Styring av mikrofinansinstitusjoner

Styring av mikrofinansinstitusjoner har først nylig dukket opp forskningsfelt. Kwame Ohene Djan har analysert flere styringsvarianter i sin avhandling. Funnene viser at det ikke fins noen universell «best practise»-styringsform.

Kwame Ohene Djan ved Institutt for strategi og ledelse disputerer for ph.d.-graden med avhandlingen «Aspects of Governance in Microfinance Institutions» torsdag 13. desember 2018.

Han har fulgt doktorgradsprogrammet ved Handelshøyskolen ved UiA med spesialisering i internasjonal business.

Doktorgradsarbeidet er finansiert av FAHU Foundation i Danmark, ved Annikka Berridge og Anni Kahler.

Slik beskriver kandidaten selv essensen i avhandlingen:

Aspects of Governance in Microfinance Institutions

BRIEF SUMMARY

Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) provide financial services to the entrepreneurial poor through sustainable business methods.

Since the early 2000s, microfinance has grown rapidly to become more competitive and several nonprofit microfinance institutions (MFIs) have transformed to for-profit organizations.

Pressure from investors

This has put more pressure on the professionalization of the industry and in particular, the increased pressure from investors to improve governance structures and increased regulation urging for better management and more transparency, have drawn attention to the governance of MFIs and it influences their performance.

In academic research, attention for the governance of microfinance has emerged only recently.

No one-size-fits-all approach to governance

Since the late 2000s, however, the number of analyses of the governance of MFIs and its impact on their financial and social performance has grown significantly. Yet, a review of the literature

demonstrates that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the governance of MFIs.

This dissertation contributes a more nuanced and detailed view on the governance of MFIs.

The Dissertation

The dissertation is made up of four (4) essays and each essay deals with one specific aspect of the governance of MFIs.

The first essay looks at the impact religious (and in particular Christian) affiliation of MFIs has on their governance structure and choices.

The results show that, as compared with secular MFIs, Christian MFIs have higher audit quality and a higher number of board meetings but are less regulated by national banking authorities.

The second essay investigates how international impact equity investors in MFIs affect the financial and social performance of these institutions.

The empirical analysis reveal that international impact equity investors enhance MFIs’ social performance but do not enhance their financial performance.

The third essay goes into the determinants of social scores in microfinance ratings.

The results demonstrate that outreach to more clients is associated with higher social rating scores. In addition, the analyses reveal that social raters appreciate nontraditional social indicators such as client satisfaction and staff welfare.

The fourth essay, finally, aims at comparing the governance structures, as well as the financial and social performance of NGOs vis-à-vis cooperatives.

It is found that NGOs and cooperatives are quite different in terms of the governance mechanisms they use. Moreover, they also differ in terms of their social performance (higher for NGOs) and financial performance (better for cooperatives).

These results make clear that lumping NGOs and cooperatives together as one category of not-for-profit institutions (which is usually the case in many academic studies) may actually lead to distorted conclusions about the relationship between organizational features of MFIs and their performance.

Overall, the microfinance literature demonstrates a lack of any universally proven best governance systems across the industry.

Thus, this dissertation addresses the call for more governance research that considers the specificities of ownership and the hybridity of the industry in general.