\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Capital Base and Operational Efficiency in Nigerian Deposit Money Banks (Evidence from a Two-Way Fixed Effect Approach)},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2016-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2016)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2016-01-15}
\title{Capital Base and Operational Efficiency in Nigerian Deposit Money Banks (Evidence from a Two-Way Fixed Effect Approach)}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Olarewaju, Odunayo  Magret}

             \affil[1]{  Ekiti State University}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 13 December 2015 Accepted: 31 December 2015 Published: 15 January 2016}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


This paper evaluated the influence of capital base of banks on the level of operational efficiency of banks in Nigeria for the period 2004- 2013, with a view to providing information on financial ratio analysis as a measure of banks? operational efficiency and how adequate is the capital adequacy of banks? policy to significantly spur the level of their operational efficiency. Secondary data extracted from annual report and accounts of the fifteen purposively selected quoted banks were employed. Data were analysed using measures of central tendency and twoway fixed effect regression technique. Findings from the analysis showed that debt to total equity (t = -3.17, p< 0.05), core capital ratio (t = 4.65, p< 0.05), bank risk (t = -3.89, p< 0.05) were significant in evaluating the influence of capital adequacy on operational efficiency of the Nigerian money deposit banks.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{capital adequacy, core capital, two-way fixed effect, operational efficiency, deposit money banks.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
hile efficiency ratio or asset utilization ratio generally measures the efficiency of management in the use of the assets at its disposal, operational efficiency specifically measures how efficiently firm's product has been produced, held and distributed.  {\ref Kolapo (2006)} posited that a firm that is not operationally efficient will not achieve satisfactory return on owners' equity and later finds it difficult to survive adverse economic conditions. Like other firms, banks are not charitable organizations and are out to maximize shareholders wealth by transforming inputs into financial products and services at a lower cost relative to revenue generated from operation. The concept of operational efficiency is crucial for bank survival especially when one view banks as service organizations with overhead constituting the most significant overhead. It is evident that banks generate significant proportion of their income through interest received on disbursed loans and customers' deposits constitute the larger source of this lending, hence, the need to be adequately capitalised is paramount. If an operationally efficient bank requires to be adequately capitalised, it is necessary to critically evaluate the influence of bank's capital adequacy on their operational efficiency. The banking systems of many developing economies have exhibited poor performance, perhaps, in part, due to excessive government regulations and unfavourable business environment. To address this problem, various financial liberalizations, reforms and restructuring programs have been implemented in an effort to foster banking efficiency and a better allocation of resources \hyperref[b11]{(Isik \& Hassan, 2003)}. The impact of these measures on bank efficiency has been widely studied with approximately 95\% of these works focusing on banks of industrialized countries. However, only a limited number of these studies have examined the impact of capital adequacy on banks operational efficiency in developing economies \hyperref[b15]{(Kwan, 2003)}.\par
Studies on the importance of operating efficiency for banks in other economies revealed that the key determinants of operational efficiency were affected by the global financial crisis  {\ref (Siraj \& Pillai, 2011)}. This reinforces the need to understand the drivers of operational efficiency for proper risk management in the Nigerian Deposit Money Banks. The high interest charged by Nigerian banks could be attributed to the inability to push their operational costs downwards despite the increase in capital base of Nigerian banks. This may be due to many challenges in respect of costs and management of risks which banks are exposed to. Operating efficiency is one of the most critical risks faced by financial institutions in the Nigerian environment. For the banking institution to make the best use of their capital base, it is paramount for the sector to operate efficiently.\par
From happenings in the banking sector, it is evident that some banks were able to meet the 2005 recapitalisation of N25b but still failed in 2009. Could this be a signal that some of the capitals raised by banks on the stock exchange were fictitious as earlier raised by \hyperref[b27]{Sanusi (2010)}? Surprisingly, few years after the much publicised consolidation in Nigeria, some of these banks that merged together or absorbed other smaller banks to meet up with the N25b requirement were later declared distress in 2009. However, some of the banks which were able to withstand the re-capitalisation exercise of 2005 without absorbing or merging with other banks are still sound up till date and they are not failing. Could it be that, those few banks that stood alone throughout these hurdles are operating efficiently without any distress because of their broad and adequate capital base?\par
From the empirical literature, it is worthy of note that not many studies have examined the relationship between capital adequacy and operational efficiency of banks in Nigeria. However, some researchers in developed and other developing economies have examined the impact of bank capital adequacy on operational efficiency and they found out that wellcapitalised banks are better run with low unit cost; thereby operating efficiently. Some of these studies include:  {\ref Berger and Young (1997)} in the United State of America;  {\ref Kwan and Eisenbeis (1997)}  With the aforementioned problems in Nigerian banking sector and with the available literature, it is evident that there is the need to dig deep into the capital base of banks in order to know the relationship between capital adequacy and operational efficiency. Thus, this paper is aimed at critically examining banks' capital adequacy and operational efficiency in Nigeria. a) Objectives of the Study a. To examine the effect of capital adequacy on banks' operational efficiency in Nigeria b. To measure banks operational efficiency using the accounting approach (that is, Financial Ratio Analysis) 
\section[{b) Hypothesis of the Study}]{b) Hypothesis of the Study}\par
Ho: Capital base does not significantly influence the operational efficiency in Nigerian deposit money banks.\par
The paper is structured into six (6) sub-sections. Next sub-section captures the review of related literatures, followed by the methodology, the fourth subsection focused on the data analysis and discussion of findings, conclusions and recommendations of relevant policies is captured by the fifth sub-section while, limitation of the study and suggested areas for further study is captured by the last subsection. 
