跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.210.132.31) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/19 19:38
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:鍾志榮
研究生(外文):Chung,Chin-Jung
論文名稱:應用平衡計分卡觀點於國防醫療機構之研究
論文名稱(外文):Applying of the Balanced Scorecard System to a National Defense Hospital
指導教授:王維康王維康引用關係
指導教授(外文):Wang,Wei-wang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國防管理學院
系所名稱:資源管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:其他商業及管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
中文關鍵詞:平衡計分卡國防醫療機構策略性管理架構個案研究
外文關鍵詞:Balanced ScorecardNational Military HospitalStrategic Management StructureCase Study
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:52
  • 點閱點閱:1295
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:470
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:6
摘 要
國軍醫院於民國九十年二月一日納入全民健康保險體系後,面臨前所未有的競爭壓力。為維持國軍醫院的競爭能力,有效運用醫療資源,提昇醫院經營效率,實乃國軍醫院現階段的重要課題。本研究以個案研究的方式,應用平衡計分卡之觀點,經由專家訪談與蒐集醫院營運績效相關的國內外文獻,發展出個案醫療機構適用的策略性績效指標,進而透過問卷調查的方式,採用因素分析、變異數分析及Scheffe事後多重檢定等統計方法予以分析。
研究結果顯示,個案醫療機構「重要程度」的績效動因共歸納出5項構面(分別為研究創新、財務管理、作業流程、公共關係及合作交流、顧客服務)及27項衡量指標。另依基本人口變項區分為「人員屬性」及「工作特性」並發展出4個主要假說。其驗證結果如下:
(1)性別、職務、現職年資、服務年資、學歷對策略性衡量指標重要程度之間有顯著差異存在。其中非主管人員對研究創新等五構面均較二、三級主管為重視;就現職年資、服務年資而言,資深人員較資淺人員重視研究創新、財務管理、作業流程、公共關係及合作交流等構面績效指標。(2)職類、部門別對策略性衡量指標現況執行程度之間有顯著差異存在。其中行政人員對財務管理、作業流程等構面現況滿意程度較醫事人員為高;就部門別而言,服務於行政部門人員較醫技部門人員對研究創新等五構面現況滿意程度為高。
由以上研究結果得知,個案醫療機構應引進現代企業經營管理理念與實務經驗,發展一套結合本身願景使命且可行之策略性管理制度,並在善盡國軍醫療與健保體制雙重任務要求下,調整經營管理策略,以顧客服務為導向,追求卓越品質為目標,降低醫療成本,積極引進最新技術與觀念,以強化競爭力,朝「高效率」、「高品質」與、「高滿意度」之管理目標邁進。進而對中、低階層的管理者及資淺人員提供適當的管理教育,以強化其對整體策略性衡量指標之認知,並持續對醫事及行政人員作教育訓練,以提昇其醫療技術及未來管理人才。
關鍵詞:平衡計分卡、國防醫療機構、策略性管理架構、個案研究
Abstract
National Military Hospitals have been facing unprecedented competition since they joined the national heath program on the first day of February 2001. In order to maintain their competitive abilities, it is an important issue for military hospitals on applying medical resource and increasing it effectiveness. This study adopts the idea of “Balanced Scorecard ” in case study. Through interviewing and collecting data from literature related to effectiveness of hospitals, the study develops a strategic standard of effectiveness in which is appropriated for medical organizations. Furthermore, this study also develops questionnaire through ANOVA and Scheffe test and other statistics methods to analyze the results.
The finding shows the subject’s (hospital) driven forces of its critical effectiveness can be induced in to five elements: innovation, financial management, internal business process, public relation, and customer service; and also 27 measurements. Additionally, it also develops 4 hypotheses. The results are as following:
(1) Sex, position, seniority, and education level of the subject’s personnel have obvious difference among the strategic standard of effectiveness. The managerial people show not much more paying attention to those five elements than those are not; rookies are not much more innovative than veterans. (2) The differences of the strategic stander of effectiveness among positions and departments are obvious. The satisfactory level of managerial people toward financial management and internal process are higher than those of medical people; also, those people serve in the managerial department show higher satisfaction to innovation and other elements than those in medical and technique.
From the research, it is important that the hospital should bring in the newer business idea in management and practices, from which develops a set of system fits to its vision and practical management system. The goals are: adjusting its managerial strategy, servicing its customers, setting high quality targets, reducing its cost, bringing in innovation and technique, strengthening its competitive ability, and other high effective, high quality as well as high customs satisfaction, etc. Moreover, other improvements should also be done such as training educating, recruiting people in order to achieve is task.
