博碩士論文 etd-1015117-095443 詳細資訊


[回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]

姓名 胡政濠(Cheng-Hao Hu) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開
畢業系所 企業管理學系研究所(Business Management)
畢業學位 碩士(Master) 畢業時期 106學年第1學期
論文名稱(中) 高階經營團隊特質與企業信用風險之關聯性探討
論文名稱(英) An Examination of the Associations among Top Management Team Characteristics and Organizational Credit Risk
檔案
  • etd-1015117-095443.pdf
  • 本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
    請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
    論文使用權限

    紙本論文:5 年後公開 (2022-11-15 公開)

    電子論文:使用者自訂權限:校內 1 年後、校外 5 年後公開

    論文語文/頁數 中文/78
    統計 本論文已被瀏覽 5602 次,被下載 5 次
    摘要(中) 本研究運用高層理論(the upper echelons perspective)探討高階經營團隊(top management team, TMT)特質與企業信用風險的關係,研究對象為台灣經濟新報(Taiwan Economic Journal, TEJ)資料庫中的所有上市櫃公司。根據統計分析結果,本研究發現經營團隊的教育程度(level)與教育背景(background)異質性、總經理雙元性(duality)、經營團隊的持股比率對企業信用風險有顯著負向影響,經營團隊成員的理工與管理教育背景比率對企業信用風險也有負向影響。
    過去有關高層理論的研究大多檢視經營團隊特質與組織策略或績效的關係,本研究延伸了此一理論的適用範疇。透過深入探討經營團隊成員的教育背景比率,本研究也填補了過去僅分析教育程度或異質性的缺口。而本研究在最後也討論了實務意涵與提供未來研究方向。
    摘要(英) This study applies the upper-echelons perspective to explore the effects of top management team (TMT) characteristics on firm credit risks. The research sample is all public firms listed in the dataset of Taiwan Economic Journal. Research results based on the regression analyses show that TMT educational level and background heterogeneities, CEO duality and the percentage of company shares held by TMT members, respectively, has a negative effect on organizational credit risk. Moreover, a TMT with more members having engineering or management background will have experienced less credit risk.
    The study contributes to the upper-echelons perspective by extending its focus from prior performance or strategic issues to risk concerns. The study also fills a gap in the upper-echelons literature by an in-depth examination of the effects of a variety of TMT educational characteristics. Implications from practices and directions for future studies are also discussed.
    關鍵字(中)
  • 教育程度
  • 總經理雙元性
  • 企業信用風險
  • 高階經營團隊
  • 高層理論
  • 關鍵字(英)
  • CEO duality
  • top management team (TMT)
  • organizational credit risk
  • education level
  • the upper-echelons perspective
  • 論文目次 審定書 i
    致謝 ii
    中文摘要 iii
    Abstract iv
    目錄 v
    表目錄 vi
    圖目錄 vii
    第一章 緒論 1
    第一節 研究動機 1
    第二節 研究目的 3
    第三節 預期貢獻 4
    第二章 文獻探討與假說推導 5
    第一節 高層理論 5
    第二節 企業信用風險評等 9
    第三節 TCRI企業風險指標 13
    第四節 總經理兼任董事長(總經理雙元性) 21
    第五節 高階經營團隊的學歷背景 22
    第六節 高階經營團隊的持股 25
    第三章 研究方法 27
    第一節 研究架構 27
    第二節 研究假說彙整 28
    第三節 研究樣本 28
    第四節 操作型定義 34
    第五節 統計分析方法 38
    第四章 研究結果 39
    第一節 相關性分析 39
    第二節 迴歸分析 42
    第三節 結果統計 51
    第五章 結論與建議 52
    一、 分析結果 52
    二、 研究結論 54
    三、 研究意涵 56
    四、 研究限制與後續研究方向 57
    參考文獻 59
    參考文獻 參考文獻
    中文文獻
    1. 方至民、曾志弘、鐘憲瑞. (1999). 高階經營團隊特質與財務能力對企業研發支出影響之研究-以台灣上市電子產業公司為例. 1999科技管理研討會論文集,國立中山大學
    2. 方至民. (1998). 資源類型與統治特質對企業多角化變動影響之實證研究 (Doctoral dissertation, 撰者).
    3. 李仲祥,2007,總經理特質與研發投入之關聯性-以我國高科技產業為例,國立中正大學會計與資訊科技所,碩士論文。
    4. 林雨潔(2010)。董事會結構、CEO特質及企業創新活動對公司績效的影響-以台灣電子工業為例。國立中正大學會計與資訊科技研究所碩士論文
    5. 邱文昌,1999,我國建立信用評等制度之規劃與檢討,證交資料,第442期,1-24頁。
    6. 邱怡茹,2009,公司治理與信用風險,國立高雄第一科技大學-財務管理研究所.
    7. 柯元達,2008,CEO轉換型領導與權力支配性對組織績效的影響:高階經營團隊社會資本的中介效果,國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所博士論文
    8. 洪錦盛. (2010). 公司治理與經營績效關係之研究. 樹德科技大學金融與風險管理系碩士班學位論文, 1-37.
    9. 莊婷婷.(2011).高階經營團隊部門多樣化對企業技術發展之影響: 以吸收能力為調節效果. 2011. PhD Thesis.
    10. 許士軍, & 陳光中. (1989). 台家家族企業發展與家族結構關係, 行政院國家科學會專題研究報告.
    11. 陳立平(2011),股權結構與董事會組成對公司經營績效之影響-產業競爭度之調節效果, 東海大學會計學系碩士班碩士論文
    12. 湯家良(2004)。總經理特質與經營績效之關聯:以我國資訊電子業為例。國立中正大學會計研究所碩士論文
    13. 蔡宜真,2005,臺灣集團家族企業的公司治理, 董事會獨立性與公司價值之實證分析.
    14. 蔡瓊滿. (2016). 動態環境對醫療機構經營團隊信任的影響及其對團隊衝突的意涵. 成功大學高階管理碩士在職專班 (EMBA) 學位論文, 1-90.
    英文文獻:
    1. Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of management journal, 39(1), 123-148.
    2. Amazon, AC Sapienza, HJ(1997),"The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitiveand affective conflict", Journal of Management, Vol. 23, pp.495-516
    3. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative science quarterly, 634-665.
    4. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization science, 3(3), 321-341.
    5. Ashbaugh, H. (2004). Ethical issues related to the provision of audit and non-audit services: Evidence from academic research. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(2), 143-148.
