图书封面
习题答案
本书是英文影印版本,在英文原版图书的基础上根据国内教学需要适当进行了删改,在内容上涵盖了银行管理方面的主要内容。
因为这本书删除了3章原书的内容,因此本书的第三章答案丛答案的第五章开始
CHAPTER 3
THE ORGANIZATION AND STRUCTURE OF BANKING AND THE
FINANCIAL-SERVICES INDUSTRY
Goal of This Chapter: The goal of thischapter is to explore the different types of organizations used in the bankingand financial services industry, to see how changing public mobility andchanging demand for financial services, the rise of potent competition, andchanging government roles have changed the structure, size, and the types oforganizations in this industry.
Key Topics inThis Chapter
· The Organization and Structureof Banks and the Banking Industry
· The Array of OrganizationalStructures in Banking: Unit, Branch, Holding Company, and Electronic Services
· Interstate Banking and the Riegle-NealAct
· The Financial Holding Company (FHC)
· Mergers and Acquisitions
· Banking Structure andOrganization in Europe and Asia
· The Changing Organization andStructure of Banking’s Principal Competitors
· Economies of Scale and Scopeand Expense Preference Behavior
Chapter Outline
I. Introduction
II. The Organization and Structure of theCommercial Banking Industry
A. AdvancingSize and Concentration of Assets
B. APossible Countertrend
III. Internal Organization of the Banking Firm
A. Community Banks andOther Community-Oriented Financial Firms
B. Larger Banks—Money Center,Wholesale and Retail
C. Trends in Organization
IV. The Array of Organizational Structures andTypes in the Banking Industry
A. Unit BankingOrganizations
B. Branching Organizations
1. Branching's Expansion
2. Reasons behind Branching’sGrowth
3. Advantagesand Disadvantages of Branch Banking
C. ElectronicBranching—Web Sites and Electronic Networks: An Alternative or a Supplement toTraditional Bank Branch Offices?
D. Holding CompanyOrganizations
1. WhyHolding Companies Have Grown
2. One-BankHolding Companies
3. MultibankHolding Companies
4. Advantagesand Disadvantages of Holding Companies
V. InterstateBanking Organizations and the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and BranchingEfficiency Act of 1994
A. Riegle-Neal InterstateBanking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994
B. Research on InterstateBanking
VI. AnAlternative Type of Banking Organization Available as the 21stCentury Opened: Financial Holding Companies (FHCs)
A. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999
B. Financial Holding Companies
VII. Mergersand Acquisitions Reshaping the Structure and Organization of theFinancial-Services Sector
VIII. The Changing Organization and Structure ofBanking’s Principal Competitors
A. Consolidation
B. Convergence
IX. Efficiency and Size: Do Bigger Financial FirmsOperate at Lower Cost?
A. Efficiency in ProducingFinancial Services
1. Economies of Scale
2. Economies of Scope
3. X-Efficiency
X. Financial Firm Goals: Their Impact onOperating Cost, Efficiency, and Performance
A. Expense-PreferenceBehavior
B. Agency Theory
C. Corporate Governance
XI. Summary of the Chapter
Concept Checks
3-1. How would you describe the size distributionof American banks and the concentration of industry assets inside the United States? Whatis happening in general to the size distribution and concentration of banks inthe United Statesand in other industrialized nations and why?
Althoughthe largest banks in the United States make up only 7.52 percent of all FDICinsured banks, they control almost 89.43 percent of all the industry’s assets. Whereas,the smallest FDIC insured banks in the U.S. account for 36.94 percent ofthe total banks, but they control only 1.19 percent of the industry’s assets. Thisdevelopment is a result of the strong trend towards consolidation andconvergence in the industry not only in the United States, but also globallyand can be explained by the increasing competitive pressures in the industryand the economies of scale that prevail in banking.
3-2. Describe the typical organization of a smallercommunity bank and a larger money-center bank. What does each major division oradministrative unit within the organization do?
Small communitybanks, also known as retail banks, generally have four basic departments ordivisions centered on lending (the credit function), fund-raising and marketing,accounting and operations, and perhaps, trust services. Daily operations areusually monitored by a cashier
and/orauditor and by the vice presidents in charge of each department and division.Overall, the small bank's organization chart is simple and uncomplicated.
Incontrast, the larger banks, practicing wholesale and retail banking, usuallyhave many specialized departments and divisions. It includes separatedepartments for different kinds of loans, departments to manage securityholdings and borrow in the money market, a division or department to manageinternational operations, a marketing division, and a planning unit along withother divisions.
3-3. What trends are affecting the way banks andtheir competitors are organized today?
Ingeneral, banks are becoming larger and more complex organizations with moredepartments and services and greater specialization. Deregulation and serviceinnovation have accelerated this trend as intense competition at home andabroad has encouraged banks to become larger organizations, serving broader andmore diversified market areas. Even small banks are reorganizing to meet thesechallenges by being more efficient in meeting their broader-based customerneeds.
3-4. What are unit banks?
Unitbanks offer their full menu of services from only one office. Although, theymay operate any number of drive-in windows, and automated teller machines thatare linked to the bank’s computer system. These organizations are still commontoday.
3-5. What advantages might a unit bank have overbanks of other organizational types? What disadvantages?
Unitbanks have the advantage of being less costly to operate because full-servicebranch offices are an expensive way to grow. As unit banks tend to berelatively small, they seem to be able to offer personalized services betterthan larger institutions. One disadvantage is the heavy dependence of most unitinstitutions on a single market area, which increases their risk of failure. Someauthorities believe unit institutions may not be able to afford technologicallyadvanced service delivery systems.