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：企業價值驅動因子之探討及績效評量指標之研究
作者：田姚明莉
作者(外文)：Tien Yao, Ming-li
校院名稱：國立臺灣科技大學
系所名稱：企業管理系
指導教授：梁瓊如
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2004
主題關鍵詞：增額資訊內涵；平衡計分卡；智慧資本；非財務績效衡量指標；績效評量；誘因契約；incremental information content；balanced scorecard；intellectual capital；Nonfinancial Performance Measurements；Performance Evaluation；Incentive Contract
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(0) 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:0
隨著資訊時代的來臨，高科技產業遂成為當今的新興產業並成為熱門的研究主題，尤其是對於影響該產業成功關鍵的無形資產與智慧資本價值創造的探究。且近年來，企業間的策略聯盟也成為一種提昇企業競爭力與成長力的重要方式。Lewis(1990)就把策略聯盟視為企業四大成長策略的其中之一，且Das, Sen及Sengupta(1998)亦指出企業透過策略聯盟可憑藉著智慧資本的形成而創造出股東的價值。因此以有形資產評價為主的傳統財務報表對於高科技產業的價值呈現就會顯得不足，進而產生公司帳面價值與其市場價值出現差異的情況。
為了深入了解高科技資訊產業價值創造的過程與無形資產及智慧資本的關聯性，本研究係先從資本市場的角度出發，透過事件研究模型探討市場對台灣高科技產業進行策略聯盟的反應，其間也討論市場對於進行策略聯盟的投資公司若屬於不同產業時的差別情況。透過市場對策略聯盟正面且顯著的反應結果，顯示企業透過策略聯盟的方式可累積智慧資本並進而創造出公司價值。因此本研究進一步透過整合智慧資本、平衡計分卡與無形資產的概念來探討影響台灣資訊電子產業價值之財務與非財務構面的相關因素。本研究最後亦以台灣共同基金市場為例，有別於傳統上多以財務面衡量基金績效的作法，本研究以徑向分析的架構觀念找出對基金績效報酬影響顯著的非財務性指標，以突顯出金融服務產業中績效衡量指標周延性與完整性的議題。
本研究之研究結果概述如下：首先就資本市場對企業策略聯盟反應的部分來看：以整體投資公司為樣本時，市場對於進行策略聯盟的投資公司之股價有正向顯著的反應，但相較於被投資公司卻有延遲反應的現象。若將投資公司做傳統、金融與高科技產業的區分，則研究結果顯示相較於投資公司為高科技產業，屬於傳統及金融產業的投資公司之股價反應較為顯著。至於整合智慧資本、平衡計分卡與無形資產的概念來探討影響台灣資訊電子產業價值的財務與非財務構面相關因素的部分：傳統上的淨利財務衡量指標並不能對資訊電子產業的價值提供顯著的解釋效果，相對地，拆解後的淨利組成細目對於資訊電子產業之公司價值卻具有顯著的增額解釋能力，顯示公司不應只以追求帳面盈餘的美化為目標而忽略了創造公司未來獲利的攸關項目。而剩餘利潤與經濟附加價值對資訊電子公司價值的衡量皆提供了近似的解釋能力。至於非財務衡量指標方面，內部流程構面對於電子上游產業提供了較顯著的增額資訊內涵，顯示生產流程的持續改進與激勵員工的創新能力，是創造上游電子產業核心價值的重要因子；整體非財務構面對電子中游產業提供了較一致性的增額資訊內涵；然而對於下游電子產業，外部構面則提供了較顯著的增額資訊內涵，代表如何維持和供應商與客戶間良好、穩定的關係與互動，實為評量電子下游產業價值的重要關鍵因素。最後就影響基金績效報酬顯著的非財務性指標來看，影響基金報酬之基金屬性面的非財務因素包含了：基金型態、分類、投資標的市場、收益分配、投資繳款方式及基金公司等；影響基金報酬之基金經理人特質面之非財務因素包含了：證照數量、風險態度、個人決策比重等；至於影響基金報酬之誘因契約的非財務因素則包含了：基金管理費設限情況與管理費用的高低。尤其是基金經理人特質面與誘因契約因素多顯著影響未來的基金報酬的表現，且研究結果顯示基金過去報酬績效與未來報酬績效並不顯著，甚至有反轉的情況，意味著非財務面衡量指標相較於財務面指標多具備績效衡量之領先指標的意涵，亦突顯出非財務績效衡量指標對基金績效評量的重要性。
With the arrival of the information age, the high-tech industry is the topic enthusiastically being discussed in the business world. Given the fact that the high-tech industry is a hot emerging industry, the value of intangible assets and knowledge management are always the keys to the success of the industry.
In recent years, the formation of strategic alliances has become an increasingly common trend among developing countries around the world. However, strategic alliances, with their emphasis on mutual cooperation, have become an efficient means by which enterprises adapt to their respective environments. Lewis (1990) also divided an enterprise’s growth strategy into four parts, namely, its internal development activities, mergers, contractual requirements and strategic alliances, based on that enterprise’s own resources, level of risk tolerance and degree of control. Thus, the motivation that gives rise to the strategic alliances that are formed between companies is nothing more than a hope to create competitive advantage and enable the corporation to develop more rapidly in the short term as a result of cooperation with other enterprises. Das , Sen and Sengupta (1998) point out that, on average, strategic alliances do create value for shareholders on account of the creation of intellectual capital. Therefore, the traditional financial statements that are based on an evaluation of tangible assets are incapable of fully evaluating the high-tech industry, and it results in there being a significant difference between corporate market value and book value. It also means that the traditional financial statements face an unprecedented challenge in terms of explaining the high-tech industry’s market value.
In this paper, we conduct an event study firstly and develop the empirical model to explore the stock price’s reaction of investing companies engaged in strategic alliances in Taiwan’s hi-tech industry, while also discussing the market’s different responses to their stock prices according to various types of industries that have been used to classify these investing companies. We further integrate the general measurements of the information electronics industry based on the concepts of the balanced scorecard, intellectual capital and intangible assets to explore the impacts of both financial and nonfinancial perspectives on the information electronics corporate value.
From the empirical results, we get the following conclusions. For the sample of investing companies as a whole that helped form strategic alliances, when TSE- and OTC-listed hi-tech industry companies in Taiwan announce the formation of a strategic alliance, the markets will positively respond to the stock prices of the investing companies. Thus, the investing companies will benefit from the optimistic news regarding strategic alliances and this will cause their stock prices to generate abnormal returns. However, when compared to the market’s response to the stock prices of the companies invested in, the investing companies will be characterized by a delayed response.
In addition, when the TSE- and OTC-listed hi-tech industry companies in Taiwan announce their strategic alliances, the markets will exhibit a significantly different response to their stock prices according to the industry to which each company belongs. Moreover, the market’s response to the stock prices of investing companies belonging to the traditional and financial industries (especially traditional) has been greater than that in relation to investing companies that belong to the hi-tech industry. Thus, when the traditional industry is confronted with an operating crisis, enterprises were able to maintain their survival niche by reinvesting in the perceptively preferable hi-tech industry, and improve their own R&D power with the help of reinvestment income to increase the value of intellectual capital. At the same time, the subject of reinvestments is able to make the investors in the traditional industry achieve abnormal returns, which in the long run is able to result in the traditional industry overcoming the usually difficult proposition of raising capital so as to achieve the ultimate goal of being completely transformed and upgraded. However, before engaging in investment in the form of a strategic alliance, a company that is in the hi-tech field should carefully assess the benefit that may result from the strategic alliance. This will help prevent shareholders from incurring losses at the expense of keeping up with market trends.
In the next part of this paper, we explore the connection between financial and nonfinancial performance measurements and corporate value through the integration of the balanced scorecard framework and intellectual capital. In terms of selecting the financial performance measurements, we first consider the traditional accounting performance measurements — net income and its component items. Then the emerging financial performance measurements — residual income (RI) and economic value-added (EVA) — are also added to compare the related information content of the corporate value. The empirical analysis of the nonfinancial performance measurements mainly explored the connection between the nonfinancial perspective and the value of the information electronics companies. Furthermore, we also seek determine whether the value connected with nonfinancial perspectives differe for companies with different types of value creation after the information electronics companies are categorized.
Our conclusions may be summarized as follows. The traditional financial performance measurement — net income — does not provide significant explanatory power in terms of the corporate value. However, after the net income is decomposed, the explanatory power is significantly enhanced. Under the existing model with the component items of net income, the emerging financial performance measurements — RI and EVA — really provide significant incremental explanatory power in relation to corporate value. Also, RI and EVA provide similar incremental explanatory power in relation to corporate value. When the full sample is analyzed, regardless of whether the MV/BV or the MV-BV models are used, the explanatory power of the nonfinancial performance measurements in relation to the corporate value is not significant. When compared with the midstream and downstream samples, the internal operational process perspective provides more incremental explanatory power in relation to the companies in the upstream sample. However, when compared with the upstream and downstream samples, the overall nonfinancial perspective can provide better incremental explanatory power for the companies in the midstream sample. This is because no one nonfinancial perspective can provide better incremental explanatory power than the other nonfinancial perspectives. When compared with the upstream and midstream samples, the external perspective indeed provides better explanatory power in relation to the value of the downstream companies.
The results of above-mentioned have important implications for management and investment planning. Since the component items of net income provide significant explanatory power in relation to a firm’s corporate value, this implies that senior managers should not just go after net income in the short term and ignore those items relevant to corporate future profitability (i.e. items such as R&D and management expenses, etc.). When investors evaluate a company, apart from examining its current profitability, the financial statements should be checked carefully. This is because the component items of net income can provide better information. In addition, the emerging performance measurements — RI and EVA — can provide a better assessment of the corporate value. However, in this study we also discover that RI and EVA do not have significantly different explanatory power in terms of explaining firms’ corporate values. Therefore, when using financial performance measurements, corporate senior managers should consider the cost effectiveness of their calculations.
In the case of upstream companies, continuously improving the production process and inspiring the creative abilities of the staff are goals that management should make efforts to achieve. When investors evaluate upstream companies, apart from analyzing the current corporate financial statements, improvements in the corporate internal process should be considered. In the case of midstream companies, no nonfinancial performance perspective provides significantly different incremental explanatory power. Nevertheless, the overall nonfinancial perspective can provide significant incremental explanatory power. This implies that when investors evaluate the midstream companies, the components of each nonfinancial perspective should be carefully taken into consideration. Corporate management should place more emphasis on corporate value creation in relation to overall nonfinancial perspective performance. The management of the downstream companies should seek to maintain good relationships with suppliers and customers in order to enhance corporate value. Investors should consider whether there exists a stable relationship with suppliers and customers when evaluating downstream companies.
Furthermore, in the tendency of financial internationalization and liberalization, how to evaluate the performance effectively has become the important subject on the development of the financial service industry. In this paper, we also take mutual fund market as example and establish the models to explore the correlation between the nonfinancial measurements and performance afer we realize the importance of nonfinancial measurements to corporate value. Path analysis is used to present the effect of nonfinancial measurements on fund performance in this part of the paper. Issues such as the correlation between variables, difference between direct and indirect effect, and cause-and-effect relation models, are analyzed through multivariate models. Deconstructed sub-models are also set to test the stability of models.
References
Aaker, “Developing Business Strategic”, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Son, (1992).
Amir, E. and B. Lev, “Value-Relevance of Nonfinancial Information: The Wireless Communications Industry”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol.22, No.1-3, pp.3-30, (1996).
Anand B. N. and T. Khanna, “Do Firm Learn to Create Value? The case of alliance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21(3), pp.295-315, (2000).
Allerdice, F. B. and D. E. Farrar, “Factors that Affect Mutual Fund Growth”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Dec. ,pp.365-382, (1967).
Badaracco J. L., “The Knowledge Link: How Firm Compete Through Strategic Alliance”, Harvard Business School Press, Boston Massachusetts, (1991).
