請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/15337
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 陳忠仁(Chung-Jen Chen) | |
dc.contributor.author | Chen-Hsiang Hong | en |
dc.contributor.author | 洪振翔 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-07T17:33:01Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2020-07-17 | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2020-07-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | [1] Allen, M. P., Panian, S. K., Lotz, R. E. 1979. Managerial succession and organizational performance: a recalcitrant problem revisited. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2): 167-180. [2] Anderson, E. G. Jr Parker, G., Tan, B. 2014. Platform performance investment in the presence of network externalities. Information Systems Research, 25(1): 152-172. [3] Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1): 99-120. [4] Beyer, J. M., Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., Glick, W. H., Ogilvie, D. T., Pugliese, D. 1997. The selective perception of managers revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), pp.716-737. [5] Black, J., Hashimzade, N., Myles, G. 2009. A Dictionary of Economics (4th Edition.). Oxford University Press. [6] Boeker, W. 1997. Strategic change: The influence of managerial characteristics and organizational growth. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1): 152-170. [7] Boeker, W., Goodstein, J. 1993. Performance and successor choice: The moderating effects of governance and ownership. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 172-186. [8] Boudreau, K. 2010. Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access vs. devolving control. Management Science, 56(10): 1849-1872. [9] Boudreau, K. Lakhani, K. 2009. How to manage outside innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(4): 69. [10] Boudreau, K. J. 2012. Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom? An Early Look at Large Numbers of Software App Developers and Patterns of Innovation. Organization Science, 23(5): 1213-1522. [11] Boudreau, K. J., Jeppesen, L. B. 2015. Unpaid crowd complementors: The platform network effect mirage. Strategic Management Journal, 36(12): 1761-1777. [12] Brumley D., Jager I., Avgerinos T., Schwartz E.J. 2011. BAP: A Binary Analysis Platform. In: Gopalakrishnan G., Qadeer S. (eds) Computer Aided Verification, 6806: 463-469. [13] Byrne, D., Clore, G. I., Worchel, P. 1966. The effect of economic similarity-dissimilarity as determinants of attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4: 220-224. [14] 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): 532-545. [15] Carpenter, M. A., Westphal, J. D. 2001. The strategic context of external network ties: Examining the impact of director appointments on board involvement in strategic decision making. Academy of Management journal, 44(4): 639-660. [16] Chaganti, R., Sambharya, R. 1987. Strategic orientation and characteristics of upper management. Strategic management journal, 8(4): 393-401. [17] Chen, C. J., Huang, Y. F. 2010. Creative workforce density, organizational slack, and innovation performance. Journal of Business Research, 63(4): 411-417. [18] Chung, C. N., Luo, X. R. 2013. Leadership succession and firm performance in an emerging economy: Successor origin, relational embeddedness, and legitimacy. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3): 338-357. [19] Cusumano, M. A. 2010. Technology strategy and management: The evolution of platform thinking. Communications of the ACM, 53(1): 32-34. [20] Cusumano, M. A., Gawer, A., Yoffie, D.B. 2019. The Business of Platforms: Strategy in the Age of Digital Competition, Innovation, and Power. Harper Business. [21] 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. [22] Daniel, F., Lohrke, F. T., Fornaciari, C. J., Turner Jr, R. A. 2004. Slack resources and firm performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Business Research, 57(6): 565-574. [23] Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P. 1994. Executive succession: Organizational antecedents of CEO characteristic. Strategic Management Journal, 15(7): 569-577. [24] Dess, G. G., Beard, D. W. 1984. Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1): 52-73. [25] Evans, D., Hagiu, A., Schmalensee, R. 2006. Invisible Engines: How Software Platforms Drive Innovation and Transform Industries. The MIT Press. [26] Finkelstein, S., Boyd, B. K. 1998. How Much Does the CEO Matter? The Role of Managerial Discretion in the Setting of CEO Compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41(2): 179-199. [27] Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C. 1990. Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative science quarterly, 35(3): 484-503. [28] Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C. 1996. Strategic Leadership: Top Executives and their Effects on Organizations. West Publishing: St. Paul, M. [29] Finkelstein, S., Hambrick, D. C., Cannella, A. A. 2009. Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards. New York: Oxford University Press. [30] Gamson, W. A., Scotch, N. A. 1964. Scapegoating in baseball. American Journal of Sociology, 70(1): 69-72. [31] Gawer, A. 2009. Platform dynamics and strategies: from products to services. In AnnabelG. (Ed.), Platforms, markets and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing, 45-76. [32] Gawer, A., Cusumano, M. A. 2002. Platform leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Harvard Business School Press, 5: 29-30. [33] Gawer, A. Cusumano, M. A. 2008. Platform Leaders. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(2): 68-75. [34] Gawer, A. Cusumano, M. A. 2013. Industry Platforms and Ecosystem Innovation. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3): 417-433. [35] Gawer, A. Henderson, R. 2007. Platform owner entry and innovation in complementary markets: Evidence from Intel. Journal of Economics Management Strategy, 16(1): 1-34. [36] Geletkanycz, M. A. 1997. The salience of ‘culture’s consequences’: The effects of cultural values on top executive commitment to the status quo. Strategic Management Journal, 18(8): 615-634. [37] Geletkanycz, M. A., Black, S. S., 2001. Bound by the past? Experience-based effects on commitment to the strategic status quo. Journal of Management, 27(1): 3-21. [38] Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., Shalley, C. E. 2006. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of management journal, 49(4): 693-706. [39] Guthrie, J. P., Datta, D. K. 1997. Contextual influences on executive selection: Firm characteristics and CEO experience. Journal of Management Studies, 34(4): 537-560. [40] Hambirck, D. C. 2007. Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32: 334-343. [41] Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., Chen, M. 1996. The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms’ competitive moves. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 659-684. [42] Hambrick, D. C., Finkelstein, S. 1987. Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Research in organizational behavior, 9: 369-406. [43] Hambrick, D. C., Geletkanycz, M., Fredrickson, J. 1993. Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some tests of its determinants. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 401-418. [44] 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. [45] Haveman, H. 1992. Between a rock and a hard place: Organizational change and performance under conditions of fundamental environmental transformation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 48-75. [46] Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., Collins, B. J. 2009. Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of management, 35(6): 1404-1427. [47] Jensen, M. C. 1986. Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American economic review, 76(2): 323-329. [48] Judge, T. A., Ferris, G. R. 1993. Social context of performance evaluation decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 80-105. [49] Karaevli, A. 2007. Performance consequences of new CEO “outsiderness”: moderating effects of pre- and post-succession contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 28: 681-706. [50] Katz, R. 1982. The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative science quarterly, 27: 81-104. [51] Katz, M. L., Carl, S. 1994. 'Systems Competition and Network Effects.' Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8 (2): 93-115. [52] Kiesler, S., Sproull, L. 1982. Managerial response to changing environments: Perspectives on problem sensing from social cognition. Administrative science quarterly, 27(4): 548-570. [53] Lambrecht, A., Goldfarb, A., Bonatti, A., Ghose, A., Goldstein. D. G., Lewis, R., Yao, S. 2014. How do firms make money selling digital goods online? Marketing Letters, 25(3): 331-341. [54] Lee, W. B., Cheung, C. F., Lau, H. C. W., Choy, K. L. 2003. Development of a Web‐based enterprise collaborative platform for networked enterprises. Business Process Management Journal, 9(1): 46-59. [55] Lehdonvirta, V., Kässi, O., Hjorth, I., Barnard, H., Graham, M. 2019. The Global Platform Economy: A New Offshoring Institution Enabling Emerging-Economy Microproviders. Journal of Management, 45(2): 567–599. [56] Lester, R. H., Hillman, A., Zardkoohi, A., Cannella, A. A., Jr. 2008. Former government officials as outside directors: The role of human and social capital. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5): 999-1013. [57] Lin, W. T., Liu, Y. 2012. Successor characteristics, organizational slack, and change in the degree of firm internationalization. International Business Review, 21(1): 89-101. [58] Luo, Y. 2003. Industrial dynamics and managerial networking in an emerging market: The case of China. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13): 1315-1327. [59] March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2(1): 71-87. [60] Marchand, A., Hennig-Thurau, T. 2013. Value creation in the video game industry: Industry economics, consumer benefits, and research opportunities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(3): 141-157. [61] McIntyre, D. P. Srinivasan, A. 2017. Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management Journal, 38(1), 141–160. [62] Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., Silverman, B. S. 1998. Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm. Research policy, 27(5): 507-523. [63] Nair, H., 2007. 'Intertemporal price discrimination with forward-looking consumers: Application to the US market for console video-games.' Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 5(3): 239-292. [64] Nieborg, D. B., van der Graaf, S. 2008. The mod industries? The industrial logic of non-market game production. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 11(2): 177-195. [65] Paik, Y., Kang, S., Seamans, R. 2018. Entrepreneurship, innovation, and political competition: How the public sector helps the sharing economy create value. Strategic Management Journal, 40(4): 503-532. [66] Palmer, T. B., Wiseman, R. M. 1999. Decoupling risk taking from income stream uncertainty: a holistic model of risk. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11): 1037-1062. [67] Quigley, T. J. Hambrick, D. C. 2012. When the former CEO stays on as board chair: effects on successor discretion, strategic change, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(7): 834-859. [68] Rochet, J. C., Tirole, J. 2003. Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4): 990-1029. [69] Rogers, E. M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press. [70] Rogers, E. M. 2010. Diffusion of Innovations (4th Edition.). Simon and Schuster. [71] Rugman, A., Verbeke, A. 2004. A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35: 3-18. [72] Sambharya, R. B. 1996. Foreign experience of top management teams and international diversification strategies of US multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 17(9): 739-746. [73] Singh, J. V. 1986. Performance, slack, and risk taking in organizational decision making. Academy of management Journal, 29(3): 562-585. [74] Song, You-Xiang. 2019. The relationship between predecessor CEO’s human capital and successor CEO’s human capital-The moderating roles of organizational slack. Master dissertation, National Taiwan University. [75] Thies, F., Wessel, M., Benlian, A. 2016. Effects of Social Interaction Dynamics on Platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33: 843-873. [76] Thomas, A. S., Litschert, R. J., Ramaswamy, K. 1991. The performance impact of strategy‐manager coalignment: An empirical examination. Strategic management journal, 12(7): 509-522. [77] Tiwana, A. 2013. Platform ecosystems: Aligning architecture, governance, and strategy. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann. [78] Tiwana, A. 2015. Platform desertion by app developers. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(4): 40-77. [79] Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., Bush, A. A. 2010. Research Commentary-Platform evolution: Coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research, 21(4): 675-687. [80] Tsui, A. S., O'Reilly, C. A. 1989. Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32: 402-423. [81] Tushman, M. L., Romanelli, E. 1985. Organizational evolution: a metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. In Research in Organizational Behavior, 7: 171-122. [82] Virany, B., Tushman, M. L., Romanelli, E. 1992. Executive succession and organization outcomes in turbulent environments: An organization learning approach. Organization Science, 3(1): 72-91. [83] Voiculet, A., Belu, N., Parpandel, D., Elena Rizea, I. C. 2010. The impact of external environment on organizational development strategy. Munich Personal RePEc Archive, No. 26303. [84] Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2): 171-180. [85] Wiersema, M. F., Bantel, K. A. 1993. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management journal, 35(1): 91-121. [86] Zhu, F., Iansiti, M. 2012. Entry into platform‐based markets. Strategic Management Journal, 33(1): 88-106. [87] Zhu, F., Liu, Q. 2018. Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon. com. Strategic Management Journal, 39(10): 2618–2642. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/15337 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 平台,是現今許多公司的策略佈局範疇,用以連結組織內外部資源,可能同時擁有客戶、廠商等多方參與者參與平台的活動事務,對於公司的經營有多重層次的影響。至於平台種類的選擇,則攸關此平台是否能為公司帶來實質助益,在搭配內部資源與外部環境的協調,使公司能獲得持續的獲益增長,這些在理論與實務上都是非常重要且迫切的議題。因此關於平台策略的議題研究從1980年代有了網際網路之後,便從各方面領域發展開花。經過40年來的各方努力,平台策略的議題已發展成兩大主流。第一個主流是注重於平台類型的選擇,包含平台系統級別與平台參與者。而第二個主流是分析所選平台的結果,包含分析網路效益以及如何計算平台績效表現等等。然而,在此兩大主流研究之中,主要都是在探討平台本身的變數,而較少著墨公司選擇平台的決策變數,也很少注重分析平台與外部環境的交互關係。 基於上述這些原因,本篇論文的目標即為分析公司在選擇使用何種平台的決策變數以及組織寬裕資源與外部環境對平台決策的交互關係。本論文以美國平台相關的公司作為研究對象,收集自2000年至2018年內共284 家公司的1134筆公司年度財務資料,作為研究的數據。經實證研究的結果顯示,公司組織寬裕資源與平台範疇存在近乎線性關係,因不同種類的組織寬裕資源而呈現正向或負向。