Recognizing nonmonotonicity of exogenous determinants in a stochastic profit efficiency framework: have banks overinvested in IT capital?

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore and evaluate potential nonmonotonicity in the determinants of profit efficiency, specifically IT and R&D investments in the Indian commercial banking sector.Design/methodology/approachThe study employs an alternative stochastic profit efficiency framework and introduces nonmonotonic effects by parameterizing the location and scale parameters of the inefficiency component on an unbalanced panel data set of 72 commercial banks in the 2008–2019 period. Marginal effects across quartiles are calculated using a bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap procedure of 500 simulations. The study disaggregates across ownership and size for gauging the impact of structure on the associations between determinants of profit efficiency.FindingsThe study partially rejects the productivity paradox as it discovers a negative association of IT and R&D with profit inefficiency. However, the observed nonmonotonicity of IT is of significance for bank managers, as the study concludes that overinvestment in IT is detrimental to a bank’s profit-maximizing interests. Further, bank size, loan default and credit risk depict a nonmonotonic relationship across the sample with large banks, high NPAs and high credit risk associated with reducing profit efficiency. In addition, higher margins and greater diversification are related positively to efficiency, and banks with cost-heavy structures or having high liquidity risk associated negatively with efficiency.Originality/valueTo the best knowledge of the authors, the study is perhaps the first to acknowledge and incorporate nonmonotonic associations of IT investments amidst other exogenous determinants under a stochastic profit efficiency framework.

Contemporaneous or causal? Evaluating the triumvirate of insolvency risk, capitalization and efficiency in Indian commercial banking

“…First, unlike stochastic frontier analysis (SFA), DEA does not require specification of a functional form. Second, SFA is known to overestimate efficiency scores by attributing a significant part of deviations to idiosyncratic shocks, causing clustering of efficiency observations near the best-practice frontier (Prakash et al , 2021).…”

A frontier-based parametric framework for exploring the competition–efficiency nexus in commercial banking: insights from an emerging economy

“…The findings establish an inverse link between bank diversification and profit inefficiency. The result is corroborated by Prakash et al (2022) but contradicts Moussawi and Mansour (2022). The profitable and non-risky nature of these activities compared to revenue from traditional activities might explain this link.…”

“…Hence, some of the lower profit efficiency may be attributable to variations in operations, such as foreign banks' cautious portfolios. Interestingly, Prakash et al (2022) conclude that a higher CRAR increases profit inefficiency for foreign banks in India. Furthermore, activities such as promoting low-cost retail loans to capture retail markets and providing free remittance services to high-end consumers may have harmed their profit efficiency.…”

“…Second, the APE metric is viable for sectors with considerable scale disparities (Isik and Hassan, 2002). Scale discrepancies define India's banking system, with small banks competing alongside large banks (Prakash et al, 2022). The SPE function generates a scale bias by considering small and large banks to have similar variable output when exposed to the same input prices, output prices and fixed netputs.…”

Bank competition, risk-taking and financial stability: insights from an emerging economy

“…These institutional differences lie in India’s weak legal institutions, inefficient bankruptcy process, inadequate accounting and governance practices, poor external monitoring and a significant state-ownership of banks, among others (Jha et al , 2015). Third, the banking sector, which holds a prominent position in India's financial system, has experienced a wide array of reforms over the past decade, following which the competitive conditions have undergone dramatic changes (Prakash et al , 2021b). While the deregulation and liberalization reforms [2] aimed at introducing competition in the Indian banking sector, the postliberalization period has witnessed various mergers and the softening of restrictions on the banks’ activities (Rakshit and Bardhan, 2019).…”