臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：策略購併後整合模式之研究－以資訊業為例
作者：徐恆功
作者(外文)：Heng-Kong Hsu
校院名稱：國立政治大學
系所名稱：企業管理學系
指導教授：司徒達賢
于卓民
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2001
主題關鍵詞：購併；併後整合；規模經濟；綜效；個案研究；Merger & Acqusition；post-merger integration；economic scale；synergy；case study
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(2) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:36
面對全球購併風潮之興起，本研究試圖從併後整合的角度切入，探討何種併後整合的模式能產生較高的績效，以及併後整合模式與績效間的關係，受到何種因素影響。換言之，本研究的主要目的在於瞭解企業在購併之後，應該採取何種整合模式－包括整合的幅度與速度，才能達成較高的購併成效；以及企業是否會因為不同的購併動機，或是其他因素－如主併公司與被併公司的差異、知識的特性等，而影響了併後整合的效果。
本研究選擇資訊產業中的迪吉多、康柏、雅虎、第三波與威盛五家公司的購併案為研究對象，並以價值單元/部門別為分析單位，針對26個樣本點，採用質化研究中的個案研究法，與量化研究中的統計方法，來探索研究變數的內涵與推導變數間的關係，最後形成研究命題。
綜合命題的推導結果，本研究獲致以下結論：
一、公司層次的策略動機與價值單元的整合目標是兩個不同的構念，且策略動機指導了整合目標。
1.策略動機包括追求經濟規模、進行截長補短、擴張經營領域與改變競爭形勢四種，整合目標則僅有建立規模與發揮綜效兩類。
2.無論公司進行購併的動機為何，當要進行整合時，必須要落實到價值單元層次，也就是要以部門為主體來進行整合，此時對於部門主管而言，最重要的目標就是要建立規模或是發揮綜效。
二、併後整合模式與購併成效之間的關係，會受到整合目標與情境因素的影響
1.整體而言，整合幅度並不會直接影響購併成效，但整合速度越快，人員滿意度將越高。
2.以建立規模為目標的併後整合，應該採取大幅度的整合，以及專案管理，以達到較高的績效滿意度。
3.以發揮綜效為目標的併後整合，應該加快整合的速度，以達到較高的績效滿意度。
4.當購併雙方業務差異性大時，整合速度越快，則績效滿意度越高，但此時會降低人員滿意度。
5.當賣方的知識屬性屬於比較內隱與集體時，應該加快整合的速度，以產生較高的任務滿意度。
三、整合目標會直接影響併後整合模式
1.以建立規模為目標的併後整合，相較於發揮綜效者，傾向較大幅度與較快速度的整合，以及多採用正式的專案管理。
2.一般而言，規模型的整合，傾向由買方主導人事，但是當賣方價值單元的相對規模與競爭優勢遠大於買方時，則傾向由賣方主導人事。
四、情境因素會直接影響併後整合模式
1.當購併雙方的業務差異性大，或是賣方的競爭優勢高時，買方應該採取小幅度的整合，尤其在綜效型的整合更是如此。
2.當賣方的相對規模遠大於買方時，則必須採取較小幅度的整合，規模型的整合尤需如此。
Abstract
Based on the rise of the global M&A trend, this research is conducted from the aspect of post-merger integration. It attempts to discuss what post-merger modes can produce higher performance, and what factors affect the relationships between post-merger integration and performance. In other words, the major object of this research is to understand the integration modes, including the range and the speed of the integration, to be adopted to achieve better integration results. It also discusses whether different M&A motivations or other contextual/situational factors, such as the differences in size, industry, and operation between the two parties, and the content of knowledge, will affect the result of the post-merger integration.
The five merging cases in information technology business — DEC, Compaq, Yahoo, Acer''s TWP and VIA — are chosen to be the research targets. The analytical unit is the value unit (department) instead of the company which is widely used in traditional studies in this stream of research. Based on 26 samples, the research methods are two-folded: the qualitative case study method and the quantitative statistic method The research propositions are formed to explore and examine the connections between the meaning of variables and the inference of variables.
The main propositions of this research are as follow:
1.Strategic motivations of company level and integration goals of value unit (department) level are two different constructs. And the former directs the latter.
lStrategic motivations include ‘pursuing economic scale’, ‘proceeding complementary process’, ‘expanding business scope’, and ‘changing competitive position’. Integration goals are only to build business scale and develop Synergy.
lNo matter what motivates a company to merger the other one, it has to be based on a value unit level when processing integration. It means to consider departments as major integration bodies. The most important objective of departments’ heads at this point of time is to build business scale and develop synergy.
2.Relationships between post-merger integration modes and M&A performances can be influenced by integration goals and situational factors.
lIn whole, scope of integration does not necessarily affect merging performances. However, the shorter time integration takes, the higher employee satisfaction it can reach.
lThe post-merger integration aiming to build business scale is suggested to use integration of great range and project management to achieve higher financial satisfaction.
lHigher financial satisfaction can be reached by accelerating integration speed when the post-merger integration aiming to develop synergy.
lIf there is a huge operation gap between merging parties, higher financial satisfaction can be achieved by faster integration, but employee satisfaction may be decreased.
lWhen company’s knowledge content tends to be tacit and collective, to accelerate integration is also suggested to produce higher task satisfaction.
3.An integration goal directly affects post-acquisition integration.
lThe integration aiming to build economics scale, in comparison with that to develop synergy, tends to integrate faster and in greater range, and it usually adopts a formal project management.
lGenerally speaking, if integration takes place under the “scale mode”, buyer will be the one directing human resources management. However, when the scale in contrast and competitiveness of the seller’s value unit are far bigger and stronger than the buyer, the seller may direct the human resources management.
4.Situational factors directly affect the modes of post-acquisition integration
lOnce there is a huge difference between both merging parties’ operations, or selling party is more competitive, buyer is suggested to conduct integration under small range, especially in the “synergy mode”.
lWhen business scale of the seller is much more developed than that of the buyer, under the “scale mode”, integration of small range is also suggested.
參考文獻
中文部份
1. 王美惠（1995），企業購併後組織文化與效能關係之研究，中興大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
2. 王泰允（1991），企業購併實用，遠流。
3. 司徒達賢（1995），策略管理，遠流。
4. 司徒達賢（2001），策略管理新論，智勝文化。
5. 伍忠賢（2000），企業購併 : 理念與實務，新陸。
6. 何森茂（1994），企業購併後整合管理之研究，政治大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
7. 余尚武、江玉柏（1998），「影響企業購併成敗之因素與策略探討」，經濟情勢，第四卷，第二期，頁125-144。
8. 吳安妮（1992），「台灣企業購併動機之實證研究」，管理評論，民81年11月，頁18-24。
9. 吳青松（2000），國際企業管理，智勝文化。
10. 呂芳燿（1996），「企業購併簡介」，證券櫃檯月刊，3期，頁5-12。
11. 李素蘭（1994），「企業購併歷史回顧及購併動機之探討（下）」，主計月報，78 卷，2期，頁35-40。
12. 李素蘭（1994），「企業購併歷史回顧及購併動機之探討（上）」，主計月報，78 卷，1期，頁43-47。
13. 林家偉（1996），企業購併作業之規劃與評估模式，東海大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
14. 林詠榮（1985），商事法新詮（上），台灣商務印書館。
15. 邱弘（1990），購併前後企業文化差異對購併後員工承諾影響之研究－以子儀電子購併迅達資訊為例，中國文化大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
16. 紀春華（1999），購併前後企業文化與人力資源管理系統演變之研究，雲林科技大學企業管理系未出版碩士論文。
17. 孫梅瑞（1999），國內上市公司從事公司購併活動對經營績效影響之研究，政治大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。new window
18. 孫儷芳（1993），企業跨國收購之整合程序探討，中興大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
19. 財政部（2000），金融機構合併法，民89年11月13日。
20. 張人方（1990），我國企業進行海外購併之意願態度與決策程序，台大商研所未出版碩士論文。
21. 梁國源等（2000），跨國事業結合競爭相關問題及其經濟影響分析，公平交易委員會。
22. 陳雅惠（1999），購併後整合管理之研究－以中華航空公司為例，政治大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。
23. 彭金隆（2001），「組織間網絡關係選擇模式與實質選擇權觀點」，經營策略論壇論文集。
24. 黃瓊玉（1996），企業購併對人力資源管理影響之研究：被購併公司之個案探討，中央大學人力資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
25. 楊天龍（1996），企業購併動機與績效之探討－以台灣1000大製造業為例，靜宜大學管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文。
26. 楊佳璋（1996），我國企業敵意接管機能法制與攻防策略之研究，成功大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
27. 葉秋美（1993），台灣企業購併宣告對股東財富之影響，政治大學貿研所未出版碩士論文。
28. 臧惠安（1998），影響企業跨國購併後調整策略之研究，政治大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。
29. 劉清波（1988），商事法，台灣商務印書館。
30. 劉壽祥（1993），「台灣企業赴美購併經驗之檢討」，經濟前瞻，第31號，PP. 126-130。
31. 應國卿（1992），我國企業國際併購之失敗因素研究，台灣工業技術學院工程技術研究所未出版碩士論文。
32. 薛明玲（1990），「成功的購併要件：標的與軍師並重」，會計研究月刊，60期，PP.104-107。
33. 薛勝夫（2000），企業購併型態、人力資源管理措施與組織績效之關係，中央大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
34. 謝劍平（1997），財務管理－新觀念與本土化，智勝文化。
35. 魏啟林（1995），台灣廠商跨國經營之購併策略分析，行政院國科會科資中心。
36. 魏郁禎（2001），購併下倫理議題與績效相關之研究，靜宜大學企管研究所未出版碩士論文。
英文部份
1. Andrei, S. & Vishny, R. W., (1988), “Value Maximization and the Acquisition Process”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.2, No.1(Winter), pp.7-20.
