Is the Acquirer More Efficient Than Target? An Empirical Study from Selected Bank Consolidation in India



This paper tries to examine whether the acquirer banks are more efficient than the target banks in 16 consolidation deals in Indian banking sector during the period 1995–2013. We find that as far as technical efficiency is concerned, the hypothesis that the acquirer is more efficient than the target bank is supported in almost all the cases except for the deal between ICICI Bank and Bank of Madura in which Bank of Madura (target) was more efficient than ICICI bank (the acquirer). Finally, both the input and output models of overall efficiency are clearly showed that the acquirer is more efficient than the target, but it does not reflect in scale efficiency.


Consolidation Indian commercial banks Pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency DEA input and output-oriented models 



I am grateful to my supervisor Dr. Mandira Sarma, who has cared about my research work and given full support to me to finish this so early.


  1. Altunbas, Y., et al. (2000). Efficiency and risk in Japanese banking. Journal of Banking & Finance, 24(10), 1605–1628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, A. N., & Humphrey, D. B. (1993). Bank scale economies, mergers, concentration, and efficiency: The U.S. experience (pp. 1–34). Wharton School University of Pennsylvania, Financial Institutions Centre working paper, No. 94-25.Google Scholar
  3. Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1962). Programming with linear fractional functionals. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 9(3–4), 181–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Charnes, A., et al. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chortareas, G. E., et al. (2011). Banking sector performance in Latin America: Market power versus efficiency. Review of Development Economics, 15(2), 307–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Khasawneh, J. A. (2006). Bank efficiency dynamics and market reaction around merger announcement. University of New Orleans theses and dissertations 1031. Accessed on July 23, 2014.
  7. Lim, G. H., & Randhawa, D. S. (2005). Competition, liberalization and efficiency: Evidence from a two-stage banking model on banks in Hong Kong and Singapore. Managerial Finance, 31(1), 52–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mohan, T. T. R. (2005). Bank consolidation issues and evidence. Economic and Political Weekly, 40(12), 1151–1159.Google Scholar
  9. Peristiani, S. (1997). Do mergers improve the X-efficiency and scale efficiency of U.S. banks? Evidence from the 1980s. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 29(3), 326–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ray, S. C. (2004). Data envelopment analysis: Theory and techniques for economics and operations research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Reserve Bank of India (RBI). (2013). Banking structure in India—The way forward. Discussion paper, Department of Banking Operations and Development (DBOD) and Department of Economic and Policy Research (DEPR), Mumbai, August 2013.Google Scholar
  12. Rezvanian, R., & Mehdian, S. (2002). An examination of cost structure and production performance of commercial banks in Singapore. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26, 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rhoades, S. A. (1998). The efficiency effects of bank mergers: An overview of case studies of nine mergers. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22, 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sufian, F., & Majid, M.-Z. A. (2007). Deregulation, consolidation and banks efficiency in Singapore: Evidence from event study window approach and Tobit analysis. International Review of Economics, 54, 261–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of International StudiesCentre for International Trade and Development, Jawaharlal Nehru UniversityNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations