Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Performance considered within the global performance of Microfinance Institutions: a new approach

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Operational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In last years, microfinance has been seen as an effective measure for empowering whole nations or marginalized groups. However, some negative issues especially with respect to over-indebtedness and high interest rates have been discussed as well. In fact, the performance of Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) has traditionally been measured by ratios. Thus, it should be remembered that MFIs are special socially-oriented financial organizations, mainly interested in the economic development of both rural and urban areas, in creating jobs, incorporating women into the labour market and addressing environmental concerns. The activity and performance ratios of these organizations are usually based on a single criterion, generally related to financial aspects or the extent of their outreach, in such a way that the performance measurement can vary according to the criterion selected. This paper proposes a new approach, a multicriteria method based on goal programming that considers not only financial aspects and outreach, but also the social Performance related to the activities of a group of MFIs in Ecuador. Our study shows the weight of the Social Performance dimension on the rankings compared with other dimensions. The practical significance of these results lies in that now it is possible to present a more comprehensive picture of the performance of MFIs. Besides, the methodology chosen can shed some light on the mission drift debate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Regarding subjectivity, we refer to the explicit consideration of the judgments made by the decision maker and not to the mathematical procedure that is used to compute the relative weight of the criteria according to these judgments.

References

  • Ahlin C, Lin J, Maio M (2011) Where does Microfinance flourish? Microfinance institution performance in Macroeconomic context. J Dev Econ 95(2):105–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akpalu W, Alnaa SE, Aglobitse PB (2012) Access to microfinance and intra household business decision making: implication for efficiency of female owned enterprises in Ghana. J Soc Econ 41(5):513–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashta A (2009) Microcredit capital flows and interest rates: an alternative explanation. J Econ Issues 43(3):661–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E, Garcia-Bernabeu A (2012) Portfolio selection with multiple time horizons: a mean variance—stochastic goal programming approach. INFOR 50(3):106–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E, Pérez-Gladish B, Garcia-Bernabeu A (2015) Socially responsible investment a multi-criteria decisión making approach. Springer International Series in Operations Research and Management Series, Vol. 219

  • Barinaga E (2014) Microfinance in a developed welfare state: a hybrid technology for the government of the outcast. Geoforum 51:27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett B, Mahul O (2007) Weather index insurance for agriculture and rural areas in lower-income countries. Am J Agric Econ 89(5):1241–1247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry TA, Tacneng R (2014) The impact of governance and institutional quality on MFI outreach and financial performance in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev 58:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandon K, Gorenflo LJ, Rodrigues AS, Waller RW (2005) Reconciling biodiversity conservation, people, protected areas, and agricultural suitability in Mexico. World Dev 33(9):1403–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervelló-Royo R, Moya-Clemente I, Ribes-Giner G (2015) Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) in Latin America: who should finance the entrepreneurial ventures of the less privileged?. In: New challenges in entrepreneurship and finance. Springer International Publishing, pp 235–245

  • CGAP (2003) Microfinance consensus guidelines. Definitions of selected financial terms, ratios and adjustments for microfinance, 3rd edn. Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Ferguson RO (1955) Optimal estimation of executive compensation by linear programming. Manage Sci 1:138–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christen R, Rosenberg P (2006) The rush to regulate: legal frameworks for microfinance. CGAP Occasional Paper No 4

  • Copestake J (2007) Mainstreaming microfinance: social performance management or mission drift? World Dev 35(10):1721–1738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Da Silva A (2007) Social banking: the need of the hour. In: da Silva AFC (ed) Social banking—perspectives and experiences. The Icfai University Press, Hyderabad, pp 3–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalberg (2012) Catalyzing smallholder agricultural finance. Dalberg Global Development Advisors, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng H, Yeng H, Willis RJ (2000) Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Comput Oper Res 27(10):963–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derflinger K, Ivaniychuk O, Grossmann H (2006) Myth and reality of agricultural micro-lending – experiences from a Commercial Bank in Georgia. Rural Finance Learning Center, Paper No. 200612

