Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:534301 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
IMDS
107,6 Benchmarking top Arab banks
efficiency through efficient
frontier analysis
802
Mohamed Mostafa
Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait
Abstract
Purpose The major aim of this research is to measure the relative efficiency of the top 100 Arab
banks. The sensitivity of the results is also investigated.
Design/methodology/approach Data envelopment analysis DEA method was used to evaluate
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
the relative efficiency of Arab banks. Cross-sectional data for the year 2005 were used to conduct the
analysis.
Findings The results indicate that the performance of several banks is sub-optimal, suggesting the
potential for significant improvements. Separate benchmarks were derived for possible reductions in
resources used, and significant savings are possible on this account.
Originality/value From a policy perspective, this study highlights the importance of encouraging
increased efficiency throughout the banking industry in the Arab world.
Keywords Data analysis, Benchmarking, Banks, Resource efficiency
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Sustained high oil prices over the past two years have continued to drive growth in
banks based in the Arab worlds main oil producing states. A certain degree of banking
sector liberalization in some states, plus some economic diversification, have also
boosted the success of the financial industry in this part of the world. Saudi Arabian
banks dominated the upper reaches of the table of the top 100 Arab banks with four out
of the top five financial banks and eight out of the top 20. A further six of the top 20 are
registered in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), while other Gulf banks make up the
remainder. Despite the overall strength and success of their economies, North African
banks are minor players in the region overall. Attijariwafabank is the top-ranked
North African Bank, followed by National Bank of Egypt one position lower at 25th.
Indeed, the absence of an Egyptian bank in the higher echelons of the table (see
Appendix) may indicate the level of competition in that country, as a total of 12
Egyptian banks are among the regions top 100 The Egyptian government has made
significant progress in recent years in transferring control and ownership of the
countrys banking services to the private sector and it is hoped that several of the
countrys banks will be able to grow over the next few years on the back of their
greater freedom (Ford, 2006).
Industrial Management & Data Despite the unprecedented growth in the banking industry in the Arab world,
Systems research on performance and efficiency of the Arab banking industry is virtually
Vol. 107 No. 6, 2007
pp. 802-823 nonexistent. Measuring efficiency levels at the Arab banks is an important issue for
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-5577
managers and investors alike. Consumers also benefit from efficient resource usage
DOI 10.1108/02635570710758734 and allocation because this may mean lower prices and more professional service
(Anderson et al., 1998; Prajogo, 2007). Although widely employed to evaluate bank Benchmarking
efficiency in the West (Rickards, 2003), Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is less well top Arab banks
known within the banking sector in developing countries, and the Arab countries are
no exception. In this research we fill this research gap through some initial analysis on efficiency
top commercial banks in the Arab world, an area where there has been virtually no
previous research. The paper also contributes methodologically through the use of
various non-parametric DEA methods that provide considerable information for 803
business analysis. More specifically, the purpose of this research is twofold to:
(1) assess the efficiency of the top Arab banks using 2005 operating data; and
(2) develop separate benchmarks for possible reductions in resources and possible
increase in outputs used by top Arab banks.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The next section reviews relevant
literature. The following section summarizes the methodology used to conduct the
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
analysis. The subsequent section presents empirical results of the efficiency levels of
Arab banks. After a brief preliminary data analysis, this section first sets out efficiency
scores derived from estimating the basic DEA models; it also presents sensitivity
analysis of DEA-derived efficiency scores as a rough validity check on the results.
Next, the paper sets out some managerial and policy implications of the analysis.
The final section deals with research limitations and explores avenues for future
research.
Literature review
During the late 1980s and particularly in the 1990s, the DEA method has been used
extensively to evaluate banking institutions. In their review, Berger and Humphrey
(1997) count 130 studies on the efficiency of the banking industry in 21 countries; 116 of
them were published between 1992 and 1997.
Miller and Noulas (1996) examined the efficiency of large US banks. They found
overall technical efficiency (TE) of around 97 per cent. However, the majority of banks
were found to be too large and experiencing decreasing returns to scale. A second stage
regression analysis showed that pure TE is positively related to bank size and bank
profitability.
Bhattacharya et al. (1997) used a two-stage DEA approach to examine the impact of
liberalization on the efficiency of the Indian banking industry. In the first stage a TE
score was calculated, whereas in the second stage a stochastic frontier analysis was
used to attribute variation in efficiency scores to three sources: temporal, ownership
and noise component.
Alirezaee et al. (1998) utilised data from 1,282 bank branches in Canada to conduct
numerical experiments relating to DEA results to sample size. They found that the
average branch efficiency score varied inversely with the number of branches in the
sample and directly with the total number of inputs and outputs. They also cautioned
that using relatively small sample sizes in a model with as few as three inputs and
three outputs could lead to a substantial upward bias in efficiency scores.
