Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139562
|
| Title: | 台灣半導體產業董監網絡的結構凝聚(2010-2020)
Structural Cohesion of the Network of Interlocking Directorates in Taiwan Semiconductor Industry, 2010-2020 |
| Authors: | 黃世竹
Huang, Shi-zhu |
| Contributors: | 熊瑞梅
鄭力軒
Hsung, Ray-May
Cheng, Li-Hsuan
黃世竹
Huang, Shi-zhu |
| Keywords: | 結構凝聚
半導體產業
董監事網絡
公司治理
財務績效
Structural cohesion
Semiconductor industry
Interlocking directorates
Corporate governance
Financial performance |
| Date: | 2022 |
| Issue Date: | 2022-04-01 15:05:52 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 結構凝聚(Structural Cohesion)網絡近年來逐漸受到關注，且被認為是分析企業網絡特質的有力視角。本文援引結構凝聚的理論和方法，針對台灣半導體產業董監事網絡進行分析。本文選取時段為2010年到2020年，企圖探討半導體企業董監網絡結構凝聚的特質、成因、效應。
本研究的主要發現如下：（一）相較於模擬的小世界網絡，真實的半導體產業董監事網絡呈現出更為異質的結構凝聚子群體。而隨著時間推移，高凝聚的網絡子群體逐漸消失。（二）在不同的政治、經濟、文化脈絡因素的影響下，企業容易形成不同凝聚程度的網絡子群體，然而，國家政治因素對於半導體企業網絡形成的影響力隨時間不斷下降。（三）企業所嵌套的不同結構凝聚的子群體，會影響到企業的財務績效和公司治理結構。結構凝聚的影響呈現倒U型，嵌套在適度結構凝聚子群體的企業容易有較高的公司價值和獨董比例，而一旦企業所嵌套子群體的結構凝聚程度超過一定臨界點，其效應就會產生的逆轉。本研究的發現展示出結構凝聚是分析企業網絡的有效取徑，值得未來研究持續應用和探索。
Structural cohesion networks have gradually attracted attention in recent years and are considered as a powerful perspective for analyzing the characteristics of intercorporate networks. This study uses the theory and method of structural cohesion to analyze the network of interlocking directorates in Taiwan semiconductor industry. This study selects the period from 2010 to 2020, and attempts to explore the characteristics, causes and effects of structure cohesion of board interlock network.
The main findings of this study are as follows: (1) Compared with the simulated small-world networks, the real networks presented a more heterogeneous cohesive subgroups and, over time, the highly cohesive subgroups have gradually disappeared. (2) Under the influence of different political, economic and cultural contextual, corporations were prone to form network subgroups with different degrees of cohesion. However, the influence of political factor on the formation of the semiconductor intercorporate networks continued to decline over time. (3) The varying cohesive subgroups in which the corporations were nested affected the financial performance and corporate governance structure of corporations. The effect of structural cohesion was parabolic. Both firm value and the ratio of independent directors increased up to a threshold after which point the positive effects reversed. These findings demonstrate that structural cohesion is an effective way to analyze intercorporate networks, and is worthy of continued application and exploration in future research. |
| Reference: | 工商時報，2021年07月19日。〈中美晶馳援 營運雙劍合璧〉。
