跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.235.120.150) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/03 04:36
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:李瑾葳
論文名稱:會計師創業、社會網絡與角色認同關聯性之研究
論文名稱(外文):The Relationships among Certified Public Accountant Entrepreneurs, Social Network, and Role Identity
指導教授:林玉娟林玉娟引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:事業經營系
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:2015
畢業學年度:103
語文別:中文
論文頁數:119
中文關鍵詞:會計師創業社會網絡角色衝突角色認同
外文關鍵詞:accountantstarting a businesssocial networkrole conflictrole identity
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:7
  • 點閱點閱:259
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:44
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
摘要
台灣會計師產業以單獨執業事務所及中小型規模居多,新創會計師於創業初期須面對規模小及正當性的質疑,因此,如何透過社會網絡關係來拓展業務,對許多創業會計師是一項重要議題,本文先期對31位執前會計師實施探索性問卷調查結果亦得到證實。其次,會計師專業規範是謹慎保守,與創業者的積極冒險,此兩個角色可能產生衝突,創業會計師如何在創業歷程中同時扮演此兩種角色?如何解決角色衝突?在面對問題或關鍵事件時如何轉換角色與角色認同?以及社會網絡對創業歷程及對角色認同的關連性為何?均是本文欲探究的主題。
本文透過訪談法,選取北、中、南三區共八位執業三年以上的會計師進行深度訪談。研究結果歸納出四項重要發現:一、創業初期運用強連帶網絡關係可以降低專業及正當性的質疑;二、積極參與非專業性社團的社交活動,無助於創業初期業務的拓展;三、會計師生活經驗與創業歷程的相互交疊,形成創業者與會計師的自我概念,即角色的意義,當創業者與會計師二個角色衝突時,會透過自我察覺選擇重要且具意義的角色扮演,進而對所扮演的角色產生認同;四、受訪會計師均認為會計師的角色才是根本,在會計師角色認同下,所採取的創業與建構社會網絡的行動,可以保護自己,避免訴訟糾紛,並且符合社會期待下的會計師角色。

Abstract

Accounting companies in Taiwan are mostly sole proprietorship certified public accountant (CPA) firms and small and medium-sized. When establishing their businesses, accountants often encounter doubts from others regarding professionalism (judgments made based on small firm size) and legitimacy. Therefore, means of growing accounting businesses through social networks is of great interest for many entrepreneurial accountants. We adopted an exploratory research method to survey 31 accountants, and conducted analysis to validate the results. Typically, the professional attitude of accountants is cautious and conservative, whereas entrepreneurs should be an active risk-taker. Nevertheless, these two roles may conflict with each other. In this study, we explored the following topics. (1) How do accountants cope with serving simultaneously as an accountant and entrepreneur during the initial entrepreneurial stage? (2) How do accountants mitigate the effects of role conflicts? (3) How do accountants switch between the roles and identify themselves with a particular role when facing problems and key events? (4) What is the relationship between social network use and role identity during the initial entrepreneurial stage?
In this study, we conducted in-depth interviews with eight accountants from northern, central, and southern Taiwan, each of whom has more than 3 years of working experience in the field. The results revealed four main findings. (1) Capitalizing on a strong tie network relationship during the initial entrepreneurial stage could reduce doubts regarding professionalism and legitimacy. (2) Participating in social activities of nonprofessional groups does not facilitate the expansion of newly established businesses. (3) Accountants’ life experience overlaps with their entrepreneurial process, forming self-concepts (i.e., meaning of their role) about being both an entrepreneur and accountant. When the entrepreneur and accountant roles conflict, the accountant perceives, selects, and ultimately plays the more crucial role, and thus eventually identifies with that role. (4) All of the interviewees agreed that being an accountant is more fundamental than being an entrepreneur. By identifying with their role as an account, accountants could protect themselves, avoid litigation, and fulfill social expectation when starting a business and constructing a social network.

