IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v9y2021i6p587-d514047.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Hybrid MCDM Model for Evaluating Open Banking Business Partners

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Kuan Daiy

    (Department of Business Administration, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 106335, Taiwan)

  • Kao-Yi Shen

    (Department of Banking & Finance, Chinese Culture University, Taipei 11114, Taiwan)

  • Jim-Yuh Huang

    (IEMBA Program, Graduate School of Business, National Taipei University, New Taipei City 23741, Taiwan)

  • Tom Meng-Yen Lin

    (Department of Business Administration, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 106335, Taiwan)

Abstract

Open banking (OB) is an emerging business field in the financial sector, which relies on intensive collaboration between banks and non-banking service providers. However, how to evaluate OB business partners from multiple perspectives for banks is underexplored. Therefore, this study proposed a hybrid decision model with supports from seasoned domain experts. This study also adopts a domestic bank from Taiwan and four non-banking service providers to illustrate the hybrid approach with the confidence-weighted fuzzy assessment technique. The proposed model might be the first attempt to explore the OB adoption strategy by the novel approach. However, its limitations are the presumed independent relationship among the factors of this hybrid model. Additionally, the results hinge upon domain experts’ knowledge. In practice, the research findings identify the relative importance of banks’ crucial factors to select OB strategic partners, which provide managerial insights and valuable guidance for the banking sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Kuan Daiy & Kao-Yi Shen & Jim-Yuh Huang & Tom Meng-Yen Lin, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Model for Evaluating Open Banking Business Partners," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:6:p:587-:d:514047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/6/587/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/6/587/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert Simon, 2000. "Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 1(1), pages 25-39, March.
    2. Yang, Minhua & He, Yu, 2019. "How does the stock market react to financial innovation regulations?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 259-265.
    3. Gupta, Himanshu & Barua, Mukesh Kumar, 2016. "Identifying enablers of technological innovation for Indian MSMEs using best–worst multi criteria decision making method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 69-79.
    4. Buffart, Mickaël & Croidieu, Grégoire & Kim, Phillip H. & Bowman, Ray, 2020. "Even winners need to learn: How government entrepreneurship programs can support innovative ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    5. Richard Dratva, 2020. "Is open banking driving the financial industry towards a true electronic market?," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(1), pages 65-67, March.
    6. Polasik, Michał & Huterska, Agnieszka & Iftikhar, Rehan & Mikula, Štěpán, 2020. "The impact of Payment Services Directive 2 on the PayTech sector development in Europe," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 385-401.
    7. Fratzscher, Marcel & König, Philipp Johann & Lambert, Claudia, 2016. "Credit provision and banking stability after the Great Financial Crisis: The role of bank regulation and the quality of governance," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 113-135.
    8. Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Fredrich, Viktor & Kraus, Sascha & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Innovation alliances: Balancing value creation dynamics, competitive intensity and market overlap," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 240-247.
    9. He, Dongwei & Ho, Chun-Yu & Xu, Li, 2020. "Risk and return of online channel adoption in the banking industry," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    10. Johanna Camargo Pérez & Martha Carrillo & Jairo Montoya-Torres, 2015. "Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 69-87, March.
    11. Jim-Yuh Huang & Kao-Yi Shen & Joseph C.P. Shieh & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2019. "Strengthen Financial Holding Companies’ Business Sustainability by Using a Hybrid Corporate Governance Evaluation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-27, January.
    12. Sengupta, Abhijit & Sena, Vania, 2020. "Impact of open innovation on industries and firms – A dynamic complex systems view," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    13. Sharma, Dheeraj & Pandey, S.K. & Chandwani, Rajesh & Pandey, Peeyush & Joseph, Rojers, 2018. "Internet Channel Cannibalization and its influence on salesperson performance outcomes in an emerging economy context," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 179-189.
    14. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    15. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    16. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    17. Mickaël Buffart & Grégoire Croidieu & Phillip H. Kim & Ray Bowman, 2020. "Even winners need to learn : How government entrepreneurship programs can support innovative ventures," Post-Print hal-02927561, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yu-Cheng Kao & Kao-Yi Shen & San-Ting Lee & Joseph C. P. Shieh, 2022. "Selecting the Fintech Strategy for Supply Chain Finance: A Hybrid Decision Approach for Banks," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(14), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Ulaş Ünlü & Neşe Yalçın & Nuri Avşarlıgil, 2022. "Analysis of Efficiency and Productivity of Commercial Banks in Turkey Pre- and during COVID-19 with an Integrated MCDM Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(13), pages 1-22, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nien-Ping Chen & Kao-Yi Shen & Chiung-Ju Liang, 2021. "Hybrid Decision Model for Evaluating Blockchain Business Strategy: A Bank’s Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.
    2. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    3. Huseyin Kocak & Atalay Caglar & Gulin Zeynep Oztas, 2018. "Euclidean Best–Worst Method and Its Application," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(05), pages 1587-1605, September.
    4. Shih-Chia Chang & Ming-Tsang Lu & Mei-Jen Chen & Li-Hua Huang, 2021. "Evaluating the Application of CSR in the High-Tech Industry during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(15), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    6. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    7. Javid Nafari & Alireza Arab & Sina Ghaffari, 2017. "Through the Looking Glass: Analysis of Factors Influencing Iranian Student’s Study Abroad Motivations and Destination Choice," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, June.
    8. Omidipoor, Morteza & Jelokhani-Niaraki, Mohammadreza & Moeinmehr, Athena & Sadeghi-Niaraki, Abolghasem & Choi, Soo-Mi, 2019. "A GIS-based decision support system for facilitating participatory urban renewal process," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    10. Göçmen Polat, Elifcan & Yücesan, Melih & Gül, Muhammet, 2023. "A comparative framework for criticality assessment of strategic raw materials in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    11. Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Gupta, Himanshu & Kunc, Martin, 2021. "Risks associated with the implementation of big data analytics in sustainable supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    12. van de Kaa, G. & Fens, T. & Rezaei, J. & Kaynak, D. & Hatun, Z. & Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A., 2019. "Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 320-327.
    13. Vineet Kaushik & Shobha Tewari, 2023. "Modeling Opportunity Indicators Fostering Social Entrepreneurship: A Hybrid Delphi and Best-Worst Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 667-698, August.
    14. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    15. Mališa Žižović & Dragan Pamučar & Goran Ćirović & Miodrag M. Žižović & Boža D. Miljković, 2020. "A Model for Determining Weight Coefficients by Forming a Non-Decreasing Series at Criteria Significance Levels (NDSL)," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Mohammadi, Majid & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Bayesian best-worst method: A probabilistic group decision making model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    17. Ren, Jingzheng & Liang, Hanwei & Chan, Felix T.S., 2017. "Urban sewage sludge, sustainability, and transition for Eco-City: Multi-criteria sustainability assessment of technologies based on best-worst method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 29-39.
    18. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Hizam, Hashim & Mirjalili, Seyedali & Othman, Mohammad Lutfi & Ya'acob, Mohammad Effendy & Ahmadipour, Masoud, 2023. "Innovative hybridization of the two-archive and PROMETHEE-II triple-objective and multi-criterion decision making for optimum configuration of the hybrid renewable energy system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    19. Sisto, Roberta & Fernández-Portillo, Luis A. & Yazdani, Morteza & Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Torkayesh, Ali Ebadi, 2022. "Strategic planning of rural areas: Integrating participatory backcasting and multiple criteria decision analysis tools," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PA).
    20. Gupta, Himanshu, 2018. "Evaluating service quality of airline industry using hybrid best worst method and VIKOR," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 35-47.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:6:p:587-:d:514047. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.