https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20210719000145-260202?chdtv。
中時新聞網，2021年10月29日。〈《半導體》合作無間 力旺再獲台積電肯定〉。https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20211029001658-260410?chdtv。
中時新聞網，2021年12月08日，〈台積電4奈米建功！ 外媒：聯發科 「天璣9000」這點首勝死敵〉。 https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20211208006154-260410?chdtv。
今周刊，2019年06月03日，〈力晶集團大復活 「九命怪貓」黃崇仁要如何推動「力積電」風光上市？〉。https://www.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/183015/post/201906030006/
今周刊，2019年10月30日，〈打不倒的拳王 你不知道的蔡明介〉。https://www.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/154769/post/201910300006/%E6%89%93%E4%B8%8D%E5%80%92%E7%9A%84%E6%8B%B3%E7%8E%8B%E3%80%80%E4%BD%A0%E4%B8%8D%E7%9F%A5%E9%81%93%E7%9A%84%E8%94%A1%E6%98%8E%E4%BB%8B 。
今周刊，2020年08月06日。〈中美晶入股宏捷科 「兩方面合作」加速新化合物市場布局〉。https://www.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/183015/post/202008060048/%E4%B8%AD%E7%BE%8E%E6%99%B6%E5%85%A5%E8%82%A1%E5%AE%8F%E6%8D%B7%E7%A7%91%E3%80%80%E3%80%8C%E5%85%A9%E6%96%B9%E9%9D%A2%E5%90%88%E4%BD%9C%E3%80%8D%E5%8A%A0%E9%80%9F%E6%96%B0%E5%8C%96%E5%90%88%E7%89%A9%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E5%B8%83%E5%B1%80 。
自由時報，2014年12月16日，〈張忠謀：台積電大同盟 可打贏三星〉。 https://ec.ltn.com.tw/article/breakingnews/1182450。
李宗榮，2007，〈在國家權力與家族主義之間：企業控制與台灣大型企業間網絡再探〉，《台灣社會學》。13:174-242。
李宗榮，2009，〈制度變遷與市場網絡：台灣大型企業間董監事跨坐的歷史考察 （1962–2003）〉。《台灣社會學》17: 101–160。
林亦之，2010，〈台灣IC產業技術的追趕到創新：組織間網絡的分析〉。東海大學社會學系博士論文。
林季誼、熊瑞梅，2018，〈台灣半導體產業的公司治理跨坐網絡趨勢（2000–2015）：朝向小世界網絡特性〉。《調查研究》40: 211–263。
洪世章，2021，《打造創新路徑：改變世界的台灣科技產業》。台北，聯經。
科技新報，2021 年 11 月 05 日，〈念 14 年亦師亦友情誼，聯電董座洪嘉聰 假日重讀劉炯朗舊作〉。https://technews.tw/2021/11/05/umc-chairman-read-cclius-books-on-holiday-in-memory-of-ccliu/。
財訊，2017年3月22日，〈聯發科延攬蔡力行擔任共同執行長與台積電合作關係 更形穩固〉。https://www.wealth.com.tw/articles/ef824605-e0d7-4b74-bfe5-ed921cff7487。
財訊，2020年12月28日，〈台積電獨吞iPhone訂單的秘密！封測供應鏈整條都在旺 這5家公司搶卡位台積電先進封裝隊〉。https://www.wealth.com.tw/articles/9d9bce93-4580-4f3b-8c1c-8cb9d501aacb 。
郭翠菱、王志洋，2017，〈公司治理如何影響家族企業之績效？長期縱貫分析〉。《會計評論》，第64 期，第 61－111 頁。
陳宜伶、林宛瑩，2012，〈獨立董監之設置決策與績效〉。《管理與系統》第二十卷第四期697-725。
陳東升，2008，《積體網路：臺灣高科技產業的社會學分析（增訂版）》。台北：群學。
陳瑞斌、許崇源，2007，〈公司治理結構與資訊揭露之關聯性研究〉，《交大管理學報》, 27(2)：55-109。
廖益興，2010，〈董事會組成、股權結構與年報資訊揭露水準〉。《臺大管理論叢》20卷2期209 – 249。
劉韻僖，2002，〈上市公司間董事會連結之研究〉。《管理學報》19: 901-926。
數位時代，2020年4月1日，〈一手操刀聯電投資案！宏誠創投年砸10億，為「聯家軍」注入新創活水〉。https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/57169/umccapital。
蔡柳卿、楊朝旭、許慧雯，2014，〈台灣電子業家族經理人之外部董事會連結與公司創新：論控制家族代理問題之影響〉，《臺大管理論叢》第24 卷第2期181-212。
鍾喜梅、詹淑婷，2017，〈家族企業股權結構的變遷：制度脈絡與組織擴張的影響〉。收錄於李宗榮、林宗弘主編，《未竟的奇蹟》，中央研究院社會所。
Allison, P. D. (2009). “Fixed effects regression models. Thousand Oaks. ” CA: Sage.
