進階搜尋


 
系統識別號 U0026-0812200914102064
論文名稱(中文) 競爭優勢、多角化投資與環境不確定性對所有權進入模式與經營績效影響之探討---以台灣電子製造業在中國投資為例
論文名稱(英文) The effect of competitive advantages, diversification, and environment factors on equity entry mode and performance-The study of Taiwanese electronic industry in China
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 國際企業研究所碩博士班
系所名稱(英) Institute of International Business
學年度 96
學期 2
出版年 97
研究生(中文) 陳柏丞
研究生(英文) Po-cheng Chen
學號 r6695112
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 61頁
口試委員 指導教授-杜富燕
口試委員-蔡東峻
口試委員-史習安
中文關鍵字 交易成本理論  折衷理論  經營績效  環境不確定性  競爭優勢  所有權進入模式  多角化 
英文關鍵字 eclectic theory  transactional costs theory  performance  equity entry mode  environment uncertainty  competitive advantage  diversification 
學科別分類
中文摘要 自經濟活動全球化以來,企業必須要持續不斷的創新與發展,才能提昇或維持其市場競爭力來面對全球競爭的環境。企業因為當前競爭力的考量和永續經營的目標,赴中國投資之風潮持續蓬勃發展。對於台灣電子製造業的經營者而言,瞭解企業海外投資與經營績效間的影響關係,已是一個刻不容緩的重要議題。
企業決定海外投資時,首先需要考量到本身與環境的條件,來決定適合本身的進入模式。本研究依據交易成本理論與折衷理論,對於企業進入模式的構面提出了更完整的看法。一旦企業決定要對海外營運的控制能力大小、承諾投入的資源多寡、承擔不同涉入程度的風險。便決定了該企業將採行何種進入模式。本研究欲了解如何擬定出對中國投資最適合的所有權進入模式以及初次投資和後續投資如何影響所有權進入模式的偏好,並因此而獲得最佳的經營績效。
本研究認為多角化投資、企業競爭優勢與環境不確定性會是影響企業所有權進入模式與經營績效最主要的原因。故本研究針對台灣新報資料庫進行資料蒐集與分析,實證結果顯示:
1. 多角化投資會導致企業選擇較低股權的進入模式。
2. 相較於初次投資,多角化投資時在後續的投資中會更傾向較低股權的進入模式。
3. 企業的差異化競爭優勢與環境不確定性越高會導致企業選擇較高股權的進入模式。
4. 當企業的差異化競爭優勢與環境不確定性越高,在初次投資中會更傾向於高股權的進入模式。
5. 企業的差異化競爭優勢越高,越對經營績效產生正向關係。
6. 相較於低股權進入模式,高股權進入模式能增強企業差異化競爭優勢與經營績效的正向關係。
英文摘要 In today’s globally competitive world, enterprises have to keep sustained innovation and development to increase or maintain their competitiveness in order to face the competitive environment. The wave of investing in China is still unrest because enterprises have to consider their competitiveness and their continuous survival. For the managers of Taiwanese electronic manufacturing, realizing how foreign investments impact their performance is an urgent and important issue.
When enterprises decide to invest overseas, they need to consider their internal and external environment first, and then select the appropriate entry mode. According to transactional costs theory and eclectic theory, we provide a point of view which is more complete to constitute the entry modes of enterprises. Only after they decide how much the control force they would like to keep to themselves, the quantity of resource they promised to give to subsidiaries, and the risks they are willing to undertake in foreign investments, they will then choose their entry mode. The objectives of our research are to (1) understand the way to draft the most appropriate equity entry mode to invest in China, (2) how early entries and subsequent entries impact the preference of equity entry mode, and (3) how enterprises can obtain the best performance from foreign investments.
We consider that diversification, competitive advantages, and environment uncertainty are the main reasons that impact the equity entry mode and the performance of enterprises. This research uses TEJ database to collect data and analyzes it by SPSS 15.
The major finding of the research includes:
1. Diversification will make enterprise adopt a lower equity entry mode.
2. Diversification will make enterprise intend to adopt a lower equity entry mode in subsequent investments than in first investments.
3. Higher the diversity competitive advantage and environment uncertainty more likely the enterprises will adopt a higher equity entry mode.