\section[{II.}]{II.} 
\section[{Review of Related Liteatures a) Conceptual Review i. Meaning of Banks' Capital Adequacy}]{Review of Related Liteatures a) Conceptual Review i. Meaning of Banks' Capital Adequacy}\par
According to Reserve Bank of New Zealand (2004), capital adequacy is a measure of the amount of a bank's capital expressed as a percentage of its risk weighted credit exposures. An international standard which recommends minimum capital adequacy ratio has been developed to ensure that banks can absorb a reasonable level of losses before becoming insolvent. Applying minimum capital adequacy ratios serves as a protection of depositors. It also promotes the stability and efficiency of financial system by reducing the likelihood of banks becoming insolvent. When a bank becomes insolvent, this may lead to a loss of confidence in the financial system, causing financial problems for other banks and perhaps threatening the smooth functioning of financial markets. 
\section[{ii. Meaning of Operational Efficiency of Banks}]{ii. Meaning of Operational Efficiency of Banks}\par
Deposit Money Banks play an important role as financial intermediaries for savers and borrowers in an economy. All sectors depend on banking sector for their very survival and growth. Operational efficiency of banks is, therefore, essential for a well-functioning economy. Operational efficiency is simply defined as the ability to deliver products and service cost effectively without sacrificing quality. Shawk (2008) defined operational efficiency as what occurs when a right combination of people, process and technology come together to enhance the productivity and value of any business operation, while driving down the cost of routine operations to a desired level.\par
According to \hyperref[b4]{Beck et al. (2000)}, Efficiency in intermediation of funds from savers to borrowers enables allocation of resources to their most productive users. The more efficient a financial system is in resource generation and in its allocation, the greater its contribution to productivity and economic growth. According to Chen (2001), Efficiency in banking has been tactically defined and studied in different dimensions including: (i) Scale efficiency (ii) Scope efficiency and (iii) Operational efficiency, a wide concept sometimes referred to as x-efficiency. Scale and Scope economies, for example, are achieved from the firms' output expansion resulting in an increase in the industry's output and reduction in the costs of production thus leading to the strong technological external economy. A bank has the scale efficiency, when it operates within the range of constant return to scale. Scope efficiency comes into play when the bank operates in different numerous locations. But the main area of interest in this study, which is operational efficiency, refers to the efficient utilization of human and material resources or the efficient use of people, machine tools and materials funds. Better utilization of any or a combination of these three, can increase output of goods and services and reduce costs. Operational efficiency is the tactical planning of an organization to maintain a safe balance between cost and productivity. It identifies the wasteful processes that contribute to loss of resources and organizational profits. It deals with minimizing waste and maximizing the benefits of resource to provide better services to the customers. For effective competition, lowering costs is the best option as internal wastage enhances more cost. Any input that is not processed through a system so as to generate useful output is a waste. It means producing more goods and rendering services with no greater use of resources to commensurate with income generated from the production or services.\par
iii Financial Institutions have started entering insurance business of which banks are not exempted. From mere offering of insurance products through network of bank branches, the business is likely to expand through self-designed insurance products after necessary legislative changes. d. Reducing overstaffing and introducing other measures for improving revenue generation. This strategy would increase the productivity of the banks. A bank does not need to create irrelevant branches that will increase the number of staff and thereby jack up their operating cost. e. Corporate Governance: Good corporate governance would bring financial stability and reduces high profile breakdowns. The transparency of the banks' operation is emphasized by the corporate governance. Following the Good Governance Practices is essential for building public confidence and faithful reporting. 
\section[{Components of Independent Variables Dependent Variable}]{Components of Independent Variables Dependent Variable}\par
In the figure above, there are four independent variables affecting the operational efficiency of banks. The ratio of tier 1 capital to risk weighted asset (Core Capital Ratio), total equity to total asset (Equity to Total Asset ratio), total equity to total Loan (Equity to Total Loan ratio) and total liabilities to total equity (Debt to Total Equity ratio), all denote the capital adequacy of banks which is expected to exert a positive influence on banks operational efficiency since capital adequacy serves as a cushion against unexpected loss or fluctuation in operation. Following the study of Djalilov and Piesse (2006), some banks in Central Asian countries are inefficient due to low capital adequacy, low profitability and poor asset quality.\par
Bank Risk ratio which is a control variable in this paper is measured as the ratio of total liability to total asset ratio will add a greater depth in understanding the risks a bank takes when trying to obtain higher returns at lower cost. If the bank's management takes very little risk, the bank would not be very efficient. Hence, the management should balance the trade-off between safety and operational efficiency and afterwards, a positive relationship is predicted between Bank Risk and operational efficiency. 
\section[{b) Theoretical Underpinning}]{b) Theoretical Underpinning} 
\section[{i. The Regulatory and Efficient Market-Monitoring Hypothesis}]{i. The Regulatory and Efficient Market-Monitoring Hypothesis}\par
This was first introduced by Fama (1965; 1970) and it states that regulators encourage banks to increase their capital to measure up with the amount of risk taken by banks. This may be achieved through efficient market monitoring mechanisms that will call for banks efficiency relates to the behaviours of regulators and supervisors. Banks could respond to regulatory actions forcing them to increase their capital by increasing asset risk \hyperref[b14]{(Kim \& Santomero, 1988)}. The need to control the high incidence of loan default occasioned by increased lending activities was a popular motive for reforms in financial systems in developing economies. Harley (2011), stated that government should regulate investment policy for banks for them to be more efficient and be globally competitive. 
