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. 商學研究所
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/59280
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor蔣明晃
dc.contributor.authorRui Zhuen
dc.contributor.author朱瑞zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-16T09:19:25Z-
dc.date.available2017-07-20
dc.date.copyright2017-07-20
dc.date.issued2017
dc.date.submitted2017-07-05
dc.identifier.citation1. 上海財經大學社會企業研究中心、北京大學公民社會研究中心、21 世紀社會創新研究中心、美國賓夕法尼亞大學社會政策與實踐學院,「中國社會企業與社會影響力投資發展報告」,2013
2. 社企流,「社企力 !:社會企業=翻轉世界的變革力量。用愛創業,做好事又能獲利!」,出版社:果力文化,2014
3. Ansari A, Siddarth S, Weinberg C. “Pricing a Bundle of Products or Services: The Case of Nonprofits”. Journal of Marketing Research, 1996, 33: 86-93.
4. Becchetti L and Huybrechts B. “The Dynamics of Fair Trade as a Mixed-Form Market”. Journal of Business Ethics, 2008, 81(4): 733-750.
5. British Council. “Social Enterprise in the UK: Developing a Thriving Social Enterprise Sector”, 2015.
6. Brooks A C. “What Do Nonprofit Organizations Seek? (And Why Should Policymakers Care?)”. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2005, 24(3): 543-558.
7. Cheng P, Ludlow J. “The 3 Models of Social Enterprise: Creating Social Impact Through Trading Activities”. Venturesome, 2008.
8. Dacin M T, Dacin P A, Tracey P. “Social Entrepreneurship: A Critique and Future Directions”. Organization Science, 2011, 22(5): 1203-1213.
9. Dees J G and Anderson B B. “Framing a Theory of Social Entrepreneurship: Building on Two Schools of Practice and Thought”, Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA), Indianapolis, 2006.
10. Defourny J, Nyssens M. “Conceptions of Social Enterprise and Social Entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences and Divergences”. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 2010, 1(1): 32-53
11. Dibb S, Carrigan M. “Social Marketing Transformed: Kotler, Polonsky and Hastings Reflect on Social Marketing in a Period of Social Change”. European Journal of Marketing, 2013, 47(9): 1376-1398.
12. Doherty B, Haugh H and Lyon F. “Social Enterprises as Hybrid Organizations: A Review and Research Agenda”. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2014, 16: 417–436.
13. Feng Q, Shanthikumar J G. “Not-for-Profit Operations Management”. Routledge Companion for Production and Operations Management, 2016, Chapter 27.
14. Huybrechts B and Defourny J. “Are Fair Trade Organizations Necessarily Social Enterprises?”. Social Enterprise Journal, 2008, 4(3): 186-201.
15. James E. “How Nonprofits Grow: A Model”. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1983, 2(3): 350-365.
16. Kimes S. “Yield Management: A Tool for Capacity-Constrained Service Firms”. Journal of Operations Management, 1989,8 (4): 348-63.
17. Klausner, Michael. “When Time Isn't Money: Foundation Payouts and the Time Value of Money”. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2003, 1(1): 51-59; Exempt Organization Tax Review, 2003, 41(3): 421-428.
18. Kotler P, Zaltman G. “Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social Change”. Journal of Marketing, 1971, 35(3): 3-12.
19. Liu Y, Weinberg C B. “Pricing for Nonprofit Organizations”. Handbook of Pricing Research in Marketing, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, 512-534.
20. Mair J, Marti I. “Social Entrepreneurship Research: A Source of Explanation, Prediction, and Delight”. Journal of World Business, 2006, 41.1: 36-44.
21. Metters R, Vargas V. “Yield Management for the Nonprofit Sector”. Journal of Service Research, 1999, 1(3): 215-226.
22. Nicholls A. “Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change”, Oxford University Press, 2006.
23. Peredo A M, McLean M. “Social Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review of the Concept”. Journal of World Business, 2006, 41.1: 56-65.
24. Popielarski J A, Cotugna N. “Fighting Hunger Through Innovation: Evaluation of A Food Bank's Social Enterprise Venture”. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, 2010, 5(1): 56-69.
25. Rykaszewski S, Ma M, Shen Y. “Failure in Social Enterprises”. SEE Change Magazine, 2013: 1-28.
26. Schiff J, Weisbrod B. “Competition Between For-Profit and Nonprofit Organizations in Commercial Markets”. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 1991, 62(4): 619-640.
