Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 管理學院
  3. 國際企業學系
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/49507
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor吳學良
dc.contributor.authorJung-Ching Linen
dc.contributor.author林容璟zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-15T11:32:02Z-
dc.date.available2026-12-31
dc.date.copyright2016-08-31
dc.date.issued2016
dc.date.submitted2016-08-16
dc.identifier.citationAnderson, R., Mansi, S., Reeb, D. M. 2003. Founding family ownership and the agency cost of debt. Journal of Financial Economy, 68: 263-285.
Anderson, R. C., and Reeb, D. M., 2004. Board composition: Balancing family influence in S&P 500 firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2): 209-237.
Ansari, I. F., Goergen, M., and Mira, S. 2014. The determinants of the CEO successor choice in family firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 28: 6-25.
Aronoff, C. E., and Ward, J. L. 1995. Family-owned businesses: a thing of the past or a model for the future. Family Business Review, 8(2): 121-130.
Bach, L. 2010. Why are family firms so small? Paris School of Economics (PSE), Mimeo.
Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51: 1173-1182.
Baysinger, B. D., Kosnik, R. D., and Turk, T. A. 1991. Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1): 205-214.
Berrone, P., Cruz, C., and Gomez-Mejia, L. R. 2012. Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25: 258-279.
Bertrand, M., and Schoar, A. 2006. The role of family in family firms. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2): 73-96.
Bianco, M., Bontempi, M. E., Golinelli, R., and Parigi, G. 2013. Family firm’s investment, uncertainty, and opacity. Small Business Economics, 40(4): 1035-1058.
Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers, L. E., and Werner, S. 2008. Real options, international entry mode choice and performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45(5): 936-960.
Casson, M. 1999. The economics of the family firm. Scandinavian Economic History Review, 17(1): 10-23.
CFBG, 2014. Chinese Family Business Report. http://cfbglobal.org/2014-10-29-cfb-forum/item/86-2013-12-04-01-32-06 ,Accessed: May 14, 2016.
Chang, S. J. 2003. Ownership structure, expropriation, and performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2): 238-253.
Chesbrough, H. W. 2002. Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Business Review, March: 4-11.
Chi, T. 2000. Option to acquire or divest a joint venture. Strategic Management Journal, 21(6): 665-687.
Chrisman, J. J., and Patel, P. C. 2012. Variation in R&D investments of family and nonfamily firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4): 976-997.
Claessens, S., and Fan, J. P. H. 2002. Corporate governance in Asia: A survey. International Review of Finance, 3(2): 71-103.
Corbetta, G., and Salvato, A. 2004. Self-serving or self-actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms: A commentary on “Comparing the agency costs of family and non-family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28: 355-362.
Cox, J. C., and Rubinstein, M. 1985. Option markets. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cui, A. S. 2013. Portfolio dynamics and alliance termination: The contingent role of resource dissimilarity. Journal of Marketing, 77(3): 15-32.
Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., and Cannella, A. A. 2003. Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3): 371-382.
Damaraju, N. L., Barney, J. B., and Makhija, A. K. 2015. Real options in divestment alternatives. Strategic Management Journal, 36(5): 728-744.
Demsetz, H., and Kenneth, L. 1985. The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of Political Economy, 93: 1155-1177.
Dixit, A., and Pindyck, R. 1994. Investment under uncertainty. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press.
Dyer, W. G., and Whetten, D. A. 2006. Family firms and social responsibility: Preliminary evidence from S&P 500. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30: 785-802.
Economist, 2015. The power of families: Dynasties. http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21648639-enduring-power-families-business-and-politics-should-trouble-believers, Accessed: May, 14, 2016.
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 57-74.
Faccio, M., Lang, L.H.P., and Young, L. 2001. Dividends and expropriation. American Economic Review, 91: 54-78.
Folta, T. B., and Miller, K. D. 2002. Real options and equity partnerships. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 77-88.