2. Arrow, K. J., (1975), “Vertical Integration and Communication”, Bell Journal of Economics, 6,(Spring), pp.173-183.
3. Ashkenas, R.N. & Francis, S.C. （2000），”Integration Managers: Special Leaders for Special Times”, Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec., pp.108-116
4. Badaracco, Jr, Joseph. (1991) “Alliances Speed Knowledge Transfer”, Planning Review, pp.10-16
5. Brigham, E. F. & Gapenski, L. C.,(1991), Financial Management-Theory and Practice, 6th edition, The Dryden Press.
6. Brigham, E. F. (1983), Cases in Managerial Finance, Dryden Press, Chicago.
7. Bower, J. L. (2001), “Not all M & As are alike — and that Matters”, Harvard Business Review, Mar., pp.93-101.
8. Buono, Anthony F., Bowditch, James L. (1989), The Human Side of Mergers and Acquisitions , Jossey-bass.
9. Burgess,R. (1989), Field Research Sourcebook and Field Manual. London: Unwin Hyman.
10. Burns, J.B. (1989), “How to Make Merger and Acquisition Work?”, Massachuestts CPA Review, Summer, pp 15-33.
11. Chandler, A. (1962), Strategy and Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 299-300.
12. Chen, Minder (1995), “The Mergers and Acquisitions-The Integration Challenge”, p.8-9 and p.30-31.
13. Cooke, T. E. (1986), Merger and Acquisition, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
14. Datta, D. K.(1991). Organizational Fit and Acquisition Performance: Effects of Post-Acquisition Integration.” Sloan Management Journal, Vol.12, pp.281-297.
15. Demsetz, H., (1973), “The Market Concentration Doctrine”, AEI Hover Policy Studies.
16. Denzin N.K. (1978), The research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Elgers, P.T. and Clark, J.J.(1980), Merger Type and Shareholder Returns: Additional Evidence, “ Financial Management, Summer , pp.66-72
18. Drucker, P. F., (1981), “Five rules for successful Acquisition”, The Wall Street Journal, 15(Oct), pp.28.
19. Fortier, D. L.,(1989), “Hostile takeovers and the market for corporate control”, Vol. 13, Iss:1(Feb/Jan), pp.2-26.
20. Fulmer, R. M. & Gilkey, R.,(1988), “Blending Corporate Families: Management and Organization Development in a Post-merger Environment”, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol.11, No.4, pp.275-283.
21. Gaughan, P. A. (1996), Mergers、Acquisitions、and Corporate Restructuring, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
22. Glaser, B. (1978), Theoretical Sensitivity, Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
23. Haspeslagh, P.C., D.B. Jemison.(1991). Managing Acquisition-Creating Value Through Corporate Renewal, New York: Free Press
24. Healy, Paul M, Palepu, Krishna G, and Ruback, Richard S.(1992). ”Does Corporate Performance Improve After Mergers?”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol: 31 Iss: 2 Apr, pp. 135-175.
25. Hedlund, Gunner. (1994), “A model of Knowledge Management and The N-Form Corporation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol.15, pp.73-90.
26. Henderson, A. R. (1989), “Business Sales and acquisitions: Post-Acquisition integration”, CMA magazine, April, pp.13-15.
27. Howell, R. (1970), “Plan to Integrate Your Acquisition”, Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec, pp.146-156.
28. Invancevich, J. M. et a.,(1987), “Strategies for Managing Human Resource During Mergers and Acquisitions”, Human Resource Planning, Vol.10, No.1, pp.19-35.
29. Irkinshaw, U.I., I. E. Resman and A.I.Akanson, (2000), “Managing the Post-Acquisition Integration Process: How the Human Integration and Task Integration Processes Interact to Foster Value Creation”, Journal of Management Studies , 37:3 May.
30. Jemison, D. B. & Sitkin, S. B.,(1986), “Corporate Acquisitions a Process Perspective”, Academy of Management Review, Vol.11, No.1, pp.145-163.
31. Jensen, M. C.,(1986), “Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeover”, American Economic Review, Vol.76, No.2(May), pp.323-329.
32. Joseph, E. M. & Marks, L. (1990), “Facilitating Post-Merger Integration: The Role of the Organizational Construction”, Organization Development Journal, Vol.8, No.3(Fall), pp.67-73.
33. Kitching, John, (1967), “Why Do Mergers Miscary?” Harvard Business Review, Nov./Dec. pp. 84-101.
34. Klein, B. et al.,(1978), “Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive contracting Process”, Journal of Law and Economics, 21(Oct), pp.279-326.
35. KPMG, (2000), July 22nd, The Economist, p.15.
36. Larsson, R. (1993). “Case Survey Methodology: Quantitative Analysis of Patterns across Case Studies,” The Academy of Management Journal 36(6), pp1515-1546.
37. Larsson , R. and S. Finkelstein (1999), “Integrating Strategic, Organizational, and Human Resource Perspectives on Mergers and Acquisitions: A Case Survey of Synergy Realization”, Organization Science , Jan.-Feb. pp. 1-26
38. Levy, H. & Sarnat, M.,(1970), “Diversification, Portfolio Analysis and Uneasy Case for Conglomerate Mergers”, The Journal of Finance, (25), pp.795-802.
39. Lin, Y.Y. (1998), ”Success Factors of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Taiwan — An Analysis of Cases,” Journal of Small Business Management V36. N4. October, pp.43-56.
40. London, M. (1990), Change Agents: New Roles and Innovation Strategies for Human Resource Professionals, San Francisco.: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
41. Manne, H. G.,(1965), “Mergers and the Market for Corporate Control”, Journal of Political Economy, 73(April), pp.110-120.”
42. Marks, M.L. & Mirvis, P.H. (1998). Joing Forces, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
43. Marks, M.L., & Mirivis, P.H. (2000), “Managing Mergers, Acquisitions, and Alliances: Creating an Effective Transition Structure”, Organization Dynamics, Winter, pp.35-46.
44. McCann, J. E. and Gilkey, R. (1988), Joining forces: Creating & Managing Successful Mergers & Acquisitions, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, pp. 5-17.
45. Mueller, D. C.,(1969), “A Theory of Conglomerate Mergers”, Quarterly Journal of Economics,(83), pp.643-659
46. Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organization Advantage,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. No.2, pp. 242-266.
47. Nahavandi, A., & Malekzadeh, A. R. (1988), “Acculturation in Mergers and Acquisitions.” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 13, No. 1, Jan, pp. 79-90.
48. Perry, L. T.,(1986), “Merging Successfully: Sending the right signals”, Solan Management Review, Spring, pp.47-57.
49. Polanyi, M. (1967), The Tacit Dimension, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul
50. Porter, M.E.(1987). “From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy.” Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp. 43-59
51. Roll, R.,(1986), “The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeover” Journal of Business, Vol.59, No.2(April), pp.197-216.
52. Salter, M. & W. A. Weinhold, Diversification Through Acquisition: Strategies for Creating Economic Value, Free Press, New York, 1989.
53. Schein, E. H. (1985), Organizational Culture and Leadership, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
54. Schweiger,D.M. and Y.Weber(1989), “Strategies for Managing Human Resources During Mergers and Acquisitions: An Empirical Investigation”, Human Resource Planning, Vol.12, No.2, pp.69-86.
55. Seetoo, D. H. (1977), The Strategy of Large Horizontal Mergers: An Empirical Investigation. PhD Dissertatin, Northwestern University.
56. Smith K.W. & Triant A.J. (1994). Untapped option for creating value in acquisition, Mergers & Acquisitions, Nov.-Dec.
57. Spender J-C (1996), “Making Knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm”, Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2):45-62.
58. Stacey, M. (1982), Method of Social Research. Oxford: Pergamon.
59. Straus, A. & Corbin, J.(1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage Publication, Inc.
60. Stybel, L. J. “After the Merger the Human element”, New England Business, Vol. 8, No. 10, June, 1986, pp. 67-68.
61. Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997), “Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management”, Foss(2nd ed.), Resources Firms and Strategies, Oxford, pp.268-285.
62. The Economist. (July 22nd, 2000), p15專題序言。
63. Trautwein, F., (1990), “Merger Motives and Merger Prescriptions,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol.9, No.2, pp.35-46.
64. Weston, J. F. & K. S. Chung,(1983), “Do Merger Make Money?”, Journal of M & A, Vol.18, No.3, pp.40-48.
65. Weston, J. F. et al.,(1998), Takeovers, Restructuring, and Corporate Governance, second edition, NY: Prentice-Hall.
66. Weston, J. F., K. S. Chung & S. E. Hoang, (1990), Mergers, Restructuring and Corporate Control, NY: Prentice-Hall.
67. Williamson, O. E.,(1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, NY: Free Press.
68. Yin, R. (1989), Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newburry Park., Sag Pubplications.
69. Zack, M. (1999), “Developing a Knowledge Strategy”, California Management Review, 41: (2), pp.125-145
70. Zweig P.L., Kline, J.P., Forest, S.A., & Gudridge K. (1995). “The Case Against Mergers.” Business Week, Oct. 30, pp. 56-64
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：574（臺灣：570，外國：4） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1725833 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67519970
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上