臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討馬來西亞傢俱業者對平衡計分卡的接受與使用的影響要素與程度，研究方法經文獻探討之後選取整合型科技接受與使用模式，探討平衡計分卡之使用意願、實際使用情況。研究對象以馬來西亞的傢俱廠商50家為主，進行問卷調查訪談發放600份，並且回收 368 份，去除無效問卷40份，有效問卷328份，有效回收率為54.66%。研究發現首先是對平衡計分卡認知重要性高於使用意願; 其次對平衡計分卡使用意願的影響因素由大至小分別為:社會影響>績效預期>付出預期; 再其次為對平衡計分卡實際使用與其使用意願及助益環境之間具有弱強度的關係存在，助益環境可以有效預測廠商實際使用平衡計分卡。本研究提出二個建議，首先是傢俱業者可以加強宣導平衡計分卡的績效及對公司的利益，也可利用教育訓練機會克服員工對改變新管理模式之抗拒，才能夠順暢地導入平衡記分卡; 其次是本研究釐清傢俱業者對平衡計分卡使用意願及實際使用相關變數間之因果關係，可以作為學術上後續研究的參考。

The aim of this study was to explore the influence factors and variables of the acceptance and usage intention of balanced score card. The research method selected the model of Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) to explore the intention to use the balanced scorecard and the actual use in the furniture industries of Malaysia. The sample used in the study was 50 Malaysian furniture manufactures. Six hundred employees were chosen through Malaysian furniture manufactures as the sample of this study. Of the 600 employees to which questionnaires were administered, 368 returned questionnaires. Fourty of 600 questionnaires was not completed. Hence, the valid sample was 328(54.66%). Data from the questionnaires were entered into the Statistical Package for the Social Science, SPSS version19.0, for analysis.
The study found that the awareness of Balance Scorecard (BSC) is higher than the intention to use BSC. For the intention to use BSC, the variable with the strongest correlation was social influence, the second is performance expectancy and effort expectancy was the third. The results indicated that social influences and performance expectancy gave explanation 58 percent of the variation in intention to use BSC.
The association among the actual use of BSC, intention to use and facilitating conditions existed with weak relationship. The factor of facilitating conditions can effectively predict the actual use of BSC. Two recommendations are provided, firstly is the furniture manufactures could propaganda the advantages of BSC and the benefit to company performance, and increase the interests of staff and also could reduce the employees’ resistance to change new management model by education and training, in order to smoothen the implementation of balanced score card; secondly is to clarify the related causal relationship among acceptance and intention to use and actual usage, and the research results will be provided with a reference for further study.

中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
一、緒論 1
1.1研究動機與目的 1
1.2研究範圍與限制 2
1.3研究流程 3
二、文獻探討 4
2.1平衡計分卡的定義 4
2.2平衡計分卡成功關鍵與窒礙難行的因素 7
2.3整合科技接受與使用模型 12
三、研究方法 18
3.1研究架構、假說、對象與工具 18
3.2 資料收集與處理 22
四、研究結果 26
4.1量測工具檢測 26
4.2統計分析 28
4.3統計分析結果小結 41
五、結論與建議 44
5.1研究發現與討論 44
5.2研究建議 46
參考文獻 47

朱碧靜（2012）。國家教育研究院隻語詞彙、學術名詞暨辭書資訊網，取自http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1678678/。
洪伯楷（2004) 。平衡計分卡在高科技產業實施過程與成效之探討。中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
許全福、張善智、郭芳男（2006）。苗栗某地區家俱業導入平衡計分卡之規劃與設計。黃埔學報，50，71-88。
張明輝（2004）。平衡計分卡制度在廠商績效管理之應用。國立台灣師範大學教育政策與行政研究所教授。
陳欣怡（2007）。建構家俱業之策略地圖與平衡計分卡-以某區域教學家俱業為例。國立成功大學會計學系研究所碩士論文。
李鬱卿（2002）。推動以平衡計分卡為基準的績效管理制度之個案研究-以一外商食品公司為例。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
蔡秀珍（2007）。管理機構之自評架構與推動。逢甲大學經營管理在職專班碩士論文。
郭峰志（2003）。管理機構導入平衡計分卡之研究-以某區域家俱業為例。國立台灣大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
朱道凱譯，Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton著（1999）。平衡計分卡：資訊時代的策略管理工具。臺北市：臉譜文化。
陳韻靜（2003）。家俱業策略型態與績效評估指標之現況及其相關性研究－以平衡計分卡觀點分析。臺北醫學大學醫務管理學系碩士論文。
黃宗賢（2005）。以平衡計分卡架構探討公立家俱業從業人員對家俱業策略及績效表現之認知。高雄醫學大學公共衛生研究所醫務管理碩士論文。
王修曉譯，Janet M Ruane著(2007)，研究方法概論，五南圖書出版， P187。
黃素芳（2001）。影響使用者「網路招募」使用意願相關因素之研究－科技接受模型之應用。朝陽科技大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
蔡秉儒（2004）。影響壽險業務員採用行動壽險業務系統因素之研究。樹德科技大學資訊管理系，碩士論文。
賴美嬌，許素貞，蔡武德（2006）。運用整合型模式評估醫學美容可行性之探討。商業現代化學刊，3(3)，241-249。
賴美嬌，蔡武德（2006）。民眾使用自費健檢意圖與行為之研究。華醫社會人文學報，13，1-15。

Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50, 179-211.
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M., (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology; A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1002.
Eccles, R.G. & Norhria, N. (1992). Networks and organizations: structure, form, and action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Eccles, R.G. (1991). The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard Business Review, 69(1), 131-137.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior：An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Green, G.I. & Keim, R.T. (1983). After implementation what’s next? Evaluation. Journal of System Management, 34(9), 10-15.
Griffith, J.R., Alexander, J.A. & Jelinek, R.C. (2002). Measuring Comparative Hospital Performance. Journal of Healthcare Management, 47(1), 41-57.
Ittner, C. D. & Larcker, D. F. (1998). Innovations in Performance Measurement: Trends and Research Implications. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, 205-238.
Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 9-17.
Kaplan, R.S. & Norton, D.P. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75-85.
Kotter, John P. (1998). Leading Change – Why Transformation Efforts Fail? Harvard Business Review on Change, Harvard Business School Press, 1-20.
Lingle, J. H. & Schiemann, W. A. (1996). From Balanced Scorecard to Strategic Gauges: Is Measurement Worth It?” Management Review, 85(3), 56-61.
Maisel, L.S. (1992). Performance measurement: the balanced scorecard approach. Cost Management, 6(2), 47-52.
Olve N.G., Roy J. & Wetter M. (1999). Performance Drivers: A Practical Guide to Using the Balanced Scorecard, Wiley, Chichester.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Perceived Behavioral Control, Computer Anxiety and Enjoyment into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342-365.
Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 45(2), 186-204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B. & Davis, F. D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 425-478.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., & Ackerman, P. L.（2000）. A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Differences in Individual Technology Adoption Decision Making Processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 83(1), 33-60.