    6. Baysinger, B. D., & Butler, H. N. (1985). The role of corporate law in the theory of the firm. The Journal of Law and Economics, 28(1), 179-191.
    7. Boeker, W. (1997). Executive migration and strategic change: The effect of top manager movement on product-market entry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 213-236.
    8. Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith, C. W. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of financial economics, 20, 267-291.
    9. Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2006). Top management team behavioral integration, decision quality, and organizational decline. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(5), 441-453.
    10. Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(3), 275-284.
    11. Carpenter, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (2001). Top management teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of uncertainty. Academy of Management journal, 44(3), 533-545.
    12. Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of management, 30(6), 749-778.
    13. Carpenter, M. A., & Sanders, W. M. (2002). Top management team compensation: The missing link between CEO pay and firm performance?. Strategic management journal, 23(4), 367-375.
    14. Chaganti, R., & Sambharya, R. (1987). Strategic orientation and characteristics of upper management. Strategic management journal, 8(4), 393-401.
    15. Chen, M. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (1995). Speed, stealth, and selective attack: How small firms differ from large firms in competitive behavior. Academy of management journal, 38(2), 453-482.
    16. Cyert, R. M., Kang, S. H., & Kumar, P. (2002). Corporate governance, takeovers, and top-management compensation: Theory and evidence. Management Science, 48(4), 453-469.
    17. Dalton, D. R., & Kesner, I. F. (1985). Organizational performance as an antecedent of inside/outside chief executive succession: An empirical assessment. Academy of management Journal, 28(4), 749-762.
    18. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of management review, 14(1), 57-74.
    19. Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm. Journal of political economy, 88(2), 288-307.
    20. Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative science quarterly, 484-503.
    21. Grinstein, Y., & Hribar, P. (2004). CEO compensation and incentives: Evidence from M&A bonuses. Journal of financial economics, 73(1), 119-143.
    22. Knight, D., Pearce, C. L., Smith, K. G., Olian, J. D., Sims, H. P., Smith, K. A., & Flood, P. (1999). Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus. Strategic Management Journal, 445-465.
    23. Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 654-681.
    24. Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms' competitive moves. Administrative science quarterly, 659-684.
    25. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of management review, 9(2), 193-206.
    26. Imhoff, G. (2003). Accounting quality, auditing and corporate governance.
    27. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360.
    28. Jensen, M. C., & Ruback, R. S. (1983). The market for corporate control: The scientific evidence. Journal of Financial economics, 11(1-4), 5-50.
    29. Miller, D. (1991). Stale in the saddle: CEO tenure and the match between organization and environment. Management science, 37(1), 34-52.
    30. Michel, J. G., & Hambrick, D. C. (1992). Diversification posture and top management team characteristics. Academy of Management journal, 35(1), 9-37.
    31. Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988). Alternative mechanisms for corporate control.
    32. Pitcher, P., & Smith, A. D. (2001). Top management team heterogeneity: Personality, power, and proxies. Organization Science, 12(1), 1-18.
    33. Sathe, V. (1983). The controller's role in management. Organizational Dynamics, 11(3), 31-48.
    34. Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2000). Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification. Journal of Management, 26(6), 1157-1177.
    35. Tushman, M. L., & Rosenkopf, L. (1996). Executive succession, strategic reorientation and performance growth: A longitudinal study in the US cement industry. Management Science, 42(7), 939-953.
