Does the Indonesian Banking Architecture Matter Substantively? : the Case of Improving Understandability and Comparability

• Autorzy: Sumiyana Sumiyana , Tri Hanani
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This research investigates the constructive validity of Indonesian Banking Architecture (IBA), especially regarding the structure of international, national, local development, and rural credit banks. It impeaches the existent structure, which is unclear as to the earning power, capacity, investment scalability, growth opportunities, and the discount rate of banks. This study argues that the IBA's structure concentrates exclusively on the classification of assets' size and legal form. It examines the old IBA's structure using mean comparison in differentiating among banks' book levels. This study found that the IBA' structure does not matter substantively. It recommends that the current IBA's structure be transformed into a new matrix structure similar to the GE and BCG Models, including at least two measurement factors. This new matrix would result in a more meaningful description and ensure the understandability and comparability of the Indonesian banking industry. Regulators could use such structure to shape the banking industry more inclined to adaptive structuration, dynamic capability, and business agility. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Banking; Bank structure; Efficiency

PL

Bankowość; Struktura banku; Sprawność

• Czasopismo: Journal of International Studies
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: 14
• Numer: nr 3
• Strony: 73--92

Twórcy

autor

Sumiyana Sumiyana

• University of Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

autor

Tri Hanani

• niversity of Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Bibliografia

• Aramand, M., & Valliere, D. (2012). Dynamic capabilities in entrepreneurial firms: A case study approach. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 142-157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-012-0088-3
• Bhatia, V. K. (1997). Democratizing government decision-making: A study of public discourse in Hong Kong. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(4), 515-532. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00035-0
• Bradshaw, M. T., Richardson, S. A., & Sloan, R. G. (2006). The relation between corporate financing activities, analysts' forecasts and stock returns. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42(1), 53-85. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2006.03.004
• Chen, P., & Zhang, G. (2007). How do accounting variables explain stock price movements? Theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 43(2), 219-244. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2007.01.001
• Coad, A. F., & Herbert, I. P. (2009). Back to the future: New potential for structuration theory in management accounting research? Management Accounting Research, 20(3), 177-192. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2009.02.001
• Cohen, D. A., & Lys, T. Z. (2006). Weighing the evidence on the relation between external corporate financing activities, accruals and stock returns. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42(1), 87-105. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2006.04.006
• DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.2.121
• Englund, H., & Gerdin, J. (2014). Structuration theory in accounting research: Applications and applicability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(2), 162-180. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2012.10.001
• Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
• Gibson, C. H. (2012). Financial reporting and analysis. Cengage Learning.
• Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Univ of California Press.
• Goethals, G. R. (1986). Social Comparison Theory: Psychology from the Lost and Found. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(3), 261-278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167286123001
• Hax, A. C., & Majluf, N. S. (1983). The Use of the Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix in Strategic Planning. INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics, 13(2), 54-71. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.13.2.54
• Higham, N. J. (2008). Functions of matrices: theory and computation. SIAM.
• Horner, S. M., & Slesnick, F. (1999). The Valuation of Earning Capacity Definition, Measurement and Evidence. Journal of Forensic Economics, 12(1), 13-32. https://doi.org/10.5085/0898-5510-12.1.13
• Liu, C., Park, E., Jin, Y., Liu, J., Yu, Y., Zhang, W., Lei, S., & Hu, W. (2018). Surface-Confined Dynamic Covalent System Driven by Olefin Metathesis. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 57(7), 1869-1873. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201711040
• McGoldrick, P. J., & Andre, E. (1997). Consumer misbehaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 4(2), 73-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-6989(96)00027-6
• McKinsey. (2008, 16.00). Enduring Ideas: The GE-McKinsey nine-box matrix. Mckinsey And Company. Retrieved 4 February 2020 from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/enduring-ideas-the-ge-and-mckinsey-nine-box-matrix

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14254/2071-8330.2021/14-3/5