請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/20805
標題: A Study of the Impacts of Dynamic Capabilities on the Performance through Organizational Life Cycle
以組織生命週期觀點分析動態能力對績效的影響
作者: 李世勤
Lee, Shi-Chin
關鍵字: Dynamic capability
動態能力
Organization life cycle
Panel data analysis
組織生命週期
經緯資料分析
出版社: 企業管理學系所
引用: 吳思華(2000), 策略九說:策略思考的本質, 台北市:城邦文化. 薛明賢 (2007), 探討組織生命週期對現金增資宣告之影響, 國立成功大學會計學研究所碩士論文 經濟部技術處(2008), 2008產業技術白皮書, 台北市:經濟部技術處. 黃靖樺 (1998), 組織生命週期與股價關聯性之研究, 國立中央大學財務管理學系研究所碩士論文 吳錦錩 (2005), 從資源基礎、能耐基礎與動態能力觀點探討企業持續性競爭優勢構面 - 以台灣代工製造公司為例, 東海管理評論, 7 (1), pp.137-166. 林正銘 (2002), 人力資源管理活動對組織績效的影響─同期與遞延效果之探討, 國立中央大學人力資源管理學系研究所碩士論文 林建煌 (2002), 行銷管理, 台北市:智勝文化有限公司. 周文賢 (2002), 多變量統計分析SAS/STAT使用方法, 台北市:智勝文化有限公司. 林震岩 (2007), 多變量分析:SPSS的操作與應用, 台北市:智勝文化有限公司. 劉永欽和洪榮華 (2007). 組織生命週期與實施庫藏股動機. 企業管理學報, 75, pp.101-140 周建新、張簡榮奮、王朝仕(2005), 可轉換公司債發行效果之再驗證-內部人交易觀點, 經營管理論叢, 1(2), pp.1-22. 陳湘芸 (2008), 策略內部配適、策略外部配適與績效之關係探討 - 以台灣半導體產業為例, 國立中興大學企業管理學系碩士論文 吳琮璠、林美鳳與吳青松 (2008). 資訊科技投資與企業績效之關係:從組織生命週期論析, 資訊管理學報, 15(2), pp.155-183. 湯珮妤 (2000). 企業類型與研發支出、專利權成效之遞延效果研究,國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。 劉正田 (2003),企業研發投資與淨值市價比現象,風險管理學報,5(2),pp.261-285。 魏振吉 (2006), 動態能力生命週期實證研究---以友達光電公司為例, 中原大學企業管理學系碩士論文. Agarwal, R. and M. Gort. (1996). Firm and product life cycles and firm survival. American Economic Review 92, pp.184–190. Aharony J., H. Falk and N. Yehuda. (2003). Corporate life cycle and the value-relevance of cash flow versus accrual financial information. Working Paper, Columbia University. Amit, R. & P. J. H. Schoemaker (1993). Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14, pp.33-46. Amit, R. and P. Schoemaker (1993). Strategic assets dynamic capabilities approach. Further theoretical and organizational rent, Strategic Management Journal 14(1), pp.33–46. Anthony, J. H., and K. Ramesh. (1992). Association between accounting performance measures and stock prices. Journal of Accounting and Economics 15, pp.203-227. Argyres, N. (1995). Technology strategy, governance structure and interdivisional coordination, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 28, pp.337–358. Asquith P., and W. Mullins (1986). Equity issues and offering dilution. Journal of Financial Economics 15, pp.61-90. Becker, B. E. & Huselid, M. A. (2006), Strategic human resources management: Where do we go from here?, Journal of Management, 32(6), pp. 898-925. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), pp.99-120. Batra R, Lehmann DR, Burke J, Pae J. (1995). When Does Advertising Have An Impacts? A Study of Tracking Data, Journal of Advertising Research 35(5), pp.19-32 Bishop, P. & Wiseman, N. (1999), The North-South Divide in the UK Defence Sector, Regional Studies, 33(9), pp. 829-843 Bowman, ConstanceE.Helfat, & EdwardH. (2001). Does corporate strategy matter? Strategic Management Journal, 22, pp.1-23. Cameron, K.S. and Whetten, D.A. (1981) , Perceptions of Organizational Effectiveness over Organizational Life Cycle, Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, pp.525-544. Chen, H., & Kuo, T. (2004). Performance appraisal across organizational life cycles. Human Systems Management, 23(4), pp.227-233. Chen, H./Kuo, T. (2004). Performance appraisal across organizational life cycles, in: Human Systems Management, 23(4), pp.227-233. Churchill, N./Lewis, V. (1983). The five stages of small business growth, Harvard Business Review, 61(3), pp.30 - 50. Churchill, N.C. and Lewis, V.L. (1983). The Five Stages of Small Business Growth, Harvard Business Review, 61(3), pp.30-39. Cohen WM, Levinthal DA. (1990). Absorptive capacity:a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1), pp.128–152. Deeds, D.L., Decarolis., & Coombs. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities and New Product Development in High Technology Ventures: An Empirical Analysis of New Biotechnology Firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 15 (3), pp.211-229. Dierickx, I. & K. Cool (1989). Assets Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage. Management Science, 35(12), pp.1504-1511. Ervin, B.L. (1998). Life-cycle Impacts on the Incremental Value-relevance of Earnings and Cash Flow Measures, Journal of Financial Statement Analysis, 4(1), pp.40-56. Ettlie JE. (1998). R&D and global manufacturing performance. Management Science, 44(1), pp.1–11. GabrieleCarbonara, & RosaCaiazza. (2008). From Knowledge to Dynamic Capabilities: Double Learning Process in Unordinary Events. The Business Review, 11 (2), pp.247-251. Galina Shirokova (2009). Organisational life-cycle: The characteristics of developmental stages in Russian companies created from scratch. Journal for East European Management Studies, 14(1), pp.65-85. Hanks, S.H. (1993). Tightening the life-cycle construct: a taxonomic study of growth stage configurations in high-technology organizations, in: Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 18(2), pp.5-30. Henderson, M. R.,& Clark B. K.(1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfigure- action of existing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), pp.9- 30. Hoy, F. (2006). The complicating factor of life-cycles in corporate venturing, in: Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 30(6), pp.831–836. Juha-Antti Lamberg, Henrikki Tikkanen, Tomi Nokelainen, and Henri Suur-Inkeroinen. (2009). Competitive dynamics, strategic consistency, and organizational survival. Strategic Management Journal, 30 (2), pp.45-60. Kalton, G., D. Kasprzyk, and D. McMillen (1989), Non-sampling errors in panel surveys, NY: John Wiley Co., pp.249-270. Kazanjian, R.K. (1988). Relation of Dominate Problems to Stages of Growth in Technology-Based New Ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 257-279. Kor YY. (2001). Resource deployment strategies following initial public offering: connecting resource-based, upper echelons, and agency perspectives. octoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. Langlois, R. (1994). Cognition and capabilities: Opportunities seized and missed in the history of Mitchell, W. (1989). the computer industry, working paper, University of Connecticut. Presented at the conference on Oversights and Foresights, Stern School of Business, New York University, pp.11–12. Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development, Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue, 13, pp.111–125. Mather, P., and Ramsay A. (2007), Do Board Characteristics Influence Impression Management through Graph Selectivity around CEO Changes?, Australian Accounting Review, 17(2), pp.84-95. Nicos A Scordis, James Barrese, Ping Wang (2008). The Impact of Cash Flow Volatility on Systematic Risk. Journal of Insurance Issues, 31(1), pp.43-71. Penrose ET (1995). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm(第三版). Oxford University Press: New York. Penrose, E. T. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. London: Basil Blackwl, pp.241-260. Peterson, P.P. (1983) , Financial Decisions and the Life-cycle of Corporation, Financial Management Association Meeting, Florida State University, Florida U.S. . Quinn, R.E./Cameron K. (1983): Organization life-cycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence, in: Management Science, 29(1), pp.33 - 51. Richardson, George B. (1972). The organization of industry. Economic Journal, 82, pp.883-896. Rubenstein, A., Radnor, M., Baker, N., Heiman, D., & McColly, J. (1967). Some organizational factors related to the effectiveness of management science groups in industry. Management Science, 13(8), pp.B508-B518. Ruigrok, W. and Wagner , H., (2003), Internationalization and Performance: An Organizational Learning Perspective, Management International Review, 43(1), 2003, pp.63-83. Schultz, T. (1961), Investment in human capital, American Economic Review, 51, pp. 1-17. Scott, B.R. (1973) , The Industrial State: Old Myths and New Realities, Harvard Business Review, 51(2), pp.133-148. Smith, K.G./Mitchell, T.R./Summer, C.E. (1985). Top level management priorities in different stages of the organization life-cycle, in: Academy of Management Journal, 28(4) , pp.799 - 820. Sougiannis, Theodore (1994). The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D. The Accounting Review, 69(1), pp.44. Sundaramurthy C. (1996), Corporate governance within the context of antitakeover provisions. Strategic Management Journal 17(5), pp. 377–394. Teece, J.David, PisanoGary, & ShuenAmy. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7), pp.509-533. Teece, J.David. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, pp.1319-1350. Tsai, M. T. & Liao, Y. S. (2002). What Influences innovation? - The Moderating Role of Organizational Life Cycle. Journal of Technology Management, 7(1), pp.91-116 Tushman, M. L., W. H. Newman and E. Romanelli(1986). Convergence and upheaval: Managing theunsteady pace of organizational evolution, California Management Review, 29(1), pp.29–44. Vinh SumChau, & Barry J.Witcher. (2008). Dynamic capabilities for strategic team performance management: the case of Nissan. Team Performance Management, 14 (3/4), pp.179-191. Yao-Sheng Liao (2006). The Effect of the Life-Cycle Stage of an Organization on the Relation between Corporate Control and Product Innovation. International Journal of Management, 23(1), pp.167-175. Yasemin Y. Kor, Joseph T. Mahoney (2005). How dynamics, management, and governance of resource deployments influence firm-level performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), pp. 489-496. Yeoh, Poh-Lin, & RothKendall. (1999). An empirical analysis of sustained advantage in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry: Impact of firm resources and capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20, pp.637-653. Zollo, M.,& Winter G.S. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 6(1), 76-92 Zott, C.(2003).Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intra-industry differential firm performance:Insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), pp.97-125. Porter, Michael E. (1980), Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, New York: Free Press. Verbeek, Marno (2004), A Guide to Modern Econometrics (再版), John Wiley & Sons : Chichester England
摘要: Firms face many problems at each life cycle phase, when they were pursuing growth. In this generation based on knowledge, operations are different from past. But, the original principal of problem solving for growth is constant. No firm can be mature at once; successful enterprises are all conquer the challenges in growth process. Being winner today, advantage they possessed today cannot ensure their future. Dynamic capability plays major role on the stage which been flat by liberalized market and information technology. In the past, the researches for dynamic capability are almost sampled foreign firms. For applicability of Taiwan, research methodology of this research design carefully. Combining organization life cycle and dynamic capability these two main theories to know what kinds of business function of dynamic capability should be develop in each life cycle phase, the result indicate: 1. Over the years to increase R&D deployment, will help to enhance organizational performance. 2. Percentage changes in marketing expense deferred two years and organizational performance showed a positive correlation. 3. Percentage changes in equipment expense and organizational performance showed a ∩-shaped correlation. 4. In growing phase, the relationship between percentage changes in R&D expense and organizational performance is better than the other two groups. 5. In recession and recovery phase, the relationship between percentage changes in marketing expense and organizational performance is better than the other two groups.
廠商在追求成長的同時,會在各個階段遇到不同的難題,在這個以知識為基礎的新經濟運作模式,許多營運上的方式階迥然於過去,但是成長過程中所遭過的狀況,其根本的原則並未改變太多,就像是組織的生命週期,沒有公司能夠一步到達成熟階段;成功的公司,都克服了在成長過程中的各種難題,才有今日的狀況,然而現況的優勢,並不保證下階段的成功,比爾蓋茲在其著作《數位神經系統》中曾提及「八○年代的主體是品質,九○代是企業再造,而二○○○年則是速度」,被市場自由化及資訊科技一手抹平的世界中,環境的變化不僅迅速,同時程度更加劇烈;動態能力扮演著舉足輕重的角色。 過去許多對於動態能力之研究其研究樣本都是針對西方國家之廠商,本研究為求於本國之適用性,在研究設計的各方面皆有所處理,以求研究結果及建議的可靠性。結合了組織生命週期與動態能力這兩大理論,欲得知台灣廠商於各組織生命週期下,必需要建立哪些企業功能的動態能力,本研究的研究結果指出: 1. 歷年增加對研究發展的部署,有助於組織績效的提升。 2. 遞延兩期之行銷支出變動百分比與組織績效呈現正相關 3. 設備支出變動百分比與組織績效呈現∩形 4. 處於成長期之廠商,其研究發展投資變動百分比對組織績效之關係優於其他兩組 5. 處於衰退復甦期之廠商,其行銷支出變動百分比對組織績效之關係優於其他兩組
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/20805
其他識別: U0005-0307200906113400
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-0307200906113400
顯示於類別:企業管理學系所

文件中的檔案:
沒有與此文件相關的檔案。


在 DSpace 系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。