請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69492完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 陸洛 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yu-Chen Lin | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 林禹辰 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T03:17:14Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2020-07-06 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2018-07-06 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2018-07-03 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 中文部分
大頭東(2015 年 9 月 3 日)。能撐過前五年的新創公司只有 1%—談創業家的七種死法。關鍵評論網,職場。 吳錦錩. (2006). 企業持續性競爭優勢構面—以台灣自有品牌企業為例.中華管理評 論國際學報. 第九卷二期. 連結. 林之晨(2017 年 6 月 7 日)。新創公司並非都是高風險。天下雜誌,624 期。 林偉文(2008)。教師創造力之系 統觀點:學校、社群、個人與創意教 學。臺北:心理。 胡幼慧. (1996). 質性研究: 理論, 方法 本土女性研究實例. 台北: 巨流. 教育部國民學前教育署(2015)。國民小學教育消費支出調查概況(104 學年度)。台北市:教育部統計處 許盈專. (2008). 台灣微型企業之創業資源與人格特質對創業類型 創業績效影響之研究 (未出版之碩士論文). 國立高雄第一科技大學, 高雄市. 郭洮村. (1998). 工研院研发人员离职创业相关因素之研究(Doctoral dissertation, 台北: 私立中原大学企业管理研究所). 陳向明. (2002). 社会科學質的硏究. 五南圖書出版股份有限公司. 陳恒嶔. (2011). 探討創業過程對創業團隊之影響: 以台灣文化創意產業為例 (Doctoral dissertation, 撰者). 陳基祥. (2013). 創業願景與創業績效之關聯性研究. 創業管理研究, 8(3), 57-84. 黃沁柔.(2012).交換記憶系統對區域創新系統產學研合作績效之影響. 東海大學企業管理學系研究所, 台北市. 經濟部(2017)。2017 中小企業白皮書。(編號:2017A01295)。臺北市:經濟部中小企業處 經濟部中企處: 我國新創企業平均存活率第 1 年為 89.55%,第 5 年為 57.43%,與主要國家相當(2017 年 7 月 21 日)。台灣商會聯合資訊網,財經瞭望。 劉常勇 (2002). '創業管理的 12 堂課.' 天下文化出版社, 第二課: P:19-36. 賴瑩綺(2017 年 10 月 15 日)。新創企業難捱過 4 年。工商時報,專題周報。 簡春安 & 鄒平儀. (1998). 社會工作與質性研究. 在社會工作研究法 (頁 122~166). 台北市: 巨流. 英文部分 Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference?.Strategic management journal, 10(S1), 107-124. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120. Bass, B. M. (1983). Organizational decision making. Richard D. Irwin. Baum, J. R., & Locke, E. A. (2004). The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. Journal of applied psychology, 89(4), 587. Berson, Y., Shamir, B., Avolio, B. J., & Popper, M. (2001). The relationship between vision strength, leadership style, and context. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(1), 53-73. Bruyat, C. & Julien, P.A. (2000). Defining the field of research in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 165–180. Chandler, G. N., & Hanks, S. H. (1998). An examination of the substitutability of founders human and financial capital in emerging business ventures. Journal of business venturing, 13(5), 353-369. Chi-hsiang, C. (2015). Effects of shared vision and integrations on entrepreneurial performance: Empirical analyses of 246 new Chinese ventures.Chinese Management Studies, 9(2), 150-175. Chowdhury, S. (2005). Demographic diversity for building an effective entrepreneurial team: is it important?. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(6), 727-746. Drucker, P. F. (1994). Trade lessons from the world economy. Foreign Affairs, 99-108. Gartner, W. B., Mitchell, T. R., & Vesper, K. H. (1989). A taxonomy of new business ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(3), 169-186. Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative science quarterly, 499-517. Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. in j. lorsch (ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological bulletin, 121(1), 43. Hirata, M. (2000). Start-up Teams and Organizational Growth in Japanese Venture Firms. Tokai University. Hirata, M. (2000). Start-up Teams and Organizational Growth in Japanese Venture Firms. Tokai University. House, R. J. (1999). Weber and the neo-charismatic leadership paradigm: A response to Beyer. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(4), 563-574. House, R. J., & Shamir, B. (1993). Toward the integration of transformational, charismatic, and visionary theories. Kamm, J. B., & Nurick, A. J. (1993). The stages of team venture formation: A decision-making model. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 17(2), 17-27. Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation. Journal of applied psychology, 88(4), 587. Lewis, M. (1999). The new new thing: A Silicon Valley story. WW Norton & Company. Liang, D. W., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 21(4), 384-393. Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Maurya, A. (2012). Why lean canvas vs business model canvas.Available in: http://practicetrumpstheory. com/why-leancanvas. Maurya, A. (2012). Running lean: iterate from plan A to a plan that works. ' O'Reilly Media, Inc.'. Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups.Academy of management review, 21(2), 402-433. Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. (2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of organizational Behavior, 22(2), 89-106. Moreland, R. L., & Myaskovsky, L. (2000). Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication?. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 82(1), 117-133. MORELAND, R., THOMPSON, L., LEVINE, J., & MESSICK, D. (1999). Shared cognition in organizations. Shared cognition in organizations. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Smith, A., Clark, T., van der Pijl, P., Alex, O., & Yves, P. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game Changers, and challengers (portable version). Amsterdam: Alexander Osterwalder & Yves Pigneur. Ovans, A. (2015). What is a business model. Retrieved July, 5, 2016. Pearce III, J. A., & Ravlin, E. C. (1987). The design and activation of self-regulating work groups. Human relations, 40(11), 751-782. Ruvio, A., Rosenblatt, Z., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (2010). Entrepreneurial leadership vision in nonprofit vs. for-profit organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 144-158. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel psychology, 40(3), 437-453. Sethi, R., Smith, D. C., & Park, C. W. (2002). How to kill a team’s creativity. Harvard business review, 80(8), 16-17. Sharma, M., & Ghosh, A. (2007). Does team size matter? A study of the impact of team size on the transactive memory system and performance of IT sector teams. South Asian Journal of Management, 14(4), 96. Timmons, J. A., & Spinelli, S. ( 2009). New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st Century, 8th edition, NY: McGraw-Hill. trange, J. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2002). The origins of vision: Charismatic versus ideological leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 343-377. Wanous, J. P., & Youtz, M. A. (1986). Solution diversity and the quality of groups decisions. Academy of Management journal, 29(1), 149-159. Wanous, J. P., & Youtz, M. A. (1986). Solution diversity and the quality of groups decisions. Academy of Management journal, 29(1), 149-159. Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In Theories of group behavior (pp. 185-208). Springer, New York, NY. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69492 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 台灣創業風氣持續盛行,然而從貼近現實面的報導中,可以得知即使新創企業 能順利度過創業初期,其中卻只有 1%能撐過五年。因此,如何讓新創企業持續穩 定成長,成為新的課題,也引發本次研究動機。本研究採用個案研究法,選定某一教學顧問事業作為分析的個案。透過半結構 式訪談法深入了解創業者的創業故事, 其商業模式的決策歷程。創業,是一個動 態的過程,利用質性個案分析的方式,能更全面了解研究個案創業過程中與環境互 動的方式。經逐字稿分析後,主要透過創業歷程模式找到關鍵事件並加以分析創業 者的應變 每個階段所採取的商業模式。
本研究給予其他管理者 創業者的建議 主要有四點:第一,在創業初期就要以做「大」為目標;第二,抓住好的機會,並 建置相關核心能力、資源與團隊;第三,讓團隊與資源保有彈性面對外部機會的衝 擊;最後,如果可以,創業者應走在變化前,以增加應變的時間。 整體而言,本研究透過創業歷程模式、商業模式九宮格 精實畫布的架構解釋 研究個案如何彈性地應變環境所帶來的衝擊,並進行商業模式的決策歷程。不僅將 理論與實務做連結,亦能讓創業者在實務上以此為借鏡,得以永續經營。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The ethos of entrepreneurship has been taken hold these years; however, according to the report, which is more practical, even if the start-ups could survive through the beginning of the venture, only 1% of them could last more than 5 years. Hence, how a start-up can grow steadily and make profit continuously becomes a new issue, and that’s also the motivation of this study.
This dissertation applies the method of case study based on a learning and teaching consulting company. Through the semi-structured interview, researcher can completely understand the story of the entrepreneur and the business model decision process of the venture. Since starting a business is a dynamic process, researcher can find out the way entrepreneur interacted with the environment through qualitative analysis. This study mainly focuses on the critical incidents during the entrepreneurship and the interactions of the entrepreneur and business model. Through the case study, there are four suggestions for managers and entrepreneurs to keep in mind. First, think “BIG” at the beginning stage of the start-up. Second, seize the good chance, and build related core capabilities, resources and an appropriate team. Third, keep the composition of team and the resources flexible in order to deal with the contingency. Finally, do before the change in environment actually happens, if possible. To sum, this dissertation explains how the entrepreneur in the case study interacted with the changes in environment flexibly by using Timmons Model, Business Model Canvas and Lean Canvas. It provides the start-ups a good example in practical and contributes to the sustainability of the venture. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T03:17:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-107-R05741009-1.pdf: 10355895 bytes, checksum: 399cab06ae96b824ab98c89edbeb6c25 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 #
誌謝 i 中文摘要 ii 英文摘要 iii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 第二節 研究目的 2 第二章 文獻回顧 3 第一節 創業類型與創業團隊的建置 3 第二節 創業團隊的領導與團隊交融記憶系統 8 第三節 新創企業商業模式的建立與所需彈性 11 第四節 小結 15 第三章 研究方法 17 第一節 研究取向與方法 17 第二節 資料收集 17 第三節 訪談對象與工具 18 第四節 資料整理與分析 18 第四章 研究個案 19 第一節 2015 年大環境的狀況 19 第二節 2015 年教育產業的概況 20 第三節 來一課新創公司商業模式的演進 21 第五章 個案分析 34 第一節 個案概述 34 第二節 個案重點 34 第三節 小結 48 第六章 結論與建議 49 第一節 研究結論 49 第二節 研究建議 50 第三節 研究限制與未來研究方向 52 第四節 結語 52 參考文獻 54 附錄 – 訪談大綱 59 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 商業模式 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 新創企業 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 創業家 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 創業歷程模式 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Business Model | en |
| dc.subject | Entrepreneur | en |
| dc.subject | Startup | en |
| dc.subject | Timmons Model | en |
| dc.title | 新創公司商業模式的決策歷程 —以某學教顧問事業為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Business Model Decision Process of the Entrepreneurs - A case study of the teaching and learning consulting company | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 106-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 張婷婷,高旭繁,吳欣蓓 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 新創企業,創業家,創業歷程模式,商業模式, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Startup,Entrepreneur,Timmons Model,Business Model, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 61 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201801214 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2018-07-03 | |
| 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 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-107-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 10.11 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。