Seiford and Zhu (1999) examined the performance of the top 55 US banks using a
two-stage DEA approach. Results indicated that relatively large banks exhibit better
performance on profitability, whereas smaller banks tend to perform better with
respect to marketability.
IMDS Cook and Hababou (2001) studied both the sales and service efficiencies of bank
107,6 branches. They extended the standard additive DEA modelling approach using goal
programming to derive optimal efficiency scores while accounting for shared branch
resource inputs.
Drake and Howcroft (2002) assessed the relative efficiency of UK clearing bank
branches using DEA method. This paper utilised the basic efficiency indices and
804 extended the analysis by examining the relationship between size and efficiency.
Yildirim (2002) evaluated the efficiency of Turkish commercial banks between 1988
and 1999 using DEA method. Results suggest that over the sample period both pure
technical and scale efficiency measures showed a great variation and the sector did not
achieve sustained efficiency gains.
Using a bootstrapping DEA technique, Casu and Molyneux (2003) investigated
efficiency across European banking systems. Results suggest that there has been a
slight improvement in bank efficiency levels since the implementation of the EUs
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
No. of
Study Country banks Inputs Outputs
Sherman and Gold (1985) USA 14 Employees, expenses, space Number of transactions
Parkan (1997) Canada 35 Employees, expenses, space, rent, terminals Number of transactions, customer response,
error corrections
Oral and Yolalan (1990) Turkey 20 Employees, terminals, number of accounts, Number of transactions
credit applications
Vassiloglou and Giokas (1990) Greece 20 Employees, suppliers, space, Computer Number of transactions
terminals
Giokas (1991) Greece 17 Employees, expenses, rent Number of transactions
Al-Faraj et al. (1993) Saudi 15 Employees, location, expenses, acquired Net profit, balance of current accounts,
Arabia equipment savings account, loans, number of accounts
Fukuyama (1993) Japan 143 Employees, capital, funds from customers Loan revenue, other revenues
Sherman and Ladino (1995) USA 33 Employees, expenses, rent Number of transactions
Favero and Papi (1995) Italy 174 Employees, capital, loanable funds, deposits Loans, investment in securities, non-interest
income
Athanassopoulos and Curram UK 250 ATMs, employees, counter transactions, Loans sales, liability sales, investments and
(1996) potential market insurance policies sold
Athanassopoulos (1997) Greece 68 Employees, ATMs, terminals, interest costs, Non-interest income
non-interest costs, location
Resti (1997) Italy 270 Employees, capital Loans, deposits, non-interest income
Bhattacharya et al. (1997) India 74 Interest expense, operating expense Advances, deposits, investments
Schaffnit et al. (1997) Canada 291 Employees Transactions, maintenance
Ayadi et al. (1998) Nigeria 10 Interest on deposits, expenses on personnel, Total loans, interest income, non-interest
total deposits income
Al-Shammari and Salimi (1998) Jordan 16 Selected financial ratios Selected financial ratios
Chen and Yeh (1998) Taiwan 34 Employees, assets, number of branches, Loans, investments interest income,
operating costs, interest expenses non-interest income
Seiford and Zhu (1999) USA 55 Employees, assets, capital stock Revenue, profits
Golany and Storbeck (1999) USA 182 Employees, space, marketing Loans, deposits, accounts per customer,
satisfaction
(continued)
research in banks
top Arab banks
Benchmarking
efficiency
805
A survey of DEA
Table I.
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
806
107,6
IMDS
Table I.
No. of
Study Country banks Inputs Outputs
Drake and Howcroft (1999) UK 250 Number of loan accounts, number of Personal loans, new cheque accounts,
mortgage accounts, number of cheque mortgage loans, insurance commission,
accounts change in marketed balances
Zenios et al. (1999) Cyprus 144 Employees, terminals, space, current Number of transactions
accounts, savings accounts, credit
applications
Mukherjee et al. (2002) India 68 Networth, borrowings, operating expenses, Deposits, net profit, advances, non-interest
employees, number of branches income, interest income
Ho and Zhu (2004) Taiwan 41 Capital stocks, assets, number of branches, Sales, deposits
employees
Sakar (2006) Turkey 11 Branch numbers, employees per branch, ROA, ROE, interest income/assets, interest
assets, loans, deposits income/operating income, non-interest
income/assets
Wu et al. (2006) Canada 142 Employees, expenses Deposits, revenues, loans
Howland and Rowse (2006) Canada 162 Non-sales FTE, sales FTE, size, city Loans, deposits, average number of
employment rate products/customer, customer loyalty
into Arab management practices in general. In this investigation we aim to fill this Benchmarking
research gap by empirically evaluating banks efficiency in the Arab world.
top Arab banks
Methodology efficiency
Data envelopment analysis
Efficiency is one of the most important performance measures of a business (Rao and
Miller, 2004; Phusavat and Photaraon, 2006). Gandjour et al. (2002) concluded that 807
many quality and efficiency indicators used by executives are lacking in general
validity. Using a recognized and valid measure of efficiency is critical for managers
seeking to increase the effectiveness of their organizations.
Introduced in 1978 by Charnes et al. (1978), DEA assigns an efficiency score to each
unit by comparing the efficiency score of ach unit with that of its peers. It identifies a
frontier comprising best performers. Those units that lie on the frontier are recognized
as efficient, and those that do not, as inefficient. DEA involves the solution of a linear
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
kx U kx
x
1
subject to : E ks # 1 ; firms s
uks ; vky $ 0
where Eks is the efficiency score of firm s, using the weights of test firm k; Osy is the
value of output y for firm s; Isx is the value for input x of firm s; vky is the weight
assigned to firm k for output y; and ukx is the weight assigned to firm k for input x.
This non-linear programming is the equivalent to the LP problem represented by
model (2).
P
maximize E kk Oky V ky
y
subject to : E ks # 1 ; firms s
P 2
I kx U kx 1
x
uks ; vky $ 0
ls $ 0 ; firms s
The CCR model has an assumption of constant returns to scale (CRS) for the inputs
and outputs. To take into consideration variable returns to scale (VRS), a model
introduced by Banker et al. (1984) (BCC) is utilized. The BCC model aids in determining
the scale efficiency of a set of units (which is a technically efficient unit for the VRS
model). This model has an additional convexity constraint defined by limiting the
summation of the multiplier weights (l) equal to 1, or:
X
ls 1 4
s
The BCC model evaluates whether increasing, constant, or decreasing returns to scale
would boost the efficiency observed. In the case of CRS, the output changes
proportionally to input, as it also does in the CCR model. But with VRS, a change in the
input leads to a disproportional change in the output. The use of the CCR and BCC
models together helps determine the overall technical and scale efficiencies of the firm
and whether the data exhibits varying returns to scale (Sarkis, 2000).
Data
To estimate the production frontier, we used cross-sectional data for the year 2005,
obtained from one of the leading business magazines in the Arab world (Middle East,
2006). This magazine publishes annually a list of the top 100 Arab banks. To be
included in the data set used in this study, banks had to meet two conditions: first, that
financial information is available; and, second, that they do not have negative financial
data. DEA requires that data set to be non-negative for the outputs and strictly positive
for the inputs (Sarkis and Weinrach, 2001). Unfortunately, there is no DEA model to
date that can be used with negative data directly without any need to transform them
(Portela et al., 2004). About 15 banks did not meet these two conditions and were
excluded from analysis.
availability of the data imposed strong restrictions on the type of variables one is able to
use. However, we think that the variables selected are sufficient to illustrate the
approach used to measure efficiency in the Arab banks.
It is well known that DEA is sensitive to variable selection. As the number of
variables increases, the ability to discriminate between the DMUs decreases. The more
variables are added the greater becomes the chance that some inefficient unit
dominates in the added dimension and becomes efficient (Smith, 1997). Thus, to
preserve the discriminatory power of DEA the number of inputs and outputs should be
kept at a reasonable level. There are no diagnostic checks for model misspecification in
DEA that could result due to wrong choices in variable selection (Galagedera and
Silvapulle, 2003). However, Raab and Lichty (2002) suggest a general rule of thumb
the minimum number of DMUs is greater than three times the number of inputs plus
outputs. In our study, with a total of two inputs and three outputs, a good minimum set
is 15 data points; we have 85 data points.
Results
Preliminary data analysis
The simple DEA model is based on CRS, implying that the size of a bank is not relevant
when assessing efficiency. However, it is likely that the size of the bank will influence its
ability to produce services more efficiently. As the CRS totally ignores the scale of
operations and will possibly lead to an identification of very unrealistic benchmarks
(Munksgaard et al., 2005), a VRS model is used in this study. A VRS frontier allows best
practice level of outputs to inputs to vary with size of bank. A DEA model can be
analysed in two ways, an input orientation or an output orientation. An input orientation
provides information as how much proportional reduction of inputs is necessary while
maintaining the current levels of outputs for an inefficient bank to become
DEA-efficient. On the other hand, an output orientation analysis provides information
on how much augmentation to the levels of outputs of an inefficient bank is necessary
while maintaining current input levels for it to become DEA-efficient. Since, it is well
known that, in competitive markets, the DMUs are output-oriented (Barros and
Athanassiou, 2004), we use the output maximisation assumption in this study.
