(3.235.41.241) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/11 22:08
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:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:李宗南
研究生(外文):Tsung-Nan Lee
論文名稱:市場導向與組織績效之關連性探討:以台灣銀行業為例
論文名稱(外文):The Relationship between Market Orientation and Organizational Performance:A Case of Bank Industry in Taiwan
指導教授:張道釗張道釗引用關係
指導教授(外文):Dau-Chao Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:東海大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系碩士班
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2004
畢業學年度:92
語文別:中文
論文頁數:93
中文關鍵詞:市場導向組織學習意願環境動態性組織績效
外文關鍵詞:market orientationorganizational learningenvironmental turbulenceorganizational performance
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:117
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
市場導向和組織績效關聯性研究發展已有14年,許多學者認為行銷觀念為市場導向基礎,而市場導向為行銷觀念的執行。在市場導向對組織績效的實證研究中,許多研究證實正向顯著結果,但是有些研究發現不一致的關係,有些學者開始以加入其它變數來解釋兩者變項之間的關係;學者將組織學習意願和環境動態性納入此兩者關係中並試圖解釋不一致的研究結果。學習能力成為企業重要的競爭優勢來源,雖然過去有若干的理論性研究提出,但是缺乏驗證性研究來說明組織學習意願,能夠藉由改善市場導向行為的品質,進而間接影響組織績效。對於環境動態性和市場導向與組織績效間的關聯性之國內研究是相當有限,仍然缺乏一致性研究結果。因此,本研究將組織學習意願和環境動態性作為解釋市場導向和組織績效的關聯性的干擾變項。
本研究以台灣銀行業為實證研究對象,從2,960家母體中隨機抽樣500家樣本,有效樣本一共163份(回收率為32.6%)。本研究以因素分析、t檢定、多變量分析及LISREL分析等方法來進行實證並驗證本研究所提出的各項假設。
本研究的主要發現為:(1)整體而言,本研究所發展的模式符合適合度檢定水準,代表本研究所發展理論模型是獲得支持,故四個構念間確實存在影響關係;(2)市場導向對組織績效有正向關係;(3)組織學習意願對市場導向和組織績效間的關係具有干擾效果;(4)環境動態性對市場導向和組織績效間的關係具有干擾效果則未達顯著關係。
Researches on the relationships between market orientation and organizational performance have been developed for 14 years. Most of scholars think marketing concept is the fundament of market orientation and market orientation is the implement of marketing concept. There are numerous empirical studies that have examined the association between market orientation and organizational performance. Many studies have found a positive association between market orientation and organizational performance, but some studies have found no significant relationship. Some scholars interpret the mixed finding by another variables. Some scholars interpret the organizational learning and environmental turbulence between market orientation and organizational performance and explain no significant relationship. Learning capabilities become the major sources of business’s competition advantages, but it lacks the empirical studies to explain that a firm’s organizational learning is likely to indirectly affect organizational performance by facilitating the quality of market orientation’s behavior. For environmental turbulence, the domestic researches are within limits and found no significant relationship. Therefore, this research present a conceptual framework for incorporating organizational learning and environmental turbulence as the moderate variable between market orientation and organizational performance.
The sample of this study has 500 banks in Taiwan Banking Industry by random sampling from 2,960 banks. The useful samples have 163(the recover percent is 32.6%). Many quantitative methods, including t-test, ANOVA, multivariate analysis, and LISREL analysis, and used to test the hypothesis of this research.
The major finding of this study are summarized as following:(1)Overall, the global model fit is acceptable. This empirical result supports the relationships among the market orientation, organizational learning, environmental turbulence, and organizational performance.(2)Market orientation has a positive impact on organizational performance.(3)Organizational learning has a positive moderate impact between market orientation and organizational performance.(4)Environmental turbulence has no significant moderate impact between market orientation and organizational performance.