Banker, R. D., Potter, D. Srinivasan, “An empirical Investigation of an Incentive Plan That Includes Nonfinancial Performance Measures”, Accounting Review, Vol.75, No.1, pp.65-92, (2000).
Barth, M. E., B. Clement, G. Foster, R. Kasznik, “Brand Values andCapital Market Valuation”, Review of Accounting Studies 3, pp.41-68, (1998).
Bassi,L.J., M.E. Van Buren, “Valuing Investment in Intellectual Capital”, International Journal of Technolohy Management, Vol.18, No.5-8, pp.414-432, (1999).
Bhattacharya, S., and P. Deleiderer, “Delegated Portfolio Management”, Journal of Economic Theory 36, pp.1-25, (1985).
Bieshaar H., J. Knight, and A. van Wassenaer, “Deals That Create Value”, The McKinsey Quarterly, New York, pp.64-73, (2001).
Black, F., M.C. Jensen, and M. Scholes, “The Capital Asset Pricing Model: Some Empirical Test”, In M. C. Jensen (ed.), Studies in the Theory of Capital Market. New York: Praeger, (1972).
Blume, M. E. and I. Friend, “A New Look at the Capital Asset Pricing Models”, Journal of Finance, Vol.28, No.1, March, pp.19-33, (1973).
Booth, R., “The Measurement of Intellectual Capital”, Management Aaccounting, Vol.76, No.10, pp.26-28, (1998).
Boulton, R. E. S., B. D. Libert, S. M. Samek, Cracking the Value Code: How Successful Businesses are Creating Wealth in the New Economic, Publisher: HarperCollins Business, (2000).
Brooking, A., P. Board, S. Jones, “The Predictive Potential of Intellectual Capital”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol.16. No.1-3, pp.115-125, (1998).
Brown, K. C., W. V. Harlow, and L. T. Starks, “Of Tournaments and Temptation: An Analysis of Managerial Incentives in the Mutual Fund Industry”, Journal of Finance 50, March, pp.85-110, (1996).
Brown, S. J., and W. N. Goetzmann, “Performance Persistence”, Journal of Finance 50, pp.697-698, (1995).
Carhart, M. M., “On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 52, March, pp.57-88, (1997).
Carhart, M. M., “Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance Re-Examined”, Working paper, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, III, (1992).
Chan S. H., J. W. Kensinger; A. J. Keown, J. D. Martin, “Do Strategic Alliance Create Value?”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.46(2), pp.199-221, (1997).
Chen H. , M. Y. Hu and J. C. P. Shieh, ”The Wealth Effect of International Joint Ventures: The Case of U.S. Investment in China”, Financial Management, Vol.20(4), pp.31-41, (1991).
Chen, S., J. L. Dodd, “Operation Income, Residual Income and EVA:Which Metric is More Value Relevant”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol.13, No.1, pp.65-86, (2001).
Chevalier J. and G. Ellison, “Are Some Mutual fund Managers Better Than Others? Cross-Sectional Patterns in Behavior and Performance”, Journal of Finance, Vol Liv, No.3, June, pp.875-899, (1999).
Chiu, S. B., “The Behavior of Mutual Funds Investors and Managers: Theory and Practice”, Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, (1989).
Chung Y., K. J. Koford, and I. Lee, “Stock Market Views of Corporate Multinationalism: Some Evidence from Announcements of International Joint Ventures”, Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Vol.33(3), pp.275-293, (1993).
Contractor F. J. and P. Lorange, “Competition vs. Cooperation: A Benefit/Cost Framework for Choosing Between Fullyowned Investment and Cooperative Relationships”, Economics, Vol.46(2), pp.237-270, (1988).
Daniel, K., M. Grinblatt, S. Titman, and R. Wemers, “Measuring Mutual Fund Performance with Characteristic-Based Banchmarks”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 52, Jul. , pp.1035-1058, (1997).
Daniel Palacios-Marques and Fernando Jose Garrigos-Simon, “Validating and Measuring IC in the Biotechnology and Telecommunication Industries”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol.4, pp.332-347, (2003).
Das S., P. K. Sen and S. Segupta, “Impact of Strategic Alliances on Firm Valuation”, Academy of Managemnet Journal, Vol.41(1), pp.27-41, (1998).
Deng, Z., B. Lev, F. Narin, “Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance”, Financial Analysis Journal, Vol.55, No.3, pp.20-32, (1999).
Devlin G.. and M. Bleackley, “Strategic Alliance-Guidelines for Success”, Long Range Planning, Vol.21(5), pp.18-23, (1988).
Dodd, J. L., S. Chen, “Economic Value Added (EVA)”, Arkansas Business and Economic Review, Vol.30, No.4, pp.1-8, (1997).
Droms W. G. and D. A. Walker, “Mutual Fund Investment Performance”, Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Vol.36, No.3, Fall, pp.347-363, (1996).
Dzinkowski, R., “The Measurement and Management of Intellectual Capital: An Introduction”, Management Accounting, Vol.78, No.2, pp.32-36, (2000).
Dzinkowski, R., “The Value of Intellectual Capital”, The Journal of Business Strategy, Vol.21, No.4, pp.3-4, (2000).
Edvinsson, L. and M. S. Malone, Intellectual Capital: realizing Your Company’s True Value by Finding Its Hdden Roots, Publisher: Harperbusiness, (1997).
Edward P. R. and T. J. Cowhey, “The Successful Use of Benchmark Portfolios: A Case Study”, Financial Analysts Journal, Sep./Oct., pp.18-26, (1990).
Elton, E. J., M. J. Gruber, S. Das, and C. R. Blake, “The Persistence of Risk-Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Business 69, pp.133-157, (1996).
Elton, E. J., M. J. Gruber, S. Das, and M. Hlavka, “Efficiency with Costly Information: A Re-Interpretation of Evidence from Managed Portfolios”, Review of Financial Studies 6, pp.1-21, (1993).
Fabozzi, F. and J, Francis, “Mutual Fund Systematic Risk for Bull and Bear Markets：An Empirical Investigation”, Journal of Finance, Vol.34, pp.1243-1350, (1979).
Firer S. and S M. Williams, “Intellectual Capital and Traditional Measures of Corporate Performance”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol.4, pp. 348-360, (2003).
Forrest J. E., “Strategic Alliances and the Small Technology Based Firm”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol.28(3), pp.37-45, (1990).
Forrest J. E. and M. J. C. Martin, “Strategic Alliances Between Large and Small Research Intensive Organizations: Experiences in the Biotechnology Industry ”, R &D Management, Vol.22(1), pp.371-385, (1992).
Gary P. B., L. R. Hood and G. L. Beebower, “Determinants of Portfolio Performance”, Financial Analysts Journal, Vol.42, No.4, July/Aug. , pp.39-44, (1986).
Goetzmann, W. N., and R. G. Ibbotson, “Do Winners Repeat? Patterns in Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Portfolio Management 20, pp.9-18, (1994).
Golec, J. H., “Empirical Tests of a Principal-Agent Model of Investor-Investment Advisor Relationship”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, March, pp.81-95, (1992).
Grant, J. L., “Foundations of EVA for Investment Managers”, Journal of Portfolio Management, Vol.23, No.1, pp.41-48, (1996).
Grinblatt, M. and S. Titman, “The Persistence of Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Finance 42, pp.1977-1984, (1992).
Grinblatt, M. and S. Titman, “Adverse Risk Incentives and the Design of Performance-based Contracts”, Management Science 35, pp.807-822, (1989).
Grinblatt, M. and S. Titman, “How Client Can Win the Gaming Game?”, Journal of Portfolio Management, Summer, pp.14-20, (1987).
Grinold, R. and A. Rudd, “Incentive Fees: Who Wins? Who Loses?”, Financial Analysts Journal, Jan./Feb., pp.27-38, (1987).
Gugler P., “Building Transitional Alliances to Create Competitive Advantage”, Long Range Planning, Vol.25(1) , pp.90-99, (1992).
