影響廠商成長的因素一直是經濟學家所關注的課題，因為藉著觀察個別廠商的成長情形，可了解整個產業的發展，進而掌握總體經濟的脈動。本文選取2001年到2006年為研究期間，以623家台灣上市上櫃公司作為分析對象。
由於資料結合時間與橫斷面資料，故採Panel Data會有更多的樣本訊息，實證結果結論有以下幾點：(1)廠商規模與廠商成長呈顯著負相關；(2)廠齡與廠商成長呈顯著正相關；(3)現金流量與廠商成長呈顯著正相關；(4)研究發展與廠商成長呈負相關，但不顯著；(5)財務槓桿比率與廠商成長呈顯著正相關；(6)外資持股比率與廠商成長呈顯著正相關；(7)利潤與廠商成長呈現顯著正相關。
另外，用最小平方估計法(Ordinary Least Square Estimate；OLS)與分量迴歸(Quantile Regression；QR)，探討廠商特徵變數對廠商成長率的影響。實證結果不僅顯示出分量迴歸與最小平方估計法之間的差異，也表現出分量迴歸的實用性，更把影響廠商成長的因素以分量迴歸的方法抓出全貌。
適度舉債會對廠商帶來成長；相反的，過度的財務槓桿運用，反而會替廠商帶來負的成長。故本文也將運用Hansen (1999) 所發展的縱橫門檻(Panel Threshold) 迴歸模型，檢測是否廠商成長率受到財務槓桿比率不同影響而呈現上下不對稱之兩個或兩個以上區間關係。結果發現，廠商成長與財務槓桿比率間存在一個門檻二個區間的門檻效果，且進一步對係數檢定後，財務槓桿比率低於門檻值時，與廠商成長呈現正相關，但不顯著；當財務槓桿比率高於門檻值時，其與廠商成長呈現顯著負相關，意味著存在最適財務槓桿比率。

Economists pay attention to the determinant factor of firm growth all the time. By observing the specific firm growth behavior, we can find the development of whole industry and then grasp the pulsation of overall economy. This assay will use the sample of 623 listed companies in Taiwan from the year 2001 to 2006.
Because the sample data combines time and cross section data, we adopt Panel Data to obtain more sample information. Conclusions have the following several points:
(1)Firm's scale exerts a negative effect on growth.
(2)Firm age displays a positive effect on growth.
(3)Cash flow shows a positive effect on growth.
(4)R&D exhibits a negative effect on growth, but not obvious.
(5)The rate of financial leverage demonstrates a positive effect on growth.
(6)The rate of foreign capitals hold share indicates a positive effect on growth.
(7)Profit has a positive effect on growth.
We also use ordinary least square estimate (OLS) and quantile regression (QR) to investigate the impact between firm's growth rate and firm's characteristic parameters. The result demonstrates the difference between OLS and QR and shows the QR practicability .Thus we use QR to catch at overall picture of the different quantile for influencing the firms to grow up.
Appropriate financial leverage will bring growing up to the firm. On the contrary, the excessive financial leverage is used will bring negative growth to the firm. We use Hansen (1999) developed method on panel threshold model that allows us to examine threshold effects that leverage threshold divides the relationship of growth and leverage into two or more than two asymmetric regimes .Our empirical results show that threshold leverage value is 0.830, which separate the sample into two different regimes. When the rate of the financial leverage is lower than 0.830, financial leverage exerts a positive effect on growth, but not obvious. When the rate of the financial leverage is higher than 0.830, financial leverage exerts a negative effect on growth .It means that there is the rate of the fittest financial leverage.

目 錄

第一章 緒論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．1
第一節 研究動機與目的．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．1
第二節 研究內容．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．3
第二章 文獻探討與研究方法．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．4
第一節 文獻探討．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．4
第二節 實證模型．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．10
第三節 Panel Data 模型．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．11
第四節 分量迴歸法(Quantile Regression；QR) ．．．．．．．．．．．．16
第五節 門檻自我迴歸模型．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．18
第三章 實證分析．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．25
第一節 資料說明．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．25
第二節 Panel Data模型之實證結果．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．28
第三節 分量迴歸模型之實證結果．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．31
第四節 門檻模型之實證結果．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．46
第四章 結論與建議．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．51
第一節 結論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．51
第二節 研究限制及後續建議．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．52
參考文獻．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．53


表目錄

表 3-1-1 變數定義．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．28
表 3-2-1 Panel Data模型廠商成長實證結果(被解釋變數： )．．．．．30
表 3-3-1 2001年廠商成長率之分量迴歸分析結果．．．．．．．．．．．．33
表 3-3-2 2002年廠商成長率之分量迴歸分析結果．．．．．．．．．．．．34
表 3-3-3 2003年廠商成長率之分量迴歸分析結果．．．．．．．．．．．．35
表 3-3-4 各年度之廠商規模對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．．．37
表 3-3-5 各年度之廠齡對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．．．．．38
表 3-3-6 各年度之現金流量對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．．．38
表 3-3-7 各年度之研究發展費用率對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．38
表 3-3-8 各年度之財務槓桿比率對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．39
表 3-3-9 各年度之外資持股比率對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．39
表 3-3-10 各年度之產業虛擬變數對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．39
表 3-3-11 各年度之利潤對廠商成長率的影響．．．．．．．．．．．．．．40
表 3-3-12 2001年至2003年各分量之迴歸係數檢定．．．．．．．．．．．42
表 3-4-1　財務槓桿比率對廠商成長率之門檻效果檢定．．．．．．．．．．49
表 3-4-2 門檻參數值估計．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．49
表 3-4-3 控制變數之效果檢定．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．50

圖目錄

圖 1-2-1 研究流程圖．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．3
圖 3-3-1 2001年各變數對廠商成長影響的信賴區間．．．．．．．．．．．43
圖 3-3-2 2002年各變數對廠商成長影響的信賴區間．．．．．．．．．．．44
圖 3-3-3 2003年各變數對廠商成長影響的信賴區間．．．．．．．．．．．45