Keywords: accountant, starting a business, social network, role conflict,
role identity

目錄

謝詞 I
中文摘要 II
英文摘要 III
目錄 V
表次 VII
圖次 VIII
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與問題 4
第三節 研究流程 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 執業會計師及會計師事務所產業發展概況 7
第二節 創業 17
第三節 社會網絡 27
第四節 角色認同 38
第五節 研究架構 41
第三章 研究方法 43
第一節 質性研究 43
第二節 訪談法 48
第三節 研究對象 50
第四節 訪談大綱 52
第四章 研究結果分析 54
第一節 創業 55
第二節 社會網絡 69
第三節 角色認同 84
第五章 結論與建議 95
第一節 討論 95
第二節 結論 99
第三節 建議 105
第四節 研究限制與未來研究方向 106
參考文獻 107
一、中文部份 107
二、英文部份 111



表次

表2-1-1 2002 - 2013年度會計師事務所家數-以組織型態分類 10
表2-1-2 會計師事務所家數 ─ 按開業時間分類 12
表2-1-3 會計師廢止執業登記表 12
表2-1-4 會計師事務所全年業務收入 ─ 以項目別分類 14
表2-1-5 會計師產業相關研究 16
表2-2-1 創業研究實證 25
表2-3-1 社會網絡與創業實證研究 37
表3-1-1 質性研究的特徵 45
表3-2-1 質性研究訪談類型 49
表3-3-1 訪談記錄編碼 51
表3-3-2 受訪者基本資料及訪談日期與時間 51
表3-4-1 訪談大綱 52
表3-4-1 訪談大綱(續) 53
表4-2-1 執前會計師社會網絡與創業關聯性之結果統計表 70
表4-3-1 各受訪者產生角色衝突的情形 93
表5-2-1 受訪者創業歷程的社會網絡發展 101

圖次

圖1-3-1 研究流程圖 6
圖2-5-1 研究理論架構 42
圖3-1-1 質性研究之過程 46
圖4-1-1 以受訪者關鍵事件推演出的動態創業歷程 67
圖5-2-1 會計師創業、社會網絡與角色認同之關聯 103




參考文獻
一、中文部份
尤隨樺、張武鈞(2014)。社會網絡特性與創新績效之關係:網絡規模與網絡結構之影響。會計評論,58,101-132。
方世榮、方世杰、楊舒蜜、黃識銘(2011)。多層級網絡結構特性對探索型與應用型創新之影響。中山管理評論,19(3),743-781。
方世榮、張文賢、林正智(2008)。中小企業跨層次社會網絡與績效之關係。中山管理評論,16(1),83-118。
方世榮、黃恆獎、江季芸(2005)。產業網絡鑲崁與網絡動態性演化。關係管理研究,1,43-84。
江烘貴、蔡志豪(2011)。創業歷程的鑲嵌效果:社群中的結構理論觀點。創業管理研究,3(4),59-72。
余伯泉、李茂興(譯)(1999)。社會心理學(原作者:Elliot Aronson、Timothy D. Wilson, & Robin M. Akert )。臺北市:弘智文化。
巫立宇(2001)。高科技新創企業合作網絡模式之研究(未出版博士論文)。國立政治大學,台北。
李宛玲(2008)。自我認同、角色認同、組織認同與工作績效關聯性之研究(未出版碩士論文)。銘傳大學,台北。
金融監督管理委員會(2015)。統計資訊【會計師事務所服務業調查報告】。取自http://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=136&parentpath=0,4
李政、趙都敏(2007)。經濟學中的創業研究︰一個歷史性的回顧。創業管理研究,2(1),89-110。
周海娟、郭盛哲、黃信洋(譯)(2013)。社會心理學:歐洲的觀點(原作者:Miles Hewstone、Wolfgang Stroeb, & Klaus Jonas)。臺北市:學富文化。
林子銘、蕭裕中、黃于玲(2013)。台灣外派中國女性主管的心理資本與社會資本。中山管理評論,21(3),625-660。
林坤賢、涂敏芬、洪世章(2006)。創業的網絡模式分析。科技管理學刊,11,(3),31-52。
林家五、黃國隆、鄭伯壎(2004)。從認同到開創:創業家的動態釋意歷程。中山管理評論,12(2),337-397。
林韶怡(2011)。擁抱創業者的生活世界:現象學取向下的創業研究。創業管理研究,6(4),35-60。
邵秀玲(2005)。以社會資本觀點探討中階主管之事業生涯成功與工作績效(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中山大學,高雄。
紐文英(2014)。質性研究方法與論文寫作。臺北市:雙葉書廊有限公司。
翁順裕(2010)。從網絡的結構分析探討「技術位置」與「技術角色」-以保險商業方法專利為例。管理學報,27(2),97-122。
張文龍、黃文谷、陳思婷(2010)。創業家人力資本、創業環境與創業績效關係之研究。創業管理研究,5(1),1-32。
張苙雲(1999)。網絡台灣-企業的人情關係與經濟理性。臺北市:遠流出版有限公司。
連勇智、方至民、鍾招正(2009)。創業研究與家族企業:回顧與展望。組織與管理,2(2),51-76。
郭明智(2012)。人格特質、創業環境與社會資本對創業績效之關係研究─以台灣之中小企業及海外台商企業負責人為例(未出版之碩士論文) 。國立成功大學,台南。
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質性研究。臺北市:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。陳志成(2005)。從社會學的『角色理論』論戲劇演員的角色觀點。網路社
會學通訊期刊,46。
陳家聲、戴士嫻(2007)。創業家社會網絡行為之質性研究。創業管理研究,2(5),1-24。
陳燕錫、林昭伶、傅鍾仁(2008)。價格管制解除、市場佔有率與財務績效:以合夥型會計師事務所為例。商管科技季刊,9(2),169-196。
陳燕錫、陳瓊燕(2014)。會計師事務所與管理顧問公司聯盟之經營績效探討。會計評論,59,73-105。
陳燕錫、黃媺婷、王雯儀(2010)。記帳士法通過後對會計師事務所業務之影響。台灣管理學刊,10(1),51-78。
陳燕錫、黃媺婷、許智順(2011)。市場區隔下:會計師事務所經營績效決定因素探討。會計學報,4(1),51-94。
湯淑貞(1991)。管理心理學。台北:三民出版社。
黃寶棟(2006)。人格特質、創業動機、創業策略與創業績效之關係研究─以台灣區中小企業創業家為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立成功大學,台南。
會計師法(2015年2月4日)。
鄔榮霖、王思峰、徐光達(2009)。山不轉路轉:創業家心智模式改變與企業的轉折歷程。創業管理研究,4(1),1-31。
劉常勇、莊立民、李信興(2008)。創業動態追蹤研究之理論、方法與展望。創業管理研究,3(1),1-27。
劉常勇、謝如梅(2006)。創業管理研究之回顧與展望:理論與模式探討。創業管理研究,1(1),1-44。
經濟部中小企業處(2015)。統計與出版品【中小企業相關統計】。取自http://www.moeasmea.gov.tw/lp.asp?ctNode=220&CtUnit=140&BaseDSD=7&mp=1
臺灣證券交易所(2015)。臺灣資本市場概況-歡迎外資來台投資。取自http://www.twse.com.tw/ch/investor/foreign_invest/TCMI_CH_1501.pdf
潘淑滿(2003)。質性研究—理論與應用。臺北市:心理出版社。
蔡文川(2009)。自我身份認同與生活環境的關係。中國地理學會會刊,42,63-81。
蔡信夫、林惠雪(2014)。審計學原理。台北:新陸書局。
蔡敦浩、林韶怡(2013)。創業教育的教學模式:典範差異與現況反思。創業管理研究,8(2),1-18。
蔡敦浩、施進忠、利尚仁(2010)。敘說創業故事:覺察、學習與再詮釋。組織與管理,3(2),67-91。
蔡敦浩、劉育忠(2011)。邁向創業研究的多元主義:創業研究的新興視角與方法。創業管理研究,6(4),1-12。
蔡舒安、蔡淑梨(2013)。產業環境影響台灣紡織產業創業家創業歷程中隨創力展現之研究:以鴻儒公司為例。創業管理研究,8(3),1-24。
謝如梅、劉常勇(2009)。創新機會辨識:創業警覺能力、先前知識與資訊獲取之關聯性研究。組織與管理,2(2),77-108。
羅宗敏、王俊人、許雄傑(2007)。創業者人格特質對創業績效影響之研究:關係網絡之中介效果。創業管理研究,2(4),57-88。
羅家德(2010)。社會網路分析講義(第二版)。北京:社會科學文獻。
羅家德、朱慶忠(2004)。人際網絡結構因素對工作滿足之影響。中山管理評論,12(4),795-823。

