Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
標題: 企業人力資本管理之研究:實質選擇權觀點
A Study in Management of Corporate Human Capital from a Real-options Perspective
作者: 李慧慈
Lee, Hut-Tzu
出版社: 高階經理人碩士在職專班
引用: 中文部份 1. 黃同圳 (2006) ,創造競爭優勢的人力資源管理策略--人力資源管理的12課:23-52。 2. 蔡維奇 (2006) ,員工訓練與開發--人力資源管理的12課:93-122。 3. 黃家齊 (2002) ,人力資源管理系統與組織績效-智慧資本觀點,管理學報,第十九卷第三期:415-450。 4. 潘秀貞 (2001) ,人力資源彈性策略對員工角色知覺及工作態度之影響,國立屏東科技大學工業管理系碩士論文。 5. 司徒達賢、林晉寬 (1998) ,台灣優勢廠商之資源管理模式,管理學報,第15卷第2期:255-270。 英文部份 1. Amram, M. and Kulatilaka, N. (1999) Real Options: Managing Strategic Investment in an Uncertain Worid. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 2. Arthur, J.B. (1994) “Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance”, Academy of Management Journal, 37(3): 670—87. 3. Becker, G. S. (1964) Human Capital, New York: National Bureau for Economic Research. 4. Barney, J., (1991) “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Adantage”, Journal of Management, 39: 779-801. 5. Becker, B. and Huselid, M. (1998) “High Performance Work Systems and Firm Performance: A Synthesis of Research and Managerial Implications”. In Ferris, G. (ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol. 16. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 6. Bhattacharya M. and Wright, P. M. (2005) ” Managing human assets in an uncertain world: applying real options theory to HRM ”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol.16 , pp.929-948 7. Cascio, W. F. (1991) Costing Human Resources: The Financial Impact of Behavior in Organizations, Boston: PWS-Kent. 8. Cascio, W.F. (2002) “Strategies for Responsible Restructuring”, Academy of Management Executive, 16(3): 80. 9. Delery, J.E. and Doty, D.H. (1996) “Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management: Tests of Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Performance Predictions”, Academy of Management Journal, 39(4): 802-35. 10. Duncan, G., and Hoffman, S. (1981) “The Incidence and Wage Effects of Overeducation”. Economics of Education Review, 1:75-86. 11. Flamholtz, E. G., and Lacey, J. M. (1981) Personnel Management, Human Capital Theory, and Human Resource Accounting, Los Angeles: Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California. 12. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. (1994) Competing for the Future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 13. Huselid, M.A. (1995) “The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance”, Academy of Management Journal, 38(3): 635-72. 14. Kogut, B. and Kulatilaka, N. (2001) “Capabilities as Real Options”, Organization Science, 12: 744-58. 15. Lado, A. A., and Wilson, M. C.(1994) “Human Resource Systems and Sustained Competitive Advantage: A Competency-based Perspective”, Academy of Management Review, 19:699-727. 16. Lepak, D.P. and Snell, S.A. (1999) “The Human Resource Architecture; Toward a Theory of Human Capital Allocation and Development”, Academy of Management Review, 24( 1); 31 - 4 8 . 17. Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) “ Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development”, Strategic Management Journal, 13:111-125. 18. McElroy, J.C, Morrow, P.C. and Rude, S.N. (2001) “Turnover and Organizational Performance; A Comparative Analysis of the Effects of Voluntary, Involuntary, and Reduction-in-Force Turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 9,6: 1294. 19. Parnes, H. S.(1984) People Power, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications 20. Schultz, T. W.(1960) The Formation of Human Capital by Education, Journal of Political Economy, 68:571-583. 21. Snell, S. A., and Dean, J. W.