Efficiency analysis of Tose'e Ta'avon Bank branches of Iran in 5 years considering undesirable outputs-A DEA based approach

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D., Department of Mathematical Sciences, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran.

2 Assistant Prof., Department of Finance, Kharazmi University,Tehran, Iran.

3 CEO of Tose’e Ta’avon Bank; Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Management, Payam Noor university, Tehran, Iran.

10.61186/ijf.2024.456022.1468
Abstract
In order to survive and compete with other financial institutions, banks, and financial institutions are required always to evaluate the efficiency of their branches. In this paper, we evaluate and analyze the efficiency of bank branches in the five last years (from 2018 to 2022). To calculate and present the branch efficiency score, we have considered an undesirable component called Nonperforming Loans (NPL) as an undesirable output in evaluating the efficiency of Tose'e Ta'avon Bank branches. Due to the high inflation in Iran, the increase in the NPL of loans causes a decrease in the banks' deposits and profitability, and ultimately, it causes a considerable decrease in inefficiency. In addition, in extreme cases, it may even cause the bank to go bankrupt. Therefore, to calculate the efficiency of the Tose'e Ta'avon Bank branches using the data envelopment analysis method, we have considered operating costs and non-operating costs as two inputs, total deposits, total loans, and also two categories of revenue (Revenue from Jointly Funded Assets and Fee-based incomes as four desirable outputs and based on Islamic banking methods with Nonperforming loans as an undesirable output. In this paper, to deal with undesirable output issues, we use a direct approach that is more suitable to deal with NPLs since it is more convenient and evident to incorporate undesirable outputs directly into the DEA model. We used the dynamic cross-efficiency technique of DEA with undesirable outputs (DEA-UO) to obtain the efficiency of the branches over five years.