  • Diakoulaki D, Mavrotas G, Papayannakis L (1995) Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the CRITIC method. Comput Oper Res 22(7):763–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García F, Guijarro F, Moya I (2010a) A goal programming approach to estimating performance weights for ranking firms. Comput Oper Res 37(9):1597–1609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García F, Guijarro F, Moya I (2010b) Ranking Spanish savings Banks: a multicriteria approach. Math Comput Model 52:1058–1065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Martínez G, Guijarro F, Poyatos JA (2017) Measuring the social responsibility of European companies: a goal programming approach. Int Trans Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Pachón J, Romero C (1999) Distance-based consensus methods: a goal programming approach. Omega Int J Manage S 27:341–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Vega C (2003) Lessons for rural finance from the Microfinance revolution. In: Wenner MD et al (eds) Promising practices in rural finance: experiences from Latin America and the Caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank. Accion International, Washington, pp 54–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez-Nieto B, Serrano-Cinca C, Mar-Molinero C (2007) Microfinance institutions and efficiency. Omega Int J Manage S 35:131–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartarska V, Shen X, Mersland R (2013) Scale economies and input price elasticities in microfinance institutions. J Bank Finance 37(1):118–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermes N, Lensink R, Meesters A (2011) Outreach and efficiency of microfinance institutions. World Dev 39(6):938–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollis A, Sweetman A (1998) Microcredit: what can we learn from the past? World Dev 26(10):1975–1991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoque M, Chishty M, Halloway R (2011) Commercialization and changes in capital structure in microfinance institutions: an innovation or wrong turn? Manage Finance 37(5):414–425

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignizio JM, Romero C (2003) Goal programming. In: Bigdoli H (ed) Encyclopedia of information systems, vol 2. Academic Press, London, pp 489–500

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Islam A, Nguyen C, Smyth R (2015) Does microfinance change informal lending in village economies? Evidence from Bangladesh. J Bank Finance 50:141–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones MB (2007) The multiple sources of mission drift. Nonprofit Volunt Sec Q 36(2):299–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonker K (2009) In the black with BRAC. Stanf Soc Innov Rev 7(1):74–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Linares P, Romero C (2002) Aggregation of preferences in an environmental economics context: a goal-programming approach. Omega Int J Manage S 30(2):89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mersland R, Strom RO (2010) Microfinance mission drift? World Dev 38(1):28–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Microfinance Information Exchange (2012) Mix: the premier source for microfinance data and analysis. Microfinance Information Exchange, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Morduch J (1999) The microfinance promise. J Econ Lit 37:1569–1614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortobelli LS, Shalit H, Fabozzi F (2013) Portfolio selection problems consistent with given preference orderings. Int J Theor Appl Finance 16(5):1–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Prišenk J, Turk J, Rozman Č, Borec A, Zrakić M, Pažek K (2014) Advantages of combining linear programming and weighted goal programming for agriculture application. Oper Res Int J 14(2):253–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogaly B (1996) Micro-finance evangelism, ‘destitute women’, and the hard selling of a new anti-poverty formula. Dev Pract 6(2):100–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero C (2001) Extended lexicographic goal programming: a unifying approach. Omega Int J Manage S 29(1):63–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero C (2014) Handbook of critical issues in goal programming. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Skees J, Barnett B (2006) Enhancing microfinance using index-based risk-transfer products. Agric Finance Rev 66(2):235–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber O, Ahmad A (2014) Empowerment through microfinance: the relation between loan cycle and level of empowerment. World Dev 62:75–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wierzbicki AP (2010) The need for and possible methods of objective ranking. Trends Multi Criteria Decis Anal 2:37–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijesiri M, Viganò L, Meoli M (2015) Efficiency of microfinance institutions in Sri Lanka: a two-stage double bootstrap DEA approach. Econ Model 47:74–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yaron J (1994) What makes rural finance institutions successful? World Bank Res Obs 9(1):49–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Economics and Social Sciences Department, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camí de Vera s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain

    Roberto Cervelló-Royo, Francisco Guijarro & Victor Martinez-Gomez

Authors
  1. Roberto Cervelló-Royo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francisco Guijarro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Victor Martinez-Gomez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francisco Guijarro.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cervelló-Royo, R., Guijarro, F. & Martinez-Gomez, V. Social Performance considered within the global performance of Microfinance Institutions: a new approach. Oper Res Int J 19, 737–755 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0360-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0360-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation