跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.14.81) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/02/19 03:49
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:藍慶祥
研究生(外文):Chin-hsiang Lan
論文名稱:專利創新、股權結構對財務績效影響之研究:以國內電子業為例
論文名稱(外文):Patent Innovation, Ownership Structure, and Financial Performance:Evidence From Taiwan Electronic Industry
指導教授:李春安李春安引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chun-an Li
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:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:71
中文關鍵詞:財務績效專利創新股權結構創新
外文關鍵詞:ownership structurepatent innovationfinancial performanceInnovation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:261
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
近年來本國與外國人申請專利件數日益增加,而台灣電子產業更是挹注大量資金在創新事業,對於台灣這個世界知名的電子設計與生產中心而言,公司的創新程度深深影響著其財務績效。
本研究以台灣182家電子產業為研究對象,探討專利創新、股權結構對財務績效之間的關係之影響,及公司財務績效是否會受到前一年度的專利創新程度與董監事持股比率和人數的影響。 本研究共蒐集92年至95年的創新與股權結構資料,經由迴歸分析之統計方法,得到下列幾項發現:
1.股權結構對財務績效具有正向的影響
2.專利創新對財務績效具有正向的影響
3.股權結構對專利創新具有正向的影響
4.加入虛擬股權結構變數觀察,財務績效受到專利創新的正向影響更為顯著。
In recent years, the number of patents applied by domestic and foreign business is increasing, and Taiwanese firms of the electronic industry also invest large number of capital in the innovative undertaking. For Taiwan, the world-famous electronnic design and production center, firms’ innovative degree influences its financial performance significantly. This research exam the causal relationship between a firm’s number of patent, the ownership structure and financial performance. This research selects electronic industry as the research object, exploring the influences of the patent innovation and ownership structure on firm’s financial performance, and the influence of last year’s number of patent, insider holding on financial performance.
This research includes 182 firms of electronic industries in Taiwan with the innovation and ownership structure data from 2003 to 2006. We uses multiple regression analyses to analysis the relationship of patent innovation, ownership structure and the financial performance.The results are as follows:
1. The ownership structure has positive influence on the financial performance.
2. The patent innovation has positive influence on the financial performance.
3. The ownership structure has positive influence on the patent innovation.
4. With the moderator of fictitious ownership structure, the positive relationship between patent innovation and financial performance will be more significant.
中文摘要
英文摘要
誌謝
目錄
表目錄
圖目錄

第壹章 緒論 
第一節 研究背景與動機
第二節 研究目的
第三節 研究流程
第貳章 文獻探討 
第一節 創新相關文獻
第二節 專利權相關文獻
第三節 股權結構相關文獻
第四節 本章小結
第參章 研究方法 
第一節 資料來源
第二節 研究架構
第三節 研究假說
第四節 研究模型與方法
第五節 研究變數之操作性定義
第肆章 實證分析 
第一節 敘述統計與共線性分析
第二節 股權結構對財務績效之影響
第三節 專利創新對財務績效之影響
第四節 股權結構對專利創新之影響
第五節 股權結構對專利創新與財務績效關係的影響
第伍章 結論與建議 
第一節 結論
第二節 研究限制與建議
參考文獻

表目錄
表1-1 最近10年本國人與外國人新申請專利件數統計表
表2-1 創新定義表
表3-2 研究變數定義
表4-1 樣本特性之敘述統計
表4-2 各變數間之相關性分析
表4-3 共線性分析
表4-4 股權結構對財務績效影響的迴歸分析
表4-5 專利創新對財務績效影響的迴歸分析
表4-6 股權結構對專利創新影響的迴歸分析
表4-7 專利創新對財務績效受到虛擬股權結構變數影響的迴歸分析

圖目錄 
圖1-1 研究流程
圖3-1 本文研究架構
一、國內相關文獻
1.許財良,2003,「廠商創新能力、產業發展與政府科技政策對科學園區廠商競爭優勢及績效影響之研究」,國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
2.謝寶煖,2001,「專利資訊」,台灣大學圖書資訊學系課程講義, http://ceiba.cc.ntu.edu.tw/patent。
3.闕河士、菅瑞昌、黃旭輝,2000,「研究發展密集度與專利對股票績效影響-以臺灣上市公司為例」,產業管理學報,第1卷第2期,257-268。
4.陳俊雄,2002,「專利權價值攸關性之研究」,中原大學會計研究所碩士論文。
5.金成隆、林修葳、紀信義,2004,「從企業生命週期探討專利權的價值攸關性:兼論法規大修的影響」,管理學報,第21卷第二期,175-197。
6.陳家樂,2001,「創投決策與高科技廠商研發行為之研究」,國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
7.張訓華,1991,「股數結構、董事會組成輿企業當年財務績效-以77 年度會計報酬率為準」,東吳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
8.吳長駿,2002,「研究發展費用、專利權與企業績效之關聯性研究」,國立中正大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
9.邱毅、張訓華,1991,「股權結構、董事會組成與企業財務績效」,台北市銀月月刊,第二十二卷第五期,11-31。
10.周行一、陳錦村、陳坤宏,1996,「家族持股、聯屬持股與公司價值之研究」, 中國財務學刊,第四卷第五期,115-139。
11.方國光,2002,「公司治理與經營績效之實證研究-以上海證券交易所上市 公司為例」,國立台北大學會計學系碩士論文。
12.葉銀華、馬君梅,1999,「股權結構、公司價值與內部監督機制-上海證券市場實證研究」,亞太管理評論,第4卷第1期,37-50。
13.郭淑枝,2004,「服裝電腦輔助軟體的應用研究-專利創新與迴避設計」, 輔仁大學織品服裝研究所碩士論文。
14.吳文德、陳振遠,2007,「公司治理與代理問題對企業併購績效影響之研究:以台灣上市公司為例」,澳門科技大學學報,第1卷第2期,71-93。
15.吳萬益、吳志正,1996,「台美日企業在台灣及大陸企業經營環境及競爭策略之研究」,台大管理論叢,第7卷第1期,49-84。
16.金成隆、陳俞如,2005,公司治理與專利權:台灣新興市場,管理學報,第23卷第1期,頁99-124。
17.經濟部智慧財產局年報,2006,http://www.tipo.gov.tw。
18.經濟部智慧財產局,2004,http://www.tipo.gov.tw。

