Top Essay Writers
Our top essay writers are handpicked for their degree qualification, talent and freelance know-how. Each one brings deep expertise in their chosen subjects and a solid track record in academic writing.
Simply fill out the order form with your paper’s instructions in a few easy steps. This quick process ensures you’ll be matched with an expert writer who
Can meet your papers' specific grading rubric needs. Find the best write my essay assistance for your assignments- Affordable, plagiarism-free, and on time!
Posted: January 15th, 2025
Introduction:
The structure of Indian banking has evolved greatly over the recent past, and with removal of ₹500 and ₹1000 from circulation, it is hard to fully understand the change in efficiency on the banks operating in India in the future. This study aims to provide a benchmark of efficiency using the DEA approach so that that the results of the future can be compared to the results presented in this study as a method of determining whether removal of currency from circulation has resulted in an increase, decrease or no effect on the efficiency of the banks operating in India.
Students often ask, “Can you write my essay in APA or MLA?”—and the answer’s a big yes! Our writers are experts in every style imaginable: APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, you name it. Just tell us what you need, and we’ll deliver a perfectly formatted paper that matches your requirements, hassle-free.
Literature Review:
Before diving in to the research it is important to provide some background of previous analysis conducted by other economists. There are several empirical analyses of the efficiency on Indian banks however most the literature looks in to difference of efficiency the state-owned banks and foreign banks.
Dude (0000) presents one of the earliest evaluations on Indian banks, however a lot of analysis is provided using old data with a lack of reliability. It is not until Satye (2003) used statistical software to determine efficiency values of 1990’s banks that a solid economic base for comparison was formed. His work concluded that public sector banks have a higher efficiency score than privately owned banks.
This work was further build on by Kumbhakar and Sarkar (2004), who explored the cost efficiency using a stochastic cost frontier model with specification of translog cost function. Their results incorporated over 50 banks with a clear analysis that deregulation lead to an increase in cost inefficiency of banks, which leads other economist (i.e. DUDE0000) to believe that a similar conclusion will occur this time around.
Absolutely, it’s 100% legal! Our service provides sample essays and papers to guide your own work—think of it as a study tool. Used responsibly, it’s a legit way to improve your skills, understand tough topics, and boost your grades, all while staying within academic rules.
During the deregulation period, Kumbhakar and Sarkar (2004) showed that private and foreign banks (of which there were an insignificantly small quantity) had a much larger cost efficiency off around 80% compared to the 58% of public sector banks. With the lower level of efficiency, could be attributed to the lack of deposits and fixed assets, due to deregulation of some currency, which resulted in a lower level of loans and investment for the public banks.
Ranmohan and Ray (2004) looked at the analysis conducted by Kumbhakar and Sarkar (2004) and compared the revenue maximising efficiency of banks in India. Interestingly, their work showed that public sector banks were better than foreign institutions. They believe that the private banks had a greater presence around India, with around 4 times as many branches, which directly lead to an increase in output for the banks, however the data was later determined to be insignificant.
Further research conducted by Das et al (2004), showed that the deregulation could be advantageous for India as it is expected to increase efficiency and productivity however it can have different effect on different ownership structures. While Sturm and Williams (2004) found that there was a decrease in the total factor productivity in foreign and domestic banks however data from Turkish banks, collected by Isik and Hassan (2003), showed that foreign banks benefitted the most from the more competitive environment than the state-banks.
Our pricing starts at $10 per page for undergrad work, $16 for bachelor-level, and $21 for advanced stuff. Urgency and extras like top writers or plagiarism reports tweak the cost—deadlines range from 14 days to 3 hours. Order early for the best rates, and enjoy discounts on big orders: 5% off over $500, 10% over $1,000!
Finally, although the changes are expected to be positive there have been concerns raised by economists previously regarding the adverse effects on the risk-taking behaviour of market participants. However, due to a lack of quality literature there is no known connection between productivity, deregulation and risk-taking (Zhao et al. 2006)
Methodology:
It is usual to measure the performance of banks using financial ratios, however Yeh (1996) presents the argument that to draw a valid analysis there would be a high reliance on benchmark ratios which could be arbitrary and may mislead analysts when drawing conclusions. Sherman and Gold (1985) build on the work of Yep to explain that financial ratios don’t fully capture the effect operations, marketing, or financing.