Folta, T. B., and O’Brien, J. P. 2004. Entry in the presence of dueling options. Strategic Management Journal, 25(2): 21-138.
Fombrun, C. 1996. Reputation. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., and Hansen, J. M. 2009. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 425-445.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Nunez-Nickel, M., and Gutierrez, I. 2001. The role of family ties in agency contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1): 81-95.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Makri, M., and Kintana, M. L. 2010. Diversification decision in family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2): 223-252.
Hsieh, K. Y., Tsai, W. P., and Chen, M. J. 2015. If they can do it, why not us? Competitors as reference points for justifying escalation of commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1): 38-58.
Kachaner, N., Stalk, G., and Bloch, A., 2012. What you can learn from family business. Harvard Business Review, November: 103-106.
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2): 263-292.
Katila, R., and Ahuja, G. 2002. Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1183-1194.
Kaufmann, P. J. 1999. Franchising and the choice of self-employment. Journal of Business Venturing, 14: 345-362.
Keh, H. T., and Xie, Y. 2009. Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The role of trust, identification and commitment. Industrial Marketing Management, 38: 732-742.
Kester, W. C. 1984. Today’s options for tomorrow’s growth. Harvard Business Review, 62(2): 153-160.
Khanna, T., and Palepu, K. 2000. Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business group. Journal of Finance, 55(2): 867-891.
Kleinbaum, D., and Klein, M. 2012. Survival Analysis: A self-learning text (3rd edition). Springer: NY.
Klein, B., and Leffler, K. 1981. The role of market forces in assuring contractual performance. Journal of Political Economy, 89: 615-641.
Klingebiel, R., and Adner, R. 2015. Real options logic revisited: The performance effects of alternative resource allocation regimes. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1):221-241.
KPMG, 2014. Family matters: Financing family business growth through individual investors. http://www.kpmg.com/ZA/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Advisory-Publications/Documents/global_survey_fb_full_pages_print.pdf Accessed: March. 22. 2016
Kremljak, Z. 2004. Decision making under risk, DAAAM International, Vienna.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., and Shleifer, A. 1999. Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54: 471-517.
Lee, P. M., and O’Neill, H. M. 2003. Ownership structures and R&D investments of U.S. and Japanese firms: Agency and stewardship perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2): 212-225.
Lee, J. 2006. Family firm performance: Further evidence. Family Business Review, 19(2): 103-114.
Li, Y., and Chi, T. 2013. Venture capitalists’ decision to withdraw: The role of portfolio configuration from a real options lens. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 1351-1366.
Lubatkin, M. H., Durand, R., and Ling, Y. 2007. The missing lens in family firm governance theory: A self-other typology of parental altruism. Journal of Business Research, 60: 1022-1029.
Matusik, S. F., and Fitza, M. A. 2012. Diversification in the venture capital industry: Leveraging knowledge under uncertainty. Strategic Management Journal, 33(4): 407-426.
McGrath, R. G. 1997. A real options logic for initiating technology positioning investments. Academy of Management Review, 22(4): 974-996.
McGrath, R. G., Ferrier, W. J., and Mendelow, A. L. 2004. Real options as engines of choice and heterogeneity. Academy of Management Review, 29(1): 86-101.
Milgrom, P., and Roberts, J. 1986. Relying on the information of interested parties. Rand Journal of Economics, 17(1): 18-32.
Miller, K. D., and Folta, T. B. 2002. Option value and entry timing. Strategic Management Journal, 23(7): 655-665.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., and Lester, R. 2010. Family ownership and acquisition behavior in publicly-traded companies. Strategic Management Journal, 31(2): 201-223.
Monks, R., and Minnow, N. 2001. Corporate governance, 2nd edition. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Morck, R., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R. W. 1988. Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(1/2): 293-315.
Morck, R., and Yeung, B., 2003. Agency problems in large family business groups. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4): 367-382.