27. Sinuany-Stern Z, Sherman H. D. “Operations Research in the Public Sector and Nonprofit Organizations”. Annuals of Operations Research, 2014, 221.1:1-8.
28. Social Enterprise UK. “State of Social Enterprise Report”, 2015.
29. Steinberg R. “The Revealed Objective Functions of Nonprofit Firms”. The RAND Journal of Economics, 1986, 508-526.
30. Szymańska A, Jegers M. “Modelling Social Enterprises”. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 2016.
31. Véricourt F, Lobo M. S. “Resource and Revenue Management in Nonprofit Operations”. Operations Research, 2009, 57(5):1114-1128.
32. Weatherford L R and Bodily S E. “A Taxonomy and Research Overview of Perishable-Asset Revenue Management: Yield Management, Overbooking, and Pricing”. Operations Research, 1992, 40 (5): 831-44.
33. Weinberg, C B. “Marketing Mix Decision Rules for Nonprofit Organizations.' Research in Marketing, 1980, 3: 191-234.
34. Weisbrod B. “To Profit or Not to Profit: The Commercial Transformation of the Nonprofit Sector”. Cambridge University Press, 1998, New York.
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/59280-
dc.description.abstract社會企業能夠利用創新的商業模式解決社會問題,如通過營運獲利以交叉補貼的方式為非營利活動提供必要的資源,從而為社會持續性地提供非營利服務,但是其發展受限於所能籌集到的初始資源數量以及無法在營運時有效率地使用這些資源。本文從社會企業的定義與本質特徵出發,以交叉補貼方式營運的社會企業為研究範疇,結合初創期食物銀行社企的資源分配流程,發展切合實際的資源分配決策理論模型,研究初創社企在最大化社會效益目標下如何制訂最佳的資源分配決策以維持盈虧平衡、實現自給自足,以此改進過往只針對非營利組織主體所建構的資源分配決策模型,彌補針對社會企業進行量化分析的空白。此外,本文從新角度出發,建構成立社會企業的最小初始投資金額線性規劃模型,探討社企營運所需要的最小初始資源投入量與初始資源的利用效率,讓社會創業家瞭解成立社企的最小籌款額度,並為從事公益創投的機構提供投資社企的參考基準。
根據資源分配決策模型的數值分析結果發現,社會企業需要在權衡社會效益目標與利潤目標後,才能確定最佳的初始資源投入量,因為增加初始總資源投入量可能會出現讓總社會效益增加但總利潤減少、總社會效益與總利潤同時減少的情況。此外,社企如果不預先限定非營利活動資源的留存比例,投入非營利活動的總資源比例也會一直維持在較高水平。而不同類型的社企如果其解決社會問題的緊迫性程度不同,社會企業則需要通過大幅度改變年社會效益折現係數才可以反映社企前期投入非營利活動資源量之間的差異性,但對後期資源分配結果的影響程度會越來越小。當社企決定不向外界額外募集資金從而實現自給自足時,其可以通過減少各期需要支付的固定成本來增加非營利活動總資源的投入量,從而增加產生的總社會效益與總利潤,但會降低最終能夠實現的總資源數額。而根據最小初始投資金額模型的研究結果,社企仍需要根據不同的目標,如決定以總利潤增長為目標,還是以實現初始總資源的成倍增長為目標,來設定合適的總社會效益目標值與最終期的總資源額度值,用於計算最小的初始總資源投入量。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractSocial enterprises can use innovative business models to solve social problems, such as through the operation of profit activities to provide necessary resources for non-profit activities in a cross-subsidized way in order to provide continuous non-profit services for the community. However, the development of social enterprises is limited by the amount of initial resources raised and the inability to use these resources efficiently at the time of operation. Based on the definition and nature of social enterprises, this paper takes the cross-subsidized operating social enterprises as research object and develops the resource allocation decision-making linear programming model in accordance with the real resource allocation process of the food bank's social enterprise startup. The research sheds light upon how to make best resource allocation decision to maximize social impact objective and in the meanwhile to maintain break even and self-sufficient. This will broaden the research arena of resource allocation decision models which solely focus on non-profit organizations and private enterprises before and will also make up for the insufficient quantitative research for the social enterprises’ operation. In addition, this paper constructs a minimum initial investment linear programming model from a different and new perspective and tries to discuss the minimum initial input of social enterprises and its resource utilization efficiency. The new model will make the social entrepreneurs know the minimum fundraising amount and will provide an investment reference point for venture philanthropy and social investment.
According to the numerical analysis of the resource allocation decision model, it finds that social enterprises need to balance the social impact goal and profit requirement before determining the initial input resource amount because investing more initial input resource may increase the total social impact with reduction of total profits or even decrease the total social impact and total profits at the same time. In addition, if the social enterprises do not pre-limit the retention ratio of resources specialized for the non-profit activity, the optimized proportion of resources distributed for non-profit activity will still remain at a high level. If some kinds of social enterprises have different degree of urgency to solve the social problems, they need to significantly change the annual social impact discount coefficient to reflect the degree of urgency. This will lead to the difference between the amount of input resource for non-profit activity in the early periods, but this effect will attenuate in the later periods. When social enterprises decide not to raise funds from outside to achieve self-sufficiency, they can reduce the fixed costs that need to be paid in each period and then it will increase the total amount of input resource for nonprofit activity. Thus, social enterprises can increase the total social impact and total profits but on the contrary will reduce the amount of total resources acquired in the final period. According to the results of the minimum initial investment model, social enterprises need to base on the different targets, such as the total profit growth or the initial total resource growth, to set up an appropriate total social impact value and an appropriate number of total resources in the final period in order to calculate the minimum initial input resource.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T09:19:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ntu-106-R04741060-1.pdf: 3976733 bytes, checksum: e1a0aebd8d3e5a801f8e5a1daecc98c7 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2017
en
dc.description.tableofcontents誌謝 i
中文摘要 ii
ABSTRACT iii
目錄 v
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 9
1.1 研究背景與動機 9
1.1.1 社會企業概況 9
1.1.2 社會企業面臨的問題 11
1.1.3 研究動機 12
1.2 研究目的 13
1.3 研究流程 13
1.4 論文架構 14
第二章 文獻探討 15
2.1 社會企業定義與研究範疇界定 15
2.1.1 社會企業定義 15
2.1.2 研究範疇界定 17
2.2 社會企業理論模型的建構 18
2.3 探討模型建構的重要假設與目標、限制式 20
2.3.1 模型建構的重要假設 20
2.3.2 模型目標式之建構 23
2.3.3 模型限制式之建構 24
2.4 小結 25
第三章 模型建構 26
3.1 研究步驟 26
3.2 分析架構與模型假設 27
3.2.1 以食物銀行社企為例探討交叉補貼模式下的資源分配流程 28
3.2.2 模型假設 30
3.3 社會企業資源分配決策模型建構 31
3.3.1 模型符號定義 31
3.3.2 資源分配決策模型 33
3.3.3 最小初始投資金額模型 34
第四章 數值分析 37
4.1 模型參數設定 37
4.2 社會企業資源分配決策模型數值求解與敏感度分析 39
4.2.1 探討初始總資源對於社企營運的影響 41
4.2.2 探討非營利活動資源留存比例對於社企營運的影響 43
4.2.3 探討社會效益折現係數對於社企營運的影響 46
4.2.4 探討固定成本與滿足盈虧平衡目標、社會效益目標之間的關係 48
4.3 社會企業最小初始資源投入額度模型數值求解與敏感度分析 52
4.3.1 探討總社會效益目標對於初始資源投入的影響 53
4.3.2 探討最後一期總資源目標值對於初始資源投入的影響 55
第五章 結論與建議 58
5.1 研究結論與管理意涵 58
5.2 研究貢獻 59
5.3 研究限制 60
5.4 未來研究方向 61
參考文獻 63
dc.language.isozh-TW
dc.subject最小投資量zh_TW
dc.subject社會企業zh_TW
dc.subject資源分配決策zh_TW
dc.subject線性規劃模型zh_TW
dc.subjectsocial enterpriseen
dc.subjectresource allocation decisionen
dc.subjectlinear programming modelen
dc.subjectminimum investmenten
dc.title初創社會企業最佳化資源分配決策與最小投資量之研究zh_TW
dc.titleOptimal decision model of resource allocation and minimum investment for social enterprise startupsen
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear105-2
dc.description.degree碩士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee郭人介,林我聰
dc.subject.keyword社會企業,資源分配決策,線性規劃模型,最小投資量,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordsocial enterprise,resource allocation decision,linear programming model,minimum investment,en
dc.relation.page65
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU201701368
dc.rights.note有償授權
dc.date.accepted2017-07-06
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 
ntu-106-1.pdf
  未授權公開取用
3.88 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