Keywords


Amin G. R. and Ibn Boamah M. A two-stage inverse data envelopment analysis approach for estimating potential merger gains in the USUS banking sector. Managerial and Decision Economics. 2021; 1454–1465.
Amirteimoori A., Kordrostami S., and Sarparast M. Modeling undesirable factors in data envelopment analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation. 2006; 180(2): 444-452.
Amirteimoori A., Sahoo BKBK, and Mehdizadeh S. Data envelopment analysis for scale elasticity measurement in the stochastic case: with an application to Indian banking. Financ Innov. 2023; 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-022-00447-1
An Q., Chen H., Wu J. and Liang L. Measuring slacks-based efficiency for commercial banks in China by using a two-stage DEA model with undesirable output. Annals of Operations Research. 2015; 235(1): 13-35.
Ariff M. and Luc C. Cost and profit efficiency of Chinese banks: A nonparametric analysis. China economic review. 2008; 19(2): 260-273.
Bisogno M. and Donatella P. Earnings management in public-sector organizations: A structured literature review. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management. 2021; 34: 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-03-2021-0035
Bozorgi Gerdvisheh F., Soufi M., Amirteimoori A. and Homayounfar M. fficiency Analysis of Banking Sector in Presence of Undesirable Factors Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Advances in Mathematical Finance and Applications. 2023; 8(2): 589-604. doi: 10.22034/amfa.2022.1950209.1684.
Charnes A., Cooper W. W. and Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European journal of operational research. 1978; 2(6): 429-444.
Chen F. Benchmarking the Bank Branch Efficiency through a New Dynamic Network DEA Model. Science Journal of Business and Management. 2024; 12(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20241201.11
Färe R. and Grosskopf S. Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation: Comment. European journal of operational research. 2004; 157(1): 242-245.
Färe R., Grosskopf S., Lovell C. K., and Pasurka C.  Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: a nonparametric approach. The review of economics and statistics. 1989; 90–98.
Fukuyama H. and Matousek R. Modelling bank performance: A network DEA approach. European journal of operational research. 2017; 259(2): 721-732.
Jahanshahloo G. R., Lotfi F. H., Shoja N., Tohidi G., and Razavyan S. Undesirable inputs and outputs in DEA models. Applied Mathematics and Computation. 2005; 169(2): 917-925.
Kamarudin F., Sufian F., Nassir A. M., Anwar N. A. M. and Hussain H. I. Bank efficiency in Malaysia a DEA approach. Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice. 2009;
Khoshroo A., Izadikhah M. and Emrouznejad, A. Improving energy efficiency considering reduction of CO2 emission of turnip production: A novel data envelopment analysis model with undesirable output approach. Journal of cleaner production. 2018; 187: 605–615.
Korhonen P. J. and Luptacik M. Eco-efficiency analysis of power plants: An extension of data envelopment analysis. European journal of operational research. 2004; 154(2): 437-446.
Leleu, H. Shadow pricing of undesirable outputs in nonparametric analysis. European journal of operational research. 2013; 231(2): 474-480.
Liu H. H., Huang J. J. and Chiu Y. H. Integration of network data envelopment analysis and decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory for the performance evaluation of the financial holding companies in Taiwan. Managerial and Decision Economics. 2020; 41(1): 64-78.
Liu Z., Lin F. and Fang L. P. A Study of Applying DEA to Measure Performance on Bank Implementing Financial Electronic Data Interchange. International Journal of Electronic Business Management. 2009; 7(4).
Mahlberg B. and Sahoo B. K. Radial and non-radial decompositions of Luenberger productivity indicator with an illustrative application. International journal of production economics. 2011; 131(2): 721-726.
Mandal S. K. Do undesirable output and environmental regulation matter in energy efficiency analysis? Evidence from Indian cement industry. Energy Policy. 2010; 38(10): 6076-6083.
Milenković N., Radovanov B., Kalaš B., and Horvat A.M. External Two Stage DEA Analysis of Bank Efficiency in West Balkan Countries. Sustainability. 2022; 14: 978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020978
Omrani H., Oveysi Z., Emrouznejad A. and Teplova T. A mixed-integer network DEA with shared inputs and undesirable outputs for performance evaluation: Efficiency measurement of bank branches. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 2022; 1–16.
Paradi J. C. and Schaffnit C. Commercial branch performance evaluation and results communication in a Canadian bank–a DEA application. European journal of operational research. 2004; 156(3): 719-735.
Park B. U., Simar L., and Zelenyuk V. Categorical data in local maximum likelihood: theory and applications to productivity analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis. 2015; 43(2): 199-214.
Portela M. C. A. S. and Thanassoulis E. Comparative efficiency analysis of Portuguese bank branches. European journal of operational research. 2007; 177(2): 1275-1288.
Puri J. and Yadav S. P. A fuzzy DEA model with undesirable fuzzy outputs and its application to the banking sector in India. Expert Systems with Applications. 2014; 41(14): 6419-6432.
Scheel H. MUndesirable outputs in efficiency valuations. European journal of operational research. 2001; 132(2): 400-410.
Seiford L. M. and Zhu J. Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. European journal of operational research. 2002; 142(1): 16-20.
Shabani P. and Akbarpour Shirazi M. Performance evaluation of commercial bank branches in dynamic competitive conditions: a network DEA model with serial and cross-shared resources. Journal of Economic Studies. 2024; 51(1): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-09-2022-0485
Shi X., Emrouznejad A. and Yu W. EOverall efficiency of operational process with undesirable outputs containing both series and parallel processes: A SBM network DEA model. Expert Systems with Applications. 2021; 178: 115062.
Shi X., Wang L. and Emrouznejad A. EPerformance evaluation of Chinese commercial banks by an improved slacks-based DEA model. ESocio-Economic Planning Sciences. 2023; 90(c).
Staub R. B., e Souza G. d. S. and Tabak B. M. Evolution of bank efficiency in Brazil: A DEA approach. European journal of operational research. 2010; 202(1): 204-213.
Subramanian T. and Reddy C. Measuring the risk efficiency in Indian commercial banking–a DEA approach. CEast-West Journal of Economics and Business. 2008; 11(1-2): 76-105.
Tavana M., Khalili-Damghani K., Arteaga F. J. S., Mahmoudi R. and Hafezalkotob A. Efficiency decomposition and measurement in two-stage fuzzy DEA models using a bargaining game approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2018; 118: 394–408.
Tone K. Dealing with undesirable outputs in DEA: A slacks-based measure (SBM) approach. Presentation at NAPW III, Toronto. 2004; 44-45.
Wijesiri M., Martínez-Campillo A. and Wanke P. Is there a trade-off between social and financial performance of public commercial banks in India? A multi-activity DEA model with shared inputs and undesirable outputs. Review of Managerial Science. 2019; 13(2): 417-442.
Yang J. disentangling the sources of bank inefficiency: a two-stage network multi-directional efficiency analysis approach. Ann Oper Res 326. 2023; 369–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05335-0
Zakaria S. The Need to go Beyond Deterministic Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA): A Comparative Analysis with Bootstrapping DEA in Risk Management Efficiency Measurements. Information Management and Business Review 2023; 15(4): 433–446.
Zhou L. and Zhu S. Research on the efficiency of Chinese commercial banks based on undesirable output and super-SBM DEA model. Journal of Mathematical Finance 2017; 7(1): 102–113.
Zhou P., Ang B. and Wang H.  Energy and CO2 emission performance in electricity generation: a non-radial directional distance function approach. European journal of operational research 2012; 221(3): 625–635. 
Zhou P., Poh K. L. and Ang, B. W. A non-radial DEA approach to measuring environmental performance. European journal of operational research 2007; 178(1): 1–9.