\section[{c) Empirical Review on Capital Adequacy and Operational Efficiency of Banks}]{c) Empirical Review on Capital Adequacy and Operational Efficiency of Banks}\par
Considerable research has been concluded in recent years on the issue of whether the private market place or government regulatory agencies exert a bigger effect on bank risk taken and on bank capital decisions. However, government regulation appears to have become important with the tightening of capital regulations and the imposition of minimum capital requirements.\par
The financial markets do seem to react to the differential risk positions of banks by downgrading the debt and equity securities offered by riskier banking sector.\par
However, as Eisenbeis and Gilbert (1985) noted, 'we are not at all sure whether markets discipline works well for small and medium -sized banks, whose securities are not as actively traded in open market nor is it clear that the risk premium imposed by the market on lower-quality bank securities (in the form of lower price and higher interest rates) are really large enough to discipline bank taking'. Also, while the market may make efficient use of all the information it possesses, some of the most pertinent information needed to assess a bank's true level of risk exposure is hidden from the market and is known only to bank examiners.\par
Is a bank's capital-to-assets ratio significantly related to its probability of failure? Most research studies find little connection between capital ratios and the incidence of bank failure. For example, Santemero and Vinso  {\ref (1977)} found that increased capital does not materially lower a bank's failure risk. Many banks would still fail even if their capital were doubled or tripled -a conclusion backed up by a recent study in New England by Peek and Rosengren (1997) which found that fourfifths of bank's failing in the 1980s and early 1990s were classified by examiners as 'well capitalized'' before they failed. It is by no means certain that imposing higher capital requirements will reduce banking risk. As Wall (1989) observed, banks faced with tougher capital standards may take on more risk in other aspect of their operations in order to keep from earning lower returns.\par
Apart from its many roles and functions, banks capital acts as protective cushion against losses precipitation by certain kinds of uncertainties. This view looks at capital as a constraint to avoid default and it also acts as a cushion to protect depositors and other creditors against loss at both the operating and liquidation stage.\par
Graham  {\ref (1985)} emphasizes that, if depositors are going to grow, capital must grow alongside. He affirmed that management disciplines have an effect on capital. In this view, capital constraint helps to avoid over-trading and curbs malpractice by management. Gardener (1989) is of the opinion that prudential guidelines of capital adequacy system have an important effect on bank capital profitability and efficiency.\par
While mandatory capital ratios help to set a corresponding profit target for banks, capital adequacy might influence banks cost of capital and its overall cost of fund. Ceteris paribus, higher capital adequacy ratios may restrict the competitive abilities of banks. Apart from this, they also affect banks growth capabilities. This view takes into consideration the effect mandatory capital ratios have on banks performance being that if the banks are not able to meet up with the mandatory capital ratio, it places a constraint on their lending abilities which eventually affects their primary aim of money creation. \hyperref[b21]{Oluyemi (1996)}, stated that capital plays a significant role in the banking sectors of an economy. The need for adequacy capital for banks is a pressing problem not only in Nigeria but also to a very large extent in many countries especially in developing economies.\par
Ayodele (1998), for instance suggested, that over the period 1952-1975 in the banking industry, a relatively large number of banks that failed were due to under capitalization. However, Bank of International Settlement (B I S) emphasized that, capital is one of a number of factors to be weighted in assessing the strength and efficiency of banks. \hyperref[b9]{Familoni (2000)} however, defines banks capital as the equity value of its future net earnings. This implies that capital is the total asset less total liabilities. He also stressed that capital is required in sufficient quantity to enable banks perform its functions efficiently and to maintain public confidence.\par
Sharma, Raina and Singh (2012) employed panel data through stochastic frontier analysis model to measure the source of technical efficiency of Indian banking sector. The major determinant of technical efficiency as revealed by the study are fixed asset, deposit and deposit to total liabilities while, the cash deposit ratio is not insignificant. In a study on the determinants of operating efficiency in Egypt banking sector, Armar, Mustapha and Eldomiaty (2011) found Thus, an important factor contributing to a positive relationship between capital adequacy and asset quality, capital adequacy, credit risk and liquidity as the main determinants of efficiency in the highly competitive banks.\par