二、英文部份
Aldrich, H., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation, Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645-670.
Ardichvili, A., Cardozo, R., & Ray, S. (2003). A theory of entrepreneurial
opportunity identification and development, Journal of Business Venturing,
18(1), 105-123.
Aydogan, N. (2003). Individual social capital and access to venture capital: Case of indian IT regions, Submitted to meteor for the small scale research grantcompetition.
Bagger, J., Li, A., & Gutek, B. A. (2008). How much do you value your family and does it matter? The joint effects of family identity salience, family-interference-with-work, and gender. Human Relations, 61(2), 187-211.
Bann, C. L. (2009). An Innovative view of the entrepreneur through explaoration of the Lived Experience of the entrepreneur in startup of the business, Journal of Business & Economic Studies, 15(2), 62-82.
Baron, R., & Henry, R. (2006). The role of expert performance in entrepreneurship: How entrepreneurs acquire the capacity to excel. Conference proceedings of the 26th Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Bloomington, Indiana (USA), June: 8-10.
Barnes, J. A. (1954). Class and committees in a Norwegian island parish. Human Relations, 7(1), 39-58.
Baum, J. (1996). Organizational ecology, in Clegg, S., Hardy, C., & Nord, S. (eds.), Handbook of Organization Studies, London: Sage.
Benjamin, G., & Philip, L. (1986). A behavioral model of entrepreneurial supply. Journal of Small Business Management, 45-53.
Bernard, H. R. (2006). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (5th ed.). Lanham, MD: Altamira Press.
Biggs, A., & Brough, P. (2005). Investigating the moderating influences of gender upon role salience and work-family conflict. Equal Opportunities International, 24, 30-45.
Bill, F., Jansson, A., & Olaison, L. (2010). The spectacle of entrepreneurship: Aduality of flamboyance and activity in F. Bill & B. Bjerk and A. W. Johansson (Eds.),(De) Mobilizing the Entrepreneurship Discourse: Exploraing Entrepreneurial Thinking and Action, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar: 158-175.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Borgatti, S., & Foster, P. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991-1013.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of cap ital. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, 1st, New York: Greenwood Press.
Brush, C. G., Greene, P. G., & Hart, M. M. (2001). From initial idea to unique advantage: The entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1): 64-78.
Burt, R. S. (1982). Toward a Structure Theory of Action:Network Models of Social Structure. New York: Academic.
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior 22, 345-423.
Busenitz, L. W., & Arthurs, J. D. (2007). Cognition and capabilities in entrepreneurial ventures. In J. R. Baum, M. Frese, & R. Baron (Eds.), The psychology of entrepreneurship, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 309-330.
Busenitz, L. W., & Lau, C. M., (1996). A cross-cultural cognitive model of newventure creation, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 20(4), 25-39.
Cantillon, R. (1755). Essai sur la nature du commerce en general. London:Macmillan.
Cheek, J. (2008). Foucauldian discourse analysis. In L. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 356-358). Thousand Oaks, CA: sage.
Chreim, S., Williams, B. E., & Hinings, C. R. (2007). Interlevel influences on the
reconstruction of professional role identity. Academy of Management
Journal, 50(6), 1515-1539.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital, American Journal of Sociology, 94, (Supplement), 95-120.
Cooper, A. C., Gimeno-Gascon, F. J., & Woo, C. Y., (1994). Initial human and
financial capital as predictors of new venture performance. Journal of
Business Venturing. 9 (5), 371-395.
Cope, J. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship through phenomenological inquiry. International Small Business Journal, 23(2), 163-189.
Cope, J., & Watts, G. (2000). Learning by doing: An exploration of experience,incidents and reflection in entrepreneurial learning. International Journal Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 6, 104-124.
Duval, S., & Wicklund, R.A. (1972). A theory of objective self-awareness.
New York: Academic Press.
Erickson, B. H. (1988). The relational basis of attitudes, In Wellman, B. & Berkowitz, S. D. Social structures: A network approach, 99-121, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Fombrun, C. J. (1982). Strategies for network research in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 7(2), 280-291.
Gartner, W. B., Carter, N. M., & Hills, G. E. (2003). The language of opportunity. In C.Steyaert & D. Hjorth (Eds.), New movements in entrepreneurship (pp.103-124). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embededness. American Journal of Sociology , 91(3), 481- 510.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Greve,A., & Salaff, J. W. (2003). Social networks and entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 28(1), 1-22.
Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do inter-organizational networks come from ? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439-1493.
Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and Networks, Strategic Management Journal, 19, 293-317.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, weak, and latent ties and the impact of new media, The Information Society, 18(5), 385-401.
Hjorth, D. (2004). Creating space for play/invention--concepts of space and organizational entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 16(5), 413-432.
Hung, S.-C. (2004). Explaining the process of innovation: The dynamic reconciliation of action and structure, Human Relations, 57(11), 1479-1497.
Ibarra. H., & Andrews, S. B. (1993). Power, social influence and sense-making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 277–303.
Jack, S. L., & Anderson, A. R. (2002), The effects of embeddedness on the
entrepreneurial process, Journal of business venturing, 17, 467-487.
Johanson, J., & Mattsson, L. G. (1992). Network positions and strategic action - an analytical framework. In B. Axelsson and G. Easton (Eds.), Industrial
Networks: A New View of Reality, London: Routledge, 205-217.
Kenis, P. & Knoke, D. (2002). How organizational field networks shape
interorganizational tie-formation rates, Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 275-293.
Klein, K. J., Tosi, H., & Cannella, A. J. (1999). Multilevel theory building: Benefits, barriers, and new developments, Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 243-248.
Knight, F. (1921). Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. New York: Augustus Kelly.
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996). What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7(5), 502-518.
Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in
organizations. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Network and Organizations, (pp.216-239). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lancy, D. F. (1993). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to the major traditions. New York, NY: Longman.
Lamertz, K. (2002). The social construction of fairness: Social influence and sense making in organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2, 19-37.
Larson, A., & Starr, J. A. (1993). A network model of organization formation, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 17(2), 5-15.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lobel, S. A., & Clair, L. St. (1992). Effects of family responsibilities, gender, and career identity salience on performance outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5), 1057-1069.
Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Low, M.B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges, Journal of Management, 14 (2), 139-161.
Marsden, P. V.(1988). Homogeneity in confiding relations. Social Networks, 10, 57–76.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Marvel, M. R., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2007). Technology entrepreneur's human capital and its effects on innovation radicalness. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 31 (6), 807-828.
Maykut, P. S., & Morehouse, R. (2001). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practice guide. Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.
McCall, G, J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and Interactions: An Examination on Human Interactions in Everyday Life, New York: Free Press.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Mitchell, R. K., Busenitz, L., Lant, T., McDougall, P. P., Morse, E. A., & Smith, J. B. (2002). Toward a theory of entrepreneurial cognition: Rethinking the people side of entrepreneurship research, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 93-104.
Mitchell, J. C. (1969). The concept and use of social networks. In J. Clyde
Mitchell (Ed.), Social Network in Urban Situations. Manchester, England:
Manchester University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Parsons, T. (1951) . The Social system, New York: Free Press.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource-dependence Perspective. New York: Harper and Row.
Reagans. R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2),
240-267.
Reich, W. A. (2000). Identity structure, narrative accounts, and commitment to a
volunteer role. The Journal of Psychology, 134(4), 422-434.
Rindova, V., Barry, D., & Ketchen, D. J. (2009). Entrepreneuring as Emancipation, Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 477-491.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 150-163.
Robbins, S. P. (2005). Organizational Behavior,Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Rouse, W. B., and Morris, N. M. (1986), On Looking into the Black Box: Prospects and Limits in the Search for Mental Models, Psychological Bulletin, Vol.100, 349-363.
Siropolis, N. C. (1989). Small business management: A guide to etrepreneurship (7th ed.). Boston: Houghton Miffin.
Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217-226.
Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Steyaert, C. (2004). The prosaics of entrepreneurship. In D. Hjorth & C. Steyaert
(Eds.), Narrative and discursive approaches in entrepreneurship (pp. 8-21).
Chelthnham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Steyaert, C. (2007). Entrepreneuring as a conceptual attractor? A review of process theories in 20 years of entrepreneurship studies, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19(6), 453-477.
Steyaert, C., & Katz, J. (2004). Reclaiming the space of entrepreneurship in
society: geographical, discursive and social dimensions. Entrepreneurship &
Regional Development, 16, 179-196.
Stinchcombe, A. (1965). Social structure and organizations, in March, J. G. (ed.), Handbook of Organizations, Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 142-193.
Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity
theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 284-297.
Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P., & Wright, M., (2001). The focus of entrepreneurial
research: contextual and process issues, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 25(4), 57-81.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The Sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect, American Sociological Review, 61, 674-698.
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of cmbcddcdncss Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67.
Uzzi, B. (1999). Social relations and networks in the making of financial capital, American Sociological Review, 64, 481-505.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

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
1. 陳麗桂:〈天命與時命〉《哲學與文化》,第三十八卷第十一期,2011年,頁59-82。
2. 李瑞全:〈當代新儒家對禮治民主之批判〉《當代儒學研究》第十六期,2014年6月,頁1-36。
3. 李軍:〈魏晉南北朝儒學教育理論的復興與發展-劉晝《劉子》教育思想初探〉《孔孟學報》,1994年3月,頁153-181。
4. 王嘉慧:〈儒、道二化的文學思想家--劉勰學術思想歸屬研究〉《東吳中文線上學術論文》第四期,2013年,頁35-53。
5. 許朝陽:〈告子對比下的孟子「義」之可能義蘊〉《淡江中文學報》第二十八期,2013年,頁1-28。
6. 王叔岷:〈《劉子集證》續補〉《中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊40(上)》,1968年10月,頁155-214。
7. 方介:〈論劉晝的儒道之學〉《孔孟學報》,1988年9月,頁173-204。
8. 方介:〈《劉子‧正賞》篇與《文心‧知音》篇的比較〉《中華文化復興月刊》,1984年9月,頁62-67。
9. 蔡家和:〈中國哲學天道論者對於德福一致問題之解決方式〉《當代儒學研究》第一期,2007年,頁111-144。
10. 楊祖漢:〈從儒家哲學論教育之兩途〉《鵝湖學誌》第一百一十二期,1985年,頁1-8。
11. 黃信二:〈在儒學與宗教之間:論「以人象天」之哲學意涵〉《哲學與文化》,第三十五卷第五期,2008年5月,73-93頁。
12. 島森哲男著 張季琳譯:〈慎獨思想〉《中國文哲研究通訊》第十三卷第二期,2003年6月,頁191-207196。
13. 姚彥淇:〈荀子「制天命」說的形成及思想內蘊〉《先秦兩漢學術》第十四期,2010年,頁21-47。
14. 林遠澤:〈禮治與正名—論儒家對於政治正當性之倫常奠基的道德文法學構想〉《漢學研究》第三十一卷第一期,2013年3月,頁255-284。
15. 林啟屏:〈先秦儒學思想中的「君」、「臣」與「民」〉《政大中文學報》第十五期,2011年6月,頁143-168。
 
無相關點閱論文