4. If enterprises’ diversity competitive advantage and environment uncertainty are higher, they will adopt a higher equity entry mode in the first investments.
5. The more diversity competitive advantage, the better
Diversity competitive advantage has a positive effect on the firm performance.
6. High equity entry mode, compared to low entry mode, may enhance the positive relationship of diversity competitive advantage and firm performance.
論文目次 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節 論文結構 3
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 所有權進入模式之相關文獻 5
第二節 多角化之相關文獻 10
第三節 競爭優勢之相關文獻 17
第四節 環境不確定性之相關文獻 20
第五節 經營績效之相關文獻 22
第六節 多角化與所有權進入模式之假設 25
第七節 競爭優勢與所有權進入模式和經營績效之假設 26
第八節 環境不確定性與所有權進入模式和經營績效之假設 28
第三章 研究方法 31
第一節 研究架構 31
第二節 研究假設 31
第三節 研究變數之操作型定義 32
第四節 研究設計 33
第五節 資料分析方法 35
第四章 實證結果 36
第一節 敘述性統計 36
第二節 相關分析 39
第三節 迴歸分析 40
第五章 結論與建議 47
第一節 研究結果 47
第二節 研究貢獻 51
第三節 建議 53
參考文獻 56
參考文獻 網頁部分:
公開資訊觀測站統計資料,2008,http://newmops.tse.com.tw/
台灣經濟新報資料庫統計資料,2008,http://www.tej.com.tw/twsite/
台灣區電機電子工業同業公會 http://www.teema.org.tw/

中文部分:
台灣區電機電子工業同業公會,2001~2007,中國大陸地區投資環境與風險調查。
行政院主計處之「中華民國行業標準分類」第八次修訂案之定義
方世杰,1999,「台灣中小企業之產業網路構形與企業國際化關係研究」,企業
管理學報,第45期,頁99-126。
洪順慶、吳長生,1999,「台灣廠商自創國際品牌策略與行銷績效之關係研究」,
中山管理評論,第七卷,第四期,頁71-104。
吳長生,2001,「地主國特性與事業策略對品牌化策略與國際行銷績效影響」,
企銀季刊,第25 卷,第二期,頁205-224。
吳仕乾,2005,「投資中國大陸經濟技術開發區的選擇策略」,國立中山大學管
理學院高階經營碩士學程碩士在職專班碩士論文。
吳萬益、吳志正,1996,「台美日企業在台灣及大陸企業經營環境及競爭策略之
研究」,臺大管理論叢,第七卷,第一期,頁49-84。
吳萬益、蔡明田、汪昭芬、王世偉,2000,「國內主要集團企業領導風格、企業
文化及組織運作色之研究」,商管科技季刊,第一卷,第一期,頁39-65。
吳萬益、蔡明田、程永明,2000,「台資企業投資中國大陸市場之所有權結構與
政策」,交大管理論叢,第二十卷,第二期,頁47-77。
施坤壽,2001。ISO9000 與競爭優勢、組織績效之結構化分析--臺灣機械、化學、
電子電器業實證研究,南臺科技大學學報,25 期:73-85。
郭姿君,2005,「管理才能、國際行銷導向、協調機制與經營績效關係之研究─
以台灣資訊電子業赴大陸投資之上市上櫃公司為例」,南華大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
繆敏志,2002,「環境不確定性與組織文化類型、強度、均衡性及集群關係之研
究」,企業管理學報,第55 期,頁83-111

英文部分:
Aaker, D. A. ,1984, Developing Business Strategies, Wiley & Sons, New York.
Aaker, D. A. ,1989, Managing Assets and Skills: The Key To a Sustainable
Competitive Advantage, California Management Review, 91-106
Aaker, D.A.,1995., Strategic market management, New York: Wiley
Amit, R. & J. Livant, 1988, Diversification strategies, business cycles and economic
performance. Strategic Management Journal, 9:99-110.
Amit, R. & J. Livant,1988.Diversification and the risk-return trade-off. Academy of
Management Journal,31:154-166.