Myers, S. C. 1977. Determinants of corporate borrowing. Journal of Financial Economics, 5: 147-175.
Raynor, M. E. 2000. Real organizations for real options: The limits of corporate contingency theory and the sources of corporate value added in hybrid diversifiers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Reuer, J. J., and Tong, T. W. 2005. Real options in international joint ventures. Journal of Management, 31: 403-423.
Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R. 1997. A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52: 737-783.
Sirmon, D. G., and Hitt, M. A. 2003. Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management, and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27: 339-358.
Stewart, G. B. 1991. The quest for value: A guide for senior managers. New York: Harper.
Su, Y., Xu, D., and Phan, P. H. 2008. Principal-principal conflict in the governance of the Chinese public corporation. Management and Organization Review, 4(1): 17-38.
Tagiuri, R., and Davis, J. 1996. Bivalent attributes of the family firms. Family Business Review, 9: 199-208.
Tong, T. W., Reuer, J. J., and Peng, M. W. 2008. International joint ventures and the value of growth options. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5): 1014-1029.
Tong, T. W., and Li, J. 2008. Real options and MNE strategies in Asia Pacific. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25: 153-169.
Tong, T.W., and Li, Y. 2011. Real options and investment mode: Evidence from corporate venture capital and acquisition. Organization Science, 22(3): 659-674.
Trigeorgis, L. 1996. Real options: Managerial flexibility and strategy in resource allocation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Trigeorgis, L. 2005. Making use of real options simple: an overview and applications in flexible/modular decision making. Engineering Economist, 50(1): 25-53.
Trigeorgis, L., Brosch, R., and Smit, H. 2010. Stay loose. Dow Jones & Company, New York.
US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015. Entrepreneurship and the US economy. http://www.bls.gov/bdm/entrepreneurship/bdm_chart3.htm, Accessed: May 17, 2016.
Vassolo, R. S., Anand, J., and Folta, T. B. 2004. Non-additivity in porfolios of exploration activities: A real options-based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 25(11): 1045-1061.
Wan, W. P. 2005. Country resource environments, firm capabilities, and corporate diversification strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1): 161-182.
Williamson, O. E. 1991. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2): 269-296.
Wu, H. L., Lee, C. Y., and Lin, J. C. 2014. When to commit more to a technological entry: Evidence of the follow-up patenting action of bearings manufactures. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 31:1-20.
Yeh, Y., Lee, T., and Woidtke, T. 2001. Family control and corporate governance: Evidence from Taiwan. International Review of Finance, 2(1/2): 21-48.
Young, S. D., and O’Byrne, S. F. 2001. EVA and value-based management. New York: McGraw Hill.
Young, M. N., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., and Jiang, Y., 2008. Corporate governance in emerging economies: A review of the principal-principal perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1): 196-220.
Zahra, S. A. 2003. International expansion of U. S. manufacturing family businesses: The effect of ownership and involvement. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4): 495-512.
Zahra, S. A. 2005. Entrepreneurial risk taking in family firms. Family Business Review, 18(1): 23-40.
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/49507-
dc.description.abstract如何透過投資追求成長亦適當處理風險已成為企業經營的重要議題。實質選擇權理論於策略管理領域的研究已廣泛應用於國際合資、企業研發、創投投資等情境中,然而其研究脈絡中對於成長選擇權價值及選擇權之執行決策間的關連仍屬片斷。為彌補該理論文獻的缺口,本研究以家族企業為背景,擬主張企業的主導家族在透過投資新事業追求成長時,內嵌於新事業的選擇權價值除受市場不確定性之影響外,也牽動執行選擇權的決策。
本研究以204家來自109個台灣家族企業集團的新事業為樣本,觀察其自IPO起十年內股權結構是否產生從母公司股權到控制家族間的股權轉換決策。實證結果顯示市場不確定性正向影響新事業的成長選擇權價值,致使控制家族做出股權轉換的自利行為。家族企業集團的多角化程度也會強化市場不確定性對新事業的成長選擇權價值。本研究亦發現企業社會責任強度有抑制控制家族進行自利行為的傾向。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractThe real options literature on the strategic actions under uncertainty has been burgeoning. Although prior research identifies the growth option value of various forms of strategic investment through the samples of international joint ventures, new ventures of venture capital or R&D projects, the linkage between growth option value and the odds of exercising the option remains elusive. Through the lens of the real options theory, this study views a family firm’s new ventures as options created for growth, and explores the rationale behind a family firm’s self-serving decision on changing from corporate ownership to family ownership in the post-IPO period of a new venture. To bridge the gap of real options literature, this study argues that a family firm’s choice to exercise its growth options in the face of uncertainty not only depends on the option value but also becomes a situation-bound decision.
