(3.238.7.202) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/01 22:11
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:陳政諺
研究生(外文):Cheng-Yen Chen
論文名稱:結合模糊語意偏好關係與資料包絡法應用於3C連鎖店之績效管理-以高雄市全國電子連鎖店為例
論文名稱(外文):Applying Data Envelopment Analysis and Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relations in 3C Chain Stores in Taiwan– A Case Study of Elifemall in Kaohsiung
指導教授:陳榮方陳榮方引用關係
指導教授(外文):Jung-Fang Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄應用科技大學
系所名稱:企業管理系
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:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:中文
論文頁數:99
中文關鍵詞:3C零售業模糊語意偏好關係法資料包絡法Tobit迴歸分析
外文關鍵詞:3C RetailFuzzy Linguistic Preference RelationsData Envelopment AnalysisTobit Regression Analysis
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:378
  • 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
過去對於3C產業的研究多是以質性或針對企業間的績效表現來探討,仍無法釐清單一企業其連鎖店間所投入的資源與績效之間是否具有效率,而連鎖企業在現今台灣的零售市場中,已是企業最主要的發展趨勢,其中3C零售業之連鎖方式更是以直營為主,在管理技術的施行上比起加盟式的連鎖店可較為迅速且不易受到干擾,因此本研究以全國電子高雄市20家門市為例,用量化方法探究影響各分店門市之相對績效表現及其成敗關鍵因素與影響程度。
本研究應用Wang & Chen (2008)所發表之模糊語意偏好關係法(Fuzzy LinPreRa),來了解各連鎖店之投入與產出項目間之重要程度,藉由績效指標相關文獻的彙整與參酌五位門市店長意見,歸納出5項投入資源與7項產出績效指標,並以資料包絡法(Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA)探討各門市間之相對經營效率與投入和產出項目所需改善的方向與大小,再依照各門市的技術效率與規模效率分為四個群組,比較出四組之成敗關鍵因素供業者作為未來經營決策之參考,最後藉由Tobit迴歸分析釐清各項投入與產出項目對於DEA所求得之總效率、純技術效率與規模效率是否具有顯著影響。
研究結果顯示,商店坪數、店面租金與電腦的銷售回轉率為最低的三個權重,而依純技術效率與規模效率所劃分的四群效率類型間,其投入資源與產出績效具有顯著差異,且在投入資源與產出績效對於總體經營效率亦有顯著影響, 顯見企業若要提昇各門市之經營效率,可針對改善幅度最大且具有顯著影響之投入資源與產出績效做改善,以期在短期內收得成效。
In the past for the 3C industry are mostly qualitative research or for inter-enterprise performance to explore, still unable to clarify the single enterprise between its stores and performance of resources invested in the question of whether efficient. The chain in the retail market in today's Taiwan is already a major business trend, 3C retail chain in which the method is even based on Direct mainly, its technology in the management of the implementation of the join-style chain can be compared to the more rapid and less susceptible to interference. Therefore, this study bases on 20 outlets of Elifemall in Kaohsiung to explore the use of quantitative methods to influence the relative performance of branch outlets and key success factors and impact.

In this study, Wang & Chen (2008) published by the Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relations Act (Fuzzy LinPreRa) to understand the chain of input and output between the importance of the project, relevant literature through performance indicators compiled by reference to the five stores manager suggestions are put in resources out of five performance indicators and seven outputs, and applies DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA) of the outlets relative efficiency between the inputs and outputs required for the project and to improve the direction and level. Then follow the store's technical efficiency and scale efficiency is divided into four groups to compare the four key success factors for the industry as a reference for future business decisions, Finally, by Tobit regression analysis clarify the various project inputs and outputs are obtained for the total DEA efficiency, pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency is a significant.

The results showed that the number of shop floor, shop rents and sales of computer was the lowest of the three weight, And by pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency are divided among the four types of group efficiency, the performance of its input and output resources are significantly different, and the input resources and output in the performance of the overall operating efficiency is also significantly affected, showing that business to improve operating efficiency of the outlets can be aimed at improving the sharpest and has a significant effect on the input and output resources to do to improve performance in order to be effective in the short term income.
