臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

台灣金融業經歷金融自由化以後，市場的改革力量一直持續不斷至今，此股力量所引發的市場反應是刺激市場出現一場搶奪顧客和利潤的戰爭。這場戰爭可分三階段：初期，競爭者爭相壯大勢力；逐漸地，分成贏家與輸家兩大陣營；最後出現合併，由贏家出面整合市場。
金融自由化後，一方面國內銀行有更大的彈性發展新產品與服務，其結果產生各項金融商品的區隔逐漸模糊，進而使得國內銀行業者均有機會擴大其目標顧客群中的市場佔有率。另一方面為國內銀行業者帶來許多新的挑戰：一、須與全球性銀行業者競爭。二、競爭使得金融業在傳統商品上的利潤越來越薄。三、須追求更高的客戶滿意度。四、客戶的選擇變多以後，銀行要擴大商品的廣度、拓展服務據點、提高服務品質、甚至於降低費用收入，經營的難度更為增加。然而新金融商品的開發雖可成為收入的新來源，但亦有可能成為新風險。
本研究以臺灣地區分行家數最多之合作金庫商業銀行為研究對象。期間自2007年至2010年止國內228家分行財務資料，以縱橫資料模型（Panel Data Model）與迴歸分析方法，分別藉由創新業務項目、分行經理與分行屬性等條件差異，以存款、放款、電子金融、理財、信託、外匯、人力資源等7個構面之變數來探討備抵後淨利率與非利息收入比率等2項獲利與創新經營績效指標之影響。
實證分析得到結論：一、傳統授信業務結合保險業務之產品創新，對獲利能力有負向顯著影響，對創新經營能力有正向顯著影響。即表示在金融市場微利的環境下，為鼓勵承作房貸保險專案而以更優惠的貸款利率承作房貸業務，將使獲利能力下降；而嘗試產品的改變與交叉行銷可增加創新經營能力進而提高市場競爭力。二、全球金融網EOI之服務創新，對獲利能力有顯著正向影響，對創新經營能力存在負向不顯著影響。即表示此項業務的創新可吸引目標客戶往來，擴大經營利基，提高獲利能力。三、分行經理人的調動促使創新經營能力下降。新合作金庫分行於創新經營能力上表現顯著高於其他分行。男性經理於創新經營能力上表現顯著高於女性經理。四、理財業務收入可促進獲利能力與創新經營能力提高。活期存款業務可促進獲利能力提高。外匯業務可促進創新經營能力提高。放款業務促使創新經營能力下降。信託業務促使獲利能力下降。其餘各項變數對獲利能力與創新經營能力或有提高、下降影響，惟不顯著。本研究結果可作為經營者未來改善創新經營方向、訂定營運目標與分行經營績效考核之參考。

The power of the market reforms in Taiwan continually after financial industry liberalization. It causes the responses from the market is to stimulate the war of robbing customers and profit in the markets. There are three stages in this war. At the beginning, competitors are strenuous to enlarge their markets. Gradually, there are only the winners and losers. Lastly, the markets are integrated by the winner.
The domestic banks in Taiwan have the more opportunities to develop the new commodity and service after financial liberalization. The result of it causes is that the differences of the financial commodities are blurred. Then, the banks in Taiwan all have the chances to expand the market share of their target customers. On the other hand, it also brings a lot of new challenges for domestic banking. First, domestic banking has to compete with global banking. Second, the competition makes financial get less and less profits in traditional commodity. Third, they have to pursue higher satisfaction of customers. Fourth, after customers have more options, banks have to enlarge the scope of their merchandise, start more branches, raise their service quality, even decrease the income from the charge. The difficulties of management become tougher. Although the development of new financial commodity can be the new source of income, it could be the new risks.
The participants are the cooperative commercial banks which are the most branches in Taiwan in this study and analyze the financial data from 228 branches from 2007 to 2010. By the condition differences of innovation business items, bank manager and the characters of the branches and seven variables which are deposit, loan money, electronic finance, manage finance, trust, foreign exchange, human source to discuss the influences to the profit of Net Profit Margin and Non-interest Income, and the indication of innovation operational performance by using Panel Data Model and Regression analysis.
The conclusions of this research: First, the commodity innovation from the combination of insurance business and the credit business can prompt the ability of innovation of management, but also drop the ability of marking profit. Second, the service innovation of electronic finance can raise the ability of making profit. income from managing finance business can increase the ability of making profit and innovation management. Current deposit business can prompt the profit. Third, the staff movement of the branch managers drop the innovation management ability. The new-cooperative-bank Branches’ ability of innovation management has significantly higher than the others. Male managers show better than female managers in innovation management. Fourth, Foreign exchange business can prompt innovation management ability. The loans business drops the ability of making profit. The trust business drops the profit. The rest variables of the profit ability and innovation management ability for upgrade and downgrade are no significant. This study result can be the references of improving the direction of innovation management, organizing management goals and the performance assessment to the branches for the managers in the future.

第一章緒論………………………………………………….………………………..
1
第一節 研究背景與動機……………………………………………………....
1
第二節 合作金庫商業銀行背景………………………………………………
9
第三節 研究目的………………………………………………………………
13
第四節 研究架構與流程………………………………………………………
14
第二章 文獻回顧……………………………………………………………………
16
第一節 銀行經營績效…………………………………………………………
16
第二節 服務創新與經營績效…………………………………………………
20
第三章 研究設計……………………………………………………………………
24
第一節 研究對象及資料來源…………………………………………………
24
第二節 研究方法………………………………………………………………
24
第三節 實證模型與變數………………………………………………………
27
第四節 敘述性統計結果分析…………………………………………………
34
第四章 實證結果分析………………………………………………………………
37
第五章結論與建議……………………………………………………………………
44
第一節 結論……………………………………………………………………
44
第二節 建議、研究限制與未來研究方向……………………………………
46
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………….………..
47
圖表………………………………………………………………………..…….……
表 1-1 金融機構統計表……………………………………..…………………
3
表1-2 將資產負債概括讓與商業銀行之27家信用合作社…………………
4
表1-3 核准合併之23家金融機構……………………………………………
5
表1-4 2001年9月14日10家本國銀行承受36家農漁會信用部、信用合作社……………………………………………………………….........
6
表1-5 2002年7月26日2家本國銀行承受7家農會信用部資料………..
7
表1-6 核准設立、撤銷、合併、更名之外國銀行在台分行……………….
7
表1-7 核准改制、概括讓與之信託投資公司……………………………….
7
表1-8 合作金庫銀行2011年各項業務統計表….……………………..……
12
表1-9 合作金庫銀行最近五年財務分析表……………………………….…
12
表1-10 截至2012年1月合作金庫商業銀行歷年信用評等結果……………
13
表2-1 2006~2011年新推出金融商品與服務一覽表…………………..……
22
表2-2 截至101年4月底金融商品……………………………………….
23
表3-1 變數分組表…………………………………………………………….