Key Words: Balanced Scorecard, National Military Hospital, Strategic Management Structure, and Case Study
目 錄
頁次
中文摘要..........................Ⅰ
英文摘要..........................Ⅱ
誌 謝..........................Ⅲ
目 錄..........................Ⅳ
圖 目 錄..........................Ⅵ
表 目 錄..........................Ⅶ
第一章 緒 論.......................1
1.1研究背景與動機................... 1
1.2研究目的...................... 3
1.3論文架構...................... 3
1.4研究貢獻...................... 5
1.5論文結構...................... 5
第二章 文獻探討...................... 7
2.1績效評估制度.................... 7
2.2績效評估制度的發展趨勢..............122.3平衡計分卡的發展................. 15
2.4平衡計分卡的應用................. 21
第三章 研究方法....................31
3.1個案研究法.................... 31
3.2研究架構..................... 37
3.3研究假說.....................38
3.4研究設計..................... 38
3.5資料分析方法................... 42
3.6個案研究流程.................. 47
第四章 個案機構介紹 ..................48
4.1個案機構背景介紹.................48
4.2個案機構環境分析.................50
第五章  研究結果與分析..................53
5.1敘述性統計分析.................53
5.2因素分析.....................60
5.3相關分析...................63
5.4變異數分析...................64
第六章  結論與建議...................75
6.1研究結論.................... .75
  6.2研究建議 ........... .........78
  6.3研究限制........... ..........79
6.4後續研究建議 ........... .......80
中文參考文獻.......................81
英文參考文獻.......................83
  附錄一問卷...................87
圖 目 錄
頁次
圖1.1:論文架構………………………………………………………4
圖2.1:平衡計分卡連結企業的願景、策略與行動……………………20
圖3.1: 研究架構…………………………………………………………37
圖4.1: 個案機構組織架構……………………………………………48
圖 6.1:個案醫療機構策略性管理架構…………………………………76
表 目 錄
頁次
表2.1:平衡計分卡應用文獻彙總表……………………………………24
表3.1:個案研究的定義彙總表. ………………………………………32
表3.2:問卷重要程度信度分析………………………………………41
表3.3:問卷執行程度信度分析…………………………………………41
表3.4:各構面之驗證性因素分析結果…………………………………46
表3.5:各構面之收斂效度檢定…………………………………………47
表5.1:樣本結構敘述統計表…………………………………………54
表5.2:個案機構績效衡量指標重要程度問卷敘述統計……………55
表5.3:個案機構績效衡量指標執行程度問卷敘述統計表…………57
表5.4:個案機構績效衡量指標重要程度因素分析結果……………62
表5.5:相關係數矩陣表…………………………………………………64
表5.6:人員屬性變項對策略性績效指標重要程度總效果檢定………65
表5.7:性別變項對策略性績效指標重要程度差異性分析……………66
表5.8:職務變項對策略性績效指標重要程度差異性分析……………67
表5.9:現職年資變項對策略性績效指標重要程度差異性分析………68
表5.10:服務年資變項對策略性績效指標重要程度差異性分析……69
表5.11:學歷變項對策略性績效指標重要程度差異性分析…………70
表5.12:人員屬性變項對策略性績效指標執行程度總效果檢定……71
表5.13:職類變項對策略性績效指標執行程度差異性分析…………72
表5.14:部門別變項對策略性績效指標執行程度差異性分析………72
表5.15:職務變項對策略性績效指標執行程度差異性分析…………73
表5.16:婚姻變項對策略性績效指標執行程度差異性分析…………74
表 6.1:研究假說驗證結果……………………………………
參考文獻
一、中文部分
方世榮(1998),統計學導讀,三版,台北:華泰書局。
朱文洋、葉淑娟(2001),「中小型醫院經營策略與營績效之探討」,醫務管理期刊,第2卷第2期,6月,110-116。
吳安妮(1996a) ,「績效評估新觀念之運用」,會計研究月刊,131 期:34-36 。
______(1996b) ,「績效評估新趨勢」,會計研究月刊,133 期:11-16 頁。
______(1999) ,「績效評估在交友上之運用」,會計研究月刊,164 期:118-120 。
吳宗正(1994),「變異數分析:理論與應用」,四版,台北:華泰書局。
吳錦波、蔡祟盛(1997),資管領域研究方法之比較研究,第八屆國際資訊管理學術研討會,405-412。
李書行(1995),「務實創新的策略性績效評估」,會計研究月刊,113期, 15-23。
杜榮瑞(1999),「作業制成本管理在管理方面之應用」陳依蘋主編,會計研究月刊,165期: 23-24。
周珮(2000),「ISO9000系列品保認證對醫院品質、財務與經營成效影響之研究」,國立政治大學會計學系未出版碩士論文。
林文雅(1998),「經營績效平衡表」,管理會計,第四十五期,6月,1-12。
林珮琪(1997),「高科技產業研究發展績效衡量之研究-平衡計分卡觀點」,國立臺灣大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
胡德澤(1998),「策略、績效評估與獎酬制度之關連性:以平衡計分卡為架構之個案研究」,私立文化大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
徐復春(1994),「醫院經營績效與衡量」,醫院,27(5):74-9。
張宗銘(1987),「醫院績效評估模式與實證分析」,國立中山大學企管研究所未出版碩士論文。
張紹動(2001),研究方法,修訂版,台中:滄海書局。
陳玉寧(1997),醫院評鑑對醫療品質之影響,高雄醫學院公共衛生學研究所未出版碩士論文。
陳佩妮(1996),「醫療品質與經營績效關係之研究」,國立台灣大學公衛所醫管組未出版碩士論文。
陳怡之、黃棟樑(1999),「我國電腦網路設備廠商之績效評估制度─以平衡計分卡分析」,中華民國科技管理研討會,高雄:國立中山大學主辦。
陳順宇(1998),多變量分析,台北:華泰書局
曾玉明(1999) ,「績效發展引領企業向前看」,能力雜誌,519 期:20-24 。
黃鎮(2000),「台北市立醫院品質與績效指標關係之研究」,台北醫學院公共衛生學研究所未出版碩士論文。
闕廷諭(1992),「醫療評鑑制度的衝擊─由受評醫院立場探討」,中國醫藥學院醫務管理學研究所未出版碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Bazzoli, Gloria J., Benjamin Chan, Stephen M Shortell, and Thomas D''''''''Aunno.(2000),The financial performance of hospitals belonging to health networks and systems. Inquiry —Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association 37(Fall):234-252.
Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. and Mead M.(1987),The Case Research
Strategy in Studies of Information system. MIS Quarterly, Vo111,No3,Sept,369-386.
Bomona, T. V. (1985),Case research in marketing: Opportunities, Problem, and a process. Journal of Marketing Research. Vol.22 May,199-208.
Brady, L. D. (1993), Implementing the balanced scorecard at FMC corporation: An interview with Larry D. Brady. Harvard Business Review (September/October): 143-47.
Chow, W. C. D. S Ganulin, K. M. Haddad., and J. E. Willamson (1998),The Balanced scorecard:A Potent Tool for Energizing and Focusing Healthcare Organization Management. Journal of Healthcare Management(May/Jun):263-280.
Chow, W. C. and M. Haddad. (1997), Applying the balance scorecard to small companies. Management Accounting (August) : 21-27.
Donnabedian, A. (1980), Explorations in quality assessment and monitoring vol. I: The definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Health Administration Press. University of Michigan.
Eccles, R. G. and N. Norhria. (1992), Beyond the hope--Rediscovering The Essence of Management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Fisher, J. (1992), Use of nonfinancial performance measures . Journal of Cost Management Vol. 6, No. 1, (Spring) : 31-38.
Flood, A. B., S. M. Shortell, and & W. R. Scott (1994), Health Care Management:Organization Design and Behavior,3th New York:Delman Publishers Inc.
Frigo, M. L. and K. R. Krumwiede. (1999), Ten ways to improve performance measurement systems. Cost Management Update No. 96, (April) : 1-4.
Gotlieb, Jerry B.(2000),Understanding the effects of nurses, patients'''''''' hospital rooms, and patients'''''''' perception of control in the perceived quality of a hospital. Health Marketing Quarterly 18:1-14.
Gowrisankaran, Gautam, and Robert J Town. (1999),Estimating the quality of care in hospitals using instrumental variables. Journal of Health Economics 18(Dec):747-767
Hormozi, A. M. and L. F. Dube. (1999), Establishing project control: Schedule, Cost, and Quality. SAM Advanced Management Journal (Autumn): 32-38.
Johnson, H. T. and R. S. Kaplan. (1987), Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Kaiser, H. (1958), The Varimax Criterion for Analytic Rotation in Factor Analysis. Psychometrika (Vol. 23) : 187-200.
Kaplan, R. S. (1988), The Importance of Field Research. Management Accounting. April : 26.
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. (1992), The balanced scorecard — measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review (January/February) : 71-79.
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton.(1993),Putting the balanced scorecard to work. Harvard Business Review (September/October): 134-47.
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P.Norton.(1996),The Balanced Scorecard : translating into action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P.Norton.(1996a), Link the balanced scorecard to strategy. California Management (Fall): 53-79.
Kaplan, R. S. and A. A. Atkinson. (1998), Advanced Management Accounting. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Kerssens-van Drongelen. and J. Bilderbeek. (1999), R&D performance measurement: More than choosing a set of metrics. R&D Management (January): 35-45.
Kerssens-van Drongelen, I. C. and A. Cook. (1997), Design principles for the development of measurement system forresearch and development processes. R&D Management (April): 345-57.
Kim, P. and D. Johnson.(1994),Implementing Total Quality Management in the Health Care Industry. The Health Care Supervisor(Mar):51-57
Kurtzman, J. (1997), Is your company off course?Now you can find out way. Fortune (February, 17): 70-72.
Li, L. (1997),Relationships Between Determinants of Hospital Quality Management and Service Quality Performance─a Path Analytic Model . Omega(Vol.,25,No.5):531145.
Nixon, B.(1999), Evaluating design performance. International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 17, No. 7/8, 814-829.
Nunnally, J. C.(1978),Psychometric Theory, 2nd edition, N. Y.: McGraw Hill.
Yin, R. K. (1984),Case study research: Design and methods, Sage, Beverly hills, CA.
Yin, R. (1981), The case study crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly,vol26, 58-65.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top