目 錄
中文摘要 --------------------------------------------------------------------- i
英文摘要 --------------------------------------------------------------------- iii
致謝 --------------------------------------------------------------------- v
目錄 --------------------------------------------------------------------- vi
表目錄 --------------------------------------------------------------------- vii
圖目錄 --------------------------------------------------------------------- viii
第一章 緒論--------------------------------------------------------------- 1
第一節 研究背景------------------------------------------------------ 1
第二節 研究動機------------------------------------------------------ 4
第三節 研究目的------------------------------------------------------ 6
第四節 研究對象與範圍--------------------------------------------- 7
第五節 研究流程------------------------------------------------------ 8
第二章 文獻回顧--------------------------------------------------------- 10
第一節  台灣3C連鎖店概況------------------------------------------ 10
第二節  經營績效之定義與評估模式------------------------------- 14
第三節  層級程序分析法與模糊語意偏好關係法---------------- 19
第四節  資料包絡法---------------------------------------------------- 24
第三章 研究方法--------------------------------------------------------- 29
第一節 研究架構------------------------------------------------------ 29
第二節 模糊集合理論------------------------------------------------ 31
第三節 模糊偏好關係法--------------------------------------------- 39
第四節 一致性模糊語意偏好關係法------------------------------ 45
第五節 模糊語意偏好關係法權重計算之步驟------------------ 47
第六節 資料包絡分析法--------------------------------------------- 49
第四章 研究結果--------------------------------------------------------- 68
第一節 研究變數定義與衡量--------------------------------------- 68
第二節 模糊語意偏好關係------------------------------------------ 71
第三節 資料包絡分析法--------------------------------------------- 72
第四節 差異分析------------------------------------------------------ 78
第五節 影響各項效率之關鍵因素分析--------------------------- 81
第五章 研究結論與建議------------------------------------------------ 83
第一節 研究結論------------------------------------------------------ 83
第二節 研究貢獻------------------------------------------------------ 87
第三節 研究限制------------------------------------------------------ 88
第四節 未來研究建議------------------------------------------------ 88
參考文獻
附錄 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
全國電子專家問卷--------------------------------------------- 89
95
表 目 錄
表1-1 台灣商業服務業(批發、零售、餐飲業)營業額及其成長率 2
表1-2 歷年連鎖總部家數與店數統計表----------------------------------- 3
表2-1 學者對通路績效評估採用項目-------------------------------------- 17
表2-2 零售商店營運績效評估指標------------------------------------------ 18
表3-1 因素權重的語意衡量變數及模糊數-------------------------------- 36
表3-2 語意變數評估尺度----------------------------------------------------- 45
表3-3
表4-1
表4-2
表4-3
表4-4
表4-5
表4-6
表4-7
表4-8
表4-9
表4-10
表4-11 規模報酬型態判斷法則-----------------------------------------------
投入與產出項目--------------------------------------------------------
投入項權重--------------------------------------------------------------
產出項權重--------------------------------------------------------------
投入變數與產出變數相關矩陣表-----------------------------------
原始問卷數據-----------------------------------------------------------
DEA效率分析----------------------------------------------------------
DEA投入與產出項之改善建議-------------------------------------
敏感度分析表-----------------------------------------------------------
典範與非典範門市於投入與產出項之差異分析-----------------
四類效率之投入與產出變數差異表--------------------------------
DEA效率值與解釋變數之Tobit迴歸分析結果-----------------
66
68
71
71
72
73
74
75
77
78
80
82









圖 目 錄
圖1-1 2002~2008年我國GDP、服務業及商業服務業產值成長率 1
圖1-2 本研究流程圖---------------------------------------------------------- 9
圖2-1 3C產業整合示意圖--------------------------------------------------- 10
圖2-2 資料包絡分析法之Farrell效率衡量模式------------------------ 25
圖3-1 本研究之研究架構圖------------------------------------------------- 30
圖3-2 隸屬函數型式圖------------------------------------------------------- 32
圖3-3 三角模糊隸屬函數圖------------------------------------------------- 34
圖3-4 模糊語意示意圖------------------------------------------------------- 36
圖3-5 資料包絡法使用程序------------------------------------------------- 52
圖3-6
圖4-1 資料包絡分析法之BCC效率衡量模式--------------------------
效率矩陣---------------------------------------------------------------- 57
79
中文部份
1.王天津、梁佳玲、李裕勇(2007)。消費者對行動加值服務之偏好分析。八十三週年校慶基礎學術研討會,88-93。
2.王天津、陳盈秀(2005)。模糊偏好關係與AHP在實施先進製造技術(AMT)預測上之比較研究。中華管理學報,3,61-72。
3.台灣連鎖暨加盟協會編製(2009)。2009台灣連鎖店年鑑。台北市:台灣連鎖暨加盟協會。
4.全國電子網站(2010)。http://www.elifemall.com.tw/。
5.周泰華、杜富燕(1997)。零售管理,台北市:華泰。
6.林育珊(2000)。行銷通路支持、競爭策略與績效之研究。國立東華大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,花蓮縣。
7.林振順(1994)。連鎖店主持人特質、策略選擇、績效關係之研究-以 餐飲業為例。國立台灣大學商學研究所,未出版,台北市。
8.林群盛(1996)。連鎖經營產業之營運性關鍵成功因素暨競爭優勢分析―台灣連鎖餐飲業之實證。國立台灣大學商學研究所,未出版,台北市。
9.紐撫民(1995)。從我國連鎖經營看服務業環境變遷趨勢。第一屆服務業管理研討會論文集,2-14。
10.高強、黃旭男、Toshiyuki S.(2003)。管理績效評估資料包絡分析法。台北:華泰。
11.張斌福(1999)。經銷商市場導向對其產品供應商配合度要求影響之研究。淡江大學國際企業學碩士論文,未出版,台北縣。
12.現代商業管理(王之弘、卓為智譯)。台北市,高立圖書。(原著出版年:1998)
13.許宏明(1995)。高科技產業的教育訓練制度與組織績效之相關性研究。中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。。 
14.郭英峰、陳邦誠(2006)。應用模糊層級分析法分析消費者對行動加值服務之偏好。電子商務學報,8,1,45-64。
15.陳哲彥(1998)。人力資源管理與組織績效之關係–本土及外資企業的比較。中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。未出版。高雄市。
16.陳榮方、梁樑、趙定濤(2006)。以資料包絡法探討中國大陸大學之經營效率。高雄應用科技大學學報,35,239-252。
17.陳澄隆(2000)。國內定期航運公司營運績效之研究-應用資料包絡分析法(DEA)。國立交通大學交通運輸研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
18.黃榮仁(2003)。台灣3C連鎖通路行銷策略與經營績效關聯性之研究。中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
19.楊岳霖(2007)。我國3C通路商經營效率之研究-以資料包絡法分析。國立雲林科技大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士班碩士論文,未出版,雲林縣。
20.資策會MICTIS計畫。12 月,1999 年。
21.管理學—競爭優勢(劉明德等譯)。台北市:桂冠圖書。(原著出版年:1993)
22.趙必孝(1994)。國際企業子公司人力資源策略、控制與績效。中山大學企管所博士論文。未出版,高雄市。
23.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)。層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(上)。中國統計學報,6,5-22。
24.薄喬萍(2007)。績效評估之資料包絡分析法。臺北市:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
25.謝登隆(1997)。個體經濟理論與應用。台北:智勝文化事業。
26.簡禎富(2005)。決策分析與管理—全面決策品質提升之架構與方法。台北市:雙葉書廊。
27.闕山晴(2002)。1998年台灣連鎖店年鑑。231-232。台北市:台灣連鎖暨加盟協會。
28.嚴盛豪(1994)。連鎖經營控制之研究--系統分析方法之應用。國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。

英文部份
1.Banker, R. D., A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper (1984). Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis, Management Science, 30, 1078-1092.
2.Banker, R.D., & Thrall, R.M. (1992). Estimation of returns to scale using Data Envelopment Analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 62(1), 74-84.
3.Belton, V. & Gear, A. E. (1985). The Legitimacy of Rank Reversal-A Comment. Omega. 13 (3), 227-230.
4.Buckley, J.J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems. 17, 233–247.
5.Chang, D.Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95, 649–655.
6.Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units, European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429-444.
7.Chen, S.J. & Hwang, C.L. (1992). Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making-Method and Application. Springer-Verlag, New York.
8.Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. (1996) .The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 949-969.
9.Dess, G. G., & Robinson Jr. R. B. (1984). Measuring Organizational Performance in the Absence of Objective Measure: The Case of the Privately-held Firm and Conglomerate Business Unit. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 265-273.
10.Dubelaar, C., C. Garland, & P. D. Larson. (2001). Relationships between inventory, sales and service in a retail chain store operation. International Journal of Phisical Distribution and Logistics Management, 31 (2), 96.
11.Dubois, D. & Prade, H. (1978). Operations on fuzzy numbers. International Joural of System Science, 9(1), 613-626.
