(3.235.191.87) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/13 05:37
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:吳雨陵
研究生(外文):Yu-lin Wu
論文名稱:探討體制環境、知識屬性與多國籍企業組織相似性對實務移轉之影響
論文名稱(外文):A Study on the Influence of Institutional Environment, KnowledgeCharacteristics and Organizational Similarity of MNCs on Practice Transfer
指導教授:陳香君陳香君引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsiang-Chun Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立雲林科技大學
系所名稱:企業管理系碩士班
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:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:中文
論文頁數:77
中文關鍵詞:體制距離知識屬性實務移轉績效組織相似性
外文關鍵詞:Organizational similarityPerformance of practice transferInstitutional distanceKnowledge attributes
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:104
  • 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
全球化的趨勢下,許多企業紛紛到各國家設立子公司,在母國或是地主國的
營運成功,並不代表成功經驗能夠有效地複製到其他國家。對於多國籍企業而言,
如何成功移轉其經驗或實務至海外分支機構相當重要。

本研究的目的在於瞭解會影響實務移轉過程有哪些因素,主要探討「體制距
離」、「知識屬性」 和「組織相似性」對移轉績效的影響。
本研究首先訪談四家多國籍企業在台子公司,同時參考Szulanski(1996)的研究,
樣本公司的資本額超過5000 萬以上,此外;無特定產業的限制。實際樣本數為640
家在台外資企業,有效回收份數為84 份。

根據資料分析後,研究發現如下:
一、組織相似性對於實務移轉績效有顯著影響,組織間互動越頻繁以及企業文化
相似度越高會正向影響市場績效。也就是當高階經理人的價值觀、公司文化等愈
相似,則雙方互動會更佳。
二、體制距離對於實務移轉績效有顯著影響。當移轉方與接收方間的體制差異越
大,表示移轉實務內容越不容易融入接收方內部。實務來源國與接收國兩者的認
知與教育水準差異越大,會導致接收方對於實務內容滿意度偏低。
三、知識屬性對於實務移轉績效有顯著影響,實務內隱性越高,代表必須透過做
中學方式才能瞭解實務內容。知識專屬性與內部化有顯著正相關。亦即當實務內
容屬於特定資產、設備、人員程度越高,則該項實務的內部化程度也會越高。
Due to the tendency toward globalization, a large number of corporations establish subsidiaries in many different countries. However, it does not mean that they can easily duplicate successful experience in other countries. Hence, how to successfully transfer the good experience and practice is critical to multinational corporations''operation(MNCs).

This research addresses the factors affecting the transfer process between the sendingunit and the receiving unit. This research takes three constructs into account. They are institutional distance, knowledge characteristics and organizational similarity.
Furthermore, the relationship between transfer performance and interaction result are examined. This research mainly observes 640 foreign companies’ subsidiaries located in Taiwan whose capital is greater than 50 million NTD. The number of valid returned questionnaires is 84. The valid return rate is up to 13.13%.

The objective of this research is to discuss the effect of institutional distance,knowledge characteristics and organizational similarity on the transfer performance.This research has conducted four cases study and questionnaire survey, and summarizes the findings as below:

1. Organizational similarity has significant influences on transfer performance. It shows that the intensive interaction and the similarity of organizational culture enhance the market performance. In addition, organizational similarity is relevant to transfer performance. When the senior managers and corporate culture are similar to each other, the results of interaction between the sending unit and the receiving unit will be better and closer.

2. Institutional distance has significant influences on practice transfer. When there is a great institutional distance, the receiving units will have difficulties in internalizing transferred practice.

3. Knowledge characteristics have significant influences on transfer performance. When the knowledge characteristic is shown more tacitness, the transferred practice must be acquired through learning by doing. When the transferred practice is highly characterized and equipped by greater specific assets, equipment and personnel; the degree of internalization of the receiving units will be higher.

Key words: Institutional distance, Knowledge attributes, Organizational similarity,Performance of practice transfer
目錄
第一章、 緒論
第一節 研究背景、動機…………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究目的…………………………………………………………………2
第三節 研究範圍…………………………………………………………………2
第四節 研究流程………………………………………………………………....2
第二章、 文獻探討
第一節 體制距離相關文獻………………………………………………………4
第二節 知識相關文獻…………………………………………………………..13
第三節 組織相似性與互動溝通相關文獻相關文獻…………………………..21
第四節 績效衡量相關文獻……………………………………………………..25
第三章、 研究方法
第一節 研究架構………………………………………………………………..29
第二節 研究假設………………………………………………………………..30
第三節 研究變項之操作型定義………………………………………………..33
第四章、 資料分析與結果
第一節 回收樣本屬性分析……………………………………………………..36
第二節 自變數分析……………………………………………………………..42
第三節 信度與因素分析………………………………………………………..46
第四節 線性迴歸分析……………………………………………………..……52
第五章、 結論與建議
第一節 研究結論………………………………………………………………..61
第二節 本研究之建議…………………………………………………………..62
第三節 後續研究建議 ………………………………………………………....63
第四節 預期貢獻………………………………………………………………..64
參考文獻 參考一……………………………………………………………………..65
附錄 訪談個案 附錄一……………………………………………………………71
問卷 附錄二…………………………………………………………………..74

表目錄
表2-1 新古典主義和新制度主義理論假設比較表……………………………………4
表2-2 新舊制度利益比較表……………………………………………………………5
表2-3 交易成本理論觀點………………………………………………………………6
表2-4 不同學者對於體制化定義的觀點……………………………………………….7
表2-5 Scott 體制化影響力來源的三個系統…………………………………………...11
表2-6 知識屬性分類…………………………………………………………………..18
表2-7 造成知識移轉阻礙的原因……………………………………………………..19
表2-8 合資雙方衝突因果……………………………………………………………..25
表2-9 績效衡量之相關實証研究彙整表……………………………………………..26
表2-10 知識移轉績效衡量指標………………………………………………………28
表3-1 體制構面操作行定義…………………………………………………………..33
表3-2 知識屬性操作性定義…………………………………………………………..33
表3-3 相似程度操作性定義…………………………………………………………..34
表3-4 互動溝通結果操作性定義……………………………………………………..34
表3-5 實務移轉績效操作性定義……………………………………………………...35
表4-1 問卷回收日期…………………………………………………………………...36
表4-2 回收管道分佈圖………………………………………………………………...37
表4-3 公司基本資料分析表…………………………………………………………...39
表4-4 實務來源單位…………………………………………………………………...41
表4-5 實務來源比例…………………………………………………………………...41
表4-6 實務來源區域…………………………………………………………………...41
表4-7 體制距離分析…………………………………………………………………...42
表4-8 知識屬性分析…………………………………………………………………...43
表4-9 組織相似度分析………………………………………………………………...43
表4-10 互動溝通分析………………………………………………………………….44
表4-11 互動溝通結果………………………………………………………………….44
表4-12 實務移轉績效分析…………………………………………………………….45
表4-13 本研究各構面之信度值……………………………………………………….46
表4-14 體制距離因素分析……………………………………………………………..47
表4-15 知識屬性因素分析……………………………………………………………..47
表4-16 組織相似性因素分析…………………………………………………………..48
表4-17 互動溝通結果因素分析………………………………………………………..49
表4-18 實務移轉績效因素分析………………………………………………………..50
表4-19 自變數相關分析………………………………………………………………..51
表4-20 自變數對市場績效與內部化之回歸分析……………………………………..52
表4-21 自變數對於滿意度與執行程度之回歸分析…………………………………..55
表4-22 整體自變數對互動溝通結果之影響………………………………………….58
表4-23 體制距離對於實務移轉績效假設表…………………………………………..60
表4-24 知識屬性對於實務移轉績效假設表…………………………………………..60
表4-25 組織相似對於實務移轉績效假設表…………………………………………..60