Harrigan K. R., “Strategic Alliance and Partner Asymmetries”, Management International Review, Vol.28(special issue), pp.53-72, (1988).
Hendricks, D., J. Patel, and R. Zeckhauser, “Hot Hands in Mutual Funds: Short-Run Persistence of Performance”, Journal of Finance 48, pp.93-130, (1993).
Howarth C. S., “The Role of Strategic Alliance in the Development of Technology”, Technovation, Vol.14(4), pp.243-257, (1994).
Hughes Ⅱ, K. E., “The Value Relevance of Nonfinancial Measures of Air Pollution in the Electric Utilit Industry”, Accounting Review, Vol.75, No.2, pp.209-228, (2000).
Ittner, C. D., D. F. Larcker, “Are Nonfinancial Measures Leading Indicators of Financial Performance? An analysis of Customer Satisfaction”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.36, pp.1-35, (1999).
James B. G., “Alliance: The New Strategic Focus”, Long Range Planning, Vol.18(3), pp.76-81, (1985).
Jensen, M. C., “Risk, the Pricing of Capital Assets, and Evaluation of Investment Portfolios”, Journal of Business 42, pp.167-247, (1969).
Jensen, M. C., “The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945-1964”, Journal of Finance, May, pp.389-416, (1968).
Kaplan, R. S., D. P. Norton, The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Publisher: Harvard Business School Press, (1996).
Kaplan, R. S., D. P. Norton, “Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measurement to Strategic Management: Part I”, Accounting Horizons, Vol.15, No.1, pp.87-104, (2001a).
Kaplan, R. S., D. P. Norton, “Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measurement to Strategic Management: Part II”, Accounting Horizons, Vol.15, No.1, pp.147-160, (2001b).
Koh J. and N. Venkatraman, “Joint Venture Formation and Stock Market Reactions: An Assessment in the Information Technology Sector”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.34(4), pp.869-892, (1991).
Landsman W. R. and J. Magliolo, “Cross-Sectional Capital Market Research and Model Specification”, The Accounting Review, Vol.LXIII, No.4, pp.586-604, (1988).
Lee, C. F., and S. Rahman, “Market Timing, Selectivity, and Mutual Fund Performance: An Empirical Investigation”, Journal of Business, April, pp.261-278, (1990).
Lee, C. F., and S. Rahman (1991) ‘New Evidence on Timing and Security Selection Skill of Mutual fund Management’, Journal of Portfolio Management, Winter, pp.80-83.
Lehn, K., A. K. Makhija, “EVA & MVA: As Performance Measures and Signals for Strategic Change”, Strategy & Leadership, Vol.24, No.3, pp.34-38, (1996).
Lei D. and J. W. Slocum, “Global Strategy, Competence-Building and Strategic Alliance”, California Management Review, Vol.35(1), pp.81-97, (1992).
Lewis J. D., “Partnerships for Profit-Structuring and Managing Strategic Alliances”, The Free Press, New York, (1990).
McConnel J. J. and T. J. Nantell, “Corporate Combinations and Comon Stock Returns: The Case of Joint Ventures”, The Journal of Finance, Vol.40(2), pp.519-537, (1985).
Mikhail B. M., B. R. Walther, and R. H. Willis, “Do Security Analysts Improve Their Performance with Experience?”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.35 Supplement, (1997).
Mohr, J. J. and R. E. Spedman, “Characteristics of Partnership Success: Partnership Attributes, Communication Behavior, and Conflict Resolution Techniques,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15(2), pp.135-152, (1994).
Moses, E. A., J. M. Cheyney, and E. T. Veit, “A New and More Complete Performance Measure”, Journal of Portfolio Management, Summer, pp.24-33, (1987).
Murray E. A. and J. F. Mahon, “Strategic Alliances: Gateway to the New Europe?”, Long Range Planning, Vol.26(4), pp.102-111, (1993).
Ohmae K., “The Global Logic of Strategic Alliance”, Harvard Business Review, Vol.67(2), pp.143-154, (1989).