Barabási, Albert-Laszlo and Ráka Albert, 1999, “Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks.” Science 286(5439): 509–512.
Burt, R. S.
(1983) “Corporate Profits and Cooptation. New York: Academic.
(1992) “Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition”, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Benton, R. A.
(2016). “Corporate governance and nested authority: Cohesive network structure, actor-driven mechanisms, and the balance of power in American corporations. ”American Journal of Sociology, 122, 661–713.
(2017). “The decline of social entrenchment: Social network cohesion and board responsiveness to shareholder activism. ” Organization Science, 28, 262–282.
(2019) “Brokerage and Closure in Corporate Control: Shifting Sources of Power for a Fractured Corporate Board Network.” Organization Studies
Vol. 40(11) 1631–1656.
Beckman, C. M.,and Haunschild, P. R. (2002) “Network learning: The effects of partners’ heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisitions.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 92-124.
Cornwell, Benjamin, and Burchard, Jake (2019)。“Structural cohesion and embeddedness in two-mode networks.” The Journal of Mathematical Sociology Vol. 43(4) 179-194.
Coleman, James S. (1988) “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology,94:95-120.
Chu Johan S. G., and Davis Gerald F. (2016) “Who killed the inner circle? The decline of the American corporate interlock network.” American Journal of Sociology.122(3):714–754.
Davis, Gerald F., and Henrich R. Greve. 1997. “Corporate Elite Networks and Governance Changes in the 1980s.” American Journal of Sociology 103 (1): 1–37.
Drees, J. M., and Heugens, P. P. M. A. R. (2013) “Synthesizing and extending resource dependence theory: A meta-analysis.” Journal of Management, 39: 1666-1698.
Dafne E. van Kuppevelt & Rena Bakhshi & Eelke M. Heemskerk & Frank
W. Takes. (2020) “Community membership consistency in corporate
board interlock networks” Journal of Computational Social Science.
DiMaggio, Paul J., and Walter W. Powell. (1983) “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review 48:147–60.
Erdös, P. and A. Rényi, (1959) “On Random Graphs, I.” Publicationes Mathematicae (Debrecen) 6: 290–297.
Evans, Peter B. (1995) “Embedded Autonomy.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Fligstein, Neil, (2001) “The Architecture of Markets: An Economic Sociology of Twenty-First-Century Capitalist Societies.” Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fich, E. M. (2005) “Are some outside directors better than others? Evidence from director appointments by Fortune 1000 firms.” Journal of Business, 78: 1943-1972.
Granovetter, Mark.
(1985) “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.”American Journal of Sociology 91:481–510.
(1992)“Economic Institutions as Social Constructions: A Framework for Analysis.” Acta Sociologica 35:3–11.
(2002) “A Theoretical Agenda for Economic Sociology.” Pp. 35–59 in The New
Economic Sociology: Developments in an Emerging Field, edited by Randall Collins, Mauro F. Guillen, Paula England, and Marshall Meyer. New York: Russell Sage.
Grahber, Gernot.(1983) “The Weakness of Strong Ties: The Lock-in of Regional Development in Ruhr Area.”Pp.255-277, in The Embedded Firms: The Social-economics of Industrial Network. edited by Grahber, Gernot. London:Routledge.
Hannan, Michael T., and John Freeman. 1984. “Structural Inertia and Organizational
Change.” American Sociological Review 49:149–64.
Hamilton, Gary G. and Nicole W. Biggart (1988) “Market, Culture, and Authority: A
Comparative Analysis of Management and Organization in the Far East.” American Journal of Sociology 94: S52-S94.