二、國外相關文獻
1.Agrawal, A. and C.R. Knoeber, 1996, “Firm performance and mechanisms tocontrol agency problems between managers and shareholders,”Journal ofFinancial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 377-397.
2.Agrawal, A. and G.N. Mandelker, 1990, “Large shareholders and themonitoring of managers: The case of antitakeover charter amendments,”Journals of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 25(2), 143-161.
3.Anderson, C. A., and R.N. Anthony, 1986, “The new corporate directors,” New York, Wiley.
4.Baysinger, B.D., R.D. Kosnik and T.A. Turk, 1991, “Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy,” Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), 205-214.
5.Betz, F., 1993, Strategic Technology Management, New York: McGraw-Hill. 6.Brickley, J. A., R. C. Lease and C.W. Smith, 1988, “Ownership structure and voting on anti-takeover amendments,” Journal of Finance Economics, 20, 267-291.
7.Capon, N., J.U. Farley, and S. Hoenig, 1990, “Determinants of financial performance: A meta-analysis,” Management Science, 36(10), 1143-1159. 8.Cockburn, I. and B. Griliches, 1987 “Industry effects and appropriablity measures in the sotck market’s valuation of R&D and Patents,” AEA Papers and Proceedings, 78(20), 419-423.
9.Damanpour, F. and W. M. Evan, 1984, “Organizational innovation and performance: The problem of organizational lag,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(3), 392-409.
10.Deng, Z., B. Lev and F. Narin, 1999, “Science and technology as predictors of stock performance,” Financial Analysts Journal, 55(3), 20-32.
11.Donaldson, L. and J.H. Davis, 1991, “Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns,” Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49-64.
12.Gedajlovic, E.R., T. Yoshikawa and M. Hashimoto, 2001,“Ownership structure,investment behavior and firm performance in Japanese manufacturing industries,” Organization Studies, 26(1), 7-36.
13.Finkelstein, S. and R. A. D’Aveni, 1994, “CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boards of directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command, ” Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 1079-1108.
14.Friend, I., and J. Hasbrouck, 1988, “Determinants of capital structure”, Research in Finance, 7(1), 1-19.
15.Griliches, Z., 1981, “Market value, R&D and patents,” Economic Letters, 7(2), 183-187.
16.Griliches, Z., B. H. Hall and A. Pakes, 1988, “R&D, patent and markets value revisited : Is there a second (technological opportunity) factor,” Working paper, NBER, 2624.
17.Hermalin, B. and M. Weisbach, 2001, “Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature,” Economic Policy Review, 1-20.
18.Hill, C. W. L. and S. A Snell, 1988, “External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research-intensive industries,” Strategic Management Journal, 9(6), 577-590.
19.Hill, C. W. L. and G. R. Jones, 1998, Strategic Management: an Integrated Approach, 4rd ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co..
20.Hunt, H., 1985, “Potential determinants of corporate inventory decisions,” Journal of Accounting Research, 23(2), 448-467.
21.Kannebley, S., Jr., G.S. Porto, and E.T. Pazello, 2005, “Characteristics of Brazilian innovation firms: An empirical analysis based on PINTEC-industrial research on technological innovation,” Research Policy, 34(6), 872-893.
22.Kesner, I. F., 1987, “Directors stock ownership and organizational performance:An investigation of fortune 500 companies,” Journal of Management, 13, 499-507.
23.Kuo, T. and A. Wu, 2007, “The determinants of organizational innovation and performance: An examination of Taiwanese electronics industry,” Working paper, University of Chengchi(Taipei).
24.Li, J., K. Lam, and Y. Fang, 2000, “Manufacturing firms’ performance and technology commitment - the case of the electronics industry in China,” Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 11(6), 385-392.
25.McConnell, J. and H. Servaes, 1990, “Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value,” Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 595-613.
26.Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R.W. Vishny, 1988, “Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis,” Journal of Financial Economics, 20(1), 293-315.
27.Pakes, A., 1985, “On patents, R&D and the stock market rate of return,” Journal of Political Economics, 93(2), 390-409.
28.Porter, M.E., 1986, Competition in Global Industries, Boston: Harvard Business Press.
29.Pound, J., 1988, “Proxy contests and the efficiency of shareholder oversight, ” Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 237-265.
30.Rosenstein, S. and J. Wyatt, 1997, “Inside directors, board effectiveness, and shareholder wealth,” Journal of Financial Economics, 44(2), 229- 250.
31.Schumpeter, J.A., 1934, The Theory of Economic Development, Boston: Harvard University Press.
32.Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny, 1986, “Large shareholders and corporate control,” Journal of Political Economy, 94(3), 461-488.
33.Siguaw, J. A., P. M. Simpson, and C. A. Enz, 2006, “Innovation orientation: Developmentof innovation theory,” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(6), 556-574.
34.Song, M. and R. Walkling, 1993, “The impact of managerial ownership on acquisition attempts and target shareholder wealth, ” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 28(4), 439-457.
35.Tushman, N. L. and D. A. Nadler, 1986, “Organizing for innovation,”California Management Review, 28(3), 74-92.
36.Vrakking. W. J., 1990, “The innovative organization,” Long RangePlanning,23(2), 94-102.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top