Skip to main content
Log in

A Credit Score System for Socially Responsible Lending

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ethical banking, microfinance institutions or certain credit cooperatives, among others, grant socially responsible loans. This paper presents a credit score system for them. The model evaluates social and financial aspects of the borrower. The financial aspects are evaluated under the conventional banking framework, by analysing accounting statements and financial projections. The social aspects try to quantify the loan impact on the achievement of Millennium Development Goals such as employment, education, environment, health or community impact. The social credit score model should incorporate the lender’s know-how and should also be coherent with its mission. This is done using Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). The paper illustrates a real case: a loan application by a social entrepreneur presented to a socially responsible lender. The decision support system not only produces a score, but also reveals strengths and weaknesses of the application.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aczel, J., & Saaty, T. L. (1983). Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 27(1), 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambec, S., & Treich, N. (2007). Roscas as financial agreements to cope with self-control. Journal of Development Economics, 82(1), 120–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleyard, L. (2011). Community development finance institutions (CDFIs): Geographies of financial inclusion in the US and UK. Geoforum, 42(2), 250–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. A. (2001). Social impact assessment. European Journal of Operational Research, 128(2), 311–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belton, V., & Gear, T. (1983). On a short-coming of Saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies. Omega, 11, 228–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BIS (2004). International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards, A Revised Framework, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Basel, Switzerland.

  • Bouman, F. J. A. (1995). Rotating and accumulating savings and credit associations: A development perspective. World Development, 23(3), 371–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burdge, R. J. (2003). The practice of social impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21(2), 84–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buttle, M. (2007). I’m not in it for the money: Constructing and mediating ethical reconnections in UK social banking. Geoforum, 38(6), 1076–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CGAP (2011). Measuring changes in client lives through microfinance: Contributions of different approaches. CGAP brief. Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest, World Bank, Washington DC.

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. S. (1990). Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science, 36, 249–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fock, H., Chan, A., & Yan, D. (2011). Member-organization connection impacts in affinity marketing. Journal of Business Research, 64(7), 672–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, D. (1998). Measuring the unmeasurable. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27(2), 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frame, B., & O’Connor, M. (2011). Integrating valuation and deliberation: the purposes of sustainability assessment. Environmental Science & Policy, 14(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard, J. A., McKillop, D. G., & Wilson, J. O. S. (2002). The growth of US credit unions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(12), 2327–2356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace, T. R. L., & Tang, J. Y. H. (2009). Appraising intangible assets from the viewpoint of value drivers. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(4), 679–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., & Harvey, C. (2002). How do CFOs make capital budgeting and capital structure decisions? Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 15(1), 8–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GRI (2011). Sustainability reporting guidelines, version 3.1. Global Reporting Initiative. Accessed June 24, 2011, from www.globalreporting.org.

  • Gutiérrez-Nieto, B., Serrano-Cinca, C., & Mar-Molinero, C. (2009). Social efficiency in microfinance institutions. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(1), 104–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. D., Sapienza, H. J., & Bowie, N. E. (2009). Ethics and entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 407–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAIA (2011). What is impact assessment? International Association for Impact Assessment. Accessed June 24, 2011, from http://www.iaia.org/publicdocuments/special-publications/What%20is%20IA_web.pdf.

  • Johnson, S. A., & Sarkar, S. K. (1996). The valuation effects of the 1977 community reinvestment act and its enforcement. Journal of Banking & Finance, 20(5), 783–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewellen, W. G. (1977). Some observations on risk-adjusted discount rates. The Journal of Finance, 32(4), 1331–1337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millet, I. (1998). Ethical decision making using the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(11), 1197–1204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moneva, J. M., Archel, P., & Correa, C. (2006). GRI and the camouflaging of corporate unsustainability. Accounting Forum, 30(2), 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morduch, J. (1999). The microfinance promise. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(4), 1569–1614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, M., & Zelewski, S. (2008). Pitfalls in the application of analytic hierarchy process to performance measurement. Management Decision, 46(7), 1039–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • REDF. (2001). SROI methodology: A social return on investment, analyzing the value of social purpose enterprise within a social return on investment framework. San Francisco: Roberts Enterprise Development Fund, The Roberts Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., & Paul, K. (1998). The development of a systematic, aggregate measure of corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 24(1), 119–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (2013). The modern science of multicriteria decision making and its practical applications: The AHP/ANP approach. Operations Research, 61(5), 1101–1118.

  • Schaefer, H. (2004). Ethical investment of German non-profit organizations: Conceptual outline and empirical results. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(4), 269–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, M. (2002). Scoring: The next breakthrough in microfinance? Occasional Paper 7. Consultative group to assist the poorest (CGAP). Washington DC.

  • Searcy, C. (2012). Corporate sustainability performance measurement systems: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. E., & von Winterfeldt, D. (2004). Decision analysis in management science. Management Science, 50(5), 561–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. W., & Ahmad, N. (2009). Using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to construct a measure of the magnitude of consequences component of moral intensity. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(3), 391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steuer, R. E., & Na, P. (2003). Multiple criteria decision making combined with finance: A categorized bibliographic study. European Journal of Operational Research, 150(3), 496–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sveiby, K. (1997). The new organizational wealth: managing and measuring knowledge-based assets. New York, NY: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triodos Bank (2011). Triodos Bank’s approach to lending. Accessed June 24, 2011 from http://www.triodos.com/downloads/lending-criteria.pdf.

  • Tsai, W.-H., & Chou, W.-C. (2009). Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 1444–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, K. H., Samsatli, N. J., & Shah, N. (2007). Capacity investment planning for multiple vaccines under uncertainty: 2: Financial risk analysis. Food and Bioproducts Processing, 85(2), 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, F. (2010). The triple bottom line and impact assessment: How do TBL, EIA, SIA, SEA and EMS relate to each other? In W. R. Sheate (Ed.), Tools, techniques and approaches for sustainability (pp. 101–124). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yurdakul, M., & Iç, Y. T. (2004). AHP approach in the credit evaluation of the manufacturing firms in Turkey. International Journal of Production Economics, 88(3), 269–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The work reported in this paper was supported by Grants ECO2010-20228 and ECO2013-45568-R of the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science, and the European Regional Development Fund and by grant Ref. S-14 (3) of the Government of Aragon. We are especially grateful to Coop57 Aragon and La Veloz staff for their support in this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Begoña Gutiérrez-Nieto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gutiérrez-Nieto, B., Serrano-Cinca, C. & Camón-Cala, J. A Credit Score System for Socially Responsible Lending. J Bus Ethics 133, 691–701 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2448-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2448-5

Keywords

Navigation