Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69521Full metadata record
| ???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 曾智揚 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ying-Chun Tung | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 董盈均 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T03:18:06Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2028-12-25 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2018-07-23 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2018-06-29 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 戎良琦,1986,統計方法在成本習性分析上之應用研究,國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。
張方駿,2015,經理人樂觀程度與成本僵固性之關聯性分析,國立臺灣大學會計學系碩士論文。 曾聯洲,2003,銷管費用僵固性之研究,國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。 楊朝旭,2008,集團多角化對研發外溢調節效果之研究,會計評論,第46期:31-65。 歐陽豪與黃美惠,2009,多角化策略與年報資訊揭露對金融產業公司績效影響之實證分析,2009 第五屆企業國際化理論與實務研討會,長榮大學。 Aaker, D. A., 1995, Strategic Market Management, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Amit, R. and J. Livnat, 1988, Diversification and Risk-return Trade-off, Academy of Management Journal, 31: 154-166. Anderson, M. C., R. D. Banker, and S. N. Janakiraman, 2003, Are Selling, General, and Cost 'Sticky'? Journal of Accounting Research 41: 47-63. Ansoff, H. I., 1957, Strategies for Diversification, Harvard Business Review 35(5):113-124. Ansoff, H. I., 1965, Corporate Strategy: An Analytic Approach to Business Policy for Growth and Expansion, Mc Graw-Hill, New York. Ansoff, H. I., 1988, The New Corporate Strategy, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Balakrishnan, R., M. Peterson, and N. Soderstrom, 2004, Does Capacity Utilization Affect the 'Stickiness' of Cost? Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 19: 283-300. Balakrishnan, R., K. Sivaramakrishnan, and G. Sprinkle, 2008, Managerial Accounting, Hoboken, New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Banker, R. D. and L. Chen, 2006, Predicting Earnings Using a Model Based on Cost Variability and Cost Stickiness, The Accounting Review 81: 285-307. Banker, R. D., D. Byzalov, M. Ciftci, and R. Mashruwala, 2014 a, The Moderating Effect of Prior Sales Changes on Asymmetric Cost Behavior, Journal of Management Accounting Research 26: 221-242. Banker, R. D., D. Byzalov, and J. M. Plehn-Dujowich, 2014 b, Demand Uncertainty and Cost Behavior, The Accounting Review 89:839-865. Banker, R. D. and D. Byzalov, 2014 c, Asymmetric cost behavior, Journal of Management Accounting Research 26: 43–79. Baysinger, B. and R. E. Hoskisson, 1990, The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: Effects on corporate strategy, Academy of Management Review 15: 72-87. Besanko, D., D. Dranove, and M. Shanley, 2000, Economics of Strategy (2nd Edition), John Wiley & Sons, New York. Byrd, J. W. and K. A. Hickman, 1992, Do outside directors monitor managers? Evidence from tender offer bids, Journal of Financial Economics 32: 195-221. Chen, C. X., H. Lu, and T. Sougiannis, 2012, The Agency Problem, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs, Contemporary Accounting Research 29: 252-282. Cooper, R. and R. Kaplan, 1998, The Design of Cost Management System: Text, Cases, and Readings. (2nd Edition), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Cyert, R. M., S. H. Kang, and P. Kumar, 2002, Corporate governance, takeovers, and top-management compensation: Theory and evidence, Management Science 48: 453-469. Dierynck, B., W.R. Landsman, and A. Renders, 2012, Do Managerial Incentives Drive Behavior? Evidence about the Role of the Zero Earnings Benchmark for Labor Cost Behavior in Belgian Private Firms, The Accounting Review 87:1219-1246. Gibbons, Robert, and K. J. Murphy, 1992, Optimal Incentive Contracts in the Presence of Career Concerns: Theory and Evidence, Journal of Political Economy 100: 468-505. Gort, M., 1962, Diversification and Integration in American Industry, NJ, Princeton University Press. Hall, C. M., 2016, Does Ownership Structure Affect Labor Decisions? The Accounting Review 91: 1671-1696. Halpern, P., 1983, Corporate Acquisitions: A Theory of Special Cases? A Review of Event Studies Applied to Acquisitions, Journal of Finance: 297-317. Holzhacker, M., R. Krishnan, and M. D. Mahlendorf, 2015, Unraveling the black box of cost behavior: An empirical investigation of risk drivers, managerial resource procurement, and cost elasticity, The Accounting Review 90: 2305-2335. Imel, B. and P. Helmberger, 1971, Estimation of Structure-profit Relationships with Application to the Food Processing Sector, The American Economic Review, 41: 614-627. Jacquemin, A. P. and C. H. Berry, 1979, Entropy Measure of Diversification and Corporate Growth, The Journal of industrial economic 27:359-369. Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling, 1976, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, Journal of Financial Economics 3:4, 305-360. Jensen, M. C., 1986, Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers, American Economic Review 76: 323-329. Jensen, M. C. and K. J. Murphy, 1988, Are Executive Compensation Contracts Structured Properly? Manuscript Boston: Harvard Bus. Kallapur, S. and L. Eldenburg, 2005, Uncertainty, Real Options, and Cost Behavior: Evidence from Washington State Hospitals, Journal Accounting Research 43: 735-752. Kama, I. and D. Weiss, 2013, Do Earnings Targets and Managerial Incentives Affect Sticky Costs? Journal of Accounting Research 51: 201-224. Kaplan, R. S. and A. A. Atkinson, 1998, Advanced Management Accounting, (3rd Edition), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Klein, A., 2002, Audit committee, Board of Director Characteristics, and Earnings Management, Journal of Accounting and Economics 33: 375-400. Montgomery, C. A., 1994, Corporate Diversification, Journal of Economic Perspectives 8:163-178. Noreen, E., 1991, Conditions under which Activity-based Cost System Provide Relevant Costs, Journal of Management Accounting Research 3: 159-168. Noreen, E. and N. Soderstrom, 1997, The Accuracy of Proportional Cost Models: Evidence from Hospital Service Department, Review of Accounting Studies 612: 89-114. Palepu, K. G., 1985, Diversification Strategy, Profit Performance, and the Entropy Measure, Strategic Management Journal 6: 239-255. Ramanujam, V. and P. Varadarajan, 1989, Research on Corporate Diversification:A Synthesis, Strategic Management Journal 10: 523-551. Reed, R. and G. A. Luffman, 1986, Diversification: The Growing Conclusion, Strategic Management Journal 7: 29-35. Rumelt, R. P., 1991, How much does industry matter? Strategic Management 12: 167-185. Shleifer, A., and R. W. Vishny, 1997, A survey of corporate governance, The Journal of Finance 52: 737-783. Simmonds, P.G., 1990, The Combined Diversification Breadth and Mode Dimensions and the Performance of Large Diversified Firms, Strategic Management Journal 11: 399-410. Stulz, R. M., 1990, Managerial Discretion and Optimal Financing Policies, Journal of Financial Economics 26: 3-27. Weisbach, M. S., 1988, Outside directors and CEO turnover, Journal of Financial Economics 20: 431-460. Weiss, D., 2010, Cost Behavior and Analysts' Earnings Forecasts, The Accounting Review 85: 1441-1471. Williamson, O. E., 1963, Managerial discretion and business behavior, The American Economic Review 53: 1032-1057. Williamson, O. E., 1983, Organization Form, Residual Claimants, and Corporate Control, Journal of Law & Economics: 315-366. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69521 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究探討企業多角化程度與成本習性之關聯性。採用多角化策略之企業通常會面臨不確定的市場需求以及較高風險,其變動成本對固定成本之比例應較高,即成本彈性愈高,因此推論多角化程度與成本彈性呈正向關係。然而,企業採多角化策略常對未來營運持樂觀預期,不會輕易裁撤已投入資源,因此容易使成本隨著成本動因下降的幅度,不若其隨著成本動因上升的幅度大,而產生成本僵固性,故推論多角化程度與成本僵固性呈現正向關係。本研究以1989 年至2016年台灣上市櫃公司為研究對象,實證結果支持本研究對企業多角化程度與成本習性之預期。本研究亦進行多項其他測試:採用其他多角化衡量指標;考慮有併購歷史之企業應更積極於多角化;近十年之樣本面對更競爭的環境應更積極於多角化;以及考慮獨立董事的存在減輕因代理問題所導致的成本僵固性。實證結果皆支持企業多角化程度分別與成本彈性及成本僵固性具正向關係。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The study examines the relation between corporate diversification strategy and cost behavior. Firms involving in more diversified businesses face higher demand uncertainty and higher operational risks. These firms should use more variable costs but less fixed costs, resulting in high cost elasticity. Thus, the study predicts corporate diversification strategy to be positively related to cost elasticity. Further, firms diversifying businesses are often optimistic and confident about the operational outcomes from the committed resources. The positive prospect should lead to cost stickiness, where the costs increase with the increases in activities more than they decrease with the drop in activities. Thus, the study predicts a positive relation between corporate diversification strategy and cost stickiness. Using a sample of listed companies in Taiwan, the empirical results support the above predictions. A few robustness tests are performed: alternative business diversification measure; firms with history of mergers and acquisitions as an indicator of active diversification in businesses; a subsample of observations from recent ten years for measuring the diversification in setting of highly competitive environment; the board governance in ameliorating cost stickiness as caused by agency problems. The above results all support that corporate diversification strategy is positively related to cost elasticity as well as cost stickiness. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T03:18:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-107-R05722048-1.pdf: 932968 bytes, checksum: 2672402f7d5e78a380ac16cf2a8b3d9e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌................................................................................................................. i
