(3.210.184.142) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/12 02:57
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:方一展
研究生(外文):I-ChanFang
論文名稱:技術關聯性與購併績效之關係研究-以產權理論的觀點
論文名稱(外文):Technology Relatedness and M&A Performance:A Perspective of Property Rights
指導教授:方世杰方世杰引用關係
指導教授(外文):Shih-Chieh Fang
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系
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:2016
畢業學年度:104
語文別:英文
論文頁數:63
中文關鍵詞:產權理論技術關聯性市場績效吸收能力
外文關鍵詞:Property rights theoryTechnology relatednessMarket performanceAbsorptive capacity
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:84
  • 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
以產權理論的觀點,購併對公司的重要性是肯定的,但當企業界在積極進行購併
活動,以利快速取得外部關鍵的技術資源時,幾乎未想過技術購併可能也會帶來負面效果,因此技術關聯性對購併績效是否有所幫助為一個值得探討的實務問題,過去學者的研究結果相當分歧,亦缺乏系統性的研究。基此,本研究以產權理論來探討技術關聯性與購併績效之關係,並納入組織內部吸收能力的調節影響。
本研究以台灣上市櫃電子業為研究對象,用專利分類碼(IPC)做為衡量購併企業
之技術關聯程度指標。研究結果顯示,技術相似性與市場績效呈倒U型關係;技術互
補性與市場績效呈正相關;技術多元性與市場績效呈負相關。最後,組織吸收能力會正向強化技術關聯性與市場績效之關係,此現象可供企業界作為購併決策之參考依據。
According to the property rights theory, M&A are undoubtedly important for companies. As companies actively engage in M&A activities to rapidly acquire key external technological resources, they often ignore the facts that M&A may bring the negative effects to the companies. This arouses an issue about the relationships between technology relatedness and M&A performance. However, this issue remains controversy to date and there is no systematically research. Here, we use the property rights theory to find out the relationships between technology relatedness and M&A performance; furthermore, it has incorporated the moderator’s effect on organizations’ internal absorptive capacity.
This research uses SDC database to find out the M&A cases in Taiwan between 2005 and 2015, then uses International Patent Classification (IPC) as a measure of technology relatedness indicator. The research results indicated the following: an inverted U-shaped relationship exists between technology similarity and market performance; technology complementary, and market performance are
positively correlated; and technology diversity and market performance are negative correlated. Finally, an organization’s absorptive capacity positively affects the
relationship between technology relatedness and market performance. Thus, such a phenomenon can act as a reference for businesses in M&A decision making.
中文摘要 ........................................I
Abstract ......................................II
誌謝...........................................III
Chapter 1 Introduction ........................1
1.1 Research Background and Motivation.........1
1.2 Research Questions & Purpose...............3
1.3 Research Workflow..........................5
Chapter 2 Literature Review ...................7
2.1 Property Rights Theory.....................7
2.2 Technological Relatedness..................13
2.3 M&A Performance............................18
2.4 Research on Technological Relatedness and M&A Performance....................................20
2.5 Absorptive Capacity........................28
Chapter 3 Research Methods.....................30
3.1 Research Framework and Assumptions.........30
3.2 Definition and Measure of Variability......32
3.3 Data Sources and Study Sample..............35
3.4 Data Analysis..............................36
Chapter 4 Results and Analysis.................37
4.1 Descriptive Statistics.....................37
4.2 Related Analysis...........................38
4.3 Regression Model Analysis..................40
Chapter 5 Discussion and Conclusion............47
5.1 Discussion of Findings.....................47
5.2 Implications for Research..................50
5.3 Implications for Practice..................51
5.4 Conclusions and Suggestions................52
5.5 Limitations................................54
References.....................................55

1.Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. (2001). Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study. Strategic management journal, 22(3), 197-220.
2.Akben-Selcuk, E., & Altiok-Yilmaz, A. (2011). The impact of mergers and acquisitions on acquirer performance: evidence from Turkey. Business and Economics Journal, 22, 1-8.