To ensure the validity of the DEA model specification, an isotonicity test (Avkiran,
1999) was conducted. An isotonicity test involves the calculation of all inter-correlations
IMDS between inputs and outputs for identifying whether increasing amounts of inputs lead to
107,6 greater outputs. As positive inter-correlations were found, the isotonicity test was
passed and the inclusion of the inputs and outputs was justified.
Efficiency scores
While standard optimisation software packages can be used for estimating efficiency
810 scores, here we used a commercial package called Frontier Analyst Professional
Version 3.0 (Banxia Holdings Ltd, 2001). In this software LP models outlined above are
solved 85-times once for each of the banks in the data set. For each bank, the
software searches for a linear combination of banks in the sample that produces a
greater level of output with fewer inputs. The model is searching for a comparison that
identifies output slacks or excess input usage of the bank under analysis. In solving the
LP problem three characteristics of the model must be specified by the user: the returns
to scale, the valuation system, and the orientation system. Returns to scale may be
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
either CCR or VRS. The evaluation system refers to weights placed on the inputs and
outputs in the objective function, subject to the inequality constraints. The orientation
system, which defines the objective function, can be designated as input-orientation or
output-orientation. In this study, we use the VRS output-orientation model with the
default weights suggested by the software.
The VRS scores measure pure TE only. However, for comparative purposes, we also
present the CRS scores, which are composed of a non-additive combination of pure TE
and scale efficiencies. A ratio of the overall efficiency scores to pure TE scores provides
a scale efficiency measurement. The relative efficiency scores of the banks analysed are
presented in Table II. The results indicate that scores range from 0 to 100 per cent for
the banks in the sample, with an average of 31 per cent when using the CCR model
(CRS) with a standard deviation of 21.6, and from 0 to 100 per cent, with an average of
43 per cent and a standard deviation of 27.2 for the banks in the sample when using
the BCC model (VRS). This means that, if the average bank in the sample was to
achieve the level of its most efficient counterpart then the average bank could realize
a 57 per cent cost saving (i.e., 1 2 [43/100]). A Spearmans rank order correlation
coefficient between the efficiency rankings derived from CCR and BCC analyses is 0.98.
The positive and strong correlation indicates that the rank of each bank derived from
applying the two approaches is similar. This implies that the choice of methodology
has no apparent impact on the estimated average efficiency scores.
These results are not surprising as it has been shown that DEA scores computed
with the CRS assumption are less than or equal to the corresponding VRS efficiency
scores (Banker et al., 1984). However, Because of difference in bank-specific operating
environments, it may be difficult to interpret overall banks efficiency by comparison
with other countries. For example, in a study of the large banks in the USA, Miller and
Noulas (1996) found 0.97 mean TE scores, which may mean that banks in the Arab
world are less competitive and/or less efficient than the US banking industry. Studies
comparing the German and Austrian banking systems efficiency found a relative
efficiency scores in the order of 75-90 per cent (Hauner, 2005). Our results corroborate
other empirical results which generally found that efficiency scores for developing
countries are lower than those of developed countries. For example, in Turkey cost
efficiency was 68.5 per cent in 1996 (Isik and Hassan, 2002). Hardy and Bonaccorsi d
Patti (2001) report efficiency in the range of 48.5 to 72.8 per cent in Pakistan.
Benchmarking
Bank Score BCC Score CCR RTS Scale efficient Peer
top Arab banks
1 Banque de Caire, Egypt 100 100 0 1 efficiency
2 National Bank of UAQ, UAE 100 100 0 1
3 United Arab Bank, UAE 100 100 0 1
4 Egyptian American Bank, Egypt 100 100 0 1
5 Suez Canal Bank, Egypt 78.3 100 0 0.78 811
6 Commercil Bank of Syria, Syria 76.5 100 0 0.77
7 Intl Banking Corp, Bahrain 67.4 100 0 0.67
8 Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi Arabia 61.6 100 0 0.62
9 Libya Arab Foreign Bank, Libya 53.1 93.4 1 0.57 7,4
10 National Comm Bank, Saudi Arabia 50 88.9 1 0.56 8
11 Bank of Sharjah, UAE 47.7 86.4 21 0.55 7,2
12 National Bank of Abu Dhabi, UAE 46.8 76.3 1 0.61 8,7
13 Samba, Saudi Arabia 45.5 73.8 1 0.62 8,7
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
Bergendahl (1998) states that DEA technique is an adequate tool for benchmarking,
since it allows the identification of a group of efficient firms for each non-efficient
one. This identified group may be used in the definition of operational goals for
their non-efficient counterpart, considering its various input and output variables.