Based on a sample of 204 IPO firms of 109 family business groups in Taiwan, the result shows that market uncertainty drives the growth option value embedded in the new venture and, in turn, leads to the family firm’s self-serving decision of ownership change. Also, the scope of a family business group augments the influence of market uncertainty on the growth option value. Furthermore, the quality of corporate governance, CSR intensity, is found to reduce the propensity of a family firm’s ownership change decision.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T11:32:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ntu-105-D98724004-1.pdf: 1277730 bytes, checksum: 7f2433cce1c3718515dfe65217ba5431 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2016
en
dc.description.tableofcontentsTABLE OF CONTENTS
口試委員審定書 i
誌謝 ii
摘要 iii
ABSTRACT iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF FIGURE vi
LIST OF TABLE vi
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES 9
2.1 The Real Options View on Family Firms’ Investment Decisions 9
2.2 Self-Serving Decisions in Family Businesses 12
2.3 Market Uncertainty and Growth Option Value 14
2.4 The Scope of the Family Business Group 17
2.5 Growth Option Value and Ownership Change Decision 19
2.6 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of Family Firms 21
3. METHODOLOGY 24
3.1 Data and Sample 24
3.2 Variables and Measures 25
3.3 Models 28
4. RESULTS 30
5. DISCUSSION 37
5.1 Contribution 39
5.2 Managerial Implications 41
5.3 Limitations and Future Directions 42
6. REFERENCE 45
LIST OF FIGURE
FIGURE 1 Research Framework and Hypotheses 23
LIST OF TABLE
TABLE 1 Descriptive Statistics 32
TABLE 2 Correlation Matrix 33
TABLE 3 Cox Model for Family Firm’s Ownership Change Decision 34
TABLE 4 Cox Model for Family Firm’s Ownership Change Decision by Diversification 35
TABLE 5 Cox Model for Family Firm’s Ownership Change Decision by CSR Intensity 36
dc.language.isoen
dc.subject自利zh_TW
dc.subject實質選擇權zh_TW
dc.subject市場不確定性zh_TW
dc.subject家族企業zh_TW
dc.subject公司治理zh_TW
dc.subjectuncertaintyen
dc.subjectself-servingen
dc.subjectcorporate governanceen
dc.subjectfamily firmsen
dc.subjectreal optionsen
dc.title從實質選擇權理論觀點看家族企業於新創公司之股權變化決策zh_TW
dc.titleIs Money for All or for Me? The Post-IPO Ownership Change Decision in the New Venture of Family Businessesen
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear104-2
dc.description.degree博士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee柯承恩,陳厚銘,陳鴻基,林博文,陳俊忠
dc.subject.keyword實質選擇權,市場不確定性,家族企業,公司治理,自利,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordreal options,uncertainty,family firms,corporate governance,self-serving,en
dc.relation.page50
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU201602607
dc.rights.note有償授權
dc.date.accepted2016-08-17
dc.contributor.author-college管理學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept國際企業學研究所zh_TW
顯示於系所單位:國際企業學系

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-105-1.pdf
  未授權公開取用
1.25 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


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。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved