請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/77634
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 湯明哲 | |
dc.contributor.author | Yi-Chun Liu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 劉怡君 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-07-10T22:12:48Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-07-10T22:12:48Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2018-07-12 | |
dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2018-07-09 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: tool for entrepreneurship?. Small Business Economics, 23(2), 127-135.
2. Aerts, K., Matthyssens, P., & Vandenbempt, K. (2007). Critical role and screening practices of European business incubators. Technovation, 27(5), 254-267. 3. Barbero, J. L., Casillas, J. C., Wright, M., & Garcia, A. R. (2014). Do different types of incubators produce different types of innovations?. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(2), 151-168. 4. Besen, S. M., & Farrell, J. (1994). Choosing how to compete: Strategies and tactics in standardization. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 117-131. 5. Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysse, B., & Groen, A. (2012). The Evolution of Business Incubators: Comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation, 32(2), 110-121. 6. Camerer, C., & Vepsalainen, A. (1988). The economic efficiency of corporate culture. Strategic Management Journal (1986-1998), 9(5), 115. 7. Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003). Chicken & egg: Competition among intermediation service providers. RAND journal of Economics, 309-328. 8. Casasnovas, G., & Bruno, A. V. (2013). SCALING SOCIAL VENTURES. Journal of Management for Global Sustainability, 1(2). 9. Chandler, G. N., DeTienne, D. R., McKelvie, A., & Mumford, T. V. (2011). Causation and effectuation processes: A validation study. Journal of business venturing, 26(3), 375-390. 10. Churchil, N. C., & Lewis, V. L. (1983). The Five Stages of Small Business Growth. Havard Business School Publishing Computer Security Institute (2004). 11. Clausen, T., & Rasmussen, E. (2011). Open innovation policy through intermediaries: the industry incubator programme in Norway. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(1), 75-85. 12. Clements, M. T., & Ohashi, H. (2005). Indirect network effects and the product cycle: video games in the US, 1994–2002. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 53(4), 515-542. 13. Cohen, S. (2013). What Do Accelerators Do? Insights from Incubators and Angels. innovations, 8(3-4), 19-25. 14. Cusumano, M. A., & Gawer, A. (2002). The elements of platform leadership. MIT Sloan management review, 43(3), 51. 15. Dutta, D. K., & Thornhill, S. (2008). The evolution of growth intentions: Toward a cognition-based model. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(3), 307-332. 16. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14(4), 532-550. 17. Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. W. (2006). Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard business review, 84(10), 92. 18. Eisenmann, T. R. (2006). Internet companies' growth strategies: determinants of investment intensity and long‐term performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1183-1204. 19. Eisenmann, T. R., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. W. (2008). Opening platforms: how, when and why?. Platforms, markets and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing. 20. Eisenmann, T., Parker, G. and Van Alstyne, M. W. (2011). Platform envelopment. Strategic Management Journal 32, 1270–1285. 21. Evans, D. S., & Schmalensee, R. (2016). Matchmakers: the new economics of multisided platforms. Harvard Business Review Press. 22. Faulkner, R. R., & Anderson, A. B. (1987). Short-term projects and emergent careers: Evidence from Hollywood. American journal of sociology, 879-909. 23. Fiet, J. O. (2002). The Systematic Search for Entrepreneurial Discoveries.Westport, CT:Quorum. 24. Fisher, G. (2012). Effectuation, causation, and bricolage: A behavioral comparison of emerging theories in entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 36(5), 1019-1051 25. Ghosal, V., & Ye, Y. (2015). Uncertainty and the employment dynamics of small and large businesses. Small Business Economics, 44(3), 529-558. 26. Greiner, L. E. 1998. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review May-June:55–66. 27. Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of management review, 22(4), 911-945. 28. Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. The American economic review, 75(3), 424-440. 29. Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. New York: Hart, Schaffner and Marx. 30. Krasniqi, B. A. (2012). Building an expanded small firm growth model in a transitional economy: Evidence on fast growing firms. Journal of East-West Business, 18(3), 231-273. 31. Lee, E., Lee, J., & Lee, J. (2006). Reconsideration of the winner-take-all hypothesis: Complex networks and local bias. Management Science, 52(12), 1838-1848. 32. Lemos, A. Q., & Andreassi, T. (2015). Effectuation and causation: Propositions about decision making process in business network environments. Revista de Negócios, 20(1), 29-43. 33. Lewis, D. A., Harper-Anderson, E., & Molnar, L. A. (2011). Incubating success. incubation best practices that lead to successful new ventures. Ann Arbor: Institute for Research on Labor, Employment, and Development, 1-144. 34. Liao, J., & Welsch, H. (2005). Roles of social capital in venture creation: Key dimensions and research implications. Journal of small business management, 43(4), 345-362. 35. Lin, W. (2017). The Mechanisms of Transition from Effectual to Causal thinking in Entrepreneurial Contingency. International Journal of Business and Management, 12(5), 51. 36. Liu, Y. T. (2015). Timing and Consequence of Transition from Effectual to Causal Thinking in New Venture Growth. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2015, No. 1, p. 18401). Academy of Management. 37. March, J. (1982). The technology of foolishness. In J.G. March and J.P. Olsen (Ed.), Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations. Universitetsforlaget: Bergen. 38. Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2005). Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market. Research Policy, 34(7), 1058-1075. 39. Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management science, 24(9), 934-948. 40. Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. I. (1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244(4907), 933-938. 41. Milanov, H., & Fernhaber, S. A. (2009). The impact of early imprinting on the evolution of new venture networks. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(1), 46-61. 42. Miller, P., & Bound, K. (2011). The Startup Factories: The rise of accelerator programmes to support new technology ventures. NESTA. 43. Newbert, S. L., & Tornikoski, E. T. (2012). Supporter networks and network growth: a contingency model of organizational emergence. Small Business Economics, 39(1), 141-159. 44. Parker, S. C., Congregado, E., Golpe, A., & Saxenian, A. (2015). 20 Incubators and Accelerators. Concise Guide to Entrepreneurship, Technology and Innovation, 3, 108. 45. Perry, J. T., G. N. Chandler, and G. Markova (2012). “Entrepreneurial Effectuation: A Review and Suggestions for Future Research,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 36(4), 837–861. 46. Reymen, I. M., P. Andries, H. Berends, R. Mauer, U. Stephan, and E. Burg (2015). “Understanding Dynamics of Strategic Decision Making in Venture Creation: A Process Study of Effectuation and Causation,” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 9(4), 351–379. 47. Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). The art of standards wars. California management review, 41(2), 8-32. 48. Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). “Causation and Effectuation: Towards a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency,” Academy of Management Review 26(2), 243–288. 49. Sarasvathy, S., K. Kumar, J. G. York, and S. Bhagavatula (2014). “An Effectual Approach to International Entrepreneurship: Overlaps, Challenges, and Provocative Possibilities,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 38(1), 71–93. 50. Scillitoe, J. L., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (2010). The role of incubator interactions in assisting new ventures. Technovation, 30(3), 155-167. 51. Scott, M., & Bruce, R. (1987). Five stages of growth in small business. Long range planning, 20(3), 45-52. 52. Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Weley. 53. Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies. New York, 26-30. 54. Williamson, O. E. (1991). Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative science quarterly, 269-296. 55. Wiltbank, R., Dew, N., Read, S., & Sarasvathy, S. D. (2006). What to do next? The case for non‐predictive strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 27(10), 981-998. 56. Woertman, S. (2014). The impact of networks on effectuation over causation processes. 57. Wu, A. (2012). Do startup accelerators deliver value? The economics of creating companies, MIT Entrepreneurship Review, August 14. 58. Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods . Beverly Hills. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/77634 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 當創業家面對開創新企業的不確定性時,通常會運用效果推理和因果推理作為不同的決策邏輯。許多創業團隊根據他們在開始創業的生命週期中,面臨的不同挑戰來調整他們的決策認知類型。