Originally, the approach of using a using an efficient frontier started by Farrell (1957) – as explained by DUDE(0000)– had become more popular as a more quantitative approach. This simple measure of a firm’s efficiency accounts for multiple inputs. From this, the Charnes et. al. (1978) introduced the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) which is a non-parametric linear programming approach, capable of handling multiple inputs and outputs. (Asmild et. al., 2004)
Yes, totally! We lock down your info with top-notch encryption—your school, friends, no one will know. Every paper’s custom-made to blend with your style, and we check it for originality, so it’s all yours, all discreet.
DEA is a mathematical programming technique that measures the efficiency of a decision-making unit (DMU) relative to other similar DMUs with the simple restriction that all DMUs lie on or below the efficiency frontier (Seiford and Thrall, 1990). DEA also identifies, for inefficient DMUs, the sources and level of inefficiency for each of the inputs and output (Charnes et al., 1995). It provides a means of comparing the efficiency of DMUs with each other based on several inputs and / or outputs. It derives its name from a theoretical efficient frontier which envelops all empirically-observed DMUs. (Repkova, 2014)
Methodology, the characteristics of DEA can be described using the original model proposed by Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes – henceforth referred to as CCR. Considering that an analysis of “N” number of DMU’s that convert “I” inputs to “J” outputs, where the input can be greater, smaller, or equal to the outputs (Satye, 2003). The CCR model presupposes that there is no significant relationship between the scale of operations and efficiency by assuming constant returns of scale (CRS). This is used to derive the following CCR model: CCR MODEL
In contrast to CCR model, Banker et al. (1984) present a slightly different model in which there is a variable output with respect to the scale. (DUDE 0000) Additionally, in this model, economic efficiency is decomposed to pure technical efficiency and scaled efficiency to measure the output to scale as efficiently as possible. (DUDE 0000) BCC Model
Whereas technical efficiency measures the ability of a bank to produce a given set of output with minimal inputs under the assumption of variable returns to scale. While scale efficiency measures whether a bank produces at an optimal size of scale. (Hauner and Peiris, 2007)
No way—our papers are 100% human-crafted. Our writers are real pros with degrees, bringing creativity and expertise AI can’t match. Every piece is original, checked for plagiarism, and tailored to your needs by a skilled human, not a machine.
The reason that DEA is used to determine the efficiency is because it allows for variables of different units (e.g. Rupees, staff, loans etc.) without the need of standardisation. Satye (2003) explains that DEA allows for benchmarking which has been investigated in banking by a variety of literature like Mester (1996); Miller and Noulas (1996) etc. However, there are limitations of using DEA analysis such as the comparison of efficiency is relative to the most efficient DMU and its likely that there could be a more efficient DMU outside of the sampled data.
This analysis uses a variety of banks from the public sector, private sector and foreign banks operating in India. However, some of the banks had to left out of the analysis due to a serious lack of reliable data. Although, there is current dispute over the variables used for conducting DEA, this study employs the intermediation approach to define inputs and outputs. Karimzadeh (2012) explains that under this approach, banks are treated as financial intermediaries that combine deposits, labour, and capital (inputs) to produce loans and investment (outputs). When conducting DEA, it is important to associate weights with all function.
To determine the weights on each input, we start by calculating employees expense per capita which is calculated by dividing employees’ expenses by the overall number of employees. For the second input, price of fixed assets, .
Additionally, a Malmquist index, based on the model by Fare et al. (1985) is used to separate changes in technology (shifts of the frontier), technical efficiency and scale efficiency (movements relative to the frontier). The Malmquist productivity function introduced by Caves, Christensen, and Diewert (1982) as explained by Rammohan and Ray (2004) is the ration of the levels of technical efficiency of two firms measured against a reference technology characterized by constant returns to scale.
We’re the best because our writers are degree-holding experts—Bachelor’s to Ph.D.—who nail any topic. We obsess over quality, using tools to ensure perfection, and offer free revisions to guarantee you’re thrilled with the result, even on tight deadlines.