圖目錄
圖1-1 研究流程…………………………………………………………………………3
圖2-1 資料、資訊與知識關連與區別………………………………………………….13
圖2-2 連結強度和信任關係…………………………………………………………...23
圖3-1 本研究架構……………………………………………………………………...29
圖4-1 徑路分析…………………………………………………………………...........38
圖4-2 整體自變數對於市場績效之線性迴歸分析…………………………………...53
圖4-3 整體自變數對於內部化之線性迴歸分析……………………………………...54
圖4-4 整體自變數對於滿意度之線性迴歸分析……………………………………...56
圖4-5 整體自變數對於執行程度之線性迴歸分析…………………………………...57
圖4-6 整體自變數對於互動溝通結果之線性迴歸分析……………………………...59
參考文獻:
1. 王文堯,1987,組織知識管理之實證研究—以台灣連鎖體系為例,國立雲林科
技大學,碩士論文。
2. 王思婷,1987,台灣地區服務業跨國技術移轉之研究--交易成本理論與知識基
礎之比較,國立台灣大學,碩士論文。
3. 王耀生,1999,新制度主義,台北:揚智文化事業股份有限公司。
4. 田國興,2003,我國政風機構組織設計之研究—新制度主義之分析,國立成功
大學,碩士論文。
5. 在台外資企業名錄2001/2002 ,2001,美商鄧白氏國際徵信股份有限公司台灣
分公司。
6. 吳思華,1988,策略九說-策略思考的本質,台北市臉譜發行。
7. 呂鴻德、朱倍瑩,1992,“知識整合、創新策略與知識移轉績效關係之研究",
中華管理學報第三卷,第一期,頁59-74。
8. 李明仁,2001,虛擬社群與網友忠誠度之研究,台灣科技大學資管所,碩士論
文。
9. 杜拉克,2003,杜拉克的管理聖經,遠流。
10. 林瑋,2002,共享文化價值觀形成機制的探討:以汽車製造、醫療服務及國營
事業為例,國立東華大學,碩士論文。
11. 林鉦釿,1994,“休閒旅館從業人員的組織公正、組織信任與組織公民行為關
係",中華管理學報,頁93-97。
12. 侯勝宗,1984,連鎖服務業合作網路中知識移轉與擴散模式之研究,國立政治
大學,碩士論文。
13. 洪秀琪,1991,知識移轉與績效表現之研究-以多層次傳銷為例。文化大學,碩
士論文,未出版,台北市。
14. 徐千惠,1986,知識系統之跨國移轉--倉儲量販業之個案研究,國立台灣大學,
碩士論文。
15. 翁志維,1997,策略聯盟的過程、演進與學習之研究,國立中央大學,碩士論
文。
16. 崔至剛,1984,連鎖體系經營知識移轉之研究-以便利商店為例,國立政治大
學,碩士論文。
17. 張慶原,1991,知識屬性與策略聯盟型式對知識移轉績效影響之研究,國立成
功大學,碩士論文。
18. 陳心田、周正樑,1993,“連鎖店知識特性、知識移轉機制與知識移轉績效關
聯性之探討",商管科技季刊。
19. 陳志遠,2000,“市場導向、市場知識管理策略、創業導向與經營績效之關係
研究",行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃書,頁17。
20. 陳榮達,1986,台灣連鎖服務業知識移轉過程之知識特性、總部技術能力、分
店長能力與移轉方式之研究,國立東華大學,碩士論文。
21. 曾怡菁,2004,網絡觀點之國際知識移轉實證研究-以知識特性為干擾變數,
長榮大學,碩士論文。
22. 童景郁,1987,多國籍企業組織知識管理模式及實證研究,國立雲林科技大學,
碩士論文。
23. 黃家齊、洪國堅,2003,“台灣大陸母子公司間之市移轉與吸收影響因素之研
究",中原企管評論。
24. 熊欣華、于卓民、司徒達賢(2004),“策略聯盟夥伴之合作信心建立─台灣資訊
電子業之實證分析",管理學報,第21 卷第4 期,頁477-497。
25. 劉致豪,1999,組織間網路關係對組織變革決策之影響研究--以台灣地區海運
相關行,國立海洋大學,碩士論文。
26. 謝甄晏,2001,市場導向、市場知識管理、產品創新與績效之實證研究—以台
灣高科技產業為例,國立雲林科技大學,碩士論文。
27. 顧淑馨,2004,競爭大未來:掌控產業、創造未來的突破策略,智庫出版。

