跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.211.117.197) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/22 00:34
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

: 
twitterline
研究生:廖柏凱
研究生(外文):Bo-Kai Liao
論文名稱:結合階層衡量與超績效排序之財務績效評比模式
論文名稱(外文):Evaluating Financial Performance by Combination of Layer Measurement and Super-performance Ranking Model
指導教授:洪僖黛洪僖黛引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsi-Tai Hung
口試委員:葉俊賢唐惠欽高子傑
口試委員(外文):Jun-Hsien YehHui-Chin TangTzu-Chieh Kao
口試日期:2014-05-29
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:正修科技大學
系所名稱:工業工程與管理研究所
學門:工程學門
學類:工業工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:中文
論文頁數:91
中文關鍵詞:財務績效資料包絡分析法差額變數效率衡量模式超效率排序法階層衡量
外文關鍵詞:financial performancedata envelopment analysisslack-based measure of efficiencysuper-efficiency of rankinglayer measurement
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:229
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:13
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
在日趨複雜、高風險性、以及競爭激烈的環境下,企業營運績效之良窳乃是決定其能否永續發展的關鍵因素,而財務績效是用以反應企業營運狀況的重要指標,財務績效之優劣不僅代表企業經營能力的好壞,更能顯示出該企業在未來的發展與成長潛力。
本研究以30家電子產業上市公司為研究對象,以財務結構、償債能力、獲利能力、經營能力、現金流量管理、以及成長率等六類財務構面,共19項財務比率作為衡量財務績效之基礎;並應用資料包絡分析法衡量不同企業之財務績效,以探討不同企業之財務績效的優劣。本研究利用階層衡量結合差額變數效率衡量模式與超效率排序法提出適用於彙整與評比全部企業財務績效的多屬性決策資料包絡排序法,探討企業在產業中的優劣地位,提供管理者進行績效改善時企業資源分配之建議。在進行財務績效之衡量與排序後30家企業可區分為四個財務績效階層,屬於每個階層的企業再依據超績效值進一步決定其排序,最後得到30家企業之財務總合績效的排名順序。此外,針對財務總合績效不佳的企業,本研究建議需改善之六類財務績效指標的目標值,以作為提升財務績效之參考。

The economic environment is characterized by rapid change, high risks, and ever-increasing competition. To survive and to prosper in such an environment, business organizations must continually improve their performance. Financial performance is an important indicator to represent an organization’s operations. The strength and weakness of financial performance can not only show the status of the organization’s operations, but also indicate its potential and growth in the future.
In this study, an example of 30 electronic companies that issued securities on the Taiwan stock market illustrates is selected. Six financial performance indicators, i.e. capital structure, liquidity, profitability, operating efficiency, cash flow management, and growth, including 19 financial ratios are used to represent the companies’ financial performances. Based on the concept of data envelopment analysis, this study applies layer measurement, the slack-based measure and super-efficiency ranking models to evaluate and ranking the financial performance of those 30 electronic companies. Firstly, the six financial performance indicators are measured for each firm. By applying the ranking procedure proposed in this study, the composite performance index of the six financial indicators is determined. And all firms are classified into four performance layers. Besides, the firms belonged to each layer are further ranked by their super-performance scores. The rankings of all firms are determined finally. For the firms with worse performances on lower performance layers, they can select adequate reference layer as their benchmark for improving their financial performances. The improvement targets of the six financial performance indicators could be determined by the firms on the reference set.

摘要..............................................I
Abstract........................................II
致謝............................................III
目錄.............................................IV
表目錄............................................V
圖目錄...........................................VI
第一章 緒論........................................1
第一節 研究動機.....................................1
第二節 研究目的.....................................3
第三節 研究對象.....................................5
第四節 研究流程.....................................5
第二章 文獻回顧.....................................8
第一節 財務績效衡量之相關研究 .........................8
第二節 資料包絡分析法之相關研究.......................11
第三節 資料包絡分析法之排序問題相關研究 .................14
第三章 研究方法....................................17
第一節 財務績效衡量構面..............................17
第二節 資料包絡分析法................................28
第三節 差額變數超績效排序模式 .........................36
第四章 實證分析與結果................................44
第一節 企業財務績效指標..............................44
第二節 企業財務總合績效之評估結果......................60
第五章 結論........................................74
參考文獻...........................................76

一、中文部分
1.中華信用評等公司,網址 http://www.taiwanratings.com/tw/。
2.公開資訊觀測站,網址 http://newmops.tse.com.tw/。
3.天下雜誌網站,網址 http://www.cw.com.tw/。
4.台灣證券交易所,網址 http://www.tse.com.tw/ch/。
5.美國標準普爾公司,網址 http://www.standardandpoors.com/。
6.惠譽信用評等公司,網址 http://www.fitchratings.com.tw/zh-tw/。
7.穆迪投資服務公司,網址 http://www.moody.com/cust/default.asp。
8.天下雜誌第522期,「二○一三年二千大調查-隱形冠軍 出列!」,天下雜誌出版,台北,172-173頁(2013)。
9.林財源,「財務報表分析」,華泰文化事業公司,台北(1995)。
10.徐俊明,「財務管理:理論與實務」,雙葉書廊有限公司,台北(2005)。
11.財團法人金融聯合徵信中心,「中華民國台灣地區主要行業財務比率」,財團法人金融聯合徵信中心,台北(2005)。
12.陳順宇,「多變量分析」,華泰書局,台北(2005)。
13.萬哲鈺與高崇瑋,「財務報表分析-食物與應用」,華泰文化事業公司,台北(2003)。
14.吳娟娟,財務績效指標之重要性分析研究-以台灣化學工業上市公司為例,中原大學會計學系碩士論文(2002)。
15.李佳生,企業財務績效之分析與評比-以台灣地區最佳營運績效50強為例,正修科技大學工業工程與管理系碩士論文(2007)。
16.林世磬,以資料包絡分析法評估我國紡織業經營績效之研究-國內五十家上市公司之實證,實踐大學企業管理研究所碩士論文(2003)。
17.林俊成,財務導向為基礎之經營績效分析-以台灣地區上市上櫃航運類公司為例,國立海洋大學航運管理學系碩士論文(1999)。
18.陳佩瑄,ISO 9001:2000認證與財務績效間之關係-以製造業為例,中國文化大學會計研究所碩士論文(2007)。
19.陳昱志,以DEA模式建立銀行績效指標,國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文(1993)。
20.黃雅祺,應用資料包絡分析法及Logit計量模式探討企業財務危機預警,明新科技大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文(2006)。
21.溫福煥,財務績效評估模式建立之研究-以台灣地區電子業為例,淡江大學科學管理研究所碩士論文(1991)。
22.趙勃軒,以財務比率分析區別台灣地區上市電子公司經營績效,大同大學事業經營研究所在職專班碩士論文(2002)。
23.鄧文雋,財務績效評估模式之建立與應用-以台灣地區電子工業上市公司為例,正修科技大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文(2008)。
24.鄭俊杰,台灣地區上市電子業財務績效評估之研究,靜宜大學企業管理研究所碩士論文(2000)。
25.鄭雅鈴,高成長企業財務風險評估模式之建立與應用,正修科技大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文(2009)。
26.盧健忠,使用資料包絡分析及財務比率評估半導體與影像顯示業經營績效,國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理學系碩士論文(2005)。
27.謝雅君,結合資料包絡法與多變量分析法建立私立大學校院財務績效指標,實踐大學企業管理研究所碩士論文(2004)。
28.蘇芳乾,景氣變動對我國製造業財務比率之影響,國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文(2000)。

二、英文部分
1.Adler, N.,Friedman, L., and Sinuany-Stern, Z., Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context, European journal of Operational Research 140, pp.249-265 (2002).
2.Alirezaee, M.R. and Afsharian, M., A complete ranking of DMUs using restrictions in DEA models, Applied Mathematics and Computation 189, pp.1550-1559 (2007).
3.Alirezaee, M.R. and Afsharian, M., Model improvement for computational difficulties of DEA technique in the presence of special DMUs, Applied Mathematics and Computation 186, pp.1600-1611 (2007).
4.Andersen, p. and Petersen, N.C., A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis, Management Science 39, pp.1261-1264 (1993).
5.Bal, H., Örkcü, H.H., and Çelebioglu, S., Improving the discrimination power and weights dispersion in the data envelopment analysis, Computers and Operations Research 37, pp. 99-107 (2010).
6.Banker, R.D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W., Some models for estimating technical and scale efficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science 30, pp.1078-1092 (1984).
7.Belton, V. and Vickers, S.P., Demystifying DEA-a visual interactive approach based on multiple criteria analysis, Journal of the Operational Research Society 44, pp.883-896 (1993).
8.Bernstein, L.A. and Wild, J.J., Financial Statement analysis, Theory, Application & Interpretation, 6th ed., Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston (1998).
9.Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W., The non-Arcimedean CCR ratio for efficiency analysis: a rejoinder to Boyd and Färe, European journal of Operational Research 15, pp. 333-334 (1984).
10.Charnes, a., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E., Measuring efficiency of decision making units, European journal of Operational Research 2, pp.429-444 (1978).
11.Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., and Tone, k., Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-Solver Software, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (2000).
12.Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., and Tone, k., Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and its Uses with DEA-Solver Software and References, Springer, New York (2006).
13.Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., and Papayannakis, L., A multicriteria approach for evaluating the performance of industrial firms, Omega 20, pp.467-474 (1992).
14.Doyle, J. and Green, R., Data envelopment analysis and multiple decision making, 21, pp.713-715 (1993).
15.Doyle, J. and Green, R., Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: derivations, meanings and uses, Journal of the Operational Research Society 45, pp. 567-578 (1994).
16.Doyle, J., Multiattribute choice for the lazy decision maker: let the alternatives decide, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision process 62, pp. 87-100 (1995).
17.Du, J., Liang, L., and Zhu, J., A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis: A comment, European journal of Operational Research 204, pp. 694-697 (2010).
18.Friedman, L. and Sinuany-Stern, Z., Scaling units via the canonical correlation analysis in the DEA context, European journal of Operational Research 100, pp. 629-637 (1997).
19.Hajkowicz, S.A., McDonald, G.T., and Smith, P.N., An evaluation of multiple objective decision support weighting techniques in natural resources management, Journal of Environment Planning and Management 43, pp.505-518 (2000).
20.Halme, M. and Korhonen, P., Restricting weights in value efficiency analysis, European journal of Operational Research 126, pp.175-188 (2000).
21.Halme, M., Joro, T., Korhonen, P., Salo, S., and Wallenius, J., A value efficiency approach to incorporating preference information in data envelopment analysis, Management Science 45, pp.103-115 (1999).
22.Hibiki, N. and Sueyoshi, T., DEA sensitivity analysis by changing a reference set: Regional contribution to Japanese industrial development, Omega 27, pp.139-153 (1999).
23.Jahanshahloo, G.R., Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., Khanmohammadi, M., Kazemimanesh, M., and Rezaie V, Ranking of units by positive ideal DMU with common weights, Expert Systems with Applications 37, pp.7483-7488 (2010).
24.Jahanshahloo, G.R., Junior, H.V., Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., and Akbarian, D., A new DEA ranking system based on changing the reference set, European journal of Operational Research 181, pp. 331-337 (2007).
25.Kao, C. and Hung, H.T., Data envelopment analysis with common weights: the compromise solution approach, Journal of the Operational Research Society 56, pp.1196-1203 (2005).
26.Li, X. and Reeves, G.R., A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis, European journal of Operational Research 115, pp. 507-517 (1999).
27.Liu, F.F. and Peng, H.H., Ranking of units on the DEA frontier with common weights, Computers and Operations Research 35, pp. 1624-1637 (2008).
28.Lovell, C.A.K., Measuring the macroeconomic performance of the Taiwanese economy, International Journal of Production Economics 39, pp. 165-178 (1995).
29.Lovell, C.A.K., Pastor, J.T. and Turner, J.A., Measuring macroeconomic performance in the OECD: a comparison of European and non- European countries, European journal of Operational Research 87, pp. 507-518 (1995).
30.Pastor, J.T., How to discount environmental effects in DEA: an application to bank branches. Working paper NO. 011/94, Departamento De Estadística e Investigación Operativa, Universidad de Alicante, Spain (1994).
31.Retzlaff-Roberts, D.L., Relating discriminant analysis and DEA to one another, Computers and Operations Research 4, pp. 311-322 (1996).
32.Roll, T. and Golany, B., Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA, Omega 21, pp.99-109 (1993).
33.Roll, T., Cook, W.D., and Golany, B., Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis, IIE Transactions 23, pp. 2-9 (1991).
34.Sarkis, J., A comparative analysis of DEA as a discrete alternative multiple caiteria decision tool, European journal of Operational Research 123, pp. 543-557 (2000).
35.Serrano-Cinca, C., Fuertes-Callén, T., and Mar-Molinero, C., Measuring DEA efficiency in Internet companies, Decision Support Systems 38, pp.557-573 (2005).
36.Sinuany-Stern, Z. and Friedman, L., DEA and the discriminant analysis of ratios for ranking units, European journal of Operational Research 111, pp. 470-478 (1998).
37.Sinuany-Stern, Z., Mehrez, A. and Hadad, Y., An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units, International Transactions in Operational Research 7, pp. 109-124 (2000).
38.Sinuany-Stern, Z., Mehrez, A., and Barboy, A., Academic departments efficiency in DEA, Computers and Operations Research 21, pp.543-556 (1994).
39.Stewart, T.J., Relationships between data envelopment analysis and multicriteria decision analysis, Journal of the Operational Research Society 47, pp. 654-665 (1996).
40.Stewart, T.J.,A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice, Omega 20, pp. 569-586 (1992).
41.Sueyoshi, T., DEA-discriminant analysis in the view of goal programming, European journal of Operational Research 115, pp.564-582 (1999).
42.Sueyoshi, T., Extended DEA-discriminant analysis, European journal of Operational Research 131, pp. 324-351 (2001).
43.Tone, K., A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis, European journal of Operational Research 130, pp. 498-509 (2001).
44.Tone, K., Slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis, European journal of Operational Research 143, pp. 32-41 (2002).
45.Torgersen, A.M., Forsund, F.R., and Kittelsen, S.A.C., Slacks-adjusted efficiency measures and ranking of efficient units, The Journal of Productivity Analysis 7, pp.379-398 (1996).
46.Tsou, C. and Huang, D., On some methods for performance ranking and correspondence analysis in the DEA context, European journal of Operational Research 203, pp. 771-783 (2010).
47.Wang, Y. and Chin, K., Some alternative models for DEA cross-efficiency evalution, International Journal of Production Economics 128, pp. 332-338 (2010).
48.Wang, Y., Luo, Y., and Liang, L., Ranking decision making units by imposing a minimum weight restriction in the data envelopment analysis, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 223, pp. 469-484 (2009).
49.Zhu, J., Data envelopment analysis v.s. principal component analysis: An illustrative study of economic performance of Chinese cities, European journal of Operational Research 111, pp. 50-61 (1998).

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top