臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究欲探討馬斯克個人行為之脫序行為與事後道歉，以及宣布調查特斯拉電動車死亡車禍事件與特斯拉工廠公安火災事件，是否會造成特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價產生異常報酬，並觀察各事件日中何者造成異常報酬率之幅度最大。並將此蒐集事件分群為脫序行為、事後道歉、死亡車禍以及公安火災事件，分析脫序行為與事後道歉是否對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價產生的異常報酬有顯著差異，以及檢視此四項事件中何者對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價之異常報酬影響較大。
本研究以2018年度為研究區間，利用上述分群訂出研究事件，以特斯拉台灣供應鏈為研究主體，實證結果如下：

1.脫序行為中，馬斯克吸食大麻的行為使特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價產生顯著負向異常報酬，僅言語上的辱罵對股價則無負面影響；事後道歉中，當事人接受馬斯克道歉，特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價會產生顯著正向異常報酬，反之則產生顯著負向異常報酬。

2.宣布調查特斯拉電動車死亡車禍事件與特斯拉工廠公安火災事件，特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價會產生顯著負向異常報酬。

3.馬斯克吸食大麻行為較其他事件使特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價產生異常報酬幅度最大。

4.事件中「事後道歉」相較於「脫序行為」，前者對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價產生的異常報酬會顯著較大。

5.事件中以「死亡車禍」對特斯拉台灣供應鏈造成較大的負向異常報酬。

The study investigates whether the stock prices of Tesla’s Taiwan suppliers will have abnormal returns during the announcement of Musk’s disordered behaviors , Musk’s apologies for disorders, Tesla’s fatal crashes and Tesla’s industrial fire in 2018. Next, we analyze whether there is a significant difference between abnormal returns caused by Musk’s disordered behaviors and abnormal returns caused by Musk’s apologies for disorders. Also, the study explores which event will d for Tesla’s Taiwan suppliers. The empirical findings are as follows :

1.Musk’s disordered behaviors of smoking marijuana caused negative abnormal returns, while Musk’s apologies for disorders caused positive abnormal returns.

2.Tesla fatal crashes and Tesla industrial fire caused negative abnormal returns.

3.Smoking marijuana caused the largest extent of abnormal returns among all events.

4.Comparing Musk’s apologies for disorders with Musk’s disordered behaviors, the former caused more significant abnormal returns for Tesla’s Taiwan suppliers.

5.Among all the events, Tesla fatal crashes caused higher degree of negative abnormal returns in Tesla’s Taiwan suppliers.

摘 要 I
ABSTRACT II
誌謝 III
目錄 IV
圖目錄 VII
表目錄 IX
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 8
1.3 研究流程 9
第二章 全球電動車產業綜觀 10
2.1 全球車市規模探討 10
2.2 電動車市佔分析 12
第三章 文獻探討 15
3.1 領導理論 15
3.2 從眾理論 17
3.3 效率市場假說 19
3.4 訊號發射理論 21
3.5過度反應理論 22
3.6事件日研究法 23
第四章 研究方法 24
4.1 研究架構 24
4.2 研究假說 24
4.3 樣本說明 32
4.4 實證模型 34
4.4.1 事件日研究法 34
4.4.2 事件日選擇 35
4.4.3 估計期與事件期之設定 36
4.4.4 定義與估計異常報酬率 36
4.4.5 檢定異常報酬率 38
4.4.5.1 傳統ｔ檢定法 38
4.4.5.2 橫斷面獨立法 39
4.4.5.3 符號檢定法 39
4.4.6 變異數分析法 40
第五章 實證結果與分析 45
5.1 樣本實證結果與分析 45
5.1.1 馬斯克脫序行為與事後道歉對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 46
5.1.1.1 馬斯克言語辱罵投資分析師對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 47
5.1.1.2 馬斯克言語辱罵援救幼童潛水員對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 49
5.1.1.3 馬斯克於電台節目吸食大麻對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 51
5.1.1.4 投資分析師接受馬斯克道歉對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 53
5.1.1.5 潛水員不接受馬斯克道歉對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 55
5.1.2 宣布調查特斯拉電動車死亡車禍事件對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 57
5.1.2.1 美國運輸安全委員會宣布調查年度首次特斯拉自動輔助駕駛電動車死亡車禍對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 57
5.1.2.2 美國運輸安全委員會宣布調查年度第二起特斯拉自動輔助駕駛電動車死亡車禍對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 60
5.1.3 特斯拉工廠公安火災事件對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 62
5.1.3.1 特斯拉工廠年度首次大幅報導公安火災事件對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 62
5.1.3.2 特斯拉工廠再次發生公安火災事件對特斯拉台灣供應鏈股價影響分析 65
5.1.4 所有事件日對特斯拉台灣供應鏈其異常報酬之影響程度比較 67
5.1.4.1 馬斯克吸食大麻事件與其他事件對特斯拉台灣供應鏈異常報酬程度之影響比較 67
5.1.5 「馬斯克脫序行為」事件與「馬斯克事後道歉」事件之市場反應與差異分析 70
5.1.5.1 「馬斯克脫序行為」事件與「馬斯克事後道歉」事件之特斯拉台灣供應鏈反應差異分析結果 70
5.1.6 脫序行為、事後道歉、死亡車禍與公安火災事件日分群之市場反應與差異分析 72
5.2 實證結果彙總 75
第六章 結論與建議 78
6.1 研究結論 78
6.2 管理意涵 82
6.3 後續研究建議 83
參考文獻 84
英文文獻 84
中文文獻 89
網站資料參考 91

英文文獻

1.Akakpo, A., Gyasi, E. A., Oduro, B., & Akpabot, S. (2019). Foresight, organization policies and management strategies in electric vehicle technology advances at Tesla. In Futures Thinking and Organizational Policy (pp. 57-69). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
2.Armour, J., Mayer, C., & Polo, A. (2017). Regulatory sanctions and reputational damage in financial markets. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 52(4), 1429-1448.
3.Basoglu, K. A., & Hess, T. J. (2014). Online business reporting: A signaling theory perspective. Journal of Information Systems, 28(2), 67-101.
4.Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Transformational leadership development: Manual for the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Consulting Psychologists Press.
5.Blasco, N., Corredor, P., & Ferreruela, S. (2012). Does herding affect volatility? Implications for the Spanish stock market. Quantitative Finance, 12(2), 311-327.
6.Borins, S., & Herst, B. (2018). Cults of Personality: Fables of the Automobile Manufacturing Industry. In Negotiating Business Narratives (pp. 23-35). Palgrave Pivot, Cham.
7.Byrne, A., Barling, J., & Dupré, K. E. (2014). Leader apologies and employee and leader well-being. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), 91-106.
8.Carraher, S. (2015). Signaling intelligence, signaling theory, Project A, and excellent management history research. Journal of Management History, 21(2).
9.Chen, Y., & Perez, Y. (2018). Business model design: lessons learned from Tesla Motors. In Towards a Sustainable Economy (pp. 53-69). Springer, Cham.
10.Nandal, V., & Krishnan, V. R. (2000). Charismatic leadership and self-efficacy: Importance of role clarity. Management and Labour Studies, 25(4), 231-243.
11.Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39-67.
12.De Bondt, W. F., & Thaler, R. H. (1987). Further evidence on investor overreaction and stock market seasonality. The Journal of finance, 42(3), 557-581.
13.Dolley, J. C. (1933). Characteristics and procedure of common stock split-ups. Harvard Business Review, 11(3), 316-326.
14.Economou, F., Kostakis, A., & Philippas, N. (2011). Cross-country effects in herding behaviour: Evidence from four south European markets. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 21(3), 443-460.
15.Endsley, M. R. (2017). Autonomous driving systems: A preliminary naturalistic study of the Tesla Model S. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 11(3), 225-238.
16.Falát, L., & Holubčík, M. (2017). The Influence of Marketing Communication on Financial Situation of the Company–A Case from Automobile Industry. Procedia engineering, 192, 148-153.
17.Fama, E. F., Fisher, L., Jensen, M. C., & Roll, R. (1969). The adjustment of stock prices to new information. International economic review, 10(1), 1-21.
18.Fama, EF (1970), ‘Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work’, Journal of Finance, 25(1), 383–417.
19.Ficici, A. (2018). Econometrics analysis and application of event study methodology on international mergers and acquisition activities of MNCs from Eastern Europe. Journal of Economic and Social Thought, 5(1), 1-8.
20.Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In Advances in experimental social psychology, 1,149-190.
21.Galariotis, E. C., Rong, W., & Spyrou, S. I. (2015). Herding on fundamental information: A comparative study. Journal of Banking & Finance, 50(1), 589-598.
22.Gilson, S. C., & Abbott, S. (2018). Tesla Motors (A): Financing Growth.
23.Glanzer, M., & Cunitz, A. R. (1966). Two storage mechanisms in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5(4), 351-360.
24.Gokhale, J., Tremblay, C. H., & Tremblay, V. J. (2015). Misvaluation and behavioral bias in financial markets. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 16(4), 344-356.
25.Groening, C., & Kanuri, V. K. (2018). Investor reactions to concurrent positive and negative stakeholder news. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), 833-856.
26.Hollander, E. P.(1984). Leadership Dynamics: A Practical Guide to Effective Relationships，New York: Free press.
27.House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J. G Hunt & L.L Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge (pp. 189-207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
28.Ingram, N. (2018). Tesla Motors: A Potentially Disruptive Force in a Mature Industry. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, 5(1), 8-21.
29.Jacobides, M. G., MacDuffie, J. P., & Tae, C. J. (2016). Agency, structure, and the dominance of OEMs: Change and stability in the automotive sector. Strategic Management Journal, 37(9), 1942-1967.
30.Kancherla Y.D., Daim T.U. (2018) Technology Roadmap: A Roadmap for Tesla. In Daim T., Chan L., Estep J. (eds) Infrastructure and Technology Management. (pp. 347-366). Springer, Cham.
31.Lao, P., & Singh, H. (2011). Herding behavior in the Chinese and Indian stock markets. Journal of Asian economics, 22(6), 495-506.
32.Lee, T. T. H., & Yip, T. L. (2018). A cause of oversupply and failure in the shipping market: measuring herding behavior effects. Maritime Policy & Management, 45(8), 995-1006.
33.Transportation Research Board. (2018, December). Electric Vehicles and Automotive Brand: How has Tesla Shaped Consumer Perceptions? (Issue Brief No. 19-00417). Washington, DC: Long, Z., Axsen, J., Miller, I., & Kormos, C. (2019).
34.Loureiro, S. M. C., Sarmento, E. M., & Le Bellego, G. (2017). The effect of corporate brand reputation on brand attachment and brand loyalty: Automobile sector. Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), 1360031.
35.Musonera, E., & Cagle, C. (2019). Electric Car Brand Positioning in the Automotive Industry: Recommendations for Sustainable and Innovative Marketing Strategies. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability, 14(1).
36.Pace, K. M., Fediuk, T. A., & Botero, I. C. (2010). The acceptance of responsibility and expressions of regret in organizational apologies after a transgression. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 15(4), 410-427.
37.Perkins, G., & Murmann, J. P. (2018). What does the success of Tesla mean for the future dynamics in the global automobile sector?. Management and Organization Review, 14(3), 471-480.
38.Pham, H. N. A., Ramiah, V., & Moosa, I. (2019). The effects of environmental regulation on the stock market: the French experience. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/acfi.12469. doi:10.1111/acfi.12469
39.Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355-374.
40.Stringham, E. P., Miller, J. K., & Clark, J. R. (2015). Overcoming barriers to entry in an established industry: Tesla Motors. California Management Review, 57(4), 85-103.
41.Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207-232.
42.Zhu, D. H., & Chang, Y. P. (2013). Negative publicity effect of the business founder’s unethical behavior on corporate image: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(1), 111-121.

中文文獻

1.王意菁. (2018). 滬港通對滬, 深, 港三地市場之價量關聯性影響. 淡江大學財務金融學系碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-62.
2.王慧菱, 譚醒朝, & 張曉芬. (2005). SARS 疾病災難事件對台灣生技醫療產業股價影響之研究. 健康管理學刊, 3(2), 99-119.
3.李佳勳. (2015), 探討蘋果、三星與華碩手機廠商企業家之人格特質與領導風格. 淡江大學管理科學學系企業經營碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-93.
4.卓正欽, 賴彥如, & 劉振緯. (2015). 轉換型領導與新科技使用意圖之關係: 自我效能之中介效果. 商管科技季刊, 16(1), 89-111.
5.林家玉. (2018). 轉換型領導, 組織氣候與組織承諾之關係研究. 淡江大學管理科學學系企業經營碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-89.
6.杭君怡. (2018), 台灣股市效率再檢定－以大立光、宏達電為例. 臺灣大學經濟學研究所學位論文, 1-48.
7.林玉真. (2018), 現金減資與公司投資策略之探討. 中興大學高階經理人碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-20.
8.洪千珮. (2014), 金融海嘯衝擊下台灣股市投資人從眾行為轉變之探討. 宜蘭大學應用經濟與管理學系經營管理碩士班學位論文, 1-65.
9.凌明智. (2004), 重大災難事件對股票市場之影響-以SARS疾病災難事件對台灣金融業為例. 國立高雄第一科技大學金融研究所學位論文.
10.陳思蒨. (2014), 股市從眾效應: 以台灣股市為例. 淡江大學財務金融學系碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-43.
11.陳益璋. (2017), 市場基本面、理性預期與從眾行為的關係. 中山大學財務管理學系研究所學位論文, 1-94.
12.張嫈娘. (2014), 獨立董事辭任之市場反應研究. 成功大學財務金融研究所碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-58.
13.曾培頤. (2017), 轉換型領導、交易型領導對知識分享及技術創新之相關性研究-以技術研發團隊為例. 中山大學人力資源管理研究所學位論文, 1-84.
14.黃正魁, 邱亞琪, & 林育志. (2017). 台灣電子商務宣告對市場反應的再研究. Information Management, 24(4), 409-434.
15.楊士範、吳居叡、鄭緯筌（2014）他是玩真的！：「鋼鐵人」伊隆‧馬斯克改變未來的10種能力。台北市:先覺出版社.
16.楊馥嫣. (2010), "投資人情緒與從眾行為之探討-台灣期貨市場為例." 國立高雄第一科技大學金融研究所碩士論文.
17.鍾智博. (2015), 投資人情緒、人格特質與資訊順序對投資人股票決策之影響. 中原大學會計研究所學位論文, 1-81.
18.謝易軒. (2014), 負面媒體報導與庫藏股宣告效果之研究. 國立高雄第一科技大學-財務管理研究所學位論文.