(1992) “ Integrated Manufacturing and Human Resource Management: A Human Capital Perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, 35:467-504 22. Snell, S.A., Youndt, M. and Wright, P. (1996) “Establishing a Eramework for Research in Strategic Human Resource Management; Merging Resource Theory and Organizational Learning”. In Eerris, G. (ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol. 14. Greenwich, CT; JAI Press, pp. 61-90. 23. Spender, J. C., (1996) “Making Knowledge the Basis of a Dynamic Theory of the Firm”, Strategic Management Journal, 17(winter special issue): 45-62 24. Trigeorgis, L. (1996) Real Options: Managerial Flexibility and Strategy in Resource Allocation. Cambridge, MA; MIT Press. 25. Tsang, M. C., Rumberger, R. W., and Levin, H. M. (1991) “ The Impact of Surplus Schooling on Worker Productivity”, Industrial Relations, 30:209-228 26. Tsoukas, H., (1996) “The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System : A Constructionist Approach “. Strategic Management Journal, 17(winter special issue): 11-25. 27. Ulrich, D. and Lake, D. (1990) Organizational Capability: Competing from the Inside/Out.New York; Wiley. 28. Wernerfelt, B., (1984) “A Resource-based View of the Firm”, Strategic Management Journal, 18; 171-180. 29. Wright, P.M., and McMahan, G.C., (1992) “Theoretical Perspectives for Strategic Human Resource Management”, Journal of Management, 18; 295-320. 30. Wright, P.M., McMahan, G. and McWilliams, A. (1994) “Human Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage; A Resource-Based Perspective”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5: 301-26.
摘要: Bhattacharya and Wright (2005) 強調,人力資本的價值會受多種不確定性因素的影響,而實質選擇權的觀點,可適當指引企業擬定人力資源管理政策與相關活動。本研究透過問卷調查,檢視企業的人力資源管理,是否已考慮到人力資本的價值所面臨的風險,及是否已應用實質選擇權的概念,來管理這些風險。研究結果顯示: (1) 企業由於面臨的產業整體風險 (包含市場風險與技術風險) 不同,會提供不同的員工薪資溢酬,此與實質選擇權的概念相符。 (2) 對於具多元技能的員工,與具新技術的員工,企業願意提供額外的薪資溢酬,且平均而言,具新技術員工的薪資溢酬高於具多元技能員工;同時,人力資本成長選擇權的價值,平均高於轉換選擇權的價值。 (3) 至於不同風險類型如何影響不同類型的人力資本實質選擇權價值,我們發現,技術風險與具多元技能員工的薪資溢酬有顯著的關聯,也與新技術員工的薪資溢酬有顯著的關聯;而市場風險則無顯著關聯。 (4) 最後,企業為獲得更高的人力資源管理彈性價值,願意承擔因建立工作輪調制度、增加員工溝通管道與施行員工教育訓練而增加的成本。整體而言,本研究之實證結果與實質選擇權觀點之預期具有一致性。
Bhattacharya and Wright (2005) pointed out that the human capital value of firms would be affected by many uncertainty factors, and firms could make more proper strategies for human resources management and its relevant activities with the real option thinking. This research investigates whether firms have adopted the real option approach to manage their human resources while they are faced with the risks affecting their human capital. The results of this study indicate: (1) When firms are concerned with the market risk and the technological risk, they will offer different levels of salary premiums to employees. This is consistent with what the real option theory predicts. (2) For employees with multiple skills or with newer skills, firms are more willing to offer higher salary premiums to them. On average, salary premiums for the employees having multiple skills are higher than those with newer skills. In addition, the growth option value of human capital is higher than the switching option value. (3) As for how different types of risks influence the real options value of human capital, we find that the technological risk has significant effect on salary premiums for multiple skills as well as on those with newer skills. However the market risk has no effect on them. (4) Last, in order to obtain higher flexibility value of human resources management, firms are willing to accept the increased costs from practicing job rotation, setting up employees communication channels and employee training. As a whole, the results of our research are consistent with the prescriptions embodied in the real option theory.
其他識別: U0005-1308200715181700
Appears in Collections:高階經理人碩士在職專班



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.