    36. Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1984). Organizational demography and turnover in top-management group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 74-92.
    37. Weir, C., & Laing, D. (2001). Governance structures, director independence and corporate
    38. Wheelen, T. L., & Hunger, J. D. (2011). Concepts in strategic management and business policy. Pearson Education India.
    39. Wiersema, M. F., & Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management journal, 35(1), 91-121.
    40. Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of management journal, 39(1), 123-148.
    41. Amazon, AC Sapienza, HJ(1997),"The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitiveand affective conflict", Journal of Management, Vol. 23, pp.495-516
    42. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative science quarterly, 634-665.
    43. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization science, 3(3), 321-341.
    44. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization science, 3(3), 321-341.
    45. Ashbaugh, H. (2004). Ethical issues related to the provision of audit and non-audit services: Evidence from academic research. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(2), 143-148.
    46. Ashford, S. J., Wellman, N., Sully de Luque, M., De Stobbeleir, K. E., & Wollan, M. (2017). Two roads to effectiveness: CEO feedback seeking, vision articulation, and firm performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior
    47. Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference?. Strategic management journal, 10(S1), 107-124.
    48. Baysinger, B. D., & Butler, H. N. (1985). The role of corporate law in the theory of the firm. The Journal of Law and Economics, 28(1), 179-191.
    49. Boeker, W. (1997). Executive migration and strategic change: The effect of top manager movement on product-market entry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 213-236.
    50. Brickley, J. A., Lease, R. C., & Smith, C. W. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of financial economics, 20, 267-291.
    51. Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2006). Top management team behavioral integration, decision quality, and organizational decline. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(5), 441-453.
    52. Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(3), 275-284.
    53. Carpenter, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (2001). Top management teams, global strategic posture, and the moderating role of uncertainty. Academy of Management journal, 44(3), 533-545.
    54. Carpenter, M. A., & Sanders, W. M. (2002). Top management team compensation: The missing link between CEO pay and firm performance?. Strategic management journal, 23(4), 367-375.
    55. Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of management, 30(6), 749-778.
    56. Chaganti, R., & Sambharya, R. (1987). Strategic orientation and characteristics of upper management. Strategic management journal, 8(4), 393-401.
    57. Chen, M. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (1995). Speed, stealth, and selective attack: How small firms differ from large firms in competitive behavior. Academy of management journal, 38(2), 453-482.
    58. Cyert, R. M., Kang, S. H., & Kumar, P. (2002). Corporate governance, takeovers, and top-management compensation: Theory and evidence. Management Science, 48(4), 453-469.
    59. Dalton, D. R., & Kesner, I. F. (1985). Organizational performance as an antecedent of inside/outside chief executive succession: An empirical assessment. Academy of management Journal, 28(4), 749-762.
    60. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of management review, 14(1), 57-74.
    61. Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm. Journal of political economy, 88(2), 288-307.
    62. Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative science quarterly, 484-503.
    63. Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 654-681.
    64. Georgakakis, D., Greve, P., & Ruigrok, W. (2017). Top management team faultlines and firm performance: Examining the CEO-TMT interface. The Leadership Quarterly.
    65. Greening, D. W., & Johnson, R. A. (1997). Managing industrial and environmental crises: The role of heterogeneous top management teams. Business & Society, 36(4), 334-361.
    66. Grinstein, Y., & Hribar, P. (2004). CEO compensation and incentives: Evidence from M&A bonuses. Journal of financial economics, 73(1), 119-143.
    67. Hambrick, D. C., & D'Aveni, R. A. (1988). Large corporate failures as downward spirals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1-23.
    68. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of management review, 9(2), 193-206.
    69. Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms' competitive moves. Administrative science quarterly, 659-684.
    70. Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms' competitive moves. Administrative science quarterly, 659-684.
    71. Imhoff, G. (2003). Accounting quality, auditing and corporate governance.
    72. Jaskiewicz, P., Block, J. H., Miller, D., & Combs, J. G. (2017). Founder versus family owners’ impact on pay dispersion among non-CEO top managers: Implications for firm performance. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1524-1552.
    73. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360.
    74. Jensen, M. C., & Ruback, R. S. (1983). The market for corporate control: The scientific evidence. Journal of Financial economics, 11(1-4), 5-50.
    75. Knight, D., Pearce, C. L., Smith, K. G., Olian, J. D., Sims, H. P., Smith, K. A., & Flood, P. (1999). Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus. Strategic Management Journal, 445-465.
    76. Lin, H. C., & Shih, C. T. (2008). How executive SHRM system links to firm performance: The perspectives of upper echelon and competitive dynamics. Journal of Management, 34(5), 853-881.
    77. Michel, J. G., & Hambrick, D. C. (1992). Diversification posture and top management team characteristics. Academy of Management journal, 35(1), 9-37.
    78. Miller, D. (1991). Stale in the saddle: CEO tenure and the match between organization and environment. Management science, 37(1), 34-52.
    79. Morck, R., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1988). Alternative mechanisms for corporate control.
    80. Murray, A. I. (1989). Top management group heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic management journal, 10(S1), 125-141.
    81. Pitcher, P., & Smith, A. D. (2001). Top management team heterogeneity: Personality, power, and proxies. Organization Science, 12(1), 1-18.
    82. Sathe, V. (1983). The controller's role in management. Organizational Dynamics, 11(3), 31-48.
    83. Steinbach, A. L., Holcomb, T. R., Holmes, R. M., Devers, C. E., & Cannella, A. A. (2017). Top management team incentive heterogeneity, strategic investment behavior, and performance: A contingency theory of incentive alignment. Strategic Management Journal.
    84. Sturdivant, F. D., Ginter, J. L., & Sawyer, A. G. (1985). Managers' conservatism and corporate performance. Strategic Management Journal, 6(1), 17-38.
    85. Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. (2000). Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification. Journal of Management, 26(6), 1157-1177.
    86. Tushman, M. L., & Rosenkopf, L. (1996). Executive succession, strategic reorientation and performance growth: A longitudinal study in the US cement industry. Management Science, 42(7), 939-953.
    87. Üsdiken, B. (1992). The impact of environmental change on the characteristics of top management teams. British Journal of Management, 3(4), 207-219.
    88. Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1984). Organizational demography and turnover in top-management group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 74-92.
    89. Weir, C., & Laing, D. (2001). Governance structures, director independence and corporate
    90. Wheelen, T. L., & Hunger, J. D. (2011). Concepts in strategic management and business policy. Pearson Education India.
    91. Wiersema, M. F., & Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management journal, 35(1), 91-121.
    92. Zajac, B., & Stearns, L. B. (1997). CEOs' Career Backgrounds and Corporate Long‐Term Strategic Planning. Sociological inquiry, 67(2), 207-226.
    口試委員
  • 李慶芳 - 召集委員
  • 施智婷 - 委員
  • 林豪傑 - 指導教授
  • 口試日期 2017-06-13 繳交日期 2017-11-15

    [回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]


    如有任何問題請與論文審查小組聯繫