1. Agarwal, Echambadi, R. and Sarkar, MB, 2002,“The Role of Knowledge in
Organizational Formation and Performance: Spin-out Generation and Survival",
Urbana-Champaign.
2. Aulakh, P. S., Kotabe, M. and Sahay, A.1996, “Trust and Performance in
Cross-Border Marketing Partnerships: A Behavioral Approach, Journal of
International Business Studies, Processes and International Joint Ventures",
pp.1005-1031.
3. Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1988,“Creation、Adoption and Diffusion of Innovations by Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol.16, pp.365.
4. Bessey, C., 2002, “Institutional Embeddedness of Economic Exchange: Convergence between New Institutional Economics and the Economics of
Conventions”, in Oliver Farereau (Ed.), Conventions and Structures in Economics
Organization-Markets, Networks and hierarchies, pp.79-92, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar.
5. Black, B. and Kase, H., 1963, “Interagency Cooperation in Rehabilitation and
Mental Health", Social ServiceReview, pp.26-32.
6. Buchley, P. J. and Casson, M., 1988, “A Theory of Cooperation in International Business", Lexington Books.
7. Chen, C. Y., Wey, S. C., 2003, “Market Orientation, Entrepreneurial Orientation,Market Knowledge Management and Performance—An Empirical Research onTaiwan’s High-tech Industry”, 2003 Annual Meeting of the Northeast Decision
Sciences Institute
8. Davenport, T. H., 1999, “Ten Principles of Knowledge Management and Four
Case Studies", Knowledge and Process Management, pp.187-208
9. Daverport. T and Prusak L, 1998, Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage
What They Know, Harvard Business School, Vol 3, pp.97.
10. DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. W. eds, 1991, The New Institutional in Organizational Analysis, The University of Chicago Press, pp.12.
11. Dixon, 2000,“Environmental Economics:A Critical Overview,Ecological
Economics Environments:Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration",Vol 40, pp.69-80.
12. Furubotn, E.G. & Richter R., 2000, Institutions and Economic Theory, USA:
Michogan Press.
13. Gary, T. W., 1996, “The Nature of Cooperation: Transfer in Strategic Alliances",Strategic Management Journal, Vol 11,pp.45-64,
14. Grant, R. M., 1996, “Prospering in Dynamically-Vompetitive Environments:
Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration", Organization Science,Vol.4,pp.375-387.
15. Grant, R. M., 1996, “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm", StrategicManagement Journal, Vol.3, pp.93-117.
16. Gupta & Govindarajan , 2000,“Knowledge Flows within Multinational
Corporations", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 Issue 4, pp.473.
17. Gupta, A. K. & Becerra, M., 2003, “Impact of Strategic Context and Inter-unit Trust on Knowledge Flows within the Multinational Corporation", Managin
International Network Corporations, Routledge.
18. Gupta, A. K. & Becerra, M., 2003, “Perceived Trustworthiness within the
Organization: The Moderating Impact of Communication Frequency on Trustor and
Trustee Effects", Organization Science. Vol.14, pp.32-44.
19. Habib ,1987,“Measure of Manifest Conflict in International Joint Venture",
Academy of Management Journal ,Vol. 3, pp.808-816.
20. Hemmert, M., 2004, “The Influence of Institutional Factors on the TechnologyAcquisition Performance of High-tech Firms: Survey Results from Germany andJapan”, Research Policy, Sep2004, Vol. 33 Issue 6/7, p1019-1038
21. Inkpen, A. C., & Dinur, A., 1998, “Knowledge Management Processes and
International Joint Ventures", Organization Science, Vol. 9, pp.454-468.
22. Inkpen, A. C., 1998, “Learning and Knowledge Acquisition through InternationalStrategic Alliances", The Academy of Management Executive, Vol 12, pp.69-80.
23. Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Leidner, D., 1998, “Communication and Trust in Global
Virtual Teams", Journal of Computer Mediated Communication.
24. Jensen, R. & Szulanski, G., 2003, “Templates and the Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer”, Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, BPS: HH1.
25. Kostova, T. & Roth, K., 2002, “Adoption of Organizational Practice By Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations: Institutional and Relational Effects”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.45, pp.215-233
26. Kostova, T., 1999, “Originational Legitimacy under Conditions of Complexity:The Case of the Multinational Enterprise", Academy of Management Review,Jan1999, Vol. 24 Issue 1, pp.64.
27. Kostova, T., 1999, “Transnational Transfer of Strategic organizational Practice: A Contextual Perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol.24, pp.308-324.
28. Lam, Alice, 1997, “Embedded Firms, Embedded Knowledge: Problems of
Collaboration and Knowledge Transfer in Global Cooperative Ventures”,
Organization Studies, Vol.18, pp.973-996.
29. Lane, C. & Bachmann, R., 1998, Trust Within and Between Organizations, Oxford University Press.
30. Levin, DZ, Cross, R., & Abrams, LC, 2002, “The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer",
Management Review, Vol. 20, pp.88-102.
31. Mayer, R. C. et al., 1995, “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust",