Table II provides the linear combination of banks on the efficiency frontier closest to a
particular bank. The linear combination is also referred to in the literature as the peer
group or the reference set for this bank and indicates to which of the efficient banks an
inefficient bank is closest in its combination of inputs and outputs. A bank, which
appears frequently in the reference set is likely to be a bank which is efficient with
respect to a large number of factors, and is probably a good example of an exemplary
operating performer. Efficient banks that appear seldom in the reference set of other
banks are likely to possess a very uncommon input/output mix and are thus not
suitable examples for other inefficient banks. Figure 1 shows the reference frequencies Benchmarking
of the efficient banks. top Arab banks
It can be seen from Figure 1 that out of the 85 banks in the data set only eight are
efficient. Of these, the one that appears more frequently as peer (i.e. benchmark) is efficiency
International Banking Corporation, Bahrain (80 times) followed by Al-Rajhi Bank,
Saudi Arabia (36 times) followed by Egyptian American Bank, Egypt (35 times). In
other words, the peer count number can be considered a measure of the extent to which 813
the performance of an efficient bank can be a useful for the non-efficient ones.
their analysis. The difference in our analysis is that they dropped each unit once at a
time whereas we dropped only the efficient units that construct the frontier.
For example, for the VRS, we ran ten additional DEA analyses. We then tested the
similarity of efficiency rankings between the model with all the banks included and
those based on dropping out each efficient unit one at a time by the Spearman
rank correlation coefficient. Correlations ranged from 0.96 to 0.99. The high rank
correlation coefficients show that the rankings are stable in regard to outlier
banks determining the efficiency frontier. Similar results were obtained using the CRS
model.
Sensitivity analysis
At the individual bank level, DEA also provides rich diagnostic information through
sensitivity analysis. Table III includes the sensitivity analysis results for each bank in
the data set. This table shows the amount of slack in each of the controllable input and
banks
814
107,6
IMDS
Table III.
Percentage of
variable of inefficient
improvement for each
Bank Percentage of capital Percentage of assets Percentage of profits Percentage of ROE Percentage of ROA
Bank Percentage of capital Percentage of assets Percentage of profits Percentage of ROE Percentage of ROA
efficiency
Table III.
815
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
816
107,6
IMDS
Table III.
Bank Percentage of capital Percentage of assets Percentage of profits Percentage of ROE Percentage of ROA
Implications
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
References
Al-Faraj, T., Alidi, A. and Bu-Bshait, K. (1993), Evaluation of bank branches by means of data
envelopment analysis, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
Vol. 13, pp. 45-52.
Al-Shammari, M. and Salimi, A. (1998), Modeling the operating efficiency of banks:
a nonparametric methodology, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 11, pp. 5-12.
Alirezaee, M., Howland, M. and van de Panne, C. (1998), Sampling size and efficiency bias in
data envelopment analysis, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Decision Sciences, Vol. 2,
pp. 51-64.
Anderson, R., Fok, R., Zumpano, L. and Elder, H. (1998), The efficiency of franchising in the
residential real estate brokerage market, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 15,
pp. 386-96.
Athanassopoulos, A. (1997), Service quality and operating efficiency synergies for management
control in the provision of financial services: evidence from Greek bank branches,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 98, pp. 300-12.
Athanassopoulos, A. and Curram, S. (1996), A comparison of data envelopment analysis and
artificial neural networks as tools for assessing the efficiency of decision making units,
Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 47, pp. 1000-16.
Atiyya, H. (1992), Research in Arab countries, Organization Studies, Vol. 13, pp. 105-12. Benchmarking
Avkiran, N. (1999), An application reference for data envelopment analysis in branch banking: top Arab banks
helping the novice researcher, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 17, pp. 206-20.
Ayadi, F., Adebayo, A. and Omolehinwa, E. (1998), Bank performance measurement in a
efficiency
developing economy: an application of data envelopment analysis, Managerial Finance,
Vol. 24, pp. 5-16.
Banker, R., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W. (1984), Some models for estimating technical and scale 819
inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science, Vol. 30, pp. 1078-92.
Banxia Holdings Ltd (2001), Frontier Analyst Professional (Version 3.0), Banxia Frontier Analyst
User Guide, Banxia Holdings Ltd, Glasgow.
Barros, C. and Athanassiou, M. (2004), Efficiency in European seaports with DEA: evidence
from Greece and Portugal, Maritime Economics & Logistics, Vol. 6, pp. 122-40.
Bauer, P., Berger, A., Ferrier, G. and Humphrey, D. (1998), Consistency conditions for regulator
analysis of financial institutions: a comparison of frontier efficiency methods, Journal of
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
Hardy, D. and Bonaccorsi d Patti, E. (2001), Bank reform and bank efficiency in Pakistan,
IMF Working Paper No. 01/38.
Hauner, D. (2005), Explaining efficiency differences among large German and Austrian banks,
Applied Economics, Vol. 37, pp. 969-80.
