Impact of Risk Management on the Performance of Commercial Banks in Ghana: A Panel Regression Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic is interesting, However there are many flaws and deficits.

The main purposes and rationale of the paper are unclear.  Authors should define the variables in detail. How you calculate or define the data? What is the limitations? There must be more clear policy implications. Academic language is insufficient. Author used "this chapter", it seems this paper have been thought as a Book chapter. Literature review is inconsistent and weak.    Model significance is insufficient, The assumptions of the model have not been tested.

Author Response

Please see the attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1.     There is an urgent need to re-formulate the title by indicating what kind of financial institutions are examined in the manuscript (lines: 2-3).

2.     There is an urgent need to re-built, re-/enrichened with quotations, some of the sentences, f. ex., in lines: 39, 42, 54, 55, 70, 71, 158, etc.

3.     There are a few too general sentences, which need to be deepened, f. ex., in lines: 39 (what are the examples), 54, 55-56, etc.

4.  Where is the detailed description of the methodology?

The methodology section is TOO SHORT, gives NO sufficient information, lines: 97-158.

5. What is the research design? 

6. What is the research population? How the researchers from different part of the world can know what is the whole number of commercial banks operating in Ghana. What does the number of 27 universal commercial banks in Ghana give to us, who are not familiar with Ghana?  

7. How was the data collected? Why data from 2008-2018 ? Why not earlier, why not later? 

8.     Why the regression analysis has been chosen? 

- what is the basic foundation for the research: methodological, organizational, etc.

- what are the restrictions of this method,

- what are the criteria for selecting this method has been used,

- what are the criteria for selecting the research population,

9.  The detailed research methodology could be presented in a clear way, f. ex. in a table.

10.  The explanation of the results should be presented in a more enrichened table.

11. Please, transform conclusions directly resulting from the analyses of statistical methods into conclusions of an applied nature.

12. What are the first and second order conclusions of the analyses carried out.

13.  Where, in the conclusion, is it proven that hypotheses have been confirmed or rejected?

14.  What are the authors’ suggestions to reduce the limitations of the study in order to continue it.

15.  The literature needs to be enrichened, expanded, and updated.

HINT: use some of the statements placed in lines: 42-42, 58-62 to build / strenghten your general conclusions in the section Conclusions. 

Other remarks from the Reviewer:

The topic is very interesting :-)

 

The quality of English is good. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The aim of the work is to examine the effect of risk management on the performance of commercial banks in Ghana. Some imrpovements are required for the publication:

Choose the type of paper 

Abstract

Add a brief overview of the research'context at the beginning of the section

Introduction

check the typos "clientele" "an insignificant" etc.

the references "Locurcio, M., Tajani, F., Morano, P., Anelli, D., & Manganelli, B. (2021). Credit risk management of property investments through multi-criteria indicators. Risks, 9(6), 106." and "Popkova, E. G., & Sergi, B. S. (2021). Dataset modelling of the financial risk management of social entrepreneurship in emerging economies. Risks, 9(12), 211." can be useful for the Authors for improving this section on the topic. 

I suggest to improve the Basel Committee regulation framework and add the reference to the economic crisis of 2007-2008 for highlight the central role of the banks within the global financial markets

the section that describes the AIMS of the work is missing

2. Materials and Methods

remove the title 2.1

the data used in the analysis are missing

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I see the authors improved the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Author,

I am satisfied with the corrections you have made in your manuscript. 

There is one thing which needs to be implemented, and thus, it is 

the answer on the question does the hypothesis have been confirmed / or rejected. It should be stated in the Conclusions.

Best regards and good luck!

Your Reviewer

 

Reviewer 3 Report

the efforts made by the authors are apprecciated