Academy of management review,Vol. 20, pp.709-734.
32. Meschi, P. X., 1997, “Longevity and Cultural Differences of International Joint Ventures: Toward Time-Based Cultural Management", Human Relations, New
York; pp.211.
33. Moorman, C., 1992, “Relationships between Providers and Users of Market".
Journal of Marketing Research, Aug92, Vol. 29 Issue 3, pp.314.
34. Mowery, D. C., 1996, The International Computer SoftwareIndustry: A
Comparative study of Industry Evolution and Structure, Oxford University Press,
New York.
35. Mowery, D. E. and J. E. Oxley, 1996, “Strategic Alliances and Interfirm
Knowledge Transfer", StrategicManagement Journal, Vo27, pp.77-91.
36. Niederkofler, M., 1991, “The Evolution of Strategic Alliances:Opportunities for Managerial Influence", Journal of Business Venturing, pp.237-257.
37. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H., 1995, The Knowledge Creating Company, New York:
Oxford University Press.
38. Nonaka, I., 1994, “A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation",
Organization Science.5/ (Feb): 14-37.
39. Nonaka, I., 1998, “The Concept of `Ba'': Building a Foundation for Knowledge
Creation.”, California Management Review Vol. 40 Issue 3, pp.40.
40. North, D., 1990, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance,Cambridge University Press.
41. Orru, Biggart and Hamilton 1991, Organizational Isomorphism in East Asia,
Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
42. Parkhe, A., 1991, “Interfirm Diversity, Organizational Learning, and Longevity in Global Strategic Alliances", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol.4,pp.579-602.
43. Parkhe, A., 1993, “Strategic Alliance Structuring: A Game Theoretic and
Transaction Cost Examination of Interfirm Cooperation", Academy of
Management Journal, Vol.36, pp.794-829.
44. Polanyi, M., 1962, Personal Knowledge: Toward a Postcritical Philosophy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.pp.454-468.
45. Polanyi, M., 1967, The Tacit Dimension. N.Y., M. E., Sharp Inc.
46. Powell, W.W., 1991, “Expanding The Scope of Institutional Analysis”,, in Powell and DiMaggio (Ed.), The New Institutional in Organizational Analysis, The
University of Chicago Press, pp.183-203
47. Reed, R.R., DeFillippi, R.J, 1990, “Causal Ambiguity, Barriers to Imitation, and Sustainable Competitive Advantage”, Academy of Management Review, Vol.15,pp.88-102.
48. Rogers, C., 1980, The Disclosure of Information. Vol. 46 Issue 14, pp.430
49. Ruekert, R. W. & Walker, O. C., 1987, “Marketing’s Interaction with Other
Functional Units: A Conceptual Framwork and Empirca Evidencel", Journal of
product innovation management, vol.51.
50. Scott, W. R., 1987, The Adolescence of institutional Theory, Cornell University.
51. Scott, W. R., 1995, Institution & Organization, Sage publication.
52. Selznick, P., 1957, “Law and the Structures of Social Action", Administrative Science Quarterly, Sep, Vol. 2 Issue 2, pp.258.
53. Simonin, B.L., 1999, “Ambiguity and the Process of Knowledge Strategic Asset.The Competitive Challenge", Cambridge, MA:Strategic Management Journal, 17,Winter Special Issue, pp. 93-117.
54. Simonin, B.L., 1999, “Transfer of Marketing Know-How in International Strategic Alliance: An Empirical investigation of the Role and Antecedents of knowledge Ambiguity”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol.30, pp.463-490.
55. Szulanski, G., 1993, “Intra-Firm Transfer of Best Practice, Appropriative
Capabilities, and Organizational Barriers to Appropriation”, Academy of
Management Proceeding, pp.47-52.
56. Szulanski, G., 1996, “Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice within the Firm”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, WinterSpecial Issue, pp.27-43
57. Szulanski, G., 2004, “Stickiness and the Adaptation of Oorganizational Practices in Cross-border Knowledge Transfers". Vol. 35 Issue 6, pp.508.
58. Williamson, O. E., 1975, Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust
Implications. New York: The Free Press.
59. Williamson, O. E., 1985, The Economic Institution of Capitalism. New York: The Free Press.
60. Winter, S. G., & Teece, D. J., 1987, “Knowledge and Competences as Strategic Asset", The Competitive Challenge, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, pp.159-184.
61. Zack, M.H., 1999, Managing Codified Knowledge, Sloan Management Review,
Vol.4, pp.45-58.
62. Zand, D. E., 1972, “Trust and Managerial Problem Solving", Administrative
science quarterly, pp.229-239.
63. Zander, U. & Kogut, B., 1992, “Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities,and the Replication of Technology", Organization Science: A Journal of theInstitute of Management Sciences, Vol.3, pp.383.
64. Zander, U. & Kogut, B., 1993, “Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary
Theory of the Multinational Corporation", Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol.4, pp.625.
65. Zander, U. & Kogut, B., 1995, “Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and
Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An empirical Test”, Organization Science,Vol. 6, no.1, pp.76-92.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