Hibbard, J., Stockard, J. and Tusler, M. (2003), Does publicizing hospital performance stimulate
quality improvement efforts?, Health Affairs, Vol. 22, pp. 84-94.
Ho, C. and Zhu, D. (2004), Performance measurement of Taiwans commercial banks,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53, pp. 425-34.
Howland, M. and Rowse, J. (2006), Measuring bank branch efficiency using data envelopment
analysis: managerial and implementation issues, INFOR, Vol. 44, pp. 49-63.
Isik, I. and Hassan, M. (2002), Technical, scale and allocative efficiencies of Turkish banking
industry, Journal of Banking & Finance, Vol. 26, pp. 719-66.
Krishnasamy, G. (2003), Malaysian post merger banks productivity: application of Malmquist
productivity index, Managerial Finance, Vol. 30, pp. 63-74.
Lo, S. and Lu, W. (2006), Does size matter? Finding the profitability and marketability
benchmark of financial holding companies, Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 23, pp. 229-46.
Manandhar, R. and Tang, C. (2002), The evaluation of bank branch performance using data
envelopment analysis: a framework, Journal of High Technology Management Research,
Vol. 13, pp. 1-17.
Middle East (2006), Middle East top 100 Arab banks, Middle East, pp. 33-5.
Miller, S. and Noulas, A. (1996), The technical efficiency of large bank production, Journal of
Banking & Finance, Vol. 20, pp. 495-509.
Mukherjee, A., Nath, P. and Pal, M. (2002), Performance benchmarking and strategic
homogeneity of Indian banks, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 20,
pp. 122-39.
Munksgaard, J., Pade, L. and Fristrup, P. (2005), Efficiency gains in Danish district heating: is
there anything to learn from benchmarking?, Energy Policy, Vol. 33, pp. 1986-97.
Oral, M. and Yolalan, R. (1990), An empirical study on measuring operating efficiency and
profitability of bank branches, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 46,
pp. 282-94.
Parkan, C. (1997), Measuring the efficiency of service operations: an application to bank Benchmarking
branches, Engineering Costs and Production Economics, Vol. 12, pp. 237-42.
top Arab banks
Phusavat, K. and Photaraon, W. (2006), Productivity/performance measurement: case
application at the government pharmaceutical organization, Industrial Management & efficiency
Data Systems, Vol. 106, pp. 1272-87.
Portela, M., Thanassoulis, E. and Simpson, G. (2004), Negative data in DEA: a directional
distance approach applied to bank branches, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 821
Vol. 55, pp. 1111-21.
Prajogo, D. (2007), The relationship between competitive strategies and product quality,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 107, pp. 69-83.
Raab, R. and Lichty, R. (2002), Identifying sub-areas that comprise a greater metropolitan area:
the criterion of county relative efficiency, Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 42, pp. 579-94.
Ramanathan, R. (2005), Operations assessment of hospitals in the Sultanate of Oman,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25, pp. 39-54.
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
Rao, M. and Miller, D. (2004), Expert systems applications for productivity analysis, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 104, pp. 776-85.
Resti, A. (1997), Evaluating the cost-efficiency of the Italian banking system: what can be
learned from the joint application of parametric and nonparametric techniques, Journal of
Banking & Finance, Vol. 21, pp. 221-50.
Rickards, R. (2003), Setting benchmarks and evaluating balanced scorecards with data
envelopment analysis, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 226-45.
Sakar, B. (2006), A study on efficiency and productivity of Turkish banks in Istanbul Stock
Exchange using Malmquist DEA, Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 8,
pp. 145-55.
Sarkis, J. (2000), An analysis of the operational efficiency of major airports in the United States,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 18, pp. 335-51.
Sarkis, J. and Weinrach, J. (2001), Using data envelopment analysis to evaluate environmentally
conscious waste treatment technology, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 9, pp. 417-27.
Schaffnit, C., Rosen, D. and Paradi, J. (1997), Best practice analysis of bank branches:
an application of DEA in a large Canadian bank, European Journal of Operational
Research, Vol. 98, pp. 269-89.
Seiford, L. and Zhu, J. (1999), Profitability and marketability of the top 55 US commercial
banks, Management Science, Vol. 45, pp. 1270-88.
Sengupta, J. (1995), Dynamics of Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory of Systems Efficiency,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.
Seydel, J. (2006), Data envelopment analysis for decision support, Industrial Management &
Data Systems, Vol. 106, pp. 81-95.
Sherman, H. and Gold, F. (1985), Bank branch operating efficiency: evaluation with data
envelopment analysis, Journal of Banking & Finance, Vol. 9, pp. 297-315.
Sherman, H. and Ladino, G. (1995), Managing bank productivity using data envelopment
analysis (DEA), Interfaces, Vol. 9, pp. 297-315.