Hsung, Ray-May and Yi-jr Lin.( 2016) “The Changes in Corporate Social Capital
and their Implications for the Semiconductor Industry in Taiwan.” Pp. 127–153 in Rethinking Social Capital and Entrepreneurship in Greater China, edited by Jenn-Hwan Wang and Ray-May Hsung. New York: Routledge.
Hsiao, Yuan (2020).“Evaluating the Mobilization Effect of Online Political Network Structures: A Comparison between the Black Lives Matter Network and Ideal Type Network Configurations.” Social Forces 99(4): 1547–1574.
Jensen, Michael C. and William H. Meckling. (1976). “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. ” Journal of Financial Economics 3:305-50.
La Porta, R. Lopez-de-Silanes, F. and Shleifer, A. (1999). “Corporate ownership around the world.” Journal of Finance, 54,(pp. 471-517).
Lorrain, Frangois and Harrison C. White. (1971) "Structural Equivalence of Individuals in Social Networks." Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1:49-80.
Luke, Douglas A. 2015. A User’s Guide to Network Analysis in R. Springer Pub.
Morgan, Stephen L. and Christopher Winship, (2015) “Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research (2nd ed.). ” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mizruchi, M. S. and L. B. Stearns. (1996) “What do interlocks do? An analysis,
critique, and assessment of research on interlocking directorates.”
Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 22.
Mizruchi, M. S.(2013) “The Fracturing of the American Corporate Elite.” Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Moody, James, and Douglas R. White. (2003) “Structural Cohesion and
Embeddedness :A Hierarchical Concept of Social Groups.”
American Sociological Review 68 (1): 103–27.
Moody, James,(2004) “The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999.” American Sociological Review 69(2): 213–238.
Moody, James and Mani, Dalhia. (2014) “Moving beyond Stylized Economic
Network Models: The Hybrid World of the Indian Firm Ownership Network.”
American Journal of Sociology 119 (6): 1629–69.
Pfeffer, J. & G. R. Salancik (1978[2003]) “Social Control of Organizations, The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective.” New York: Harper and Row Publishers.
Perry, T. O. D., & Peyer, U. R. S. (2005) “ Board seat accumulation by executives: A shareholder’s perspective. ” Journal of Finance, 60: 2083-2123.
Pennings JM. (1980) “Interlocking Directorates. ” San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stark, David and Vedres, Balazs (2010) “Structural Folds: Generative Disruption in
Overlapping Groups.” American Journal of Sociology 115:1150–90.
Simmel, Georg. ([1908] 1950) “ The Sociology of Georg Simmel. ” Edited by K.H. Wolf. New York: Free Press.
Shropshire, C. (2010) “The role of the interlocking director and board receptivity in the diffusion of practices. ” Academy of Management Review, 35: 246-264.
Useem, Michael. (1984) “The Inner Circle." New York: Oxford University Press.
Uzzi, Brian.
(1996) “The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. ” American Sociological Review, v61(4): 674-698.
(1997) “Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. ” Administrative Science Quarterly, March 42:35-67.
(1999) “Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Finance. ” American Sociological Review, v64: 481-505.
Uzzi, Brain and Jarrett Spiro. (2005) “Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World
Problem.” American Journal of Sociology 111(2):447-504.
Westphal, James D., and Poonam Khanna.(2003) “Keeping Directors in Line: Social Distancing as a Control Mechanism in the Corporate Elite.” Administrative Science Quarterly 48 (3): 361–98.
Watts, Duncan and Steven H. Strogatz. (1998) “Collective Dynamics of ‘Small-
World’ Networks.” Nature 393(6684): 440–442.
Watts, Duncan J.(1999) “Networks, Dynamics, and the Small-World Phenomenon.”
American Journal of Sociology 105(2): 493–527.
White, Harrison C., Scott A. Boorman, and Ronald L. Breiger. 1976. “Social Structure From Multiple Networks I. ” American Journal of Sociology 81:730-80. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
社會學系
108254011 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108254011 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202200363 |
| Appears in Collections: | [社會學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 401101.pdf | | 5252Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 199 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