12.Dubois, D. & Prade, H. (1980). Fuzzy Sets and Systems: Theory and Applications. Academic, New York.
13.Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, General, 253-281.
14.Ghosh, D., & R. Lusch. F. (2000). Outcome effect, controllability & performance evaluation of managers: Some field evidence from multi-outlet businesses. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 25(4), 411-425.
15.Herrera,V.E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F. & Luque, M., et al. (2004). Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 154, 98-109.
16.Kahraman, D. Ruan, I. Dogan (2003). Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection, Information Sciences, 157, 135–153.
17.Kaplan, R. S. & D. P. Norton (1992).The Balanced Scorecard-Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, Jan/Feb, 71-79.
18.Kast, F. E & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1985). Organization and Management:A System and Contingency, 286.
19.Kaufmann, A. & Gupta, M. M. (1991). Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic:Theory and Application. Van Nostr& Reinhold, N.Y.
20.Kohli, A., & Jaworski, B. (1990). Market orientation: The construct research propositions and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 1-18.
21.Laarhoven, V., P.J.M. & Pedrycz, W. (1983). A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11, 229–241.
22.Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge Management Enablers, Processes, & Organizational Performance: An Integrative View and Empirical Examination. Journal of Management Information System, 20(1), 179-228.
23.Levy, M. & Weitz, B. (1998), Retailing Management, Third Edition, Irwin/McGraw Hill, Burr Ridg, IL.
24.Lumpkin G. T. & G. G. Dess (1996). Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Constructs and Linking it to Performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
25.Lusch, R. L. (1986). The new algebra of high performance retail management. Retail Control, 54(7), 15-35.
26.Mikhailov, L. (2003). Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 134, 365–385.
27.Millet, I. & Harker, P. T. (1990). Globally effective questioning in the analytic hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 88-97.
28.Morash, Edward, Droge, Cornelia & Vickery, Shawnee (1996). Strategic Logistics Capabilities for Competitive Advantage and Firm Success. Journal of Business Logistics, 17(1), 1-21.
29.Paradi, J. C. & Schaffnit, C. (2004).Commercial branch performance evaluation and results communication in a Canadian bank-a DEA application. European Journal of Operational Research, (56). 719-735.
30.Reed, Richard, David J. Lemak & Joseph C. Montgomery (1996).Beyond Process: TQM Content and Firm Performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 173-202.
31.Reimann, Bernard C., & Anant. Negandhi (1975). Strategies Of Administrative Control and Organizational Effectiveness. Human Relations, 28(5), 475.
32.Satty, T. L. (1971). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 40, 9-10.
33.Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
34.Stern, L., El-Ansary, A. & Coughlan, A. (1996). Marketing Channels, 5th ed. NJ: Prentice Hall.
35.Teng, J. Y. & Tzeng, G. H. (1993).Transportation investment project selection with fuzzy multi-objective. Transportation Planning & Technology, 17, 91-112.
36.Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814.

37.Vickery, Shawneek (1991).A Theory of Performance Competence Revisited. Decision Science, 3, 635-643.
38.Wang, T.C. & Chang, T.H. (2007). Forecasting the probability of successful knowledge management by consistent fuzzy preference relations, Expert Systems with Applications, 32 (3), 801-813.
39.Wang, T.C. & Chen, Y.H. (2005). A new method on decision-making using fuzzy linguistic assessment variables and fuzzy preference relations. In: The Proceedings of the 9th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Orlando, 360-363.
40.Wang, T.C. & Chen, Y.H. (2008). Applying fuzzy linguistic preference relations to the improvement of consistency of fuzzy AHP. Information Sciences, 178, 3755-3765.
41.Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer Value: the Next Source for Competitive Advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25, 139-153.
42.Xu, R. (2000). Fuzzy least-squares priority method in the analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11, 2359-404.
43.Youndt, M. A., Snell, S. A., Dean, J. W., & Lepak, D. P. (1996). Human resource management, manufacturing strategy, & firm performance, Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 836-866.
44.Zadeh, L.A. (1965).Information and control, Fuzzy Sets, 8, 338-353.
45.Zadeh, L.A. (1975). The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning I, II, III, Information Sciences, 8, 199-251, 301-357, 9, 43-80.
46.Zhang, Z. (2000). Developing a Model of Quality Management Methods and Evaluating Their Effects on Business Performance. Total Quality Management, 11(1), 129-137.
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