3.Alam, P., & Brown, C. A. (2006). Disaggregated earnings and the prediction of ROE and stock prices: a case of the banking industry. Review of Accounting and Finance, 5(4), 443-463.
4.Alchian, A. A. (1969). Corporate management and property rights. Economic policy and the regulation of corporate securities, 337.
5.Anderson, T. L., & Hill, P. J. (1983). Privatizing the commons: An improvement? Southern Economic Journal, 438-450.
6.Arora, A., & Merges, R. P. (2004). Specialized supply firms, property rights and firm boundaries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(3), 451-475.
7.Asher, C. C., Mahoney, J. M., & Mahoney, J. T. (2005). Towards a property rights foundation for a stakeholder theory of the firm. Journal of Management & Governance, 9(1), 5-32.
8.Aulakh, P. S., Jiang, M. S., & Li, S. (2013). Licensee technological potential and exclusive rights in international licensing: A multilevel model. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(7), 699-718.
9.Bannert, V., & Tschirky, H. (2004). Integration planning for technology intensive acquisitions. R&D Management, 34(5), 481-494.
10.Blair, M. M. (2005). Closing the theory gap: How the economic theory of property rights can help bring ‘‘stakeholders’’ back into theories of the firm. Journal of Management and Governance, 9(1), 33-40.
11.Braun, J., & Pugatch, M. P. (2005). The changing face of the pharmaceutical industry and intellectual property rights. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 8(5), 599-623.
12.Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32(1), 69-87.
13.Bryer, L., & Simensky, M. (Eds.). (2002). Intellectual property assets in mergers and acquisitions (Vol. 12). John Wiley & Sons.
14.Caloghirou, Y., Kastelli, I., & Tsakanikas, A. (2004). Internal capabilities and external knowledge sources: complements or substitutes for innovative performance? technovation, 24(1), 29-39.
15.Capron, L., & Pistre, N. (2002). When do acquirers earn abnormal returns?.Strategic management journal, 23(9), 781-794.
16.Carson, S. J., & John, G. (2013). A theoretical and empirical investigation of property rights sharing in outsourced research, development, and engineering relationships. Strategic Management Journal, 34(9), 1065-1085.
17.Cassiman, B., Colombo, M. G., Garrone, P., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The impact of M&A on the R&D process: An empirical analysis of the role of technological-and market-relatedness. Research Policy, 34(2), 195-220.
18.Chalmers, O. G. (2000). Corporate management of intellectual property in Japan. International Journal of Technology Management, 19(1-2), 121-148.
19.Chang, J. R., Hung, M. W., & Tsai, F. T. (2005). Valuation of intellectual property: A real option approach. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(3), 339-356.
20.Chen, C. J. (2004). The effects of knowledge attribute, alliance characteristics, and absorptive capacity on knowledge transfer performance. R&D Management, 34(3), 311-321.
21.Chen, Y. S., Shih, C. Y., & Chang, C. H. (2012). The effects of related and unrelated technological diversification on innovation performance and corporate growth in the Taiwan's semiconductor industry. Scientometrics, 92(1), 117-134.
22.Chiu, Y. C., & Liaw, Y. C. (2009). Organizational slack: is more or less better? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 22(3), 321-342.
23.Cimoli, M., & Primi, A. (2008). Technology and intellectual property: A taxonomy of contemporary markets for knowledge and their implications for development (No. 2008/06). LEM Working Paper Series.
24.Cloodt, M., Hagedoorn, J., & Van Kranenburg, H. (2006). Mergers and acquisitions: their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries. Research policy, 35(5), 642-654.
25.Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. economica, 4(16), 386-405.
26.Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
27.Coase, R. H. (1998). The new institutional economics. The American Economic Review, 88(2), 72-74.
28.Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128-152.
29.Cybo-Ottone, A., & Murgia, M. (2000). Mergers and shareholder wealth in European banking. Journal of Banking & Finance, 24(6), 831-859.
30.Davis, L. (2008). Licensing Strategies of the New Intellectual Property Vendors. California Management Review, 50(2), 6-30.
31.De Alessi, L. (1983). Property rights, transaction costs, and X-efficiency an essay in economic theory. The American economic review, 73(1), 64-81.
32.Demsetz, H. (1967). Toward a theory of property rights. American Economic Review, 57(2), 347-359.
33.Dhakal, D., Kandil, M., & Sharma, S. C. (1993). Causality between the money supply and share prices: a VAR investigation. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 52-74.
34.Dodd, P., & Warner, J. B. (1983). On corporate governance: A study of proxy contests. Journal of financial Economics, 11(1), 401-438.
35.Erbisch, F. H., & Maredia, K. M. (2000). Intellectual property rights in agricultural biotechnology. Universities Press.
36.Escribano, A., Fosfuri, A., & Tribó, J. A. (2009). Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Research policy, 38(1), 96-105.
37.Fallah, M. H., & Lechler, T. G. (2008). Global innovation performance: Strategic challenges for multinational corporations. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 25(1), 58-74.
38.Fisher III, W. W., & Oberholzer-Gee, F. (2013). Strategic management of intellectual property. California management review, 55(4), 157-183.
39.Flignor, P., & Orozco, D. (2006). Intangible asset & intellectual property valuation: A multidisciplinary perspective. ipthought. com.
40.Foss, K., & Foss, N. J. (2002). Organizing economic experiments: property rights and firm organization. The Review of Austrian Economics, 15(4), 297-312.
41.Foss, K., & Foss, N. J. (2005). Resources and transaction costs: how property rights economics furthers the resource‐based view. Strategic Management Journal, 26(6), 541-553.
42.Furubotn, E. G., & Pejovich, S. (1972). Property rights and economic theory: A survey of recent literature. Journal of economic literature, 10(4), 1137-1162.
43.Gambardella, A., & Torrisi, S. (1998). Does technological convergence imply convergence in markets? Evidence from the electronics industry. Research policy, 27(5), 445-463.
44.García-Morales, V. J., Ruiz-Moreno, A., & Llorens-Montes, F. J. (2007). Effects of technology absorptive capacity and technology proactivity on organizational learning, innovation and performance: An empirical examination. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(4), 527-558.
45.Garcia-Vega, M. (2006). Does technological diversification promote innovation?: An empirical analysis for European firms. Research Policy, 35(2), 230-246.
46.Gerpott, T. J. (1995). Successful integration of R&D functions after acquisitions: An exploratory empirical study. R&D Management, 25(2), 161-178.
47.Ghosh, A. (2001). Does operating performance really improve following corporate acquisitions?. Journal of corporate finance, 7(2), 151-178.
48.Giuri, P., Hagedoorn, J., & Mariani, M. (2004). Technological diversification and strategic alliances. The economics and management of technological diversification. Routledge, London and New York, 116-151.
49.Gong, G., Louis, H., & Sun, A. X. (2008). Earnings management, lawsuits, and stock-for-stock acquirers’ market performance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 46(1), 62-77.
50.Graff, G. D., Rausser, G. C., & Small, A. A. (2003). Agricultural biotechnology's complementary intellectual assets. Review of economics and statistics, 85(2), 349-363.
51.Grandori, A. (2005). Neither stakeholder nor shareholder ‘theories’: How property right and contract theory can help in getting out of the dilemma. Journal of Management and Governance, 9(1), 41-46.
52.Granstrand, O., & Oskarsson, C. (1994). Technology diversification in “MUL-TECH corporations. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 41(4), 355-364.
53.Griffith, R., Redding, S., & Van Reenen, J. (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of economics and statistics, 86(4), 883-895.
54.Grimpe, C., & Hussinger, K. (2014). Resource complementarity and value capture in firm acquisitions: The role of intellectual property rights. Strategic Management Journal, 35(12), 1762-1780.
55.Hagedoorn, J., & Duysters, G. (2002). The effect of mergers and acquisitions on the technological performance of companies in a high-tech environment. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 14(1), 67-85.
56.Haro-Dominguez, M. C., Arias-Aranda, D., Llorens-Montes, F. J., & Moreno, A. R. (2007). The impact of absorptive capacity on technological acquisitions engineering consulting companies. Technovation, 27(8), 417-425.
57.Harrison, J. S., Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Ireland, R. D. (2001). Resource complementarity in business combinations: Extending the logic to organizational alliances. Journal of management, 27(6), 679-690.
58.Hart, O. (1995). Firms, contracts, and financial structure. Clarendon Press.
59.Hart, O., & Moore, J. (1990). Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm. Journal of political economy, 1119-1158.
60.Helfat, C. E. (1997). Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management Journal,18(5), 339-360.
61.Henisz, W. J., & Macher, J. T. (2004). Firm-and country-level trade-offs and contingencies in the evaluation of foreign investment: The semiconductor industry, 1994–2002. Organization Science, 15(5), 537-554.
62.Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., Ireland, R. D., & Harrison, J. S. (1991). Effects of acquisitions on R&D inputs and outputs. Academy of Management journal,34(3), 693-706.
63.Jo, G. S., Park, G., & Kang, J. (2016). Unravelling the link between technological M&A and innovation performance using the concept of relative absorptive capacity. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 24(1), 55-76.
64.Jones, G. R. (1983). Transaction costs, property rights, and organizational culture: An exchange perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 454-467.
65.Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Harvard Business Press.
66.Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of management journal, 45(6), 1183-1194.
67.Kim, J., & Mahoney, J. T. (2005). Property rights theory, transaction costs theory, and agency theory: an organizational economics approach to strategic management. Managerial and decision economics, 26(4), 223-242.
68.Kim, J., & Mahoney, J. T. (2002). Resource‐based and property rights perspectives on value creation: The case of oil field unitization. Managerial and Decision Economics, 23(4‐5), 225-245.
69.King, J. L., & Schimmelpfennig, D. (2005). Mergers, acquisitions, and stocks of agricultural biotechnology intellectual property.
70.King, D. R., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Kesner, I. (2008). Performance implications of firm resource interactions in the acquisition of R&D-intensive firms. Organization Science, 19(2), 327-340.
71.Klein, P. G., Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Pitelis, C. N. (2012). Who is in charge? A property rights perspective on stakeholder governance. Strategic Organization, 10(3), 304.
72.Kor, Y. Y., & Mahoney, J. T. (2005). How dynamics, management, and governance of resource deployments influence firm‐level performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), 489-496.
73.Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic management journal, 19(5), 461-477.
74.Leblebici, H. (2000). Allocation of rights and the organization of transactions: Elements of a generative approach to organizing. Journal of Management and Governance, 4(1-2), 149-168.
75.Makri, M., Hitt, M. A., & Lane, P. J. (2010). Complementary technologies, knowledge relatedness, and invention outcomes in high technology mergers and acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 602-628.
76.Martínez, J. I., Stöhr, B. S., & Quiroga, B. F. (2007). Family ownership and firm performance: evidence from public companies in Chile. Family Business Review, 20(2), 83-94.
77.Maury, B. (2006). Family ownership and firm performance: empirical evidence from western European corporations. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(2), 321-341.
78.Merrill, T. W., & Smith, H. E. (2001). What happened to property in law and economics? The Yale Law Journal, 111(2), 357-398.
79.Miyake, M., Mune, Y., & Himeno, K. (2004). Strategic Intellectual Property Portfolio Management: Technology Appraisal by Using the “Technology Heat Map. NRI Papers, Nomura Research Institute, (83).
80.Moeller, S. B., Schlingemann, F. P., & Stulz, R. M. (2004). Firm size and the gains from acquisitions. Journal of Financial Economics, 73(2), 201-228.
81.Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 77-91.
82.North, D. C. (1981). Structure and change in economic history. Norton.
83.Orsi, L., Ganzaroli, A., De Noni, I., & Marelli, F. (2015). Knowledge utilisation drivers in technological M&As. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(8), 877-894.
84.Oxley, J. E., & Sampson, R. C. (2004). The scope and governance of international R&D alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8‐9), 723-749.
85.Pisano, G. (2006). Profiting from innovation and the intellectual property revolution. Research policy, 35(8), 1122-1130.
86.Puranam, P., Singh, H., & Zollo, M. (2006). Organizing for innovation: Managing the coordination-autonomy dilemma in technology acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 263-280.
87.Quintana-García, C., & Benavides-Velasco, C. A. (2008). Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification. Research Policy, 37(3), 492-507.
88.Razgaitis, R. (2009). Valuation and Dealmaking of Technology-Based Intellectual Property: Principles, Methods and Tools. John Wiley & Sons.
89.Reburn, J. P., & Jackson, S. S. (2000). Enhancing performance through stock buybacks. Bank Accounting & Finance, 14(2), 31-31.
90.Rivera, K. G. (2000). Discovering new value in intellectual property. Harvard business review, 55.
91.Rothaermel, F. T., Hitt, M. A., & Jobe, L. A. (2006). Balancing vertical integration and strategic outsourcing: effects on product portfolio, product success, and firm performance. Strategic management journal, 27(11), 1033-1056.
92.Schildt, H. A., Maula, M. V., & Keil, T. (2005). Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 493-515.
93.Schimmelpfennig, D., & King, J. L. (2006). Mergers, acquisitions and flows of agbiotech intellectual property. International Trade and Policies for Genicically Modified products, 208.
94.Singh, S., & Ranchhod, A. (2004). Market orientation and customer satisfaction: Evidence from British machine tool industry. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(2), 135-144.
95.Smyth, S. J., & Gray, R. (2011). Intellectual property sharing agreements in gene technology: implications for research and commercialisation. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, 4(3), 179-190.
96.Song, M., Van Der Bij, H., & Weggeman, M. (2005). Determinants of the Level of Knowledge Application: A Knowledge‐Based and Information‐Processing Perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(5), 430-444.
97.Sople, V. V. (2014). Managing Intellectual Property the Strategic Imperative. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
98.Spinello, R. A. (2007). Intellectual property rights. Library hi tech, 25(1), 12-22.
99.Stock, G. N., Greis, N. P., & Fischer, W. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity and new product development. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12(1), 77-91.
100.Sun, Z. (2014). Domestic technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 12(2), 149-170.
101.Suzuki, J., & Kodama, F. (2004). Technological diversity of persistent innovators in Japan: Two case studies of large Japanese firms. Research Policy, 33(3), 531-549.
102.Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 27-43.
103.Todeva, E., & Knoke, D. (2005). Strategic alliances and models of collaboration. Management Decision, 43(1), 123-148.
104.Torrisi, S., & Granstrand, O. (2004). Technological and business diversification. The Economics and Management of Technological Diversification, 21-67.
105.Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of management journal, 44(5), 996-1004.
106.Tsai, K. H., & Wang, J. C. (2008). External technology acquisition and firm performance: A longitudinal study. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(1), 91-112.
107.Warner, J. B., Watts, R. L., & Wruck, K. H. (1988). Stock prices and top management changes. Journal of financial Economics, 20, 461-492.
108.Wiederhold, G., Tessler, S., Gupta, A., & Smith, D. B. (2009). The valuation of technology-based intellectual property in offshoring decisions. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24(1), 31.
109.Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications: A study in the economics of internal organization. New York: Free Press.
110.Willoughby, K. W. (2013). What impact does intellectual property have on the business performance of technology firms? International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, 6(4), 316-338.
111.Whinston, M. D. (2001). Assessing the property rights and transaction-cost theories of firm scope. The American Economic Review, 91(2), 184-188.
112.Zhu, P., & Malhotra, S. (2008). Announcement effect and price pressure: An empirical study of cross-border acquisitions by Indian firms. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 13(2).

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
無相關論文
 
無相關期刊
 
無相關點閱論文
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