Ohlson J., “Earning, Book Values and Dividends in Equity Valuation”, Contemporary Accounting Research, Spring Vol.11 lss.2, pp.661-687, (1995).
Pekar P. and R. Allio, “Making Alliance Work: Guidelines for Success”, Long Range Planning, Vol.27(4), pp.54-65, (1994).
Pekar P. and R. Allio, “Making Alliance Work: Guidelines for Success”, Long Range Planning, Vol.27(4), pp.54-65, (1994).
Pietras T. and C. Stormer, “Making Strategic Alliances Work”, Business and Economic Review, Vol.47(4), pp.9-12, (2001).
Porter M. E. and K. Fuller, “Coalitions and Corporate Strategy”, In: M. Porter (Ed.), Competition in Global Industries, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School, (1986).
Rangan U. S. and M. Y. Yoshino, “Strategic Alliances: A Entrepreneurial Approach to Globalization”, Columbia Journal of World Business, Vol.31(3), pp.6-13, (1996).
Sharpe, W. F., “Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Business, Vol.39, Jan., Part II, pp.119-138, (1966).
Sheikholeslami, M., “EVA, MVA, and CEO Compensation”, American Business Review, Vol.19, No.1, pp.13-17, (2001).
Shukla, R. and S. Singh, “Are CFA Charterholders Better Equity Fund Managers?”, Financial Analysts Journal, Vol.50 No.6, Nov./Dec., pp.68-74, (1994).
Starks, Laura T., “Performance Incentive Fees: An Agency Theoretic Approach”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, March, pp.17-32, (1987).
Stewart, T. A., Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations, Publisher: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc, (1997).
Sveiby, K. E., The New Organizational Wealth-Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets, Publisher: Berrett-Koehler Pub U.S.A, (1997).
Treynor, J. L. and K. K. Mazuy, “Can Mutual Fund Outguess the Market? “, Harvard Business Review, July/Aug., pp.131-136, (1966).
Trueman, B., M.H. Franco Wong, Xiao-Jun Zhang, “The Eyeballs Have It: Searching for the Value in Internet Stocks”, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.38, pp.137-169, (2000).
Varadarajan P. R. and M. H. Cunningham, “Strategic Alliances: A Synthesis of Conceptual Foundation”, Journal of Academy of Marketing Sciences, Vol.23(4), pp.282-296, (1995).
Volkman, D. A. and M. E Wohar, “Determinants of Persistence in Relative Performance of Mutual Funds”, Journal of Financial Research, Vol. 18, Winter, pp.415-430, (1995).
Wermers R. and T. J. Moskowitz, “Mutual Fund Performance: An Empirical Decomposition into Stock-Picking Talent, Style, Transactions Costs, and Expenses / Discussion”, Journal of Finance, Cambridge, Vol. 55, Aug., pp. 1655-1703, (2000).
Wermers, R., “Momentum Investment Strategies of Mutual Funds, Performance Persistence, and Survivorship Bias”, Working paper, Graduate School of Business and Administration, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, Col, (1996).
Weston, J. F. and T. E. Copeland, Managerial Finance, The Dryden Press, (1986).
Whipple, “Strategic Alliance Success Factors”, The Journal of Supply Chain Management, pp.21-28, (2000).
Whipple J. M. and R. Frankel, “Strategic Alliance Success Factors”, The Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol.36(3), pp.21-28, (2000).
Woerheide, W., “Investor Response to Suggested Criteria for the Selection of Mutual Funds”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, March, pp.129-137, (1982).
Wright, S., “Path Coefficients and Path Regressions: Alternative or Complementary Concepts”, Biometrics 16, pp.189-202, (1960).
Yoshino and Rangan, “Strategic Alliances: An Entrepreneurial Approach to Globalization”, Harvard Business School Press, Boston Massachusetts, (1995).
Zuckerman H. S. and T. A. D’Aunno, “Hospital Alliances: Cooperative Strategy in a Competitive Environment”, Health Care Management Review, Vol. 15(2), pp.21-3, (1990).
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
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：1109（臺灣：1079，外國：30） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1669892 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67478662
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