Anderson E. & H. Gatignon , 1986, Modes of Foreign Entry: A Transaction cost
Analysis and Propositions, Journal of International Business Studies, 17:1-26
Ansoff H.I., 1957, Strategies of Diversification, Harvard Business Review
35(5):113-124
Ansoff H. I., Corporate Strategy N.Y., McGraw-Hill Book Co.,1965
Bagozzi R.P. & Y Yi., 1998, On the Evaluation of Structure Equations Models,
Academic of Marketing Science, 16 76-94
Barney J.B. ,1986, Strategic factor markets. Management Science 32: 1231–1241.
Barney JB. ,1991, Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
Management 17: 99–120.
Barney J.B. ,1997, Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. Addison-Wesley:
Reading, MA.
Berry, C. H. Corporate Growth and Diversification, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, N.J., 1975.
Brouthers, Keith D. 2002.Institutional, Cultural and Transaction Cost Influences on
Enter Mode Choice and Performance. Journal of international Business Studies, 33(2):203-221
Bradley F. & M. Gannon ,2000, Does the Firm's Technology and Marketing Profile
Affect Foreign Market Entry, Journal of International Marketing, 8(4), 12-36.
Caves R. & S. Mehra ,1986, Entry of Foreign Multinationals into U.S. Manufacturing
Industries. In Competition in Global Industrues, Porter M (ed.). Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA; 449-481
Cavusgil S.T. & S. Zou.1994, Marketing Strategy-Performance Relationship: An
Investigationof the Empirical Link in Export Market Ventures. Journal of
Marketing,58:1-21
Chandler, Alfred D.jr.,Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the
American Industrial Enterprise,Cambridge, MA,M.I.T.Press.1962.
Chang S. J. & P. M. Rosenzewig, 2001, The Choice of Entry Mode in Sequential
Foreign Direct Investment. Strategic Management Journal,22:747-776
Chakravarthy B.S.,1986, Measuring Strategic Performance. Strategic Management
Journal,7:437-458
Chen H. ,1999, International Performance of Multinationals: A Hybrid Model,
Journal of World Business, 34(2):157-170.
Contractor F. J.& S.K.Kundu,1998, Modal Choice in a World of Alliances︰
Analyzing Organizational Forms in the International Hotel Sector. Journal of International Business Studies,29(2):325-358
Covin, J.G., J.E. Prescott, & D.P. Slevin,1990,The Effect of Technological
Sophisticated on Strategic Profiles, Structure and Fire Performance. Journal of Management Studies,27(5):485-510
Davis P.S., A.B. Desai, & J.D. Francis, 2000, Model of International Entry : An
Isomorphism Perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(2):239-258
Daft, R. L. 2001, Organization Theory and Design, 7th ed., South-Western College
Publishing, Cincinnati, OH
Dess G.G., G.T. Lumpkin, & J.G. Covin, 1997, Entrepreneurial Strategy Making and
Firm Performance: Tests of Contingency and Configurational Models. Strategic Management Journal. 18(9):677-695
Foss, N. J. & T. Kundsen, 2003, The resource-based tangle: Toward a sustainable
explanation of competitive advantage. Managerial and Decision Economic, 24(4), 291-308.
Goerzen A.,2007, Alliance networks and firm performance: The impact of repeated
partnerships. Strategic Management Journal,28:487-509
Gort, M. ,1962,Diversification and integration in American Industry. Princeton,
N. J.,Princeton University Press.
Harzing A.H.,2002,Acquisitions versus Greenfield investments: international strategy
and management of entry modes. Strategic Management Journal.,23(3):211-227
Hennart J.F., 1991, The Transaction Costs Theory of Joint Ventures: An Empirical
Study of Japanese Subsidiaries in the United States. Management Science 37(4):483-497
Hennart J.F. & Y. Park, 1993, Greenfield vs. Acquisition: the Strategy of Japanese
Investors in the United States. Management Science 39(9):1054-1070
Hill, C.W.L. & G.R. Jones, 2001, Strategic Management Theory, Houghton Mifflin
Company.
Hoskisson, R. E. & M. A. Hitt,1988., Strategic Control Systems and Relative R&D
Investment in large Multiproduct Firms.Strategic Management Journal,9,605-621.
Kamien, M.I. & N.L. Schwartz, 1975, Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey,
Managerial Economics and Decision Sciences.
Kim, W.C. & P. Hwang 1992, Global Strategy and Multinationals Entry Mode
Choice, Journal of International Business Studies, 29-53.
Knight G., 2000, Entrepreneurship and Marketing Strategy: The SME Under
Globalization. Journal of International Marketing, 8(2):12-32
Kogut B., H. Singh,1988, The Effect of National Culture on The Choice of Entry
Mode. Journal of International Business Studies,19:414-432
Kolter, P.,1994, Marketing Management Analysis, Planning, Implementation and
Control. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
McGee J.E., M.J. Dowling & W.L. Megginson ,1995, Cooperative strategy and new
venture performance: the role of business strategy and management experience.
Strategic Management Journal, 16:565-580.
Miller, K. D. 1992, A Framework for Integrated Risk Management in International
Business, Journal of International Business Studies, 23:311-331
Morrison A.J. & K. Roth, 1992, A Taxonomy of Business-Level Strategies in Global
Industries. Strategic Management Journal, 13(6):399-417
Pan Y. & S. Li and D. K. Tse 1999, The Impact of Order and Mode of Market Entry
on Profitability and Marker Share, Journal of International Business Studies, 30:81-104.
Peteraf, M. A. & Barney, J. B. 2003. Unraveling the resource-based tangle.
Managerial and Decision Economic, 24(4): 309-323.
Pitts R.A. & H.D. Hopkins, 1982, Firem Diversity: Conceptualization and
Measurement, Academic Management Review, 7(4):620-629
Porter, M. E. ,1985, Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior
performance, New York: Free Press.
Prahalad, C. K. & G. Hemel ,1994, Strategy As a Field of Study: Why Search for A
New Paradigm, Strategic Management Journal, 15:5-16.
Ramanujam, V. and P. Varadarajan ,1989, Research on Corporate Diversification: A
Synthesis, Strategic Management Journal, 10(6):523-551.
Reed, R. & G. A. Luffman,1986, Diversification: The Growing Confusion, Strategic
Management Journal, 7:29-35.
Rumelt R. P., 1982, Diversification Strategy and Profitability, Strategic Management
Journal, 3:359-369.
Rumelt, R., 1974, Strategy, structure, and economic performance, Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, MA.
Tan, K., V.R. Kannan,, , R.B. Handfield &, S. Ghosh,1999, Sipply chain
management: an empirical study of its impact on performance, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(10):1034-1052.
Teece, D. J.,1982, Towards an economic theory of multi-product firm., Journal of
Economic Behavior and Organization.3:39-63.
Terpstra V. & C. Yu, 1988, Determinants of foreign investment of U.S. advertising
agencies. Journal of International Business Studies 19:33-46
Wei Y., Liu B. & Liu X. , 2005, Entry Mode of Foreign Investment in China: A
Multinational Logic Approach. Journal of Business Research, 58:1495-1505
Wernerfelt B. ,1984, A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management
Journal 5: 171–180.
Wernerfelt B. ,1995, Resource-based strategy in a stochastic model. In
Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm, Montgomery CA (ed.). Kluwer:Boston; 133–145.
Wernerfelt B, Montgomery CA. ,1986, What is an attractive industry?, Management
Science 32: 1223–1230.
Williamson, O.E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust
Implications. New York: The Free Press.
Williamson, O.E., 1981, “The economics of organization: The transaction cost
approach.” American Journal of Sociology, 87:548-577.
Wood. A. ,1971, Diversification , Merger , Research Expenditure: A Review of
Empirical Studies , In Marris , R. and A. Wood(eds),The Corporate Economy : GroupCompetition and Innovation Potential, New York:Macmillan.
Wrigley, L.,1970,.Divisional Autonomy and Diversification. Unpuplished Doctoral
Dissertation, Harvard Business School Press.
Zenjan J.,1990, New Ventures or Acquisitions: the Choice of Swedish Multinational
Enterprises. Journal of Industrial Economics 38(3):349-355
Yu C. 1990, The experience effect and foreign direct investment. Weltwirtschaftliches
Archiv 126:560-579
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2009-06-24起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2009-06-24起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw