臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在這個資訊爆炸的時代，每個人每天皆會接觸到不勝枚舉的訊息量，每個單位部門皆希望能判斷出所有事件的輕重緩急，將每個任務及資源交給最適配的人員處理，做出效率與效能兼具的決策並成功有效執行，以期獲利。每個部門單位都追求效率，審計的機關部門更是如此。本論文以某金控內部稽核單位為取樣對象，以資料探勘之分群及鑑別方法，找出每位審計員最適合處理的審計案件條件，使其得到較佳的績效評比，亦能對於其較弱的地方提供合適的教育訓練，達到「適性揚才，強化弱點」之目的。
本論文之研究結果顯示，在銀行相關科系畢業的審計人員的在職教育訓練方面，會計業務（AC）課程應優先安排給審計人員。而會計業務（AC）、內控內稽（ICA）、進出口外匯（FX）課程應優先安排給非銀行相關科系畢業的審計人員。

At an era of information explosion, everyone is expected to be overloaded with information every day. Among a bunch of information and matters, it is crucial that companies make an accurate judgement on which takes priority over others. In this study, the sample of the research is an Internal Audit Department of a certain finance holding company. By applying clustering and discriminant analysis of data mining, each auditor is assigned to cope with the audit case that suits him/her the most, and therefore, the company obtains a better performance rating and is capable of finding out the weakness in the auditors and offers them the trainings that they need accordingly. The result of the study shows that the auditors that are graduated from bank-related departments should be arranged to accounting courses and those that are from non-bank-related departments should be arranged to accounting, foreign exchange, internal control and audit.

摘 要 i
ABSTRACT ii
誌 謝 iii
目 錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 8
1.1研究背景與動機 8
1.2研究目的 9
1.3研究流程 10
第二章 文獻探討 11
2.1績效 11
2.2績效審計 12
2.3教育訓練之定義 14
2.4教育訓練之種類 15
2.5年資和工作經驗 16
2.6任務複雜度 17
2.7績效評估 18
2.8綜述 21
第三章 研究方法 22
3.1研究架構 22
3.2集群分析法 23
3.3距離計算 24
3.4五種常見的集群分析法 26
3.5鑑別分析法 31
第四章 研究結果 34
4.1資料描述 34
4.2敘述統計 36
4.3分群結果 44
4.4鑑別分析結果 48
第五章 研究結論與建議 54
5.1研究結論與發現 54
5.2未來研究建議 55
參考文獻 56

中文文獻
1.楊季臻，我國地方審計機關審計效率評估及差異分析之研究，碩士論文，國立東華大學會計與財務金融碩士學位學程，花蓮，2010。
2.李錦常，從我國政府審計策略觀點探討審計人員應具備之職能，碩士論文，逢甲大學會計學系碩士班，台中，2011。
3.丁仁後，審計績效決定因素之實證研究-以臺灣審計機關為例，碩士論文，國立臺北商業技術學院商學研究所，台北，2011。
4.陳正鏞，政府審計品質管理機制、工作滿意度與提升績效審計成果影響因素關聯性之探討，逢甲大學會計學系碩士班，台中，2013。
5.何志明，企業知識管理應用於我國政府績效審計之研究，碩士論文，國立彰化師範大學商業教育學系行政管理碩士班，彰化，2003。
6.謝詩晨，提示系統中任務複雜度對使用者工作績效的影響，碩士論文，國立清華大學資訊系統與應用研究所，新竹，2006。
7.許峻維，分析與衡量結構化查詢語言敘述的任務複雜度，碩士論文，中華大學資訊管理學系碩士班，新竹，2011。
8.黃莉婷，以實驗法探討資料表示方式與任務複雜度對使用者查詢績效的影響，碩士論文，中華大學資訊管理學系碩士班，新竹，2009。
9.曾苡蓁，知識管理、審計專業人員核心能力與工作績效之關連性研究-以我國五大會計師事務所為例，碩士論文，淡江大學會計學系碩士班，台北，2003。
10.楊靜宜，主管與部屬關係交換品質與晉升力評分之關聯性研究－以挑戰性工作經驗與組織年資為調節變項，碩士論文，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所，桃園，2014。
11.鄭雅如，會計知識與工作經驗對以成本為基礎的決策能力之影響，碩士論文，東海大學會計學系碩士班，台中，2013。
12.蔡宛玉，銀行財富管理的激勵制度、教育訓練對工作績效之關係研究-以銀行資深理財專員為研究對象，碩士論文，國立交通大學高階主管管理學程碩士班，新竹，2015。
13.連慧如，企業推動員工教育訓練對組織績效影響之探討-以企業人力資源提升計畫為例，碩士論文，國立東華大學管理學院高階經營管理碩士在職專班，花蓮，2015。
14.陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵，多變量分析方法，五南圖書出版股份有限公司，1994。
15.丁一賢、陳牧言，資料探勘，滄海書局，2003。
16.洪永祥，銀行服務品質之績效評估，博士論文，國立交通大學工業工程與管理學系，新竹，2002。
17.陳佳妏，領隊人員績效評估建構之研究－以平衡計分卡為基礎，碩士論文，國立高雄餐旅學院旅遊管理研究所，高雄，2006。
18.黃美玲，科技大學行政單位經營績效評估之研究，碩士論文，朝陽科技大學工業工程與管理所，台中，2006。
19.邱淑惠，科技大學學術單位經營績效評估之研究，碩士論文，朝陽科技大學工業工程與管理所，台中，2006。
20.鄭叔謀，產險公司營業單位經營績效評估模式之研究－灰色理論之應用，碩士論文，朝陽科技大學保險金融管理所，台中，2006。
21.沈艷雪，校務基金績效評估－以某大學個案為例，碩士論文，國立成功大學會計學研究所，台南，2002。
22.楊中睿，派遣人員績效評估之研究，碩士論文，華梵大學工業工程與經營資訊研究所，新北市，2006。
23.陳嘉碩，人力資源管理的績效評估對改進公部門考績制度之啟發－南投地區政府機關的觀點，碩士論文，國立暨南國際大學公共行政與政策所，南投，2002。

英文文獻
1.Abdolmohammadi, M., & Wright, A. (1987). An examination of the effects of experience and task complexity on audit judgments. The Accounting Review, 62(1), 1–13.
2.Allee, K., Bhattacharya, N., Black, E., & Christensen, T. (2007). Pro forma disclosure and investor sophistication: External validation of experimental evidence using archival data. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32, 201–222.
3.Asare, S., & McDaniel, L. (1996). The effects of familiarity with the preparer and task complexity on the effectiveness of the audit review process. The Accounting Review, 71(2), 139–159.
4.Bedard, J. (1989). Expertise in auditing: Myth or reality? Accounting,Organizations and Society, 14(1–2), 113–131.
5.Birnberg, J. (2011). A proposed framework for behavioral accounting research. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23, 1–43.
6.Bonner, S. (1991). Is experience necessary in cue measurement? The case of auditing tasks. Contemporary Accounting Research, 8(1), 253–269.
7.Bonner, S. (1994). A model of the effects of audit task complexity. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19(3), 213–234.
8.Brown, S., & Leigh, T. (1996). A new look at psychological climate and its relationship to job involvement, effort, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 358–368.
9.Campbell, D. (1988). Task complexity: A review and analysis. The Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40–52.
10.Caramanis, C., & Lennox, C. (2008). Audit effort and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 45(1), 116–138.
11.Chang, J., Ho, J., & Liao, W. (1997). The effects of justification, task complexity and experience/training on problem-solving performance. Behavior Research in Accounting Supplement, 98–116.
12.Chan, K., & Mo, P. (2000). Tax holidays and tax noncompliance: An empirical study of corporate tax audits in china’s developing economy. The Accounting Review, 75(4), 469–484.
13.Christen, M., Iyer, G., & Soberman, D. (2006). Job satisfaction, job performance, and effort: A reexamination using agency theory. Journal of Marketing, 70(1), 137–150.
14.Clement, M. (1999). Analyst forecast accuracy: Do ability, resources, and portfolio complexity matter? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 27, 285–303.
15.Clement, M., Koonce, L., & Lopez, T. (2007). The role of task-specific forecasting experience and innate ability in understanding analyst forecasting performance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 44(3), 378–398.
16.Cloyd, C. (1997). Performance in tax research tax: The joint effect of knowledge and accountability. The Accounting Review, 72, 111–131.
17.Cloyd, B., Pratt, J., & Stock, T. (1996). The use of financial accounting choice to support aggressive tax positions: Public and private firms. Journal of Accounting Research, 34(1), 23–43.
18.Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (1976). The design and conduct of quasiexperiments and true experiments in field settings. Handbook of industrial and organisational psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.
19.Dye, R. (1995). Incorporation and the audit market. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 19(1), 75–114.
20.Fisher, S., & Ford, J. (1998). Differential effects of learner effort and goal orientation on two learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 51(2), 397–420.
21.Francis, J., & Yu, M. (2009). Big 4 office size and audit quality. The Accounting Review, 84(5), 1521–1552.
22.Fried, Y., & Slowik, L. (2004). Enriching goal-setting theory with time: An integrated approach. The Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 404–422.
23.Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153–161.
24.Hillegeist, S. (1999). Financial reporting and auditing under alternative damage apportionment rules. The Accounting Review, 74(3), 347–369.
25.Hirst, D. E. (1994). Auditor sensitivity to earnings management. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(1), 405–422.
26.Jacob, J., Lys, T., & Neale, M. (1999). Expertise in forecasting performance of security analysts. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 28(1), 51–82.
27.Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 657–690.
28.Kerlinger, F. (1986). Foundations of behavioural research. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
29.Lennox, C. S., Francis, J. R., & Wang, Z. (2012). Selection models in accounting research. The Accounting Review, 87(2), 589–616.
30.Libby, R. (1981). Accounting and human information processing: Theory and applications. Contemporary topics in accounting series. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31.Libby, R. (1985). Availability and the generation of hypotheses in analytical review. Journal of Accounting Research, 23(2), 648–667.
32.Libby, R., Bloomfield, R., & Nelson, M. (2002). Experimental research in financial accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27, 775–810.
33.Libby, R., & Frederick, D. (1990). Experience and the ability to explain audit findings. Journal of Accounting Research, 28(2), 348–367.
34.Libby, R., & Luft, J. (1993). Determinants of judgement performance in accounting setting: Ability, knowledge, motivation, and environment. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18(5), 425–450.
35.Lim, C., & Tan, H. (2010). Does auditor tenure improve audit quality? Moderating effects of industry specialization and fee dependence. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27, 923–957.
36.Locke, E., & Latham, G. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
37.Louis, H., Sun, A., & Urcan, O. (2013). Do analysts sacrifice forecast accuracy for informativeness? Management Science, 59, 1688–1708.
38.Maynard, D., & Hakel, M. (1997). Effects of objective and subjective task complexity on performance. Human Performance, 10(4), 303–330.
39.McGrath, J. (1981). Dilemmatics: The study of research choices and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 25(2), 179–210.
40.Mills, L. (1998). Book-tax differences and internal revenue service adjustments. Journal of Accounting Research, 36(2), 343–356.
41.Mills, L., & Sansing, R. (2000). Strategic tax and financial reporting decisions: Theory and evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research, 17(1), 85–106.
42.Mohd-Sanusi, Z., & Mohd-Iskandar, T. (2007). Audit judgment performance: Assessing the effect of performance incentives, effort and task complexity. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(1), 34–52.
43.Murray, M. (1995). Sales tax compliance and audit selection. National Tax Journal, 48, 515–530.
44.Pratt, J., & Jiambalvo, J. (1981). Relationship between leader behaviors and audit team performance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6, 133–142.
45.Sacket, P., & Larson, J. (1990). Research strategies and tactics in industrial and organisational psychology. In Hough Dunette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organisational psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
46.Scandura, T., & Williams, E. (2000). Research methodology in management: Current practices, trends, and implications for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1248–1264.
47.Simnett, R. (1996). The effect of information selection, information processing and task complexity on predictive accuracy of auditors. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(7), 699–719.
48.Simnett, R., & Trotman, K. (1989). Auditor versus model: Information choice and information processing. The Accounting Review, 64(3), 514–528.
49.Tan, H., & Kao, A. (1999). Accountability effects on auditors’ performance: The influence of knowledge, problem-solving ability, and task complexity. Journal of Accounting Research, 37(1), 209–223.
50.Tan, H., Ng, T., & Mak, B. (2002). The effects of task complexity on auditors’ performance: The impact of accountability and knowledge. Auditing: A journal of Practice & Theory, 21(2), 81–95.
51.Weingart, L. (1992). Impact of group goals, task component complexity, effort, and planning on group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(5), 682–693.
52.Wood, R. (1986). Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60–82.
53.Yeo, G., & Neal, A. (2004). A multilevel analysis of effort, practice, and performance: Effects; of ability, conscientiousness, and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 231.
54.Yeo, G., & Neal, A. (2008). Subjective cognitive effort: A model of states, traits, and time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 617–631.
55.Walid Alissa, Vedran Capkun, Thomas Jeanjean, Nadja Suca (2014).An empirical investigation of the impact of audit and auditor characteristics on auditor performance. Accouting, Organizations and Society, 39, 495-510.