創立企業的過程的特點是在面對不確定性時,需要適時做出決策並採取行動。由於應用程序(app industry)競爭的高度不確定性(生命週期短,競爭激烈),我們選擇從事應用程序經濟(app economy)的新創企業,作為研究的對象。為了了解在創業不確定性下如何決策,我們找了10個從事app產業的創業團隊,研究在其創業的生命週期中,商業環境的社會機制下的新創企業,如何從效果推理和因果推理決策中獲益,並探討這些轉變和這些機制的成果。我們使用來自28位高階決策者的71份深入訪談的資料,按時間順序記錄了179個關鍵決策,並檢查了決策過程的模式。我們發現,創業家認知決策在損益平衡點之前後,採取在一個積極行動的「保留策略」或「生存策略」。我們研究支持社會交換機制和效果推理原則,並探討了兩個決策過程之間的動態歷程如何影響初創團隊。這種交流機制表明,新創業企業如何結構性地正向影響交易,談判和融資能力等方面,使公司能夠利用社會機制進行調整,協調和保障。我們的觀察結果提出了一個關於策略決策的全方面觀點,展示了效果推理和因果推理邏輯如何轉換,以及創業企業如何透過整合交易成本理論和社會網絡理論的機制來說明之。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Entrepreneurs rely on different decision-making logics when they face the uncertainty on starting new ventures by both of causal and effectual reasoning. Many entrepreneurial teams adjusting their cognitive styles based on the different challenges they face during the new venture life cycle. The process of new venture creation is characterized by the need to decide and take action in the face of uncertainty. Due to the high uncertainty (short life cycle and high competition) of app competitions, we choose the new venture firms are in app business and also adopted for a given app affects app performance as measured by the app’s database. To investigate the uncertainty under social mechanisms on how new ventures benefit from between effectuation and causation over the life cycle of ventures launched by 10 startup teams which are all focusing on app economy; and to explore the consequences of this transition and these mechanisms. Using data from 71 in-depth interviews with 28 executive members, we recorded 179 key decisions chronologically and examined the pattern of decision-making processes. We found that a dynamic of entrepreneurial cognitive style will reveal a certain conservative action, the remaining decision, before the breakeven point and an aggressive action, the survival decision, the next growth means. Our examination supported the social exchange mechanisms with effectuation principles and explored how the transitions between the two decision-making processes impact start-up teams. This exchange mechanism demonstrates how new venture firms encourage structurally embedding their transactions, negotiating and financing capabilities, which enable firms to use social mechanisms for adapting, coordination and safeguarding. Our observations suggest a hybrid perspective on strategic decision-making, demonstrating how effectuation and causation logics are combined, and how entrepreneurs emphasis by integrating and synthesizing transaction cost economics and social network theory. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-07-10T22:12:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-107-P04746004-1.pdf: 2738176 bytes, checksum: 2af67e01fc5a431af8421d079030e72d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 目錄
口試委員審定書 i 誌謝 ii 中文摘要 iii THESIS ABSTRACT iv 目錄 vi 圖目錄 viii 表目錄 ix 第一章 緒論 1 第一節、研究緣起暨動機1 第二節、研究目的與貢獻3 第三節、研究步驟與架構4 第四節、研究流程圖5 第二章 文獻回顧 6 第一節、創業環境 6 第二節、創業決策模型:效果推理與因果推理 10 第三節、多邊平台和應用程序經濟中的多面相網路效應 13 第四節、創業團隊的成長模式 16 第三章 研究方法、樣本與數據 18 第一節、研究方法 18 第二節、樣本和數據 19 第三節、數據採集 20 第四章 結果分析與討論 22 第一節、質性分析(案例A1分析)24 第二節、高度不確定性增加了社會交換機制的影響28 第三節、認知多樣性的動態:保留決定與生存決定30 第五章 結論與建議33 第一節、面對創業偶發性的交換機制35 第二節、研究結論37 第三節、研究限制與後續研究建議38 參考文獻 39 圖目錄 圖 1-1 How Social Mechanisms Resolve Exchange Problems as Dynamics of Transition8 圖 5-1 Dynamics of transition between Effectuation and Causation in entrepreneurial contingency35 表目錄 表1-1 Key differences between incubators, accelerators and angel investors7 表3-1 Description and background of the entrepreneurial teams20 表4-1 Case A1 Chronicles of decisions and categorizing22 表4-2 The entrepreneur team of case A1 decision model summary23 表4-3 Cross-case comparative Summary27 表4-4 Key decision of dynamics between effectuation and causation31 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 新創事業領導特質研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | A Study of the Leadership
from the Perspective of Entrepreneurship of Startups | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 106-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 吳政衛,陳聿宏 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 效果推理,App經濟,社會交換機制,保留策略,生存策略, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | effectuation,app economy,social exchange mechanism,remaining decision,survival decision, | en |
dc.relation.page | 43 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201801357 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2018-07-10 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 國際企業管理組 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 國際企業管理組 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-107-P04746004-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.67 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。