Sherman, H. and Rupert, T. (2006), Do bank mergers have hidden or foregone value? Realized
operating synergies in one bank merger, European Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 168, pp. 253-68.
Smith, P. (1997), Model misspecification in data envelopment analysis, Annals of Operations
Research, Vol. 73, pp. 233-52.
IMDS Staat, M. (2001), The effect of sample size on the mean efficiency in DEA: a comment, Journal of
Productivity Analysis, Vol. 15, pp. 129-37.
107,6
Vassiloglou, M. and Giokas, D. (1990), A study of the relative efficiency of bank branches:
an application of data envelopment analysis, Journal of the Operational Research Society,
Vol. 41, pp. 591-9.
Weill, L. (2004), Measuring cost efficiency in European banking: a comparison of frontier
822 techniques, Journal of Productivity Analysis, Vol. 21, pp. 133-52.
Wu, D., Yang, Z. and Liang, L. (2006), Using DEA-neural network approach to evaluate branch
efficiency of a large Canadian bank, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 31, pp. 108-15.
Yildirim, C. (2002), Evolution of banking efficiency within an unstable macroeconomic environment:
the case of Turkish commercial banks, Applied Economics, Vol. 34, pp. 2289-301.
Zenios, C., Zenios, S., Agathocleous, K. and Soteriou, A. (1999), Benchmarks of the efficiency of
bank branches, Interfaces, Vol. 2, pp. 37-51.
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
Further reading
Avkiran, N. (1997), Productivity Analysis in the Services Sector with Data Envelopment Analysis,
North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Barr, R., Killgo, K. and Zimmet, S. (2002), Evaluating the productive efficiency and performance
of US commercial banks, Managerial Finance, Vol. 28, pp. 3-25.
Sun, S. and Lu, W. (2005), Evaluating the performance of the Taiwanese hotel industry using a
weight slacks-based measure, Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 22,
pp. 487-512.
National Comm Bank, Saudi Arabia 5,777 38,929 1,338 23.1 3.44
Arab Bank Plc, Jordan 3,749 27,484 503.2 13.42 1.83
Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi Arabia 3,597 25,377 1,504 41.8 5.9
Samba, Saudi Arabia 3,446 28,920 1,073 31.1 3.71
Riyadh Bank, Saudi Arabia 2,908 21,383 758 26.06 3.54
Abu Dhabi Comm Bank, UAE 2,344 15,653 523 22.31 3.34
Emirates Bank Intl, UAE 2,110 16,172 471 22.32 2.91
National Bank of Kuwait, Kuwait 2,109 21,234 736 34.9 3.46
First Gulf Bank, UAE 2,085 7,157 287 13.76 4.01
Saudi British Bank, Saudi Arabia 2,001 17,604 669 33.43 3.8
National Bank of Abu Dhabi, UAE 1,915 22,780 717 37.44 3.15
Kuwait Finance House, Kuwait 1,842 16,031 406 22.04 2.53
Arab Banking Corp, Bahrain 1,842 17,588 155 8.41 0.9
Mashreqbank, UAE 1,718 12,455 550 32.1 4.41
Arab National Bank, Saudi Arabia 1,692 18,022 488 28.84 2.71
Gulf Intl Bank, Bahrain 1,613 22,857 207 12.83 0.9
Qatar National Bank, Qatar 1,478 13,753 422 28.55 3.07
Banque Saudi Fransi, Saudi Arabi 1,473 15,934 410 27.83 2.57
Union National Bank, UAE 1,425 9,512 314 22.03 3.3
Table AI.