參考文獻
一、中文文獻
吳佳穎 (2001)，「台灣資訊電子產業研究發展活動與公司經營績效之研究」，國立交通 大學科技管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
李佳珍 (1997)，「公司融資決策、投資決策與公司成長關係之研究」，國立中正大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
張恩浩 (1991)，「研究發展之影響因素及其與績效關係之研究」，國立臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
黃雅苓 (1997)，「研究發展支出與經營績效關係及其費用化之探討-以台灣上市公司電子業與非電子業為例」，國立政治大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
鄒孟文 劉錦添 (1997)，「外人直接投資對台灣製造業波及效果之實證」，經濟論文叢刊，25 : 2，155-181頁。
鄭松茂 (1998)，「台灣地區本國銀行效率評估及生產力成長與獲利成長關係之研究 」，私立東海大學管理研究所碩士論文。　
鄭嘉珮、劉錦添 (1995)，「台灣廠商研究發展支出的分析」，台灣銀行季刊，第四十五卷第二期，頁138-152。
賴淑妙 (2000)，「負債、未預期成長與公司價值」，國立台灣大學國家發展研究所碩士論文。
二、英文文獻
Aitken, B. and A. Harrison (1999), Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezela,American Economic Review,89(3),605-618.
Andrews, D.W.K. and Ploberger, W. (1994), Optimal tests when a nuisance parameter is present only under the aleernative,Econometrica, 62, 1383-1414.
Blomstrom, M. and H. Persson (1983), Foreign Investment and Spillover Efficiency in an Underdeveloped Economy：Evidence from the Mexico Manufacturing Industry,World Development, 11, 493-501.
Branch,B.(1974)，Research and Development Activity and Profitability: A Distributed Lag analysis. Journal of Political Economy (September/October):999-1011。
Brigham , E. F. (1995), Financial Management, Theory An Practice, The Dryden Press. Ho 15-Saunders Japan, 13-14.
Cantor, Richard (1990), Effects of Leverage on Corporate Investment and Hiring Decisions , Federal Reserve Bank of New York Quarterly Review, 31-41.
Caves,R.E. (1974),Multinational Firm,Competition,and Productivity in Host-Country Markets,Economica, 41, 176-193.
Chan, K.S. (1993), Consistency and Limiting Distribution of the Least Squares Estimator of a Continuous Threshold autoregressive Model, The Annals of Statistics, 21,520-533.
Chhibber, P.K., and S.K. Majumdar. (1999) Foreign Ownership and profitability：property rights,control, and the performance of firms inIndian Industry.Journal of Law and Economics .42(1), 209-238.
Chiang, C.C. and Mensah, Y., (2004), The Determinants of Investor Valuation of R&D Expenditure in the software Industry, Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting,22 (4),293-313.
Coad, A. and R. Rao (2006), As Luck would have it: Innovation and Firm Growth in Complex Technology Sectors, paper presented at the 2006 DRUID summer conference on Knowledge, innovation and competitiveness: Dynamics of firms, networks, regions and institutions, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Das, S. (1995), Size, Age and Firm Growth ins an Infant Industry：The Computer Hardware Industry in India, International Journal of Indstrial Organization, 13, 111-126.
Davies, R.B. (1977), Hypothesis testing when a nuisance parameter is present only under the alternative,Biometrika, 64, 247-254.
Davies, R.B. (1987), Hypothesis testing when a nuisance parameter is present only under the alternative,Biometrika, 74, 33-43.
Doms, M., T. Dunne and M.J. Roberts (1995), The Role of Technology Use in the Survival and Growth of Manufacturing Plants,International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 523-542
Dosi, G., (2005), Statistical Regularities in the Evolution of Industries: A Guide through some Evidence and Challenges for the Theory, Pisa, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, LEM Working Paper Series.
Dunne, P. and A. Hughes (1994), Age, Size, Growth and Survival：UK Companies in the 1980s, Journal of Industrial Economics,42, 115-140.
Evans, D. (1987a), The Relationship between Firm Growth, Size and Age：Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries, Journal of industrial Economics, 35, 567-581
Evans, D. (1987b), Tests of alternative Theories of Firm Growth, Journal of Political Economy, 95, 657-674
Gibrat, R. (1931). Les Inegalites Economiques. Paris：Sirey.
Globerman, S. (1979), Foreign Direct Investment and‘Spillover_Efficiency Benefits in Canadian Manufacturing Industries, Canadian Journal of Economics,12, 42-56.
Hall, B.H., (1987), The relationship between firm size and firm growth in the US manufacturing sector. The Journal of Industrial Economics , 35, 583-606.
Hansen, B.E. (1996), Inference when a nuisance parameter is not identified under the null hypothesis, Econometrica, 64, 413-430.
Hansen, B.E. (1999), Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing and inference, Journal of Econometrics, 93, 345-368.
Hansen, B.E. (2000), Sample splitting and threshold estimation,Econometrica, 68, 575-603.
Hart, P.E and S. J. Prais (1956), The analysis of Business Concentration：A Statistical Approach, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General),119(2), 150-191.
Hart,P.E.and Oulton (1999), Gibrat, Galton and Job Generation, International Journal of the Economics of Business, 6, 149-164.
Hausman,J.A. (1978),Specification Tests in Econometrics,Econometrica,.46, 1251-1271.
Hymer,S. and P. Pashigian (1962), Firm Size and Rate of Growth, Journal of Political economy, 52, 556-569.
Jensen,M.C. (1986), Agency costs of free cash flow,Corporate finance and Takeovers,
American Economics Review, 76, 323-329.
Jovanovic B. (1982), Selection and the evolution of industry. Econometrica, 50, 649-670.
Klette, T.J. and Z. Griliches (2000), Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D
Investment：A Quality Ladder Model Interpretation, Economic Journal，110，363
-387.
Koenker R. and G. Bassett (1978), Regression Quantiles, Econometrica,46,33-50.
Kokko, A. (1994), Technology, Market Characteristics, and Spillovers, Journal of Development Economics, 43, 279-293.
Kokko, A., Tansini, R., and M.C. Zejan (1996), Local Technology Capability and Productivity Spillovers from FDI in the Uruguayan Manufacturing Sector, Journal of Development Studies, 32(4), 602-611.
Lang, Larry (1994), Leverage, Investment, and Firm Growth, The First NTU International Conference on Finance, unpublished working paper.
Larry Lang, Eli Ofek, Rne M. Stulz (1996), Leverage, Investment, and Firm Growth, Journal of Financial Economics 40, 3-29.
Liu, J.-T., Tsou, M.-W., Hammitt J.K. (1999), Do small plants grow faster? Evidence from the Taiwan electronics industry, Economic Letters, 65, 121-129.
Lotti, F., E. Santarelli and M. Vivarelli (2003), Does Gibrat's Law Hold among Young, Small Firms?,Journal of Evolutionary Economics,13, 213-235
Mansfield,E. (1962), Entry, Gibrat's rule, innovation and growth of firms.American Economic Review,52,1023-1051.
Nurmi,S. (2002),Plant Size,Age and Growth in Finish manufacturing, paper presented at the 29th EARIE Conference, Madrid, Spain.
Opler,Tim C, and Sheridan Titman (1994), Financial Distress and Corporate Performance
, Journal of Finance, 46, 1015-1040.
Ozkan, A. (2001), Determinants of Capital Structure and Adjustment to Long Run Target：Evidence from UK Company Panel Data,Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 28(1/3), 175-198.
Singh, A. and G. Whittington (1975), The Size and Growth of Firms, The Rewiew of Economic Studies, 42, 15-26.
Smith, Clkfford W, and Ross Watt (1992), The Investment Opportunity Set and Corporate Financing, Dividend and Compensation Policies, Journal of Financial Economics, 7, 117-161.
Sougiannis, T. (1994), The Accounting Based Valuation of corporate R&D, The Accounting Review, 69(1), 44-68.
Storey, D.J. (1994), Understanding the small business sector, London: Routledge.
Titman, sheridan, and Roberto Wessels (1988), The Determinants Capital Structure Choice, Journal of Forecasting,13, 109-131.
Tong, H., (1978),On a threshold Model, in C.H. Chen (ed.), Pattern Recognition and Signal Processing, Amsterdam: Sijthoff & Noordhoff,101-141.
Whited, Tony (1992), Debt, Liquidity Constrains, and Corporate Investment: Evidence from Panel Data, Journal of Finance ,47, 1425-1461.