Using non parametric approach of measuring efficiency by focusing on total factor productivity in the measurement of the determinant of efficiency in the central Asian banks between 2003-2006, Djahlilor and Piesse revealed that majority of the banking organizations are efficient and that the inefficiency observed in some of the central Asian banks are traceable to low capital adequacy, poor asset quality and low profitability.\par
Employing Data Envelopment Analysis, it is evident that the main sources of efficiency in Nigerian banking sector is market size and the banking sector is not efficient in the pre and post liberalization period because of the distribution in the financial system.  {\ref (} With the use of Non parametric Data Envelopment Analysis, Inefficiency in Tazanian banks can be traced to inadequate long term capital, poor remuneration, poor management capacity and excess liquidity in terms of technical efficiency. Foreign banks take the lead followed by small and large domestic banks while, small banks are scale efficient followed by foreign and large domestic banks respectively \hyperref[b0]{(Aikaeli, 2008)}.\par
Efficiency can be improved through investment in new piece of technology. Financial market in India is dominated by public banks and the ranking revealed that they are the most efficient compared to private banks. Consequent to rising number of bank customers, there has been a significant growth in the Jordanian Islamic banks with a concomitant increase in innovation efficiency.  {\ref Ajlouni and Omari (2009)}, using both Data Envelopment and Financial Ratio Analysis found that the most profitable banks faced higher risk which makes them operationally inefficient.\par
According to Ines Ayadi (2013), in the study determinants of Tunisian bank efficiency, using Data Envelopment Analysis, it was discovered that market share in Tunisian banks has inverse impact on their efficiency. Quality of asset suggests that most banks engage in risky activities including credit. In the study, high ratio of quality of asset has negative effect on efficiency because it shows a small yield of bank assets. Tunisian banks tend to be less efficient because they suffer from under evaluation of Credit Risk and misallocation of resources. Therefore, it was denoted that the cost of the Tunisian banks increases with non performing loans.\par
Employing Data Envelopment fixed effect regression analysis by Sarchez, Hassan and Bartkus (2013), efficient banks in Latin American capitalise earnings in liquidity because the ratio of loan loss reserve to gross loan is negatively related to efficiency and banks with low quality loan are expected to have low efficiency. Also, Kamarudaddin and Rohani (2013) in their Data Envelopment Analysis of efficiency in Malaysian Islamic banks found that size of banking operation, asset quality improves operational efficiency as opposed to corporate social responsibility which is negatively related to cost/operational efficiency. Malaysian banks will be more efficient if they can control non-performing loans, in that the high cost of maintaining loan default will be avoided. Furthermore, employing Data Envelopment Analysis by Endri and Divilestari (2014), it was noted that variable of interest rate is inversely related to technical efficiency and the rate of Inflation on the contrary has positive relationship with banks operational efficiency. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Methodology a) Model Specification}]{Methodology a) Model Specification}Y it = ? 0 + ? ? i X it + ?? it ???????????????? (1)\par
Explicitly, the model isY it = ? 0 + ? 1 X it1 + ? 2 X it2 + ? 3 X it3 + ? 4 X it4 + ? 5 X it5 + ?? it ????????. (\textbf{2})OE it = ? o + ? 1 CCR it + ? 2 ETA it + ? 3 ETL it + ? 4 DTE it + ? 5 BR it + ?? it ??? ??\textbf{(3)}\par
Y is the proxy of operational efficiency which was measured by operational efficiency ratio using the accounting approach of the measure of efficiency and X is the proxy of the independent variables which was measured by capital adequacy ratios (X 1, X 2 X 3 ,X 4, ) and Bank Risk ratio (X 5 ). i stands for the total sample of banks \hyperref[b15]{(15)} and t denotes the total number of years \hyperref[b9]{(10)} in consideration.\par
Based on the conceptual framework designed in this study, the following models were formulated to show the relationship between the variables of interest. b) A Priori Expectation ? 1 , ? 2 , ? 3, ? 4 and ? 5 > 0 Where X 1 (Core Capital Ratio), X 2 (Equity to Total Asset ratio), X 3 (Equity to Total Loan ratio) and X 4 (Debt to Total Equity ratio) are the proxies of capital adequacy. On a priori, the coefficients of X 1 , X 2 , X 3 and X 4 (capital adequacy) are expected to be positive. According to  {\ref CBN (2004)}, capital adequacy serves as a cushion against unexpected loss or fluctuation in operation. So, the higher the capital base of a bank, the higher its activities and the higher its operational efficiency. Following the study of  {\ref Djalilov et al. (2006)}  \hyperref[b25]{Sanchez et al. (2013)}, support positive relationship between capital adequacy and bank earnings, though not all were significant, but with the current situation of Nigerian economy, a positive relationship is expected between capital adequacy and operational efficiency. 