(continued)
Bank Capital Assets Profits ROE ROA
Benchmarking
top Arab banks
Saudi Invest. Bank, Saudi Arabia 1,417 10,569 284 20.04 2.68
Naional Bank of Dubai, UAE 1,356 13,998 300 22.12 2.14 efficiency
Gulf Intl Corp. GSC, Kuwait 1,321 7,256 135 10.22 1.86
Commercial Bank of Qatar, Qatar 1,295 6,094 194 15 3.2
Attijariwafabank, Morocco 1,199 12,725 131 10.9 1.03
Banque Intl Arabe de Tun., Tuni 194 2,688 14 7.21 0.52 823
Saudi Hollandi Bank, Saudi Arabi 980 10,670 281 28.67 2.63
Gulf Bank, Kuwait 955 8,932 302 31.62 3.38
Dubai Islamic Bank, UAE 871 11,708 290 33.3 2.47
Audi Sardar Bank, Lebanon 869 11,478 127 14.61 11
Credit Populaire de Maroc, Moroc 862 12,555 215 24.94 1.71
Ahli United Bank, Bahrain 819 13,872 196 23.93 1.41
Blom Bank, Lebanon 817 1,1918 161 19.7 1.35
Al Ahli Bank of Kuwait, Kuwait 811 6,876 167 20.59 2.42
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
Corresponding author
Mohamed Mostafa can be contacted at: mostafa@usa.com
1. Anwar Al-Gasaymeh. 2016. Bank efficiency determinant: Evidence from the gulf cooperation council
countries. Research in International Business and Finance 38, 214-223. [CrossRef]
2. Mini Kundi Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, New Delhi,
India Seema Sharma Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, New
Delhi, India . 2016. Efficiency of glass firms in India: an application of data envelopment analysis. Journal
of Advances in Management Research 13:1, 59-74. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Mohammad Nourani, Evelyn Shyamala Devadason, Qian Long Kweh, Wen-Min Lu. 2016. Business
excellence: the managerial and value-creation efficiencies of the insurance companies. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence 1-18. [CrossRef]
4. Congcong Yang, Alfred Taudes, Guozhi Dong. 2015. Efficiency analysis of European Freight Villages:
three peers for benchmarking. Central European Journal of Operations Research . [CrossRef]
5. Jonchi Shyu, Pang-Tien Lieu, Wei Chang. 2015. How the environment determines banking efficiency:
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)
a comparison of banking firms in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Mainland China. International Transactions
in Operational Research 22:4, 757-770. [CrossRef]
6. Varun Mahajan Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee,
India D.K. Nauriyal Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology,
Roorkee, India S.P. Singh Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology,
Roorkee, India . 2014. Technical efficiency analysis of the Indian drug and pharmaceutical industry.
Benchmarking: An International Journal 21:5, 734-755. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Muhammet Enis Bulak Department of Industrial Engineering, Fatih University, Istanbul, Turkey Ali
Turkyilmaz Department of Industrial Engineering, Fatih University, Istanbul, Turkey . 2014. Performance
assessment of manufacturing SMEs: a frontier approach. Industrial Management & Data Systems 114:5,
797-816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. Yusuf Tansel . 2014. A TOPSIS based design of experiment approach to assess company ranking. Applied
Mathematics and Computation 227, 630-647. [CrossRef]
9. Ming-Hung Shu Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University
of Applied Sciences, Kaohsiung, Taiwan Jan-Yee Kung Department of Industrial Engineering and
Management, National Kaohsiung University of Applied Sciences, Kaohsiung, Taiwan Thanh-Lam
Nguyen Graduate Institute of Mechanical and Precision Engineering, National Kaohsiung University
of Applied Sciences, Kaohsiung, Taiwan Bi-Min Hsu Department of Industrial Engineering and
Management, Cheng Shiu University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan . 2013. Dynamically monitoring the service
efficiency with tracking signals. Industrial Management & Data Systems 113:9, 1334-1350. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
10. Ying-Chen Hsu, Cheng-Chi Chung, Hsuan-Shih Lee, H. David Sherman. 2013. Evaluating and
Managing Tramp Shipping Lines Performances: A New Methodology Combining Balanced Scorecard
and Network DEA. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research 51:3, 130-141. [CrossRef]
11. Vidyashankar GourishankarDepartment of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai, India Prakash Sai LokachariDepartment of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology
Madras, Chennai, India. 2012. Benchmarking educational development efficiencies of the Indian states:
a DEA approach. International Journal of Educational Management 26:1, 99-130. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
12. Sunil KumarFaculty of Economics, South Asian University, New Delhi, India. 2011. State road transport
undertakings in India: technical efficiency and its determinants. Benchmarking: An International Journal
18:5, 616-643. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. Darwish Abdulrahman Yousef. 2011. Operations research/management science in the Arab world:
historical development. International Transactions in Operational Research 18:1, 53-69. [CrossRef]
14. Jos Humberto Ablanedo-Rosas, Hongman Gao, Xiaochuan Zheng, Bahram Alidaee, Haibo Wang. 2010.
A study of the relative efficiency of Chinese ports: a financial ratio-based data envelopment analysis
approach. Expert Systems 27:5, 349-362. [CrossRef]
15. Ali Emrouznejad, Abdel Latef Anouze. 2009. A note on the modeling the efficiency of top Arab banks.
Expert Systems with Applications 36:3, 5741-5744. [CrossRef]
16. D.M. Mathuva. 2009. Capital Adequacy, Cost Income Ratio and the Performance of Commercial Banks:
The Kenyan Scenario. The International Journal of Applied Economics and Finance 3:2, 35-47. [CrossRef]
17. HsinHung ChenDepartment of Business Administration, Cheng Shiu University, FengShan, Taiwan.
2008. Stock selection using data envelopment analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems 108:9,
Downloaded by University of Ghana At 15:56 27 June 2016 (PT)