摘要 ................................................................................................................ii Abstract ...........................................................................................................iii 目錄 ............................................................................................................... iv 圖次 ................................................................................................................v 表次 ................................................................................................................v 第一章 緒論........................................................................................................1 第一節 研究動機與目的............................................................................1 第二節 研究架構與流程............................................................................3 第二章 文獻探討及假說建立............................................................................4 第一節 企業多角化....................................................................................4 第二節 成本彈性........................................................................................5 第三節 成本僵固性....................................................................................5 第四節 研究假說........................................................................................6 第三章 研究方法................................................................................................8 第一節 樣本選擇與資料來源....................................................................8 第二節 多角化程度衡量............................................................................9 第三節 研究模型........................................................................................9 第四章 實證結果與分析..................................................................................14 第一節 敘述性統計..................................................................................14 第二節 企業產品多角化程度與成本彈性之關聯性分析......................15 第三節 企業產品多角化程度與成本僵固性之關聯性分析..................17 第五章 敏感性測試..........................................................................................20 第一節 不同多角化衡量指數與成本習性之關聯性分析......................20 第二節 多角化指數分群與成本習性之關聯性分析..............................22 第三節 企業併購與成本習性之關聯性分析..........................................26 第四節 產業競爭環境分期之影響..........................................................29 第五節 代理問題與成本僵固性之關聯性分析......................................32 第五章 研究結論與建議..................................................................................35 第一節 研究結論......................................................................................35 第二節 研究限制與建議..........................................................................37 參考文獻 .......................................................................................................39 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 成本僵固性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 企業多角化策略 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 成本彈性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 成本習性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Cost Behavior | en |
| dc.subject | Cost Elasticity | en |
| dc.subject | Corporate Diversification Strategy | en |
| dc.subject | Cost Stickiness | en |
| dc.title | 企業多角化與成本習性之關聯性分析 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Diversification of Enterprises and Cost Behavior | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 106-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳耀宗,葛俊佑 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 企業多角化策略,成本彈性,成本僵固性,成本習性, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Corporate Diversification Strategy,Cost Elasticity,Cost Stickiness,Cost Behavior, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 42 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201801168 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2018-06-29 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 會計學研究所 | zh_TW |
| Appears in Collections: | 會計學系 | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-107-1.pdf Restricted Access | 911.1 kB | Adobe PDF |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