DEA Results and Discussion:
Looking at the results of productivity efficiency using the CCR model the overall efficiency of banks has increased by 1% from the 85% to 86% (Table 1), although that number may not to a true representation of the results. Foreign banks are the most efficient at converting their inputs to outputs with an average of 93% efficiency and a small variation of only 5% around mean.
It can be seen from the data in Table 3 that majority of banks within the foreign sector are within the fourth quartile while most private sector banks are within the third quartile. Banks within this sector have a much lower average efficiency score of only 76% suggesting that ideally just more than three-quarters of the inputs could be used to produce the same amount of outputs. With one bank being so inefficient as to be only 34% efficient. Ideally, this bank would only need a third of its inputs to provide the same level of outputs. This could be because of the inefficiency in handling PART OF INTER..APPR, this is backed up by DUDE(0000) who found the same trend using similar inputs and outputs.
Between the average efficiencies of private sector banks and foreign banks, falls the productivity efficiency of public sector banks at an average of 87%, but it should also be noted that the quantity of banks explored within the sector is the lowest because a lot of these banks failed to provide reliable data.
Our writers are top-tier—university grads, many with Master’s degrees, who’ve passed tough tests to join us. They’re ready for any essay, working with you to hit your deadlines and grading standards with ease and professionalism.
These results from the CCR model can be explained by the evidence presented by DUDE (0000) that suggests that foreign banks have a greater knowledge because of larger scale of their operations in increasing their efficiency however an opposing view argued by DUDE (0000) suggests that an increase in scale can often lead to a decrease in efficiency, a factor not considered within the CRR model; which leads us on to the BCC analysis.
The efficiency scores were expectedly higher when using a BCC model (Table 4), with overall efficiency increasing to 90%. Over the two years there a smaller increase in each of the sector, but that could be because they are already extremely efficient. Even Private Sector banks have increased from 76% (CCR model) to 83% (BCC model). Using Table 6, most banks jumped from the third quartile up to the fourth.
There was also an increase of the number of relies on the efficiency frontier jumping from the 10 originally to 12 in the BCC model. This is most likely because BCC models allow for variable returns to scale which achieves more efficiency than the model with the constant returns to scale. The higher efficiency value is caused by the fact that the BCC model decomposes inefficiency of production units into two components: the pure technical inefficiency and the inefficiency to scale. Values of efficiency computed by VRS reach higher values than efficiency computed by CRS by eliminating the part of the inefficiency that is caused by a lack of size of production units. (CZECH 0000)
It is important for banks to deduce the factors that leads to this inefficiency, so that can deal with them. The cost efficiency is split it in to technical and allocation efficiency, using the formula CE = AE/TE. The results from Table 7 show that most of the inefficiency comes from allocative inefficiency rather than technical efficiency. This means that the inefficiency is most likely due to “wrong” inputs at the “prevailing input prices” (GERMAN 0000), rather than waste of inputs. Technical efficiency rose from 90% to 91% from 2014 to 2015 showing there is still room of improvement in producing more outputs from the same level of inputs.
Always! We start from scratch—no copying, no AI—just pure, human-written work with solid research and citations. You can even get a plagiarism report to confirm it’s 95%+ unique, ready for worry-free submission.
Furthermore, the panel data was used to measure productivity change using the Malmquist index. However, technical efficiency, scale efficiency nor technology changed significantly over the two years for any of the banking sectors – it would be best to use data from around 10 years for more conclusive results. Satye (0000) measures changes in Indian banks and exhibit positive productivity changes over the time-period 2004-2010 which shows banks are moving towards a move efficient future and closer towards the efficient frontier.
Finally, to explain the differences in productivity efficiencies among different sectors within the banking industry. Several explanatory variables were regressed (shown in Table 9) using a Tobit model because the efficiencies have a value between 0 and 1.
QML standard errors and covariance’s are calculated as there is a chance of heteroscedasticity, and a R-squared value of 86% shows that values are close to the regression line. The first variable is GDP growth, DUDE(0000) shows that GDP growth has a clear relationship with banking efficiency as changes in macroeconomic performance can have an effect on respective cost structures. For example, if a bank has a higher ratio of interest to administrative costs than other competing banks, an economic slump could result in a loss and hence a loss of efficiency. The data from Table 9 shows a there is a negative relationship with GDP significant to the level of 1%.