第壹章 緒論……………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究背景與動機………………………………………………1
第二節 研究目的與範圍………………………………………………3
第三節 研究程序………………………………………………………4
第四節 構念定義………………………………………………………6
第五節 論文架構………………………………………………………7
第六節 研究貢獻………………………………………………………8
第貳章 文獻探討與假設推演…………………………………………9
第一節 市場導向………………………………………………………9
第二節 組織學習意願…………………………………………………20
第三節 環境動態性……………………………………………………24
第參章 研究方法與設計………………………………………………30
第一節 研究架構………………………………………………………30
第二節 問卷設計………………………………………………………31
第三節 變數的操作性定義與衡量……………………………………32
第四節 研究樣本………………………………………………………39
第五節 資料分析方法…………………………………………………42
第六節 LISREL模式之建立……………………………………………44
第肆章 資料分析與結果………………………………………………47
第一節 資料純化分析…………………………………………………47
第二節 信、效度分析…………………………………………………59
第三節 變數相關分析…………………………………………………69
第四節 樣本分析………………………………………………………71
第五節 整體模式之關係分析…………………………………………75
第伍章 結論與建議……………………………………………………81
第一節 研究結果與討論………………………………………………81
第二節 研究限制………………………………………………………83
第三節 未來研究建議…………………………………………………84
附錄………………………………………………………………………85
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………91
一、中文部分
方靜月,2003。台灣銀行業市場導向、環境干擾、銀行創新與經營績效關係之研究,台北:台北大學企業管理研究所博士論文。
林建山,1998。行職業資訊研發成果,行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局出版。
林義屏,2001。市場導向、組織學習、組織創新與組織績效間關係之研究-以科學園區資訊電子產業為例,高雄:中山大學企業管理研究所博士論文。
邱皓政,2003。結構方程模式-LISREL的理論、技術與應用,台北:雙葉書廊有限公司。
洪順慶、陳振燧,1995,中小企業市場導向之實證研究,第二屆中小企業管理研討會論文集,151-172。
范惟翔,2001。顧客知識管理、市場導向與行銷績效之關係研究,嘉義:中正大學企業管理研究所未出版之博士論文。
洪順慶、沈經洪,2002。市場驅動的組織學習與新產品成功之關係探討,管理學報,第二十卷第三期,515-545。
張玉琳,2003。組織創業精神傾向、市場導向以及組織學習類型對組織績效之關係探討,台北:政治大學企業管理研究所未出版之博士論文。
陳耀茂,2004。多變量分析的SPSS使用手冊,台北:鼎茂圖書出版股份有限公司。
二、英文部分
Bell, Martin L. and C. William Emory(1971),“The Faltering Marketing Concept,”Business Horizons,22(June),pp.76-83.
Baker, William E. and James M. Sinkula(1999),“The Synergistic Effect of Market Orientation and Learning Orientation on Organizational Performance,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,27(4),pp.411-427.
Brownee, P. and A. S. Dunk(1991),“Task Uncertainty and Its Interaction with Budgetary Participation and Budget Emphasis:Some Methodological Issues and Empirical Investigation,”Accounting Organizations and Society,16(8),pp.693-703.
Cyert, Richard M. and James G. March(1963),“A Behavioral Theory of the Firm ,”Englewood Cliffs,NJ.:Prentice-Hall,Inc.
Day, George S. and Robin Wensley(1983),“Markeing Theory With a Strategic Orientation,”Jorunal of Marketing,47(3),pp.79-89.
Deshpande, Rohit and John U. Farley (1996),“Understanding Market Orientation:A Prospectively Designed Meta-Analysis of Three Market Orientation Scales,”Marketing Science Institute Working Paper ,pp.96-125. Cambridge. MA:Marketing Science Institute.
Fornell,C. and D. Larcker(1981),“Evaluating Structure Equations Models With Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,”Journal of Marketing Research,Vol.18,pp.39-50.
Garvin, David A.(1993),“Building a Learning Organization,”Harvard Business Review,71(July),pp.78-91.
Greenley, Gordon E.(1995), “Forms of Market Orientation in UK Companies”Journal of Management Studies,32(1),pp.47-66.
Han , Jin K., Namwoon Kim, and Rajendra K. Srivastava(1998),“Market Orientation and Organizational Performance:Is Innovation a Missing Link?”Journal of Marketing,62(October),pp.30-45.
Huber, G.P.(1991),“Organizaional Learning:The Contributing Process and The Literatures,”Organization Science,(February),pp.88-115.
Hult, G. Tomas M. and O.C. Ferrell(1997),“Global Organizational Learning Capacity in Purchasing:Construct and Measurement,”Journal of Business Research,40,pp.97-111.
Kim, D. H.(1993),“The Link between Individual and Organizational Learning,”Sloan Management Review,Fall,pp.37-50.
Kohli, Ajay K. and Bernard J. Jaworski(1990),“Market Orientation:The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications,”Jorunal of Marketing,54(April),pp.1-18.
Kohli, Ajay K., Bernard J. Jaworski, and Ajith Kumar(1993),“MARKOR:A Measure of Market Orientation,”Jorunal of Marketing Research,30(November),pp.467-477.
Leonard-Barton, Dorothy(1992),“Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities:A Paradox in Managing New Product Development”Strategic Management Journal,13(2),pp.111-125.
Miller, Danny(1987),“The Structural and Environmental Correlates of Business Strategy,”Strategic Management Journal,8(1),pp.55-76.
Morgan, Robert E. and Carolyn A. Strong(1998),“Market Orientation and Dimensions of Strategic Orientation,”European Journal of Marketing,32(11/12),pp.1051-1073.
