Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/34229
|
| Title: | 我國資訊電子業智慧資本蓄積情形之研究 |
| Authors: | 黃文珊
Huang, Wen-Shan |
| Contributors: | 王文英
黃文珊
Huang, Wen-Shan |
| Keywords: | 智慧資本蓄積
策略
資訊電子業
企業績效
Intellectual capital
Strategy
Electronic industry
Performance |
| Date: | 2005 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-18 09:04:17 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 在這個知識經濟時代中，智慧資本是組織競爭優勢的關鍵所在，而智慧資本的創造、發展、分享及整合則是創造企業價值的主要動因。因此，智慧資本對一個組織而言是很重要的資源，然而每個組織需要的資源種類及多寡是否相同? 又該如何衡量、蓄積與管理? 這些將成為未來企業競爭的重要關鍵。在資源基礎論下認為企業應持續建構及運用本身的經營條件，以對抗外在環境的變化，特別強調資源對公司經營與未來發展的重要性，由此可知，資源是企業策略決策的思考邏輯中心。因此，對資源之需求理論上應隨著策略之不同而有所不同，然而是否會真的有所不同? 具體上又有何不同? 值得我們進一步探討。
然而在企業界的現行實務中，企業所實際擁有的智慧資本是否足以幫助企業達成策略目標與組織目標，非常值得深思。若能掌握企業為達策略目標所需之智慧資本與目前實際擁有之智慧資本的差異狀況，相信能對企業蓄積智慧資本應努力方向提供切實且有助益之參考。故本研究的目的主要係探討企業應重視蓄積之智慧資本為何、應重視蓄積之智慧資本是否會隨著企業所採策略不同而不同，以及實際蓄積不足而應加強蓄積之智慧資本為何。
本研究係以我國資訊電子業之上市與上櫃公司為研究對象，並採取問卷調查法來進行，發現之結果如下：
一、企業所重視之智慧資本包含「研發能力與智財強度」、「提昇顧客關係能力」、「營運管理能力」、「提昇人力品質能力」、「行銷能力」、「製程彈性與產能利用」、「生產品質」、以及「組織結構」八個因素構面。
二、企業對於智慧資本之重視蓄積程度會隨著企業所採取策略之不同而不同。
三、兩策略下蓄積不足之智慧資本主要皆集中於「營運管理能力」構面以及「研發能力與智財強度」構面有關之項目，但採低成本策略之企業亦明顯在「生產品質」構面之項目上蓄積不足。
四、企業之智慧資本未達蓄積目標會影響企業績效。
In this knowledge-based economy, intellectual capital is the key factor to help firms get its competitive advantage. The creation, development, sharing and integration of intellectual capital is the key driver to create the value of firms. Therefore, intellectual capital is a very important resource for a firm. However, what kind of resource do different firms need and how much do they need? How to measure, store, and manage the resource will be the key point for firms to compete in the future. In the resource-base theory, it is thought that firms should keep constructing and making use of its terms to react to the change of the external environment. It also insist on the importance of the resource for firms, so we can know that resource is the logic center for firms to make a strategic decision. Therefore, the need for resource will be different by the strategy. But what’s the different is worth for us to discuss.
It is worth for us to think about that in practice do firms really have enough intellectual capital to help them reach the strategic goal of a frim. If we can know well about the difference between the intellectual capital which firms really have and the intellectual capital they want to have, we can provide a practical and helpful way for firms to store their own intellectual capital. The objective of this study is to find out what intellectual capital should firms need to emphasis on. Are they different by strategy. And what intellectual capital should they enhance to store.
In this study, both questionnaire survey method are used. The public firms in the electronic industry are the objects of the thesis. We found that:
1. Firms should emphasis on eight intellectual capital, including research, development and intellectual property ability, increase customer relationship ability, operation processes management, increase human quality ability, sales ability, manufacture process elasticity and capacity utilization, manufacture quality, and business structure.
2. The importance of intellectual capital for a firm is affected by strategic types.
3. Firms are mainly insufficient in operation processes and research, development and intellectual property ability. However firms taken low cost strategy are especially insufficient in manufacture quality.
4. The insufficient of intellectual capital will influence business performance. |
| Reference: | （一）中文參考文獻
王文英與張清福，2004，智慧資本影響績效模式之探討：我國半導體業之實證研
究，會計評論，第39期(7月)：89-117。
王癸元，2002，人力資本、智慧財產與企業價值關係之研究－以資源基礎論之觀點，國立中正大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。
林明德，2004，無形資產之價值攸關性與決定因素之探討，國立政治大學會計學系未出版碩士論文。
林洋鑫，2003，電子產業無形資產之關聯性研究，國立交通大學管理科學學程未出版碩士論文。
吳思華、賴鈺晶、顏妙如，2000，網際網路智慧資本衡量與發展措施研究，經濟部工業局軟體五年發展計畫。
吳靜怡，2003，我國奈米科技產業關鍵成功因素及競爭策略之研究－以半導體製造業為例，國立交通大學管理科學學程未出版碩士論文。
周文賢，2002，多變量統計分析SAS/STAT使用方法，台北：智勝文化。
章義明，2002，半導體產業競爭策略群組及關鍵成功因素之研究—以我國IC測試廠商為例，國立交通大學管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
郭美玲，2004，智慧資本外部報導之研究－以資訊電子及金融服務業為對象，國立政治大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
曾俊堯與古永嘉，2003，智慧資本與公司無形價值關係之研究--以台灣製造業為
例，管理與系統，第11期(1月)：1-30。
資策會，2001，我國產業智慧資本先導性個案研究，財團法人資訊工業策進分包學術機構研究計畫期末報告。
楊建國，2001，無形資產之評價，輔仁大學金融學系未出版碩士論文。
蔡基德，2001，資訊電子業市場價值與帳面淨值之差異探討，國立台灣大學會計學系未出版碩士論文。
歐進士、陳博舜、李貴富，2004，台灣資訊電子業之訓練活動的企業價值分析，
人力資源管理學報，(12月)：51-72。
饒祥浩，2002，從企業、分析師及會計師觀點論資訊電子業智慧資本資訊之揭露，國立政治大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
（二）英文參考文獻
Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1): 99-120.
Bublitz, B., and M. Ettredge. 1989. The information in discretionary outlays: Advertising, research and development. The Accounting Review 64: 108-124.
Collis, D. J., and C. A. Montgomery. 1998. Creating corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review (May-June): 71-83.
Edvinsson, L., and M. S. Malone. 1997. Intellectual Capital: Realizing Your Company’s True Value by Finding It’s Hidden Brainpower. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.
Emma, G. M. 2005. Bridging the gap between disclosure and use of intellectual capital information. Journal of Intellectual capital 6(3): 427-441
Grant, R. M. 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review 33(3): 114-135.
Hirschey,M.,and J.J.Weygandt. 1985. Amortization policy for advertising and research and development expenditures. Journal of Accounting Researc 23(1): 326-336.
Hope, J., and T. Hope. 1997. Competing in the Third Wave: The Ten Key Management Issues of the Information Age. Harvard Business School Press.
Huselid M. A. 1995. The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal 38(3): 635-672.
Kaiser, H. F. and J. Rice. 1974. Little jiffy mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement 34(1): 111-117.
Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 2004. Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lim, L. L.K., and P. Dallimore. 2004. Intellectual capital: Management attitudes in service industries. Journal of Intellectual Capital 5(1): 181-194.
Masoulas, V. 1998. Organizational requirements definition for intellectual capital management. International Journal of Technology Management 16(1): 126-143.
Mavrinac, S., and T. Siesfeld. 1998. Measures that matter: An exploratory investigation of investor`s information needs and value priorities. OECD.
Miles, R., and C. Snow. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Porter, M. E. 1980. Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. New York: The Free Press.
Saenz, J. 2005. Human capital indicators, business performance and market-to-book ratio. Journal of Intellectual Capital 6(3): 374-385.
Shapiro.C., and H.R.Varian. 1999. The art of standard wars. California Management Review 41(2): 8-33.
Slater, S. F., E. M. Olson, and V. K. Reddy. 1997. Strategy-based performance
measurement. Business Horizons 40 (July-August): 37-44.
Sougiannis, T. 1994. The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D. The Accounting Review 69(1): 44-68.
Stewart, T. A. 1997. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group Inc.
Stickler, M. J. 1996. Strategy: The key to financial payback from reengineering. Hospital Material Management Quarterly 18(1): 10-16.
Treacy, M., and F. Wiersema. 1995. How market leaders keep their edge. Fortune 131 (Feb.): 88-93. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
會計研究所
93353039
94 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093353039 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [會計學系] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
