correcting market failures and upgrading the existing practices and hence have a positive impact on the performance. However, our research proves that AP ordinance has a negative impact on the performance of the firm and hence does not support the theory in the Indian context. Diversity and experience in the board could lead to conflicts and delayed decision making, having a negative impact on the performance of the firm. Our research survey confirms this theory. Managers’ powers are limited by the external environment, and the state has more powers to set the field. However, our empirical model does not support the negative impact of demonetization on the performance of MFIs. There is a dearth of study on Indian MFI industry, and this paper contributes to narrow that gap.

Keywords

MFI Regulation AP ordinance board conflicts Demonetization Governance 

Notes

References

  1. Adams A (2017) Performance of microfinance institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa: a cross country analysis of outreach, sustainability, efficiency and regulation. Doctoral dissertation, University of ZululandGoogle Scholar
  2. Aranson PH (1989) Theories of economic regulation: from clarity to confusion. JL & Pol 6:247Google Scholar
  3. Armendáriz B, Morduch J (2010) The economics of microfinance. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Augustine D (2012) Good practice in corporate governance: transparency, trust, and performance in the microfinance industry. Bus Soc 51:659–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balkenhol B (ed) (2007) Microfinance and public policy: outreach, performance and efficiency. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  6. Buchanan JM (1972) Theory of public choice. University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  7. Chin WW, Todd PA (1995) On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS research: a note of caution. MIS Q 19:237–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chopra R (2017) Financial inclusion or financial destruction: a case study of microfinance institutions. Glob J Enterp Inf Syst 9(1):85–89Google Scholar
  9. Christen RP, Rosenberg R, Jayadeva V (2004) Financial institutions with a “double bottom line”: implications for the future of microfinance. In: Consultative group to assist the poorest (CGAP)Google Scholar
  10. Estapé-Dubreuil G, Torreguitart-Mirada C (2015) Governance mechanisms, social performance disclosure and performance in microfinance: does legal status matter? Ann Public Co-op Econ 86(1):137–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans PB, Rueschemeyer D, Skocpol T (1985) Bringing the state back in. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman Press, PrudhoeGoogle Scholar
  13. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR (2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Adv Int Mark 20(1):277–319Google Scholar
  14. Herbst J (1989) The creation and maintenance of national boundaries in Africa. Int Organ 43(04):673–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Joskow PL, Noll RG (1981) Regulation in theory and practice: an overview. In: Fromm G (ed) Studies in public regulation. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–78Google Scholar
  16. Ledgerwood J (1999) Sustainable banking with the poor: microfinance handbook: institutional and financial perspectives. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22:853–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Olsen TD (2017) Political stakeholder theory: the state, legitimacy, and the ethics of microfinance in emerging economies. Bus Ethics Q 27(1):71–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Phillips RA, Berman SL, Elms H, Johnson-Cramer ME (2011) Stakeholder orientation, managerial discretion and nexus rents. In: Phillips RA (ed) Stakeholder theory: impacts and prospects. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 163–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ramesh SA (2014) An idea which went wrong: commercial microfinance in India, CreateSpace Independent Publishing PlatformGoogle Scholar
  22. Rice RE, Aydin C (1991) Attitudes toward new organizational technology: network proximity as a mechanism for social information processing. Adm Sci Q 36:219–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stevenson WB, Radin RF (2009) Social capital and social influence on the board of directors. J Manag Stud 46(1):16–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thorat YSP, Arunachalam RS (2005) Regulation and areas of potential market failure in micro-finance. In: High level policy conference on microfinance in India, organized by NABARD on, pp 3–5Google Scholar
  25. Viscusi WK, Vernon JM, Harrington JE Jr (1992) Economics of regulation and antitrust, 2nd edn. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Institute of Management Calcutta 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. P. Saraswathy Amma
    • 1
  • Gopalakrishnan Kannan
    • 2
  • Lakshmi Parthasarathy
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.FISAT Business SchoolAngamaly, ErnakulamIndia
  2. 2.Research and Development CentreBharathiar UniversityCoimbatoreIndia
  3. 3.Department of Management StudiesIndian Institute of Technology MadrasChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations