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：創新資本對經營績效與公司價值影響之研究
作者：曾俊堯 引用關係
作者(外文)：TSENG, CHUN-YAO
校院名稱：國立臺北大學
系所名稱：企業管理學系
指導教授：古永嘉
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2003
主題關鍵詞：創新；創新資本；研究發展；專利權；技術引進；經濟附加價值；Innovation；Innovation capital；R&D；Patent；Imported technology；EVA
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(3) 博士論文(3) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:33
根據世界經濟論壇(WEF)於2002年「全球競爭力報告」中，台灣在未來的成長競爭力中「創新競爭力」項目的表現，僅次於美國為全世界第2名，顯示台灣對於技術創新的推動與發展的成效，已受到國際上各國的注意與肯定。從民間投入研發金額佔全國整體研發支出額的比例也由1991年47.93%提高至2001年的63.02%，顯示台灣民間企業持續持增加對於研發的投入，以提升企業的技術創新能力。既然台灣創新活動蓬勃發展，是否創新活動對於台灣企業的經營績效有顯著性影響？以及創新投入與成果是否可以反映在公司價值上？實為相當重要而且值得深入探討的研究主題。
過去國內外研究在探討創新資本的衡量項目都集中在公司內部研究發展以及專利權產出兩者，忽略外部技術創新來源的探討。本研究增加外部技術引進項目，除了探討三者之間關係外，主要研究此三項創新資本對於經營績效與公司價值影響程度有無差異。其中有關專利權經濟效益的的探討，分別探討台灣地區、大陸地區、美國地區所獲得專利數對於經營績效與公司價值的影響程度有無差異，並進一步探討專利數、專利品質、結合專利數量與品質的「引用基礎專利數」指標三項的經濟效益有無差異。本研究利用經濟附加價值(EVA)取代傳統經營績效指標，較能考量創新資本的特性，正確反映公司的經營績效的差異，尤其本研究對象為研發支出比率高的資訊電子業更為重要。
本研究期間為1993年至2002年，研究對象為已於2000年底以前上市，而且在研究期間內至少擁有美國專利一個以上的資訊電子業公司，合計共有101家公司以及595個觀察值，為一個兼顧時間數列與橫斷面的非平衡式追蹤資料(unbalanced panel data)型態。有關研究模式的建立，分別利用Cobb-Doulgas生產函數建立探討創新資本對於經營績效影響，以及利用市場價值模式探討創新資本對於公司價值的影響，而且研究模式因創新資本的認列方式不同，分為「費用化」與「資本化」兩種模式，分別探討。有關模式的估計方法，採用二因子隨機效果模式(two way random effects model)，同時考量廠商差異以及時間效果的影響。有關模式解釋能力的比較，利用Vuong Z值檢定去驗證。有關經營績效變數有營業收入、經濟附加價值兩項，而公司價值則用市場價值衡量，資料來源主要為台灣經濟新報所出版的上市公司資料庫查詢，而專利權的數量與品質，分別從經濟部智慧財產局、大陸的中國知識產權局、美國專利商標局三處查詢而得之。
研究結果為(1)三項創新資本都有逐年增加的趨勢，但是研究發展投入金額遠高於外部技術引進，而專利數量也逐年成長中，但是專利品質仍不高；(2)研究發展與專利權兩者有正向關係，而技術引進與研究發展、技術引進與專利權則無顯著性關係；(3)研究發展對於營業收入、經濟附加價值與公司價值的影響均為正向而顯著；(4)外部技術引進對於營業收入、經濟附加價值無顯著性影響，對於公司價值甚至有負向顯著性影響；(5)專利權對於經營績效與公司價值的影響程度，會因專利權獲取地區不同，而有明顯差異，其中以美國地區所獲得專利數對於經濟附加價值、公司價值的影響程度，會顯著大於台灣、大陸地區所獲得專利數的影響力；而且美國專利數、專利被引用數、引用基礎專利數三項的影響力都正向與顯著；(6)研究發展的經濟效益顯著大於外部技術引進、專利權的經濟效益也顯著大於外部技術引進、專利權與研究發展兩者經濟效益比較則不一定；(7)創新資本的衡量，不論費用化或資本化，研究結果差異不大，但是資本化的衡量方式會增加模式的解釋能力；研究發展與專利權的效益期間約為本年與遞延兩年。
According to the World Economic Forum''s(WEF) “Global Competitiveness Report, 2002-2003” Taiwan rose to 2nd place on the “Technology Index” behind only the US. A total of 5,431 US patents were awarded to recipients from the Taiwan in 2002, behind only the US, Japan, and Germany. These results are making the world take notice of Taiwan''s impressive innovation development. On the other hand, private industry accounted for 63.02% of all R&D expenditures in 2001, compared to rates of 47.93% in 1991. These very gratifying achievements strengthen technological innovation and promote industrial upgrading efforts of the private industry in Taiwan. This study addresses two specific questions：(1)Does innovation have a impact on operation performance? (2)Does a higher degree of innovation translate into superior corporate value?
R&D and patents can be viewed as two important indicators of innovation capital in previous research. The novelty of this study is that, apart from R&D and patents of the firms, we measure the imported technology of the firms by also including a measure of premium and technological service. The objective of this study is the investigation about effects of three innovation capitals on operation performance and corporate value. We separately investigate approved patents from Taiwan, China, USA. On the other hand, we separately analyze the value relevance of patents divided into three parts：patent counts, patent citations and citations-based patents. We use a Cobb-Douglas form based on the empirical association between innovation capital and operation performance, and a market value model is used to show the empirical association between innovation capital and corporate value. This study is examined for 101 listed firms in Taiwan electronic industry by using unbalanced panel data during 1993-2002. We use two way random effects model to evaluate parameters of model, and use Vuong Z test to examines the explanatory power of a model, with respect to the previous model.
There are seven empirical findings：(1) R&D, patents and imported technology have been the tendency of growth. R&D expenditures are higher than imported technology’s expenditures. Although approved patents are increased year by year, patent equality is low. (2)There are positive relationship between R&D and patents. Nevertheless, no significant relationship between R&D and imported technology, neither significant relationship between patents and imported technology. (3)R&D has a positively impact on firm’s revenue, Economic Value Added(EVA), corporate value. (4)Imported technology has no significant effect on firm’s revenue and EVA, moreover has a negative impact on corporate value. (5)Approved patents from USA have positively effect on EVA and corporate value more than approved patents from Taiwan, China. On the other hand, not only patent counts but also patent quality and citations-based patents have a positively impact on firm’s revenue, EVA, corporate value. (6)R&D contribute to operation performance and corporate value beyond the effects of imported technology. Patents also contribute to operation performance and corporate value beyond the effects of imported technology. (7)The effect on operation performance and corporate value of innovation capital between expense and capitalization is not different, but capitalization can increase explanatory power of a model. In addition, R&D and patents have a positively impact EVA with priority year and a lag of 2 years after priority year.
參考文獻
一、中文部分
1. 王泰昌，劉嘉雯(2001)，「經濟附加價值（EVA）的意義與計算」，貨幣觀測與信用評等，頁14-21。
2. 古永嘉、李鑑剛(1998)，「台灣股票市場報酬率之橫斷面與縱斷面分析」，輔仁管理評論，第5卷，第1期，頁77-96。new window
3. 行政院國科會(2002)，2001年全國科學技術統計要覽。
4. 行政院國科會(2003)，2002年中華民國科學技術年鑑。
5. 吳秀娟(2000)，「企業市場價值與淨值差異影響因素之研究-以我國資訊電子業為例」，國立政治大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
6. 李素華(2002)，「技術移轉模式-技術引進與技術授權」，資訊工業策進會科技法律中心。
7. 李淑華(2003)，「產業價值鏈知識密度與企業績效」，國立台灣大學會計學系博士論文。new window
8. 林惠玲與李顯峰(1996)，「台灣專利權數與R&D支出關係之研究－非負整數計量模式之應用」，經濟論文，第24卷，第2期，頁273-302。
9. 洪慧娟(2002)，「應記項目與未來現金流量預測之研究」，國立成功大學會計系碩士論文。
10. 唐明山(1994)，「技術引進與研究發展關係之研究-以科學工業園區內廠商為例」，國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
11. 涂宏任(1999)，「經濟附加價值解釋科技產業經營績效能力之研究」，國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
12. 張愛萍(1999)，「研究發展與技術引進-上市電子公司panel data之實證研究」，國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
13. 張麗娟(2000)，「銀行資本適足率、風險管理品質與資產組合型態之研究-運用混合橫斷面和時間序列迴歸模型」，國立台北大學企業管理系博士論文。new window
14. 莊奕琦與許碧峰(1999)，「研究發展對生產力的貢獻及產業間的外溢效果：台灣製造業實證」，經濟論文，第27卷，第3期，頁407-432。
15. 陳柏彰(2002)，「創新發明能力與企業生產力以及企業價值之關連性研究-以台灣資訊電子業為例」，國立台灣大學會計學系碩士論文。
16. 曾俊堯(2002)，「國內銀行業智慧資本之探討與比較」，產業金融季刊，第114期，35-52頁。
17. 曾俊堯與古永嘉(2003)，「智慧資本與公司無形價值關係之研究-以台灣製造業為例」，管理與系統，1-30頁(於2003/4/8日被接受，尚未刊登)。
18. 湯珮妤(2000)，「企業類型與研發支出、專利權成效之遞延效果研究」，國立中正大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
19. 黃文英(2001)，「資訊軟體業之專利權對企業價值之效應研究」，私立東吳大學會計研究所碩士論文。
20. 黃宛華(1999)，「資訊服務業智慧資本之研究」，政治大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
21. 黃則智(2002)，「專利、研發支出與廠商市值-半導體產業之實證研究」，國立台灣大學經濟學研究所碩士論文。
22. 黃雅苓(1999)，「研究發展支出與經營績效關係及其費用化之探討-以台灣上市公司之電子業與非電子業為例」，國立政治大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
23. 楊志海(1999)，「技術來源、創新與生產力」，國立中央大學產業經濟研究所博士論文。
24. 楊志海與陳忠榮(2001)，「研究發展、技術引進與專利-一般動差法於可數追蹤資料的應用」，經濟論文叢刊，第29卷，第1期，頁69-87。
25. 楊志與海陳忠榮(2002)，「研究發展、專利與生產力-臺灣製造業的實證研究」，經濟論文叢刊，第30卷，第1期，頁27-48。
26. 趙耀君(1997)，「企業研發支出之價值衡量」，東吳會計研究所碩士論文。
27. 劉正田(1997)，「研究發展支出之效益及其資本化會計資訊對股票評價攸關性之研究」，國立政治大學會計研究所博士論文。new window
28. 蔣禮芸(2002)，「我國資訊電子業公司專利引用網路與技術分類關係之研究」，國立台灣大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文。
29. 蔡其昀(2002)，「經濟附加價值與市場附加價值相關性之研究」，東海大學企業管理系碩士論文。
30. 蔡基德(2001)，「資訊電子業市場價值與帳面淨值之差異探討」，國立台灣大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
31. 鄧琼姿(2002)，「以隨機資料包絡分析法對半導體產業經濟附加價值之績效評估」，國立高雄第一科技大學風險管理與保險研究所碩士論文。
32. 闕河士與管瑞昌與黃旭輝(2000)，「研究發展密集度與專利對股票績效影響-以台灣上市公司為例」，產業管理學報，第1卷，第2期，頁257-268。
二、英文部分
1. Acs, Z. J. and Anselin, L. and Varga, A.(2002), “Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge,” Research Policy, Vol. 31, pp.1069-1085.
2. Afuah, A. (1998), Innovation management : strategies, implementation, and profits, Oxford University press, Inc.
3. Baltagi, B. (1995), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, Wiley, New York.
4. Bassi, L. J. and Van Buren, M. E.(1999), “Valuing Investment in Intellectual Capital,” International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 18, No. 5/6/7/8, pp.414-432.
5. Bernstein, J. I. And Nadiri (1989), “Research and development and intra-industry spillover: an empirical application of dynamic duality,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 56, pp.249-269.
6. Bloom, N., and Reenen, J. V. (2001), “Real options, patents, productivity and market value: Evidence from a panel of British firms,” Institute for Fiscal Studies, Working Paper No. W 00/21, Feb.
7. Blumenthal, T. (1979), “A note on the relationship between domestic research and development and imports of technology,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, pp.303-306.
8. Blumenthal, T.(1976), “Japan’s technological strategy,” Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 3, pp.245-255.
9. Blundell, R. and Griffith, R. and Reenen, J. V. (1999), “Market share, market value and innovation in a panel of British manufacturing firms,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 66, pp. 529-554.
10. Bosworth, D., and Rogers, M. (2001), “Market value, R&D and intellectual property: An empirical analysis of large Australian firms,” The Economic Record, Vol.77, no. 239, pp. 323-337.
11. Canto, J. G. D. and Gonzalez, I. S.(1999), “A Resource-based Analysis of the Factors Deterrmining a Firm’s R&D Activities,” Research Policy, Vol.28, pp.894-905.
12. Chan, L. K. C., Lakonishok, J. and Sougiannis, T. (2001), “The stock market valuation of research and development expenditures,” The Journal of Finance, Vol. LVI, No. 6, pp.2431-2465.
13. Chan, S. H. and Martin, J. D. and Kensinger, J. W. (1990), “Corporate research and development expenditures and share value,” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 26, pp.255-276.
14. Chauvin, K. W., and M. Hirschey (1993), “Advertising, R&D expenditures and the market value of the firm,” Financial Management, Vol. 22, Winter, pp. 128-140.
15. Chen, S. and Dodd, J. L. (1997), “Economic value added (EVATM): An Empirical Examination of a New Corporate Performance Measure,” Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol.9 (Fall), pp.318-333.
16. Cincera, M. (1997), "Patents, R&D, and technological spillovers at the firm level : some evidence from econometric count models for panel data," Journal of Applies Econometrics, Vol. 12, pp.265-280.
17. Cockburn, I., and Griliches, Z. (1988), “Industry effects and appropriability measures in the stock market’s valuation of R&D and patents, ” American Economic Review Proceedings, Vol. 78, pp. 419-423.
18. Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A.(1989), “Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D,” The Economic Journal, Vol. 99, pp.569-596.
19. Connolly, R. A., and Hirschey, M. (1990), “Firm size and R&D effectiveness: A value-based test,” Economics Letters, Vol. 32, pp. 277-281.new window
20. Crepon, B. and Duguet, E. (1997), "Estimating the innovation function from patent numbers : GMM on count panel data," Journal of Applies Econometrics, Vol. 12, pp.243-263.
21. Da Silva, J.G.C. (1975), “The Analysis of Cross-Sectional Time Series Data,” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University.
22. Davidson, R. and Mackinnon, J. G. (1981), “Several tests for model specification in the presence of alternative hypotheses, Econometrica, Vol. 49, pp.781-793.
23. Dechow, P. M. (1994), “Accounting earnings and cash flows as measures of firm performance：The role of accounting accruals,” Journal of accounting and economics, Vol. 18, pp.3-42.
24. Dechow, P. M. and Lys, T. and Sabino, J. S. (1998), “Addressing recognition issues in accounting：an evaluation of alternative research approaches, “ working paper.
25. Deng, Z. and Lev, B. and Narin, F.(1999), “Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance,” Financial Analysts Journal, May/June, pp.20-32.
26. Dierks, P. A. and Patel, A. (1997), “What is EVA, and how can it help your company?,” Management Accounting, Vol.79, November, pp.52-58。
27. Downs, G. W. and Mohr, L. B. (1976), “Conceptual issues in the study of innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 21, pp.700-714.
28. Drucker, P. F. (1993), Post-Capitalist Society, Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
29. Dzinkowski, R. (2000), “The Measurement and Management of Intellectual Capital：An Introduction,” Management Accounting, Vol.78, No.2, pp.32-36.
30. Edvinsson, L., and Malone, M. S. (1997), Intellectual capital: realizing your company’s value by finding its hidden roots , London: Piatkus.
31. Ellerman, J. and Montgomery, B. and Stradley, B. (2002), “Linking intangibles in executive pay,” Workspan, Vol. 45, No. 5, pp.8-10.
32. Erdielk, A.(1986), “Issues in international technology transfer,” Economic Impact, Vol.56, pp.49-54.
33. Fuller, W.A. and Battese, G.E. (1974), “Estimation of Linear Models with Crossed-Error Structure,” Journal of Econometrics, Vol.2, pp.67-78.
34. Gambardella, A. and Torrisi, S. (2000), “The Economic Value of Knowledge and Inter-firm Technologyical Linnkages: An Investigation of Science-Based Firms, Dynacom TSER Projectt(Contract no. SOE1-CT97-1078).
35. Grabowski, H. G. and Mueller, D. C. (1978), “Industrial research and develop, intangible capital stocks, and firm profit rates,” The Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 9, pp.328-343.
36. Griliches, Z. (1979), “Issue in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity growth,” Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 10, pp.92-116.
37. Griliches, Z. (1981), “Market value, R&D, and patents,” Economics Letters, Vol. 7, pp. 183-187.
38. Griliches, Z. (1987), “R&D and productivity: measurement issues and econometric results,.” Science, Vol. 237, pp.31-35
39. Griliches, Z. (1990), “Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey, ” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 28, pp. 1661-1707.
40. Griliches,Z. (1998 ), R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press..
41. Grupp, H. and Schmooh, U. (1999),.”Patent statistics in the age of globalization: new legal procedures, new analytical methods, new economic interpretation,” Research Policy , Vol. 28, pp.377—396.
42. Gupta R.K. and Lin, C. C. and Malarkey, P. J. and Rachiele, M.G. (1995), “A New Yardstick for Measuring Value Creation,” Oil & Gas Investor, Vol.15, pp.51-54
43. Guthrie, J. and Petty, R. (2000), “Intellectual Capital: Australian Annual Reporting Practices”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol.1, No.3, pp.241-251
44. Hall B. H., (1993), “The Stock Market’s Valuation of R&D Investment During the 1980’s”, American Economic Review, Vol. 83, No. 2, pp. 259-264
45. Hall B. H., (1999), “Innovation and market value”, NBER Working Paper # 6984, Cambridge, MA.
46. Hall B. H., Jaffe A., Trajtenberg M., (2000), “Market value and patent citations: A First Look”, University of California at Berekeley, Department of Economics Working Paper # 00-277, Berkeley, CA
47. Hall, L. A. and Bagchi-Sen, S. (2002), “A study of R&D, innovation, and business performance in the Canadian Biotechnology Industry,” Technovation, Vol. 22, pp.231-144.
48. Hausman, J. A.(1978), “Specification tests in econometrics,” Econometrica, Vol. 46, pp.1251-1271.
49. Hausman, J.A. and Taylor, W.E. (1982), “A Generalized Specification Test,” Economics Letters, Vol.8, pp.239-245.
50. Hausman, J. and Hall, B.H. and Griliches, Z. (1984), “Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship,” Econometrica, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp.909-938.
51. Hirschey, M., and Weygandt. J. J. (1985), “Amortization policy for advertising and research and development expenditures,” Journal of Accounting Research, Spring.
52. Howell, R. A. (2002), “Fixing financial reporting: Financial statement overhaul,” Financial Executive, Mar/Apr.
53. Hurwitz, J.(2002), “The Linkage between Management Practices, Intangible Performances and Stock Returns,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol.3, No.1, pp.51-61.
54. Jagle, A. J. (1999) “Shareholder value, real Options, and innovation in technology-intensive companies,” R&D Management, Vol. 29, no. 3.
55. Kalafut, P. C. and Low, J. (2001) “The value creation index: Quantifying intangible value,” Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp.9-15.
56. Katrak, H. (1985), “Imported technology, enterprise size and R&D in a newly industrializing country: the Indian experience,” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 47, pp.213-229.
57. Katrak, H. (1989), “Imported technology and R&D in a newly industrializing country: the Indian experience,” Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 31, pp.123-139.
58. Kelley, D. J. and Rice, M. P.(2002), “Advantage Beyond Founding The Strategic Use of Technologies”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 17, pp.41-57.
59. Kelm, K. and Narayanan, V. K. and Pinches, G. E.(1995), “Shareholder value creation during R&D innovation and commercialization stages,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, pp.770-786.
60. Kumar, N. (1987), “Technology imports and local research and development in Indian manufacturing, “ The Development Economies, Vol. 25, pp.220-233.
61. Lau, R. S. M. (1998), “How does research and development intensity affect business performance?,” South Dakota Business Review, Vermillion, Sep.
62. Lev, B., and Sougiannis, T. (1996), “The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D,” Journal of Accounting & Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 107-138.
63. Megna, P. and Klock, M. (1993), “The Impact of Intangible Capital on Tobin s q in the Semiconductor Industry,” American Economic Review, May , Vol. 83, No. 2, pp.265-269.
64. Milunovich, S., and Tsuei, A. (1996), “EVA in the Computer Industry,” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol.9, pp.105-115.
65. Morbey, G. K., and Reithner, R. M. (1990), “How R&D affects sales growth, productivity and profitability,” Research Technology Management, May/June.
66. Nadiri, I. and Kim, S. (1996), R&D, production structure and productivity growth: Comparison of the U.S., Japanese, and Korean manufacturing sectors, National Bureau of Economic Research, working paper no. 5506.
67. Narin, F. and Hamilton, K. and Olivastro, D.(1997), “The increasing linkage between U. S. technology and public science,” Research Policy, Vol. 26,pp. 317-330.
68. Narin, F. and Noma, E. and Perry, R. (1987), “Patents as indicators of technological strength,” Research Policy, Vol. 16, pp.143-155.
69. O’Byrne, S. F. (1996), “EVATM and market value,” Journal of applied corporate finance, Spring, pp.116-125.
70. Pakes, A. (1985), “On patents, R&D, and the stock market rate of return,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 93, pp.390-409.
71. Pakes,A. and Griliches, Z.(1980), “Patents and R&D at the firm level:a first report,” Economics Letters ,Vol. 5, pp.377-381.
72. Pakes, A. and Griliches, Z. (1984), “Estimating distributed lags in short panels with an application to the specification of depreciation patterns and capital stock constructs," NBER Reprints 0532 (also Working Paper 0933 ), National Bureau of Economic Research.
73. Palia, D. and Lichtenberg, F.(1999), “Managerial ownership and firm performance：Are-examination using productivity measurement,” Journal of corporate finance, Vol.5, pp.323-339.
74. Parasuraman, A. and Zeren, L. M. (1983), “R&D’s relationship with profits and sales,” Research Management, Jan/Feb.
75. Parks, R.W. (1967), “Efficient Estimation of a System of Regression Equations when Disturbances Are Both Serially and Contemporaneously Correlated,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol.62, pp.500-509.
76. Pegels, C. and Thirumurthy, M. V. (1996),.”The impact of technology strategy on firm performance,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 43, No.3, pp.249 —346.
77. Roberts, E. B. (1988), “What we’ve learned: managing invention and innovation.” Research Technology Management, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp.11-29.
78. SAS Institute Inc. (2002), SAS/ETS Users guide, SAS 8.0, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
79. Scherer, F.M. (1983), “R&D and declining productivity growth,” American Economic Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, pp.215-218.
80. Schoenecker, T. and Swanson, L.(2002), “Indicators of Firm Technological Capability：Validity and Performance Implications,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 49, No. 1, Feberuary, pp.36-44.
81. Siddharthan, N. S.(1988), “In-house R&D, imported technology, and firm size: lessons from Indian experience,” The Development Economies, Vol. 216, pp.212-221.
82. Siddharthan, N. S.(1992), “Transaction costs, technology transfer, and in-house R&D,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 18, pp.265-271.
83. Sougiannis, T. (1994), “The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D”, The Accounting Review, Vol. 69, No. 1, pp.44-68.
84. Stern, J. M. and Stewart, G. B. and Chew, D. H. (1995), “The EVA Financial Management System,” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp.32-46.
85. Teitel, S. (1984), “Technology creation in semi-industrial economies,” Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 16, pp.39-61.
86. Thomas, P. and McMillan, G. S. (2001), “Using science and technology indicators to manage R&D as a business,” Engineering Management Journal, Sep, pp.9-14.
87. Toivanen O. and Stoneman, P. and Bosworth, D.(2002), “Innovation and the market value of UK,” OXFORD Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 64, NO. 39, pp.39-61.
88. Trajtenberg, M.( 1990), “A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations,” Rand Journal of Economics, Vol. 21, pp.172-187..
89. Trajtenberg, M. and Jaffe, A. B. and Henderson, R. (1997), “University versus corporate patents: a window on the basicness of Invention,” Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.19-50.
90. Van Buren, M. E. (2000), “Making Knowledge Counts：Knowledge management systems and the human element,” Unpublished manuscript.
91. Voung, Q. H. (1989), “Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses,” Econometrica, Vol. 57, pp.307-333.
92. Wansbeek, T., and Kapteyn, Arie (1989), “Estimation of the Error-Components Model with Incomplete Panels,” Journal of Econometrics, Vol.41, pp.341-361.
93. Watanabe, C. and Tsuji, Y. S. and Griffy-Brown, C.(2001), “Patent statistics：deciphering a real versus a pseudo proxy of innovation,” Technovation, Vol. 21, pp.783-790.
94. Zantout, Z., and Tsetsekos, G. (1994), “The wealth effects of announcements of R&D expenditure increases,” Journal of Financial Research, Sept., pp. 205-216.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
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：1771（臺灣：1736，外國：35） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1806188 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67608658
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