\section[{IV.}]{IV.}\par
Analysis and Discussion of Results Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.1 above presents the descriptive statistics of all the variables used in an attempt to determine the influence of capital adequacy on operational efficiency of Deposit Money Banks. The Table reveals that the average value for OE, ETA, ETL, DTE, CCR and BR of the pooled observations for the period and cross sectional unit covered in the study stood at 0.15556, 0.1457867, 0.40404, 7.857353, 0.34426, 0.8481275 respectively. Reported in Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.1 are minimum and maximum values of OE which stood at .005 and 0.413 respectively while, for ETL, DTE, CCR and BR, the Table reports minimum and maximum values of -0.319 and 0.413, -1.589 and 1.319, -7.22 and 191.21, -0.909 and 0.996, 0.267 and 1.319 respectively. The standard deviation of the variables stood at 0.0703573 for OE, 0.0889667 for ETA, 0.3138729 for ETL, 15.80529 for DTE, 0.2158141 for CCR, 0.0981351 for BR. It is noteworthy to stress that Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.1 only gave the description of the variables used in achieving objective the study which does not call for any form of inferential analysis Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.2 above explains the correlation between operational efficiency and capital adequacy proxied by ratio of Equity to Total Asset (ETA), ratio of Equity to Total Loan (ETL), ratio of Debt to Total Equity (DTE), Bank Risk (BR) and Core Capital Ratio (CCR). The Table shows that there is negative correlation between operational efficiency and capital adequacy proxied by ETA, DTE, BR while, operational efficiency and capital adequacy proxied by ETL and CCR tends to be positive. From the correlation statistics presented in the Table, it can be seen that there is no strong correlation between operational efficiency and capital adequacy rather mildly weak and/or very weak correlation. Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.2 shows positive correlation between capital adequacy proxied by ETA and other proxies of explanatory variables such as DTE, CCR, BR while, the correlation between ETA and ETL is negative. Thus, majority of capital adequacy proxies tend to move in the direction with the ratio of Equity to Total Asset (ETA). Although, the degree of the correlation is weak and/or very weak. Correlation between capital adequacy proxied by ETL and other explanatory variables such as, DTE and BR is negative, but positive for CCR while, there is negative correlation between DTE and CCR. Notably, the correlation between CCR and BR is weak. Lastly, the  It is noteworthy to stress that, correlation analyses presented above only gave information on the degree and direction of relationships between pairs of variables employed in the model corresponding to objective two and three, without any reference to the causal-effect relationship between the variables. Thus, negative/positive correlation coefficients reported in Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.2 only depicted the direction of the linear relationship between pairs of variables and/or the strength of such linear relationship. However, the general overview of the correlation coefficient reveals that, there is no indication or possibility of multi-co linearity problem in the model where all the observed variables will be employed.  Evaluating the result by a priori expectation, it was discovered that the direction of causal-effect relationship between operational efficiency and the explanatory variables contradict expectations. However, the result presented in Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.3 reveals that capital adequacy as measured by the likes of ratio of Debt to Total Equity (DTE), Core Capital Ratio (CCR) and Bank Risk (BR) exert significant influence on the operational efficiency while, the influence of other measures of capital adequacy such as ratio of Equity to Total Asset (ETA), and ratio of Equity to Total Loan (ETL) are not significant.\par
Relating the findings from the result presented in Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.3 to previous researches it was discovered that the findings of this study corroborates the findings of past researches; such as Santemero et al. (1997), peek et al.  {\ref (1997)} where it was asserted that many banks fail or would fail even if their capital were doubled or tripled, meaning capital adequacy does not at all times positively influence operational efficiency, which is the case for some of the measures of capital adequacy (such as ETA, ETL, DTE and BR) employed in this study. On the other hand, the discovery of negative influence of capital adequacy on operational efficiency contradicts the works of Gardener (1989), Ayodele (1998) and Ekundayo (1999). However, in agreement with the works of \hyperref[b21]{Oluyemi (1996)}; Armar et al.  {\ref (2011)}, the study attested to the fact that capital adequacy is a significant consideration in the discourse of operational efficiency of Deposit Money Banks.\par
Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.3 also reveals the cross-sectional and time-specific effect of all the subject units (that is, all the banks) for the period covered (2004-2013). The reference/based cross-sectional unit for intercept differential analysis is Guarantee Trust Bank while, 2004 was used as the base period for the time-specific effect analysis. From the Table, it was reported that deviation from the cross-sectional reference point (0.2994814) average 0.0033405 for Zenith Bank, 0.0103981 for Sterling Bank, 0.0004334 for Skye Bank, 0.0251221 for First Bank, 0.0236104 for Access Bank, 0.0026756 for Diamond Bank, 0.0571225 for FCMB Bank, 0.015415 for IBTC Bank, 0.0071874 for Unity Bank, 0.033398 for UBA Bank, 0.0489608 for Fidelity Bank, 0.0632969 for WEMA Bank, 0.0164259 for Union Bank and 0.023981 for Ecobank.\par
However, close check on the probability values corresponding to each of the cross-sectional intercept differential shows that, there is a significant difference between the based intercept and that of banks like FCMB, Fidelity and WEMA which by implication shows that, there are intrinsic organizational factors influencing operational efficiency of the aforementioned banks which cannot be subsumed or assumed to affect other banks, thus, their heterogeneity/uniqueness. This uniqueness might be attributed to managerial standard/competence, technological acceptance and timeliness of decision making of those banks, towards sustaining operational efficiency.\par
In like manner, Table \hyperref[tab_7]{4}.3 shows further that there is significant difference in the operational efficiency of Deposit Money Banks in year 2009 and 2010 as against other period given the intercept differential that is significant for the two periods/years. The observed time-specific effect might be traceable to the Central Bank of Nigeria policy of 2009 for instance; the 'stress test' conducted which led to the reclassification of banks not by balance sheet size or asset base, but along the lines of grossly endangered, in dangers and healthy. 
\section[{V. Conclusion and Recommendations}]{V. Conclusion and Recommendations}\par
Premise on the findings in this paper, it is concluded that capital adequacy of Deposit Money Banks of Nigeria has not attained a level where its contribution can significantly spur operational efficiency. Out of CAMEL rating system of banks, other variables like Asset quality, Managerial Efficiency and Liquidity of banks must be given consideration. This prompts the following policy recommendations to ensure better interrelationship between capital adequacy and operational efficiency of Deposit Money Banks in Nigeria. a) For effective performance, each bank should be allowed to set its own benchmark depending on the desired cushion level and to commensurate with their risk exposures. There are some of the banks that are strong enough to set a capital base more than N25 billion while, some that are small can be allowed to set a level they are capable to afford so as to avoid declaration of fictitious assets as earlier proclaimed by Sanusi (2010). b) The government should make the environment conducive for banks to operate by providing basic amenities like electricity, good roads and other infrastructures. Most importantly, electricity supply constitutes the major operating cost incurred by Nigerian banks. c) In CAMEL rating system of banks, the apex banks has placed high concentration on the capital adequacy, their attention should also be shifted to asset quality, managerial efficiency and banks liquidity by trying to adopt the Basle III whose focus is based on liquidity management of banks. d) The risk weight categorization and computation of banks' asset should be consistent and it should be more standardized and adequately publicized to ensure easy accessibility to all users. e) The regulatory authority should ensure that the gains of the banking reforms processes are sustained and the Central Bank of Nigeria should take more decisive measures aimed at tightening the risk management framework of the Nigerian banking sector as this will have a positive effect on their operational efficiency.\par
VI. 
\section[{Limitation of the Study and Suggested Area for Further Study}]{Limitation of the Study and Suggested Area for Further Study}\par
Further research should consider other financial institutions most importantly, insurance companies. Would-be researchers can also carry out a comparative study on using both profitability and operational efficiency as a measure of Deposit Money Banks' performance over the years.\begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png}
\caption{\label{fig_0}D}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
. Measures that can Improve Operational Efficiency of\\
Banks\\
According to Dhanapal and Ganesan (2012),\\
the following measures will improve the operational\\
efficiency of banks if strictly adhered to.\\
a. Innovative product designing:\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: b. Development of new technology: Banks have to interact constantly with other industries, trade associations, farming communities, academic/ research institutions etc, so as to initiate studies and pilot projects for evolving better financial models in their banks. For example, solar powered ATM technology save costs. c. Engaging in the insurance business is catching up.]} 
\caption{\label{tab_1}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_4}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{41} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.26616161616161615\textwidth}P{0.0601010101010101\textwidth}P{0.14595959595959596\textwidth}P{0.17744107744107743\textwidth}P{0.10303030303030303\textwidth}P{0.09730639730639731\textwidth}}
Variable\tabcellsep Obs\tabcellsep Mean\tabcellsep Std. Dev.\tabcellsep Min\tabcellsep Max\\
OE\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 0.15556\tabcellsep 0.0703573\tabcellsep 0.005\tabcellsep 0.413\\
ETA\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 0.1457867\tabcellsep 0.0889667\tabcellsep -0.319\tabcellsep 0.413\\
ETL\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 0.40404\tabcellsep 0.3138729\tabcellsep -1.589\tabcellsep 1.319\\
DTE\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 7.857353\tabcellsep 15.80529\tabcellsep -7.22\tabcellsep 191.21\\
CCR\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 0.34426\tabcellsep 0.2158141\tabcellsep -0.909\tabcellsep 0.996\\
BR\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 0.8481275\tabcellsep 0.0981351\tabcellsep 0.267\tabcellsep 1.319\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{Source: Author's Computation, 2015 using STATA statistical package 11}\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_5}Table 4 . 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
Capital Base and Operational Efficiency in Nigerian Deposit Money Banks (Evidence from a Two-Way Fixed\\
Effect Approach)\\
2016\\
Year\\
Volume XVI Issue I Version I\\
( ) D\\
Global Journal of Management and Business Research\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.2811284046692607\textwidth}P{0.13560311284046692\textwidth}P{0.11245136186770428\textwidth}P{0.1686770428015564\textwidth}P{0.07276264591439689\textwidth}P{0.05291828793774319\textwidth}P{0.026459143968871595\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{2 : Correlation Matrix}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep OE\tabcellsep ETA\tabcellsep ETL\tabcellsep DTE\tabcellsep CCR\tabcellsep BR\\
OE\tabcellsep 1.0000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
ETA\tabcellsep -0.0848\tabcellsep 1.0000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
ETL\tabcellsep 0.4357\tabcellsep -0.0783\tabcellsep 1.0000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
DTE\tabcellsep -0.3780\tabcellsep 0.0929\tabcellsep -0.1634\tabcellsep 1.0000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
CCR\tabcellsep 0.5779\tabcellsep 0.0355\tabcellsep 0.5233\tabcellsep -0.3439\tabcellsep 1.0000\tabcellsep \\
BR\tabcellsep -0.5782\tabcellsep 0.1233\tabcellsep -0.7147\tabcellsep 0.2242\tabcellsep -0.4686\tabcellsep 1.0000\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{Source: Author's Computation, 2015 using STATA Statistical Package 11}\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_7}Table 4 .}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{43} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.2619269949066214\textwidth}P{0.1962648556876061\textwidth}P{0.17606112054329373\textwidth}P{0.09741086587436333\textwidth}P{0.11833616298811546\textwidth}}
Variable\tabcellsep Coefficient\tabcellsep Standard Error\tabcellsep T-Test Values\tabcellsep Probability\\
C\tabcellsep 0.2994814\tabcellsep .0634205\tabcellsep 4.72\tabcellsep 0.000\\
ETA\tabcellsep -0.0055735\tabcellsep .0069643\tabcellsep -0.80\tabcellsep 0.425\\
ETL\tabcellsep -0.0057056\tabcellsep .021973\tabcellsep -0.26\tabcellsep 0.796\\
DTE\tabcellsep -0.0008808\tabcellsep .0002779\tabcellsep -3.17\tabcellsep 0.002*\\
