Skip to main content

Big bank theory: On Public Sector Bank mergers

For the mergers to work, realising staff cost synergies is key

For its sheer magnitude, the scale and the ability to disrupt the status quo, the mega bank mergers announced by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Friday must go down as the most significant the banking industry has seen in the five decades since nationalisation. The bottomline is clear: to create banks of global level that can leverage economies of scale and balance sheet size to serve the needs of a $5-trillion economy by 2025. The jury is, of course, out on whether this strategy will succeed. Mergers are driven by synergies — in products, costs, business, geographies or technology and the most important, cost synergies. While there may be some geographical synergies between the banks being merged, unless they realise cost synergies through branch and staff rationalisation, the mergers may not mean much to them or to the economy. This is where the government’s strategy will be tested. It is no secret that public sector banks are overstaffed. There is also bound to be overlap in branch networks such as in the Canara-Syndicate Bank merger, especially in Karnataka and a couple of other southern States. Ditto with Punjab National Bank and Oriental Bank of Commerce, both of which have strong networks in the north and the west. The success of these mergers, therefore, will hinge on how well these banks handle the sensitive issue of staff rationalisation. The All India Bank Employees Association has already raised the red flag.

It was the Narasimham Committee in the late 1990s that recommended consolidation through a process of merging strong banks. The issue has been the proverbial bee in the bonnet of successive governments since then. What the committee also recommended was shutting down the weaker banks and not merging them with the strong ones as is being done now. But this is obviously not an option politically even for a government with a brute majority in Parliament. The biggest plus of the mergers is that they will create banks of scale — there are too many banks in India with sizes that are minuscule by global standards with their growth constricted by their inability to expand. Yet, this advantage of scale cannot be leveraged without adequate reforms in governance and management of these banks. To be sure, Ms. Sitharaman did announce a few measures to make managements better accountable to the board. But the key reforms to be made are at the board level, including in appointments, especially of government nominees. These are often political appointees, with little exposure to banking. Surely, such practices need to be curbed as the definition of global banks is not just about size but also professionalism in governance. The government will also have to manage the fallout of unleashing four mergers simultaneously which is bound to cause upheaval in the industry. Would it have been better if these mergers had been done one by one? The future will colour the past

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The latest FDI rule changes may not be enough to draw a rush of investments

On the face of it, the Centre’s announcement on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) norms on Wednesday appears to be one more push to make India a more attractive destination to overseas investors, especially those keen on entering the market for the long haul. From extending the available 100% FDI under the automatic route in the coal mining sector (till now permitted only for captive consumption) to include those companies seeking to commercially sell the commodity, to distinctly including contract manufacturing under the automatic 100% route and easing local sourcing norms for overseas investors in the Single Brand Retail Trading (SBRT) business, the changes in investment guidelines approved by the Cabinet have been touted as “FDI policy reform”. The government, clearly concerned by the economic slowdown and persistently weak investment activity, has sought to provide a policy fillip to attract more foreign capital into sectors that it sees as having a multiplier ef...
1 comment
Read more

With or without: On U.K. Parliament suspension

Boris Johnson seems bent on delivering a no-deal Brexit Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s audacious move on Wednesday to prorogue Parliament for five weeks is a cynical attempt to silence elected representatives on the key issue of Britain’s future ties with the European Union (EU). The decision is all the more suspect because the fraught political climate that has prevailed since June 2016 was the consequence of the country having to renegotiate the nature of its ties with its closest neighbours. Those complex questions could only have been addressed on the floor of the house. Mr. Johnson has sought to play down the controversial decision as no more than an intent to commence a fresh legislative session with the Queen’s speech charting the government’s domestic priorities. But the outrage the country has witnessed suggests that despite its legal correctness, the move may have set a terrible precedent and possibly eroded the Conservatives base. The long suspension...
Post a Comment
Read more