Moving on to size, a measure of the total assets within the Indian banking system. Size would have a positive to market power, the larger banks would have lower for their inputs which can be seen in the results as foreign banks have the largest positive relationship. Additionally, with the larger banks the cost of increasing scales of returns will decrease because factors like fixed costs (e.g. research) will result in greater efficiency. The results show a positive relationship with foreign sector followed by private and then public sector all within a significance of 5%.
You bet! From APA to IEEE, our writers nail every style with precision. Give us your guidelines, and we’ll craft a paper that fits your academic standards perfectly, no sweat.
Furthermore, inspired by the work of GERMAN (0000), the component of RISK which is defined by Berger and Mester (1997) by the volatility of a bank’s return on assets. It is argued that risk creates cost as it creates administrative costs. This holds true for my data as all the sectors present a negative correlation which shows that all types of banks struggle to manage risk within a 5% significance.
Lastly, one of the main features for success of any firm or bank is its staff. EXPEMPL is the personal expense per employee, which has a positive relationship within all sectors of the banks all within a significance of 10%. Brunner et al. (2003) showed that quality of the bank’s staff might influence the cost efficiency only if output per employees also increased proportionally to the compensation presented to the employees.
Limitations of DEA analysis
Future Research (Brazil 0000)
Yep! Use our chat feature to tweak instructions or add details anytime—even after your writer’s started. They’ll adjust on the fly to keep your essay on point.
Asmild, M., Bogetoft, P., & Hougaard, J. (2004). Rationalising Inefficiency: A study of Canadian bank Branches. University of Copenhagen.
Banker, R., Chanes, A., & Cooper, W. (1984). Some Model for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science 30, 1078-1092.
Bas, A., & Ghosh, S. (2006). Financial deregulation and efficiency: An empirical analysis of Indian banks during the post reform period. Review of Financial Economics, 193-211.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429-444.
Easy—place your order online, and your writer dives in. Check drafts or updates as you go, then download the final paper from your account. Pay only when you’re happy—simple and affordable!
Charnes, A., Cooper, W., Lewin, A., & Seiford, L. (1995). Data Envelopement Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Farrell, M. (1957). The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 120(3), 253-290.
Hauner, D., & Peiris, S. (2008). Banking efficiency and competition in low income countries: the case of Uganda. Applied Economics, 40(21), 2703-2720.
Karimzadeh, M. (2012). Efficiency Analysis by using Data Envelopment Analysis: Evidence from Indian Banks. International Journal Latest Trends Financial Economics Society, 2(3), 228-237.
Super fast! Our writers can deliver a quality essay in 24 hours if you’re in a pinch. Pick your deadline—standard is 10 days, but we’ll hustle for rush jobs without skimping.
Mester, L. (1996). A study of bank efficiency taking into account risk preferences. Journal of Banking and Finance, 20(6), 1025-1045.
Miller, S., & Noulas, A. (1996). The technical efficiency of large bank production. Journal of Banking and Finance, 20(3), 495-509.
Repkova, I. (2014). Efficiency of the Czech banking sector employing the DEA window analysis approach. Procedia Economics and Finance 12, 587-596.
Sathye, M. (2003). Efficiency of banks in a developing economy: The case of India. European Journal of Operational Research, 148, 662-671.
Seiford, L., & Thrall, R. (1990). Recent Development in DEA: the Mathematical Programming Approach to Frontier Analysis. Journal of Econometrics, 7-38.
Definitely! From astrophysics to literary theory, our advanced-degree writers thrive on tough topics. They’ll research deeply and deliver a clear, sharp paper that meets your level—high school to Ph.D.
Sherman, H., & Gold, F. (1985). Bank Branch Operating Efficiency. Journal of Banking and Finance, 9(2), 297-315.
Yeh, Q. (1996). The application of date envelopment analysis in conjunction with financial ratios for bank performance evaluation. Journal of Operational Research Society, 47, 989-988.
Appendix:
Table 1: Bank efficiency measured using the CCR Model during 2014
Total Economic Efficiency (CCR model) How Do You Meet My Professor’s Standards?We tailor your paper to your rubric—structure, tone, everything. Our writers decode academic expectations, and editors polish it to perfection, ensuring it’s grade-ready. |
|||||
N |
Mean |
SD |
Min What’s Your Editing Process?Upload your draft, tell us your goals, and our editors will refine it—boosting arguments, fixing errors, and keeping your voice. You’ll get a polished paper that’s ready to shine. |
Max |
|
Public Sector |
26 |
0.87 |
0.08 Can You Suggest Paper Topics?Sure! Need ideas? We’ll pitch topics based on your subject and interests—catchy and doable. Pick one, and we’ll run with it, or tweak it together. |
0.76 |
1 |
Private Sector |
32 |
0.76 |
0.13 |
0.34 Do You Offer Rush Revisions?Yes! If you need quick edits, our team can turn it around fast—hours, not days—tightening up your paper for last-minute perfection. |
1 |
Foreign Banks |
35 |
0.93 |
0.05 |
0.68 Can You Provide Outlines First?Absolutely! We’ll draft an outline based on your topic so you can approve the plan before we write—keeps everything aligned from the start. |
1 |
Total banks |
93 |
0.85 |
0.09 |
0.58 |
1 |
Table 2: Bank efficiency measured using the CCR Model during 2015
You bet! Need stats or charts? Our writers can crunch numbers and craft visuals, making your paper both sharp and professional.
Total Economic Efficiency (CCR model) |
|||||
N |
Mean |
SD |
Min |
Max |
|
Public Sector |
26 |
0.89 |
0.08 How Do You Handle Long-Term Projects?We break it down—delivering each part on time with consistent quality. From proposals to final drafts, we’re with you all the way. |
0.76 |
1 |
Private Sector |
32 |
0.77 Can You Write for Global Standards?Yep! Whether it’s UK, US, or Australian rules, we adapt your paper to fit your institution’s style and expectations perfectly. |
0.11 |
0.41 |
1 |
Foreign Banks |
35 Is there a possibility of plagiarism in my completed order?We write every paper from scratch just for you, and we get how important it is for you to feel confident about its originality. That’s why we double-check every piece with our own in-house plagiarism software before sending it your way. This tool doesn’t just catch copy-pasted bits—it even spots paraphrased sections. Unlike well-known systems like Turnitin (used by most universities), we don’t store or report anything to public databases, so your check stays private and safe. We stand by our plagiarism-free guarantee to ensure your paper is totally unique. That said, while we can promise no plagiarism from open web sources or specific databases we check, no tech out there (except Turnitin itself) can scan every source Turnitin indexes. If you want that extra peace of mind, we recommend running your paper through WriteCheck (a Turnitin service) and sharing the report with us. |
0.93 |
0.05 |
0.68 |
1 When will my order be assigned to the writer?The moment you place your order, we jump into action to find the perfect writer for you. Usually, we’ve got someone lined up within an hour. Sometimes, though, it might take a few hours—or in rare cases, a few days—if we need someone super specialized. If no writers from your chosen category are free, we’ll suggest one from a lower category and refund the difference if you’d paid extra for that option. Want to keep tabs on things? You can always peek at your order’s status on your personal order page. |
Total banks |
93 |
0.86 |
0.08 |
0.61 |
1 |
Table 3: Number of Banks in four quartiles of efficiency scores using CCR Model during 2014-2015
Public Sector |
Private Sector |
Foreign Sector |
Total |
|
Lowest efficiency (Q1 ≤ 0.25) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Second Quartile (0.26 ≥ Q2 ≤ 0.50) |
0 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
Third Quartile (0.51 ≥ Q3 ≤ 0.75) |
1 |
21 |
4 |
36 |
Fourth Quartile (0.76 ≥ Q2 < 1) |
25 |
8 |
31 |
54 |
Total |
26 |
32 |
35 |
93 |
Frontier (efficiency = 1) |
2 |
3 |
5 |
10 |
Table 4: Bank efficiency measured using the BCC Model during 2014
Total Economic Efficiency (BCC model) |
|||||
N |
Mean |
SD |
Min |
Max |
|
Public Sector |
26 |
0.91 |
0.06 |
0.72 |
1 |
Private Sector |
32 |
0.82 |
0.10 |
0.62 |
1 |
Foreign Banks |
35 |
0.95 |
0.04 |
0.79 |
1 |
Total banks |
93 |
0.89 |
0.07 |
0.71 |
1 |
Table 5: Bank efficiency measured using the BCC Model during 2015
Total Economic Efficiency (BCC model) |
|||||
N |
Mean |
SD |
Min |
Max |
|
Public Sector |
26 |
0.91 |
0.08 |
0.76 |
1 |
Private Sector |
32 |
0.83 |
0.09 |
0.64 |
1 |
Foreign Banks |
35 |
0.95 |
0.05 |
0.80 |
1 |
Total banks |
93 |
0.90 |
0.07 |
0.73 |
1 |
Table 6: Number of Banks in four quartiles of efficiency scores using BCC Model during 2014-2015
Public Sector |
Private Sector |
Foreign Sector |
Total |
|
Lowest efficiency (Q1 ≤ 0.25) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Second Quartile (0.26 ≥ Q2 ≤ 0.50) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Third Quartile (0.51 ≥ Q3 ≤ 0.75) |
2 |
3 |
2 |
7 |
Fourth Quartile (0.76 ≥ Q2 < 1) |
24 |
29 |
33 |
86 |
Total |
26 |
32 |
35 |
93 |
Frontier (efficiency = 1) |
3 |
3 |
6 |
12 |
Table 7: Descriptive Statistics: Efficiency scores
2014 |
2015 |
|||||
Public |
Private |
Foreign |
Public |
Private |
Foreign |
|
Technical Efficiency |
0.92 |
0.82 |
0.96 |
0.91 |
0.86 |
0.96 |
Allocative Efficiency |
0.78 |
0.66 |
0.81 |
0.79 |
0.71 |
0.84 |
Cost Efficiency |
0.91 |
0.82 |
0.95 |
0.91 |
0.83 |
0.95 |
Table 8: Net Productivity change 2014-2015: Malmquist decomposition by market and size
Technical Change |
Scale Efficiency |
Technology |
Total factor productivity |
|
Private Sector |
1.01 |
0.99 |
0.99 |
0.99 |
Public Sector |
1.00 |
0.99 |
1.01 |
1.01 |
Foreign Sector |
1.01 |
0.98 |
1.01 |
0.99 |
Table 9: Tobit Regression model – factors explaining differences in efficiency
Private Sector |
Public Sector |
Foreign Sector |
||||
Coefficient |
P-Value |
Coefficient |
P-Value |
Coefficient |
P-Value |
|
GDP |
-0.00749 |
0.1012 |
-0.000875 |
0.1216 |
-0.00124 |
0.1182 |
SIZE |
8.65×10-08 |
0.0000 |
1.73×10-06 |
0.0000 |
6.42×10-07 |
0.0000 |
RISK |
-0.45321 |
0.0023 |
-0.26345 |
0.0028 |
-0.34673 |
0.0019 |
EXPEMPL |
0.00207 |
0.0978 |
0.00371 |
0.1042 |
0.01032 |
0.0891 Tags: Assignment Help: USA's #1 Online Assignment Writing Service, Assignments for you - Online Assignment Maker - Writing Services, Buy cheap essay UK, Can I pay someone to do my homework?Why Choose Essay Bishops?You Want The Best Grades and That’s What We Deliver Top Essay WritersOur top essay writers are handpicked for their degree qualification, talent and freelance know-how. Each one brings deep expertise in their chosen subjects and a solid track record in academic writing. Affordable PricesWe offer the lowest possible pricing for each research paper while still providing the best writers;no compromise on quality. Our costs are fair and reasonable to college students compared to other custom writing services. 100% Plagiarism-FreeYou’ll never get a paper from us with plagiarism or that robotic AI feel. We carefully research, write, cite and check every final draft before sending it your way. |