而外部環境在此兩者關係中有著調和的效果,也因不同種類的外部環境而呈現正向或負向。本論文透過建立了決策層級的平台理論架構,彌補了過去的研究方向缺口,同時也對公司組織在選擇平台範疇時提供了策略管理意涵的參考依據。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Many companies nowadays have a strategic platform. It is used to integrate the organization's external and internal capital while involving clients, suppliers and other members in the operations of the platform. It has multiple levels of impact on the operations of the company. As far as the platform type is concerned, it is important whether it can provide the company with substantial benefits. The business may achieve sustained income development in coordination with internal resources and external environments. These are very theoretical and practical, important and urgent issues. Therefore, since the invention of the Internet in the late 1980s, research on platform strategy has been evolving in all dimensions. The topic of platform strategy has been developed into two main streams after all parties have made efforts for nearly 40 years. The first mainstream is concentrated on the choice of platform type, including platform system level and platform participants. The second main stream is to analyze the results of the platform chosen, including network effect analysis and how to measure platform performance, and so on. However, the two mainstream studies mainly discuss the variables of the platform itself, with little research focusing on the platform decision variables. The analysis of the platform's interaction with the external environment also received rare attention. Based on the reasons above, the goal of this thesis is to analyze the decision variables of which platform the company chooses to use on platform decision-making and the interaction between the resources of the organization and the external environment on platform decision. This thesis takes U.S. companies related to the platform as the research object, collecting 1134 annual financial data of 284 companies from 2000 to 2018 as the research data. The results of empirical research show that there is a linear relationship between the company's organizational slack and the platform scope, which is positive or negative due to different types of organizational slack. The external environment has a moderating effect in the relationship between organizational slack and the platform scope, and it is also positive or negative due to different types of external environment. This paper constructs the theoretical framework of the decision-making platform to make up for the research gaps in the past, and also provides a reference basis for the strategic management implications of the company and organization when choosing the platform scope. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-07T17:33:01Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-0107202014212300.pdf: 2852152 bytes, checksum: 80246b681ae514ed74f3a7aa824ff340 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i 誌謝 ii 中文摘要 iii ABSTRACT iv CONTENTS vi LIST OF FIGURES viii LIST OF TABLES ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Research background 1 1.2 Research questions 4 1.3 Research procedure 5 1.3.1 The structure of this study 5 1.3.2 Research flow 6 Chapter 2 Literature review 8 2.1 Selections of platform-type variables 9 2.1.1 System level of platform 9 2.1.2 Platform roles 10 2.2 Outcomes of platforms 16 2.2.1 Network effect 16 2.2.2 Measurement of platform performance 17 Chapter 3 Research framework and methodology 20 3.1 Research framework and hypotheses 20 3.2 Data collection and sample 22 3.3 Measures 23 3.3.1 Dependent variable 23 3.3.2 Independent variable 23 3.3.3 Moderating variable 25 3.3.4 Control variable 25 3.4 Model specifications 30 Chapter 4 Results 31 4.1 Descriptive statistics 31 4.2 Empirical results 32 Chapter 5 Discussion and conclusion 38 5.1 Theoretical implications 39 5.2 Managerial implications 43 5.3 Limitation and future direction 44 REFERENCE 46 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 組織寬裕資源與產業環境對平台範疇策略之影響 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The effect of organizational slack and industry environment on the platform scope strategy | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 108-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳俊忠(Chun-Chung Chen),林俊裕(Jun-You Lin) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 平台策略,平台範疇,平台決策,外部環境,組織寬裕資源,調和效果, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Platform strategy,Platform scope,Platform decision,External environment,Organizational slack,Moderating effect, | en |
dc.relation.page | 58 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202001237 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2020-07-03 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 商學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-0107202014212300.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.79 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。