CCR\tabcellsep 0.1232206\tabcellsep .0265005\tabcellsep 4.65\tabcellsep 0.000*\\
BR\tabcellsep -0.2543113\tabcellsep .0653358\tabcellsep -3.89\tabcellsep 0.000*\\
Cross-sectional effects\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
ZENITH BANK\tabcellsep 0.0033405\tabcellsep .0218654\tabcellsep 0.15\tabcellsep 0.879\\
STERLING BANK\tabcellsep 0.0103981\tabcellsep .0223073\tabcellsep 0.47\tabcellsep 0.642\\
SKYE BANK\tabcellsep 0.0004334\tabcellsep .0214986\tabcellsep 0.02\tabcellsep 0.984\\
FIRST BANK\tabcellsep 0.0251221\tabcellsep .0233023\tabcellsep 1.08\tabcellsep 0.283\\
ACCESS BANK\tabcellsep 0.0236104\tabcellsep .0209836\tabcellsep 1.13\tabcellsep 0.263\\
DIAMOND BANK\tabcellsep -0.0026756\tabcellsep .021795\tabcellsep -0.12\tabcellsep 0.903\\
FCMB BANK\tabcellsep 0.0571225\tabcellsep .0217209\tabcellsep 2.63\tabcellsep 0.010*\\
IBTC BANK\tabcellsep 0.015415\tabcellsep .0271144\tabcellsep 0.57\tabcellsep 0.571\\
UNITY BANK\tabcellsep -0.0071874\tabcellsep .0219118\tabcellsep -0.33\tabcellsep 0.743\\
UBA BANK\tabcellsep 0.033398\tabcellsep .0216588\tabcellsep 1.54\tabcellsep 0.126\\
FIDELITY BANK\tabcellsep 0.0489608\tabcellsep .0219899\tabcellsep 2.23\tabcellsep 0.028*\\
WEMA BANK\tabcellsep 0.0632969\tabcellsep .0258532\tabcellsep 2.45\tabcellsep 0.016*\\
UNION BANK\tabcellsep 0.0164259\tabcellsep .0248452\tabcellsep 0.66\tabcellsep 0.510\\
ECOBANK\tabcellsep 0.023981\tabcellsep .0233683\tabcellsep 1.03\tabcellsep 0.307\\
Time specific effects\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
2005\tabcellsep 0.018556\tabcellsep .0175014\tabcellsep 1.06\tabcellsep 0.291\\
2006\tabcellsep 0.0242585\tabcellsep .0175883\tabcellsep 1.38\tabcellsep 0.170\\
2007\tabcellsep 0.0040887\tabcellsep .0173376\tabcellsep 0.24\tabcellsep 0.814\\
2008\tabcellsep 0.012346\tabcellsep .0177444\tabcellsep 0.70\tabcellsep 0.488\\
2009\tabcellsep 0.0532566\tabcellsep .0174012\tabcellsep 3.06\tabcellsep 0.003*\\
2010\tabcellsep 0.0625517\tabcellsep .0172537\tabcellsep 3.63\tabcellsep 0.000*\\
2011\tabcellsep 0.0211278\tabcellsep .0172763\tabcellsep 1.22\tabcellsep 0.224\\
2012\tabcellsep 0.0295974\tabcellsep .0174324\tabcellsep 1.70\tabcellsep 0.092\\
2013\tabcellsep 0.000342\tabcellsep .0182631\tabcellsep 0.02\tabcellsep 0.985\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{(*) connote rejection at 5\% level of significance}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Source: Author's Computation, 2015 using STATA statistical package 11}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_8}Table 4 . 3 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_9}Table 4 .}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{© 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US)} 			\footnote{© 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) 1DCapital Base and Operational Efficiency in Nigerian Deposit Money Banks (Evidence from a Two-Way Fixed Effect Approach)} 		 		\backmatter   			 \par
The major limitation of the study is the inability to incorporate all the existing 21 Deposit Money Banks in Nigeria due to unavailability of data which is traceable to the fact that they are not listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange and their activities are unstable and unsteady. Also, data to capture some of the variables that would have been used to measure capital adequacy were not available in the annual reports and accounts of the banks for all the years covered by the study due to the changes in preparation of accounts from Statement of Accounting Standards (SAS) to International Accounting Standards (IAS) and currently on International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). However, the aforementioned limitations do not in any way affect the authenticity of these findings. 			  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Kwan and Eisenbeis ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		‘An Analysis of Inefficiencies in Banking’.  		 			S Kwan 		,  		 			V Eisenbeis 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Banking \& Finance}  		1995. 19  (3-4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Samad ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		‘Bahrain Commercial Bank's Performance during 1994-2001’.  		 			A Samad 		.  	 	 		\textit{Credit \& Financial Management Review}  		2004. 10  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Capital adequacy ratios for banks-simplified explanation & examples for calculation ()]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		\textit{Capital adequacy ratios for banks-simplified explanation \& examples for calculation},  		2004.  		 			Reserve Bank of New Zealand 		 	 
\bibitem[Aikaeli ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		‘Commercial Banks Efficiency in Tanzania’.  		 			. J Aikaeli 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Conference on Economic Development in Africa}  		2008.  (1) .  	 
\bibitem[Said ()]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		‘Comparing the Change in Efficiency of the Western \& Islamic Banking Systems’.  		 			A Said 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Money, Investment \& Banking}  		2012. 10  (23)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Isik and Hassan ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		\textit{Cost \& profit Efficiency of the Turkish banking Industry: An empirical investigation. The financial review},  		 			I Isik 		,  		 			M K Hassan 		.  		2002. 37 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Odunga et al. ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		‘Credit Risk, capital adequacy \& operational efficiency of commercial banks in Kenya’.  		 			R M Odunga 		,  		 			P M Nyangweso 		,  		 			D A Carter 		,  		 			M Mwarumba 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal o f Business \& Management invention}  		2013. 2  (9)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ismail et al. ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		\textit{Determinants of Efficiency in Malaysian Banking Sector},  		 			F Ismail 		,  		 			R Rahim 		,  		 			M S Majid 		.  		2009. 3 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Armer et al. (2011)]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		‘Determinants of operating efficiency for lowly \& highly competitive banks in Egypt’.  		 			H M H Armer 		,  		 			W Moustafa 		,  		 			T Eldomiaty 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Cambridge Business \& Economics Conference}  		2011. June. p. 33.  	 
\bibitem[Karimzadeh ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		‘Efficiency analysis by using Data Envelop Analysis Model: Evidence from Indian Banks’.  		 			M Karimzadeh 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Finance}  		2012. 2  (3)  p. .  	 	 (Economics \& Science) 
\bibitem[Sanchez et al. ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		‘Efficiency Determinants \& Dynamic Efficiency changes in Latin American Banking Industries’.  		 			B Sanchez 		,  		 			M K Hassan 		,  		 			J R Bartkus 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Centrum Cathedra}  		2013. 5  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Isik and Hassan ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Efficiency, ownership \& market structure, corporate control \& governance in the Turkish banking industry’.  		 			I Isik 		,  		 			M K Hassan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business Finance \& Accounting}  		2003. 30 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Fama ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		‘Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory \& Empirical Work’.  		 			E F Fama 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Finance}  		1970. 25  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Santomero and Vinson ()]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		‘Estimating the probability of failure for commercial banks \& banking system’.  		 			A M Santomero 		,  		 			J D Vinson 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Banking \& Finance}  		1977. 1 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Beck et al. ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		‘Finance \& sources of growth’.  		 			T Beck 		,  		 			R Levine 		,  		 			L Norman 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Monetary Economics}  		2000. 46 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ncube ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		\textit{Fostering Development in an Era of financial \& Economic Crises},  		 			M Ncube 		.  		2009. 2009. Addis Ababa.  	 	 (Efficiency in the Banking Sector in South Africa) 
\bibitem[Oke and Poloamina ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		‘Further Analysis of Bank Efficiency Correlates: The Nigerian Experience’.  		 			D M Oke 		,  		 			I D Poloamina 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Applied Finance \& Banking}  		2012. 2  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Berger and Mester ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		‘Inside the black box: what explains differences in the efficiencies of financial institution’.  		 			A N Berger 		,  		 			L B Mester 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of banking \& finance}  		1997. 21 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Familoni ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		\textit{Management of Banks \& Financial Institutions},  		 			J A Familoni 		.  		2000. Ado-Ekiti: Bab's Publication.  	 
\bibitem[Eisenbeis and Gilbert ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘Market discipline \& the prevention of bank problems \& failure’.  		 			R A Eisenbeis 		,  		 			G G Gilbert 		.  	 	 		\textit{Issues in banking regulation}  		1985. 1  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Sharma et al. ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		‘Measurement of Technical Efficiency \& its sources: An Experience of Indian Banking Sector’.  		 			S Sharma 		,  		 			D Raina 		,  		 			S Singh 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Economics \& Management}  		2012. 6  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Kwan ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘Operating performance of banks among Asian economies: An international \& time series comparison’.  		 			S H Kwan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Banking \& Finance}  		2003. 27 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ajlouni and Omari ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		‘Performance Efficiency of the Jordanian Islamic Banks using Data Envelopment Analysis \& Financial Ratio Analysis’.  		 			M M Ajlouni 		,  		 			H O Omari 		.  	 	 		\textit{European Journal}  		2010. 3  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Wall (1985)]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		\textit{Regulation of Banks' Equity Capital. Economic review},  		 			L D Wall 		.  		1985, 4 th November. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.  	 
\bibitem[Kim and Santomero ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘Risk in Banking \& Capital Regulation’.  		 			D Kim 		,  		 			P Santomero 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Journal of Finance}  		1988. 43  (5)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Fama ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		‘The Behaviour of Stock-Market Prices’.  		 			E F Fama 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business}  		1965. 38  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Oluyemi ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		‘The implication of banks' profitability on implementing the risk based capital requirement’.  		 			S A Oluyemi 		.  	 	 		\textit{NDIC Quarterly review}  		1996. 2  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ayodele (1988)]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		‘The Nigerian Banking \& Financial Environment: Bank of Nigeria’.  		 			O Ayodele 		.  	 	 		\textit{Nigeria Banker}  		1988. Jan-June. 4  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Sanusi ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		\textit{The Nigerian banking industry: What went wrong \& the way forward},  		 			L S Sanusi 		.  		2010.  	 	 (Being an address delivered at the convocation Square) 
\bibitem[Obafemi et al. ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		‘The sources of Efficiency in the Nigerian Banking Industry; A Two-Stage Approach’.  		 			F N Obafemi 		,  		 			O S Ayodele 		,  		 			F S Ebong 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Finance \& Banking Studies}  		2013. 2  (4)  p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
