近年來台灣金融業弊案層出不窮，尤其2016年兆豐金因為法令遵循問題被裁罰57億新台幣，一銀ATM遭駭客盜領八千多萬新台幣，顯示金融業的資安問題日漸嚴重，但是這些隱藏的公司風險都是無法從財務報表上面的數字看出端倪，因此本文想利用年報揭露的文字來預測公司的風險，透過年報揭露的學歷，建立不同職位的管理階層之管理專業度、法律專業度、資訊專業度，再利用金管會裁罰案件衡量公司風險，最後將專業度與裁罰案件作連結。本文研究2015年至2017年80間金融業公司的管理階層專業度與公司被裁罰的關係，研究結果發現不區分職位的情況下，管理階層的管理專業度無法降低公司之裁罰案件；區分職位的情況下，總經理的管理專業度無法降低公司之裁罰案件，法遵長的法律專業度可以降低公司之裁罰案件，資訊長的資訊專業度可以降低公司之裁罰案件。本文最大的貢獻為所建立的學歷專業度資料庫以及建立的流程，過去對於學歷的研究並沒有針對學院科系深入探討，然而本文透過文字探勘技術建立學歷專業度的資料庫，目前雖然只針對金融業探討，將來可以應用在不同產業，研究各產業特有的學歷專業度與公司風險的關聯性。

The fraud of financial industry in Taiwan has emerged in endlessly. For example, Mega Holdings was fined $5.7 billion dollars by NYDFS because of legal compliance in 2016. Besides, Hackers stole more than $80 million dollars from an ATM network of First Financial Bank without using a bank machine card in 2016. This burglary indicate the information security issue of financial industry is more and more important. These hidden risks of the company cannot be discovered from the figures above the financial statements. This study would like to use the text disclosed in the annual report to predict the risk of the company. Through the academic records disclosed in the annual report, we establish the management profession, legal profession and information profession of management in different positions. Also, we use the administrative sanction of Financial Supervisory Commission measure the risk of the company. Finally, we link the position profession and the administrative sanction.
The results are following below, in the situation of no distinction between positions, the management profession of management cannot reduce the administrative sanction. In the situation of distinction between positions, the management profession of CEOs cannot reduce the administrative sanction. The legal profession of regulator compliance and the information profession of Chief Information Officer can reduce the administrative sanction. The contribution of this study is establish the database of educational profession and the process of establishing. In the future, this database can be applied in different industry.

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝詞 iii
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 viii
一、 緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的與貢獻 2
1-3 研究架構 2
二、 文獻探討與假說發展 4
2-1 公司治理 4
2-2 管理階層專業度 5
2-3 文字探勘 7
2-4 公司風險之衡量 8
三、 研究設計 11
3-1 研究設計 11
3-1-1 學院科系資料庫 11
3-1-2 董監經理人學經歷資料庫 19
3-1-3 學院科系與董監經理人學歷之連結23
3-1-4 產業專業度 25
3-1-5 專業度之連結 26
3-2 樣本選取與資料來源 28
3-3 變數之定義與衡量 30
3-3-1 管理專業度比例 30
3-3-2 總經理 34
3-3-3 法遵長、資訊長 35
3-3-4 裁罰案件 36
四、 研究結果 39
4-1 有、無裁罰差異 39
4-2 管理學院專業度比例高、低差異 41
4-3 區分職位：總經理、法遵長、資訊長43
五、 結論與建議 48
參考文獻 50
附錄一 52
附錄二 63

Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2007). A theory of friendly boards. The journal of finance, 62(1), 217-250.
Bhagat, S., Bolton, B. J., & Subramanian, A. (2010). CEO education, CEO turnover, and firm performance. Available at SSRN 1670219.
Charitou, A., Neophytou, E., & Charalambous, C. (2004). Predicting corporate failure: empirical evidence for the UK. European Accounting Review, 13(3), 465-497.
Dambolena, I. G., & Khoury, S. J. (1980). Ratio stability and corporate failure. The Journal of Finance, 35(4), 1017-1026.
Defond, M. L., & Hung, M. (2004). Investor protection and corporate governance: Evidence from worldwide CEO turnover. Journal of Accounting Research, 42(2), 269-312.
Elsaid, E., Wang, X., & Davidson III, W. N. (2011). Does experience matter? CEO successions by former CEOs. Managerial Finance, 37(10), 915-939.
Feldman, R., & Sanger, J. (2007). The text mining handbook: advanced approaches in analyzing unstructured data. Cambridge university press.
Goel, A. M., & Thakor, A. V. (2008). Overconfidence, CEO selection, and corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 63(6), 2737-2784.
Gottesman, A. A., & Morey, M. R. (2006). Does a better education make for better managers? An empirical examination of CEO educational quality and firm performance.
Guthrie Datta, J. P. D. K. (1997). Contextual influences on executive selection: Firm characteristics and CEO experience. Journal of Management Studies, 34(4), 537-560.
Hamori, M., & Koyuncu, B. (2015). Experience matters? The impact of prior CEO experience on firm performance. Human Resource Management, 54(1), 23-44.
Jalbert, T., Rao, R. P., & Jalbert, M. (2002). Does school matter? An empirical analysis of CEO education, compensation, and firm performance. International Business and Economics Research Journal, 1(1), 83-98.
King, T., Srivastav, A., & Williams, J. (2016). What's in an education? Implications of CEO education for bank performance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 37, 287-308.
Mintzberg, H., & Lampel, J. (2001). Do MBAs Make Better CEOs? Sorry, Dubya, It Ain't Necessarily So. Fortune, 143(4), 244-244.
Nassirtoussi, A. K., Aghabozorgi, S., Wah, T. Y., & Ngo, D. C. L. (2014). Text mining for market prediction: A systematic review. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(16), 7653-7670.
Parker, S., Peters, G. F., & Turetsky, H. F. (2002). Corporate governance and corporate failure: a survival analysis. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 2(2), 4-12.
Slater, D. J., & Dixon-Fowler, H. R. (2010). The future of the planet in the hands of MBAs: An examination of CEO MBA education and corporate environmental performance. Academy of Management learning & education, 9(3), 429-441.
Song, F., & Thakor, A. V. (2006). Information control, career concerns, and corporate governance. The Journal of Finance, 61(4), 1845-1896.
陳冠宏，(2009)，CEO 特質對企業經營績效之影響。
郭秋榮，(2011)，ECFA下我國金融業管理風險機制之探討，經濟研究，第11期。