IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Benchmarking firm performance from a multiple-stakeholder perspective with an application to Chinese banking

  • Avkiran, Necmi K.
  • Morita, Hiroshi
Registered author(s):

    We know very little about how a firm would compare against its peers when evaluated from a multiple-stakeholder perspective where the same variables are interpreted differently. Since most medium-to-large organizations acknowledge the multi-dimensional nature of their operations, finding out the performance evaluations of various stakeholders can inform managerial decision-making. Thus, the main motivation for this study is to capture the interactions among different perceptions on a common set of performance measures. Using data envelopment analysis (DEA), we work with an approach that allows a flexible designation of inputs and outputs based on varying perspectives of five key stakeholders in banking. The versatile approach demonstrates that different views from the stakeholder universe can be summarily captured in DEA scores. A numerical example on Chinese commercial banks identifies the compliant (efficient) banks versus rigid (inefficient) banks, as well as the amenable stakeholders (those evaluating banks as efficient) versus the recalcitrant stakeholders (those evaluating banks as inefficient). The aligned views held by management and shareholders as evidenced by significant correlation among performance rankings imply reduced agency costs. Similarly, shared perceptions between customers and employees may encourage management to examine how this important business interface can be improved.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VC4-4Y34R1R-1/2/f54c32074bcf711988a9cd53d5234b15
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Omega.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 6 (December)
    Pages: 501-508

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:38:y:2010:i:6:p:501-508
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description

    Order Information: Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
    Web: https://shop.elsevier.com/order?id=375&ref=375_01_ooc_1&version=01

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Angel Prieto & José ZofIo, 2001. "Evaluating Effectiveness in Public Provision of Infrastructure and Equipment: The Case of Spanish Municipalities," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 41-58, January.
    2. Banker, Rajiv D. & Cooper, William W. & Seiford, Lawrence M. & Thrall, Robert M. & Zhu, Joe, 2004. "Returns to scale in different DEA models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 345-362, April.
    3. Garcia-Cestona, Miguel & Surroca, Jordi, 2008. "Multiple goals and ownership structure: Effects on the performance of Spanish savings banks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(2), pages 582-599, June.
    4. Chen, Yao, 2004. "Ranking efficient units in DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 213-219, June.
    5. Dyson, R. G. & Allen, R. & Camanho, A. S. & Podinovski, V. V. & Sarrico, C. S. & Shale, E. A., 2001. "Pitfalls and protocols in DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 245-259, July.
    6. Gordon E. Greenley, 1997. "Multiple Stakeholder Orientation in UK Companies and the Implications for Company Performance," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 259-284, 03.
    7. Joshua Kirkwood & Daehoon Nahm, 2005. "Australian Banking Efficiency and its Relation to Stock Returns," Research Papers 0508, Macquarie University, Department of Economics.
    8. Banker, Rajiv D. & Chang, Hsihui, 2006. "The super-efficiency procedure for outlier identification, not for ranking efficient units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(2), pages 1311-1320, December.
    9. Elena Beccalli & Barbara Casu & Claudia Girardone, 2006. "Efficiency and Stock Performance in European Banking," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1-2), pages 245-262.
    10. A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper & E. Rhodes, 1981. "Evaluating Program and Managerial Efficiency: An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis to Program Follow Through," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 668-697, June.
    11. Per Andersen & Niels Christian Petersen, 1993. "A Procedure for Ranking Efficient Units in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1261-1264, October.
    12. Aida, Kazuo & Cooper, William W. & Pastor, Jésus T. & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 1998. "Evaluating Water Supply Services in Japan with RAM: a Range-adjusted Measure of Inefficiency," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 207-232, April.
    13. Chu, Sing Fat & Lim, Guan Hua, 1998. "Share performance and profit efficiency of banks in an oligopolistic market: evidence from Singapore," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(2-3), pages 155-168, September.
    14. Avkiran, Necmi K., 2009. "Opening the black box of efficiency analysis: An illustration with UAE banks," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 930-941, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:38:y:2010:i:6:p:501-508. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.