(3.236.118.225) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/17 09:51
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:陳思吟
研究生(外文):Szu-Yin Chen
論文名稱:傭船經紀人營運管理關鍵成功因素之分析
論文名稱(外文):An Analysis of Key Success Factors in Operation Management of Chartering Brokers
指導教授:林秀芬林秀芬引用關係鍾政棋鍾政棋引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsiu-Fen LinCheng-Chi Chung
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣海洋大學
系所名稱:航運管理學系
學門:運輸服務學門
學類:運輸管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
論文頁數:83
中文關鍵詞:航運市場傭船經紀人關鍵成功因素模糊德菲法模糊層級分析法
外文關鍵詞:Shipping marketChartering brokersKey Success FactorFuzzy Delphi MethodFuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:206
  • 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:0
全球航運市場競爭激烈,對於航運公司而言,傭船決策之制定相對重要。傭船實務上,主要透過傭船經紀人,協助船東或傭船人制定傭船決策。就經紀人受重視程度而言,相較於歐、美、日本與澳洲等傳統航運國家,我國船東與傭船人相對較低。因此於傭船市場中,如何提升顧客(船東或傭船人)對於經紀人重視係重要之研究課題。本文基於顧客導向觀點,針對貨櫃航運與散裝航運公司進行分析;且為了解顧客與經紀人對於經紀服務之重要性認知差異,亦針對船東/傭船人與傭船經紀人進行分群分析,以Saaty提出之BOCR模型應用於航運傭船經紀人構建研究基礎,以模糊德菲法(Fuzzy Delphi Method)與模糊層級分析法(Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process)探討經紀人營運管理之關鍵成功因素及其重要性。本文研究結果如下:
1.採用模糊德菲法(FDM)分析關鍵成功因素,整體評估結果顯示,就評估構面而言,以「效益面」最為關鍵;就評估準則而言,以「經紀人時效掌握」最為重要,其次較重要者依序為「傭船契約與條款」、「運價與付款條件」、「市場情報之分析」與「人才之培育成本」。
2.採用模糊層級分析法(FAHP)分析關鍵成功因素。整體評估果顯示,就整體而言,以「風險面」與「效益面」最為關鍵;就評估準則而言,以「交易時信用風險」、「經紀人能力經驗」、「傭船契約與條款」最為重要。
本文研究結果可作為經紀人改善顧客關係品質的方向,針對不同屬性之顧客時,可依其所重視的關鍵成功因素不同,量身打造客製化服務,以提升船東或傭船人對於傭船經紀人之重視程度。

Because of the increasing competition in global shipping market, it is important for shipping companies to make chartering decisions.In fact, it is chartering brokers who help owners and charterers to make chartering decisions. Previous researches show that, compared with Europe, America, Japan, Australia and other traditional maritime countries, Taiwanese shipowners and charterers show relative negligence in attention to brokers. Therefore, it is an important research issue that how to enhance the importance of chartering brokers between owners and charterers. Based on customer-oriented view and the cognitive differences, this paper focuses on chartering brokers and their customers, owners and charterers, to analyze the key success factorsby using Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) and Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP).
1.Using Fuzzy Delphi Method to analyze the importance of key success factors. Concerning the integral evaluation objectives, “Benefits” is valued the most.Concerning the integral evaluationcriteria, “Timing risks of brokers” is valued the most, followed by “Terms and conditions of charter parties”, “Freight rates or charter hires and terms of payment”, “Collection and analysis of market information” and “Professional training and education costs”.
2.Using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process to analyze the importance of key success factors. Concerning the integral evaluation objective,“Risks”and “Benefits”are valued the most.Concerning the integral criteria, “Credit risks of trading partners”,“Capabilities and experiences of chartering brokers” and “Terms and conditions of charter parties” are valued the most.
The results of this study can contribute to chartering brokers to improve the quality of customer relationship and offer customized solutions. Further, the KSF also can be a selection reference of chartering brokers for owners and charterers.

謝誌 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iii
目 錄 iv
表 目錄 vi
圖 目錄 vii
第一章緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究問題與目的 2
1.3 研究內容與方法 4
1.4 研究架構 5
1.5 研究流程 6
第二章文獻回顧與評析 8
2.1 經紀人相關文獻 8
2.1.1 各產業經紀人相關文獻 8
2.1.2 航運傭船經紀人相關文獻 9
2.2 關鍵成功因素相關文獻 10
2.3 研究方法相關文獻 12
2.3.1 模糊德菲法相關文獻 12
2.3.2 模糊層級分析法相關文獻 12
2.3.3 BOCR模型相關文獻 13
2.4 綜合評析 14
第三章航運市場現況分析 15
3.1 散裝傭船市場 15
3.1.1 船噸供給方面 15
3.1.2 貨源需求方面 17
3.2 貨櫃傭船市場 18
3.2.1 船噸供給方面 18
3.2.2 貨源需求方面 21
3.3 綜合討論 22


第四章研究方法與評估架構 23
4.1 模糊德菲法 23
4.2 模糊層級分析法 25
4.2.1 層級分析法 25
4.2.2 模糊層級分析法 30
4.3 分析架構與內涵 34
4.4 問卷評量表統計 38
第五章關鍵成功因素重要性分析 —模糊德菲法應用 41
5.1 整體評估 41
5.1.1 評估構面方面 41
5.1.2 評估準則方面 41
5.2 分群評估 43
5.2.1 依公司屬性區分 43
5.2.2 依不同身分區分 45
5.3 綜合討論 48
5.3.1 評估構面方面 48
5.3.2 評估準則方面 49
第六章關鍵成功因素重要性分析 —模糊層級分析法應用 52
6.1 整體評估 52
6.1.1 評估構面方面 52
6.1.2 評估準則方面 53
6.2 分群評估 55
6.2.1依公司屬性區分 55
6.2.2 依不同身分區分 58
6.3 綜合討論 61
6.3.1 評估構面方面 61
6.3.2 評估構面方面 63
第七章結論與建議 67
7.1 結論 67
7.2 建議 70
參考文獻 71

1.大前研一(1984),策略家的智慧,台北:長河出版社,譯者:黃宏義。
2.江治澔(2010),臺灣生技醫療產業發展策略之研究—以某電子醫療廠商為例,國立臺北大學會計學系碩士論文。
3.吳思華(1988),產業策略與企業研究,台北:中國經濟企業研究所。
4.汪岱蓉(2011),論時傭船契約協商階段主要約款之認知分析,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
5.林千郁(2003),台灣地區物流經營績效與關鍵成功因素之研究,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
6.林承逸(2008),散裝二手船購船決策關鍵影響因素與服務因素之分析,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
7.林香君(2008),論程傭船營運關鍵影響因素與方案組合之分析,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
8.美國行銷管理協會(2004),網址:http://www.marketingpower.com,12月,擷取日期:2011年10月13日。
9.黃莉雅(2007),運用模糊理論建立品牌權益衡量方法─以液晶電視產業為例,國立臺南大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
10.張嘉珮(2008),論時傭船營運關鍵影響因素與傭船方案組合之分析,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
11.陳怡錡(2009),中小企業產業群聚網站之評估模式研究,國立臺北科技商業自動化與管理研究所碩士論文。
12.陳欣怡(2009),託運人異質選擇行為影響因素之研究,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
13.黃鈺堯(2010),以Fuzzy Delphi與DEMATEL應用於散裝航運論時傭船營運關鍵影響因素之認之分析,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
14.許維庭(2011),國家層級永續營建評估指標建立之研究,國立中央大學土木工程學系博士論文。
15.葉怡慧(2011),城市行銷重要因素之研究—以基隆市為例,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
16.葉淑鈞(2011),論程傭船契約協商階段主要約款之認知分析,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理研究所碩士論文。
17.曾曉瑜(2006),阿里山森林鐵路民營化再生方案之評估,國立成功大學交通管理研究所碩士論文。
18.蔡博凱(2008),應用模糊層級分析法於國小數學教科書評選指標之權重建立,國立臺中教育大學數學教育學系碩士論文。
19.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989a),層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(上),中國統計學報,第二十七卷第六期,頁13707-13724。
20.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989b),層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(下),中國統計學報,第二十七卷第七期,頁13767-13870。
21.鍾欣儒(2007),臺北縣公立高級中等學校公辦民營經營型態評估研究,國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
22.龔惠茹(2009),應用模糊層級分析於銀行授信因素權重分析—以電動車產業授信案件為例,國立台灣師範工業教育學系碩士論文。
23.Anderson, H. E. (2000), “Shipbrokers’ Authority and Ability to Bind Principal: At the Juncture of Chartering and Agency,” Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, Vol. 31,No. 1,pp.89-99.
24.Ansoff, I. H. (1984), Implanting Strategic Management, UK: Prentice Hall International Ltd. p. xvi.
25.Anthony, R. N. and Dearden, J. (1998), “Management Control Systems: Text and Cases, Homewood: Irwin, Illinois.
26.Auh, S. (2005), “The Effects of Soft and Hard Service Attributes on Loyalty: the Mediating Role of Trust,” Journal of Service Marketing, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 81-92.
27.Azizi, M. (2005), “Using ANP and BOCR Structure for Location Analysis of Plywood and Veneer Industry Plants, the Case of Iran,” Journal of the Institute of Wood Science, Vol. 17, No.1, pp. 24-33.
28.Banar, K., Kose, B. M., Ozkan, A., and Acar, l. P. (2007), “Choosing a Municipal Landfill Site by Analytic Network Process,” Environmental Geology,Vol. 52, No.4, pp. 747-751.
29.Bamberger, G. (1989), “Developing Competitive Advantage in Small and Medium size Firms,” Long Range Planning, Vol. 22, No. 5, pp. 80-82.
30.Cheng, J. H., Chen, S. S., and Chung, Y. W. (2008), “A Study of Constructing Fourth Party Logistics’ Selection Criteria from Supply Chain Integration and Information Technology Perspectives- An Application of Fuzzy MCDM,” Electronic Commerce Studies, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 401-424.
31.Chang, D. Y. (1992), Extent Analysis and Synthetic Decision, Singapore: World Scientific.
32.Chang, D. Y. (1996), “Applications of the Extent Analysis Method on Fuzzy AHP,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 95, No. 3, pp. 649-655.
33.Chen, S. H. and Hsieh, C. H. (2000), “Representation, Ranking, Distance, and Similarity of L-R Type Fuzzy Number and Application,” Australian Journal of Intelligent Processing System, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 217-229.
34.Clarkson (2012), “Shipping Review Database,” Clarkson Research Services, Spring.
35.Clauretie, T. M. and Daneshvary, N. (2008) “Principal-Agent Conflict and Broker Effort Near Listing Contract Expiration: The Case of Residential Properties,” The journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Vol. 37. No, 2. pp.147-161.
36.Csutora, R. and Buckley, J. J. (1965), “Fuzzy Hierarchical Analysis: the Lambda-Max Method,”Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 181-195.
37.Daniel, R.D. (1961), “Management Information Crisis,” Harvard Business Review, September, pp. 111-121.
38.Erodogmus, S., Kapanoglu, M., and Koc, E. (2005), “Evaluating High-tech Alternatives by Using Analytic Network Process with BOCR and multiactors,” Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 28, Iss. 4, pp. 391-399.
39.Fiotakis, D. (2005), “The Impact of Information Technology upon the Shipbroking Profession,” Tulane Maritime Law Journal, Vol. 29, Summer,pp. 237-247.
40.Hofer, C. W. and Schendel, D. E. (1978), Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts, Minnesota: West Publishing, pp. 75-76.
41.Ishikawa, A., Amagasa, M., Shiga, T., Tomizawa, G., Tatsuta, R., and Mieno, H. (1993), “The Max-min Delphi Method and Fuzzy Delphi Method via Fuzzy Integration,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 55, Iss. 3, pp. 241-253.
42.Kohli A. K. and Jaworski B. J. (1990), “Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 1-18.
43.Kuo, H.P. and Tsai, Y.C. (2009) “The Relationships between Service Attributes and Behavioral Intentions for the Real Estate Brokerage,” The Business Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 272-280.
44.Lodwick, M. W. (1998), “Shipbrokers’ Liability: An American Overview,” Tulane Maritime Law Journal, Vol. 23, Winter, pp. 45-60.
45.Mass, P. (2010), “How Insurance Brokers Create Value - A Functional Approach,” Risk Management and Insurance Review, Vol.13, Spring, pp. 1-10.
46.Manoliadis, O. G., Pantouvakis, J. P., and Christodoulou, S. E. (2009), “Improving Carriers Agree, or Not?” Transportation Research Part E, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 62-72.
47.Murray, T. J., Pipino, L. L. and Gigch, J. P. (1985), “A Pilot Study of Fuzzy Set Modification of Delphi,” Human Systems Management, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 76-80.
48.Rockart, J. F. (1979), “Chief Executive Define Their Own Data Needs,” Harvard Business Review, May, pp. 81-93.
49.Saaty, T. L. (1971), “A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structural,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 274-281.
50.Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill: New York.
51.Saaty, T. L., (1990), “Multi-criteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process,” AHP Series, Vol. 32, No. 7, pp.47-52.
52.Saaty, T. L., (1999), “Fundamentals of the Analytic Network Process,” International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (ISAHP), August 12-14, Kobe, Japan, pp. 48-63.
53.Saaty, T. L. (2008), “Synthesis of Complex Criteria Decision Making: A Case towards a Consensus Agreement for a Middle East Conflict Resolution,” Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 363-385.
54.Saaty, T. L. (2010), “The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Measurement Processes: The Measurement of Intangibles Decision Making under Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks,” Handbook of Multicriteria Analysis Applied Optimization, Vol. 103, Part 2, pp. 91-166.
55.Strandenes, S. P. (2000), “The Shipbroking Function and Market Efficiency,” International Journal of Management Education, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 17-26.
56.Tillett, B. B. (1989), Authority Control in the Online Environment, New York: Haworth Press.
57.Thompson, A. and Strickland, A. J. (1998), Strategic Management Concept and Cases, New York: McGraw Hill.
58.Tvedt, J. (1997), Shipbroker,SNF Working Paper No. 23, Bergen.
59.Tvedt, J. (2003),“A New Perspective on Price Dynamics of the Dry Bulk Market,” Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 221-230.
60.UNCTAD (2011), Review of Maritime Transportation, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations, UNCTAD/RMT, New York and Geneva.
61.Wan, K. and Levary R. R. (1995), “A Linear-programming-based Price for Negotiation Procedure for Contracting Shipping Companies,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 173-186.
62.Yinger, J. (1981), “A Search Model of Real Estate Broker Behavior,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 591-605.

連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top