Narver ,John C., Robert L. Jacobson, and Stanley F. Slater(1999),“Market Orientation and Business Performance:An Analysis of Panel Data,”in Developing a Market Orientation, Rohit Deshpande, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications,pp.195-216.
Narver ,John C. and Stanley F. Slater(1990),“The Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability,”Jorunal of Marketing,54(October),pp.20-35.
Nevis, Edwin C., Antohony J. DiBella, and Janet M. Gould(1995),“Understanding Organizations as Learning Systems,”Sloan Management Review,36(2),pp.73-85.
Noble Charles H., Rajiv K. Sinha,& Ajith Kumar(2002),“Market Orientation and Alternative Strategic Orientations:A Longitudinal Assessment of Performance Implications,”Jorunal of Marketing,66(October),pp.25-39.
Pelham, Alfred M. and David T. Wilson(1996),“A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of Market Structure, Firm Structure, Strategy, and Market Orientation Culture on Dimensions of Small-Firm Performance,”Jorunal of the Academy of Marketing Science,24(1),pp.27-43.
Ruekert, Robert W.(1992),“Developing a Market Orientation:An Organizational Strategy Perspective,”International Jorunal of Research in Marketing, 9(3),pp.225-245.
Schein, E. H.(1990),“Organizational Culture”American Psychologist,45(February),pp.109-119.
Senge, Peter M.(1990),“The Fifth Discipline:The Art and Purpose of the Learning Organization,”1stEdition, New York:Doubleday.
Shapiro, Benson P.(1988),“What the Hell is ‘Market oriented’?,”Harvard Business Revies,(November),pp.119-125.
Sinkula, James M.(1994),“Market Information Processing and Organizational Learning,”Jorunal of Marketing,58(January),pp.35-45.
Sinkula, James M., William E. Baker, and Thomas Noordewier(1997),“A Framework for Market-Based Organizational Learning:Linking Values, Knowledge, and Behavior,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,25(4),pp.305-318.
Slater, Stanley F.and John Narver(1994a),“Does Competitive Environment Moderate the Market Orientation Performance Relationship?”Journal of Marketing,58(January),pp.46-55.
Slater, Stanley F.and John Narver(1994b),“Market Orientation, Customer Value, and Superior Performance,”Business Horizons,37(March),pp.22-28.
Slater Stanley F. and John C.Narver(1995),“Market Orientation and the Learning Organization,”Journal of Marketing,59(July),pp.63-74.
Uncles Mark(2000),“Market Orientation,”Australian Journal of Management,25(September),pp.1-9.
Walker, L. Jean Harrison(2001),“The measurement of a market orientation and its impact on business performance,”Jorunal of Quality Management,6(September),pp.20-35.
Webster, Frederick E. Jr.(1988),“Rediscovering the Marketing Concept,”Business Horizons,31(May),pp.139-172.
Weiss, Allen M. and Jan B. Heide(1993),“The Nature of Organizational Search in High Technology Markets,”Journal of Marketing Research,30(May),pp.220-223
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 王靜如(民88)。美國國家科學教育標準有關科學教學的探究。屏師科學教育,9,24-30。
2. 羅清水(民87)。認知心理學理論對電腦輔助教學設計發展與成效之影響。研習資訊,5(1),1∼15。
3. 韓善民(民90)。我國資訊教育發展現況與展望。資訊與教育,81,7-12。
4. 彭富源(民90)。將資訊科技融入各科教學的困境與因應。研習資訊,3,40-48。
5. 張再明(民87)。建立國小網路教學環境。教師之友,39(1),1-6。
6. 陳福慶(民88)。淺談「WWW上CAI之設計」一以國小自然科「電路」單元為例。視聽教育雙月刊,40(4),46-48。
7. 方偉達(民87)。規畫校園生態教材園。研習資訊,15(3),27-30。
8. 洪順慶、沈經洪,2002。市場驅動的組織學習與新產品成功之關係探討,管理學報,第二十卷第三期,515-545。
9. 莊嘉坤(民86)。談國小科學教育與鄉土自然教學。屏師科學教育,6,48-54。
10. 戴偉謙(2001)。希臘三哲人蘇格拉底、柏拉圖及亞里士多德的運動觀--以休閒為中心的探討。體育學報,30,45-54。
11. 羅清吉 (民86)。 談中小學教材園之規劃與設計。造園季刊,7,17-21。
12. 梁瑞安(民88)。開放教育中感官學習時空的開拓--從一項「果樹葉子的便是活動」談起。研習資訊,3,26-33。
13. 徐新逸、楊昭儀(民88)。兒童自然科網路學習社群之設計與發展經驗。遠距教育,12,36-44。
14. 何榮桂(民89)。從教育部之資訊教育推展策略看未來中小學資訊教育的願景。資訊與教育雜誌,69,2-13。
15. 林清江(民87)。當前教育改革的方向。『文教新潮』,3(4),2-8。
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