ABSTRACT
“Alternative” is a term used not only by some banks to describe their own business model, but also by outside observers to indicate banks that appear to differ from the mainstream. However, it is difficult to figure to what extent they are alternative. The focal point is to define what the benchmark (the conventional) is and what parameters we adopt to qualify a bank as alternative: the legal framework, the pattern of its governance, the market that it addresses, the goals by which it is driven? Since its beginning, the banking world listed various patterns and this heterogeneity has not diminished over the centuries. However, the last years register significant changes, and the legal frameworks and the need to be competitive seem to erode the diversities among banks. Overlapping in the business strategies of banks is common: commercial banks use the relationship lending to attract customers especially in remote areas, while local and small banks try to expand their loans to a more remunerative yet risky market. The research questions are: What defines a bank as such and which is the reference model? How, and how much, might a bank be alternative?
