臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著產業全球化與專業化的趨勢發展，企業個體為了因應日亦嚴峻的競爭與衝擊，有關成本資訊的控管與分析上也因此更顯攸關與重要。然而近年來國內外許多學者研究中發現銷管費用變動幅度與成本動因變動幅度間並不一致，產生所謂的成本僵固性之特殊現象，而其亦為相關成本研究與決策時所應納入考量之特殊成本習性。本研究以台灣筆記型電腦相關產業自民國85年至98年共14年間，包含147家上市、櫃公司樣本為例，實證結果發現銷貨收入每增加1%時，銷管費用將連帶增加0.5727%；然而當銷貨收入下跌1%時，銷管費用卻僅下降0.3979%，明顯小於銷貨收入上升時所增加之幅度，顯示國內筆記型電腦相關產業亦具有成本僵固性之特殊現象。此外本研究並發現位處產業供應鏈下游之廠商，因承接自上中游廠商以價格機能轉嫁而來的成本僵固性，將使自身成本僵固性程度相較上中游廠商來得更為嚴重與明顯；另外也發現若企業個體採取發展自有品牌之營運策略時，品牌權益不僅具有市場行銷方面之助益外，亦可為企業成本構面帶來高度的成本優勢，尤其是在行銷費用層面上更為明顯，可有效的改善與舒緩企業的成本結構與成本僵固性。本研究之發現，除了補充成本僵固性之相關研究外，亦可提供未來與產業供應鏈以及品牌權益與成本構面間交互影響之相關研究方向。

The precision of cost information has posed a great influence on the management’s decision, and the exactness of cost information depends on the accurate behavior of cost analysis. Recently, the domestic and international scholars found SG&A are sticky (cost increases more with the increase of cost activity than it decreases in response to the equivalent activity decrease ), so the management should consider this special phenomenon while analyzing and making policies for relevant cost. In this study, we extend this line of research by examining whether the sticky behavior also exists in Taiwanese Notebook industry. We found that SG&A cost increases at a rate of 0.5727% per 1% increase in sales but decreases only 0.3979% per 1% decrease in sales. This implied that the stickiness cost phenomenon truly exists in Taiwan. Besides, in this study, we also found that when the enterprises belong to downstream enterprises of supply chain, their cost structure are more sticky than the upper and middle ones. And the sticky costs will be moderate when the enterprises adopt and develop the brand tactics; it is especially obvious in the aspect of marketing expenses. In addition to supplement related study of cost stickiness, the findings of this study can offer relevant cost research directions in supply chain and brand equity in the future.

目 錄
謝辭
摘要
Abstract
圖目錄
表目錄
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究背景與動機
第二節 研究目的
第三節 論文組織架構
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 成本習性
第二節 成本僵固性特性
第三節 成本僵固性與產能、景氣間之關聯
第四節 品牌與成本間之關聯
第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究架構
第二節 研究假說之建立
第三節 研究模型與變數之衡量
第四節 研究期間與樣本選取
第五節 統計分析方法
第四章 實證結果與分析
第一節 敘述性統計與相關分析
第二節 實證結果
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 研究結果
第二節 研究限制
第三節 研究建議
參考文獻
著作權聲明

一、中文文獻：

戎良琦，1986，統計方法在成本習性分析上之應用研究，國立政治大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
李岳霖，2008，品牌與企業價值之探討-以筆記型電腦及其相關產業為例，東吳大學會計學系碩士論文。
林旻毅，2004，銷管費用僵固性之額外證據，天主教輔仁大學會計學系碩士論文。
林政盈，2008，品牌價值與企業價值關聯性之探討-以我國電腦及週邊設備類產業為例，東吳大學會計學系碩士論文。
林秉翰，2008，前期銷貨收入變動對成本習性之影響-以台灣公司為例，國立成功大學會計學研究所論文。
張玫絹，2004，品牌績效評估-以筆記型電腦產品為例，國立中正大學會計與資訊科技研究所碩士論文。
郭冠汝，2007，產品多角化與產能利用率對成本習性之影響：成本黏滯性之檢測。國立中正大學會計與資訊科技研究所碩士論文。
黃恆獎，2004，行銷管理，台北市：華泰文化出版。
楊昌智，2005，銷管費用僵固性之個案研究-以國內買賣業為例，天主教輔仁大學會計學系在職專班論文。
曾淑玲，2005，營業成本、銷管費用之成本習性研究-以某筆記型電腦公司為例，天主教輔仁大學會計學系在職專班論文。
曾聯洲，2003，銷管費用僵固性之研究，國立政治大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
董燕昭，2008，品牌資產形成因素之研究，逄甲大學會計學系碩士班碩士論文。


二、英文文獻

Aaker David A(1991), Managing Brand Equity, New York, The Free Press.
Aaker David A(1992), “The Value of Brand Equity”,Journal of Business Strategy, 13, No4, pp27-32.
Anderson, M. C., Rajiv D. Banker, T. L. Chen, and S. Janakiraman. 2001. Drivers of Stickiness in the Cost of Sales at Service Firms. Working paper, University of Texas at Dallas.
Anderson, M. C., Rajiv D. Banker, and S. N. Janakiraman. 2003. Are Selling, General, and Administrative Cost “Sticky”? Journal of Accounting Research 41(March):47-63
Balakrishnan, R and Naomi Soderstrom. 2006. “Capacity Utilization and Unit Variable Cost: Evidence from California Hospitals”. Working paper. The University of Iowa and University of Colorade.
Balakrishnan, R., M. Peterson, and N. Soderstrom. 2003. Does Capacity Utilization Affect the “Stickiness” of Cost? Working paper, University of Iowa and University of Colorado at Denver.
Balakrishnan, R., M. Peterson, and N. Soderstrom. 2004. Does Capacity Utilization Affect the “Stickiness” of Cost? Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance. 19(3):283-299.
Banker, R. D., M. Ciftci, and R. Mashruwala (May 2006). “The Effect of Prior-Period Changes on Cost Behavior” Unpublished Working Paper.
Charles T. Horngren, George Foster, Srikant M. Datar, Madhav Rajan, Chris Ittner. 2009. Cost Accounting 13/e. Prentice Hall. P.56-60.
Chen, E., and W. Dixon. 1972.“Estimates of parameters of a censored regression sample.”Journal of the American Statistical Association 67 (September): 664-671.
Chernatony, L.D. and McWilliam, G.(1989).“Branding Terminology The Real Debate,”Marketing Intelligence and Planning, July/August, pp.29-32.
Cobb-Walgren, Cathy J., Cynthia A. Ruble, and Naveen Donthu(1995), Brand equity, brand preference, and purchase intent. Journal of Advertising, Vol.24(11):25-40.
Cooper, R., and R. Kaplan. 1998. The Design of Cost Management System: Text, Cases, and Readings. (2nd Edition) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gibson, Stanley.1998. X/open: first step. Computerworld, Framingham; Sep 19, 1988; Vol.22, Iss.38; pg.22,3pgs.
Kenneth Calleja, Michael Steliaros & Dylan C. Thomas. 2006. “A Note on Cost Stickiness: Some International Comparisons”. Management Accounting Research 17(2006):127-140
Lazere, C. 1995. Spotlight on SG&A. CFO 11(December):39-45
Lazere, C. 1996. Spotlight on SG&A. CFO 12(December):28-34
Leventhal, R.C.(1996),“Branding Strategy” Business Horizons, September / October: pp.17-23.
Mintz, S. L. 1994. Spotlight on SG&A. CFO 10(December):63-65.
Noreen, E. 1991. Conditions under which Activity-based Cost System Provide Relevant Costs. Journal of Management Accounting Research 3:159-168
Noreen, E. and N. Soderstrom. 1994. Are Overhead Costs Strictly Proportional to Activity? Evidence from Hospital Service Departments. Journal of Accounting and Economics 17(January):255-78
Noreen, E. and N. Soderstrom. 1997. The Accuracy of Proportional Cost Models: Evidence from Hospital Service Department. Review of Accounting Studies 2:89-114
Otavio Ribeiro de Medeiros and Patricia de Souza Costa. 2004. “Cost Stickiness in Barzilian Firms”. 4th USP Congress of Managerial Control and Accounting, held in Sao Paulo, Brazil. October, 2004.
Shannon W. Anderson and William N. Lanen. 2007. “Understanding Cost Management: What Can We Learn from the Evidence on “Sticky Costs?” ” Working paper. Rice University and University of Michigan.
Shannon W. Anderson, Clara Xiaoling Chen and S. Mark Young. 2005. “Sticky Costs as competitive Response: Evidence on Strategic Cost Management at Southwest Airlines” Working paper. Rice University and University of Southern California.
Subramaniam, C., and Marcia L. Weidenmier. 2003. Additional Evidence the Sticky Behavior of Costs. Working paper, Texas Christian University.
Shocker, A.D. and B. Weitz(1988),“A Perspective on Brand Equity Principles and Issues,”In: L. Leuthesser (ed), Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute, Report pp.88-104.


三、網站部份

公開資訊觀測站：http://newmops.twse.com.tw/
台灣工銀證劵公司(IBTS)：http://www.ibts.com.tw/
MoneyDJ理財網：http://www.moneydj.com/
Yahoo!奇摩股市：http://tw.stock.yahoo.com/