34
表3-2 敘述性統計表……………………………………………………….…
36
表4-1 影響備抵後淨利率(ROS)與非利息收入比率(CMR)因素之實證結果…………………………………………………………………….…
43
圖1-1 國內金融機構統計圖……………………………………….…………
3
圖1-2 合作金庫商業銀行組織架構（2011年6月）………………………
11
圖1-3 研究架構流程圖…………………………………………………….…
15

（1）中文部分
王美惠與黃台心，2005，「考慮技術與配置無效率下的銀行業規模與多元經濟分析」，東吳經濟商學學報，50: 1-44。
余忠苗，2009，「運用資料包絡分析法評估銀行之分行經營效率」，碩士論文。
林昌陞，2010，「臺灣銀行分行經營績效之研究」，碩士論文。
林炳文，2001，「臺灣地區商業銀行合併效率性之分析」，風險管理學報，3（1）：1-21。
邱美菁、許永明與陳寧馨，2011，「台灣銀行業多角化經營對績效的影響」，商略學報，3（3）：155-174。
許志義，2010，「資通訊科技與企業競爭力管理：台灣金融產業實證」，台大管理論叢，21（1）：263-278。
陳瑞煬，2001，「本國銀行經營獲利績效之研究」，碩士論文。
陳曉蓉，2007，「台灣銀行業分行網絡之發展」，台灣金融財務季刊，8（4）：95-119。
黃台心，2005，計量經濟學，台北：雙頁書廊。
黃速蘭，2011，「銀行業商業模式探討-以合作金庫銀行及花旗(台灣)銀行為例」，碩士論文。
楊純誠，2008，「上市銀行合併前後經營績效之分析-以合作金庫銀行併農民銀行為個案之研究」，碩士論文。
劉秀玲，2006，「金融控股公司下銀行經營之多角化、穩定性及績效研究」，行政院金融監督管理委員會銀行出國報告書，金融監督管理委員會。
蔡靜宜，2002，「商業銀行合併信用合作社之效益分析」，碩士論文。
（2）英文部分
Betz, F., 1988 , Management Technological Innovation , New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Bolton, R. N., 1997, “A Dynamic Model of the Duration of the Customer’s Relationship with a Continuous Service Provider: The Role of Satisfaction,” Marketing Science, 17:45-65.
Damanpour, F. 1991, “Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis Effects of Determinants and Moderators,” Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 555-990.
De Young, R. and Roland, K.P., 2001, “Product Mix and Earnings Volatility at Commercial Banks: Evidence from a Degree of Total Leverage Model,” Journal of Financial Intermediation, 10(1): 54-84.
Diaz, B. D., M. G. Olalla, and S. S. Azofra, 2004, “Bank Acquisitions and Performance: Evidence from a Panel of European Credit Entities,” Journal of Economics and Business, 56(5): 377-404.
Ducker, P. F., 1985, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, New York: Harper Row.
Hernando I. and Nieto M. J., 2007, “Is The Internet Delivery Channel Changing Banks’ Performance? The Case of Spanish Banks,” Journal of Banking and Finance, 31(4): 1083-1099.
Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F. and Knight, G. A., 2004, “Innovativeness: Its Antecedents and Impact on Business Performance,” Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5): 429-438.
Kast, Fremont E. and Rosenzweig, James E., 1974, Organization and Management Theory: A Systems Approach, New York: McGraw-Hill .
Keskin, H., 2006, “Market Orientation, Learning Orientation, and Innovation Capabilities in SMEs: An Extended Model,” European Journal of Innovation Management, 9(4): 396-417.
Kotler, P., 1996, Marketing Management： Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Mercieca, S., Schaeck, K. and Wolfe, S., 2007, “Small European Banks: Benefits from Diversification?” Journal of Banking and Finance, 31(7), 1975-1998.
Panayides, P., 2006, “Enhancing Innovation Capability Through Relationship Management and Implications for Performance,” European Journal of Innovation Management, 9(4): 466-483.
Robbins, S. P., 1993, Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies, and Applications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schumpeter, J. A., 1932, The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard Business School, Boston.
Stiroh, K. J. and Rumble, A., 2006, “The Dark Side of Diversification: The Case of US Financial Holding Companies,” Journal of Banking and Finance, 30(8): 2131-2161.
Subramanian, A. and Nilakanta, S., 1996,“Organizational Innovativeness: Exploring the Relationship Between Organizational Determinants of Innovation, Types of Innovations, and Measures of Organizational Performance,” Omega, 24(6): 631-647.
Voss, C. A., 1992, “Measurement of Innovation and Design Performance in Services,” Design Management Journal, 3(1): 40-46.