本研究首先探討公司治理基本理論與牽涉之法理。其次，在全球化的熱潮之下，由德國、日本、台灣的公司治理發展過程中，發現各國公司治理漸向英美模式靠攏，雖然是不容否認的趨勢。但是從比較法研究中，吾人可以發現，在統合的過程中，也存在許多因素的影響。畢竟各國公司治理的改革走向，不完全僅是考慮經濟效率，「腳步依循理論」即指出各國有其特殊的治理文化、政治與社會背景，因此即便有此向英美模式靠攏的發展趨勢，然而在統合收斂與固守不變兩者間的張力是始終存在的。接著，進行董事受任人義務的比較法分析，發現英國公司法對董事義務採類型條文化，美國則藉由判例來補實抽象的法條規定，我國公司法則仍維持抽象的法條規定。再來，探討營造業的公司治理特性以及由失敗案例所帶來的啟示。
本研究另一重點是，藉由探討ENR雜誌上排名世界前百大營造廠的公司年報，建立營造公司推行良善公司治理的核心議題，發現股權結構、治理結構、治理與倫理、資訊揭露、永續發展、利害關係人參與等六項構成營造廠商推動公司治理的核心議題。並以該等營造廠商以及國內39家上市營建公司為例，在這些核心議題上如何推動公司治理的情形作一比較分析。主要結果發現由於所有權與經營權分離的情況在我國營建業並不明顯，營建公司利用公司治理來降低代理成本的誘因不大，因此年報中顯示國內上市營建公司於推動公司治理上雖尚能「符合法令」，但是「自我監控」的部份仍有改善空間。最後，嘗試將該等核心議題如何由上位的「治理概念」，逐次建立施行「管理目標」，再到具體「行動方案」，以供國內營造業推動良善公司治理的參考。

This work starts with the examination on the basic theory and legal system associated with corporate governance. Next, this work found that there is no denying a trend to incline to Anglo-American model under the pressure of globalization. However, this work found that many factors will influence the convergence process through comparative legal study. The dominant factor to the reform of corporate governance is not based on the consideration on efficiency only. Rather, the theory of path dependence indicates that each country has its unique governance culture, political and societal background. There is a trend to present inclination to Anglo-American model, however, the tension between convergence and persistence exists eventually.
A comparative legal analysis on fiduciary duty is to be undertaken following the above discovery. It reveals that while a director’s duties under UK’s company law presents categorized clauses, precedents are complementary to the abstract legal clauses in the US. Still, the statute of Taiwan’s corporate business law remains in an abstract manner. The characteristic of corporate governance in the construction industry and the implication behind the corporate failure case then are presented. Another point of this work is an empirical study on construction industry. This work intends to develop core agenda to corporate governance for construction firms through exploring the annual reports of the top 100 worldwide construction firms posted in ENR 2010. It is revealed that a total of six issues including ownership structure, governance structure, governance ethics, information disclosure, sustainable development and stakeholder engagement constitute the core agenda to corporate governance. Based on the 100 construction firms and 39 publicly listed companies in Taiwan, a comparative analysis has been conducted on the enforcement of corporate governance through such core agenda.
This work mainly found that the fact the insignificant degree of separation between ownership and control may be resulted in the lack of incentive to reducing agency cost through corporate governance. Thus, although a construction firm’s annual reports indicates that while the implementation to corporate governance is complied with its legal requirement, there still is room for better enhancement to the dimension of self-regulation. In the last, such core agenda with top level involvement will be implemented by management objective. This study further provides solid action plan to be adopted by the construction industry as reference.

（一）、中文書籍及期刊
1.丁克華：沙氏法案為我國立法革新帶來的啟示，內部稽核，第45期，2003年9月，頁4-9。
2.干學平、黃春興（1994），經濟學原理－牽成繁榮與追求進步，上、下冊，新陸書局。
3.王文宇（2004），公司法論，元照出版。
4.王文宇（2003），新公司與企業法，元照出版。
5.王文宇（2002），從公司治理論董監事法制之改革，台灣本土法學雜誌，34期，頁99-116。
6.王石番（1991），傳播內容分析法，滄海書局。
7.王育琦（2010），我國公開發行公司內部監控機制之變革－以審計委員會相關規範為中心，東海大學法律研究所碩士論文。
8.王婷媛（2009），公司治理當的變數：對營建股股票價值之影響，中央大學財務金融系碩士論文。
9.台灣公司治理（2009）, 證券及期貨市場發展基金會。
10.伍忠賢（2003），公司治理的第一本書。
11.李維心（2008），從比較法觀點論商業判斷法則之應用，東吳大學法律學系碩士在職專班比較法學組碩士論文。
12.吳英亮（2011），營建工程體系侵權行為之研究，東吳大學法律學系碩士在職專班法律專業組碩士論文。
13.柯芳枝（2012），公司法論（上），第八版，三民書局。
14.林明鏘（2006）；營建法學研究，元照出版。
15.林藝馨Lin, Y.H. 2009. Model for organizational governance structure choices in construction joint ventures. 臺灣大學土木研究所博士論文（英文）。
16.易明秋（2007），公司治理法制論，五南圖書。
17.周蕙怡（2007），國內政府採購研究趨勢與特性分析，中華大學營建管理研究所碩士論文。
18.洪秀芬（2009），企業經營監控機制之法律變遷，國科會「台灣政經轉型下制度變遷」研究計畫之子計畫三，精簡報告版。
19.洪秀芬（2006），董事會獨立經營權限及董事注意義務，政大法學評論，94期，頁217-264。
20.常正之（1984）；土木工程概論，三民書局。
21.孫森焱（2010）；侵權行為人之注意義務，月旦裁判時報，創刊號。
22.許良宇（2003），公司治理法制之比較研究，台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
23.馬嘉應、蘇英婷：會計師簽證之法律責任探討－適時瞭解相關法規為守門員身份加分，會計期刊，第260期，頁93-99。
24.張登傑（1997）營建業組織中代理問題之研究，台灣大學土木研究所碩士論文。
25.張婉婷（2011），美國防禦措施「毒藥丸」之研究－以敵意併購下目標公司董事之受任人義務為中心，臺北大學法律研究所碩士論文。
26.陳春山主持翻譯（2011），美國公司法－德拉瓦州公司法經典案例選輯，美國德拉瓦州最高法院大法官JusticeRandy J. Holland著，新學林。
27.陳錦烽：公司治理變革－對內部稽核之意涵，內部稽核，第47期，頁10-15。
28.陳麗娟（2008），全球化之公司治理，五南圖書。
29.陳麗娟(2006)：從德國「公司治理規約」看該國公司治理之改革，東海大學法學研究第二十六期，頁45-84。
30.曾宛如（2008），公司管理與資本市場法制專論（二），元照出版。
31.黃銘傑（2001），公開發行公司法制與公司監控－法律與經濟之交錯，元照出版。
32.馮震宇，從博達案看我國公司治理的未來與問題，月旦法學雜誌，2004年，(113)：215-35。
33.游啟璋，從公司法的實踐看公司社會責任，台灣本土法學，2007年，93期，頁209-220。
34.楊君仁(2008)：公司治理與企業社會責任－德國法的觀點，公司治理與企業社會責任論壇，理律文教基金會與政治大學法學院合辦，頁25-49。
35.楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢與李亦園（1989），社會及行為科學研究法（下冊），東華書局。
36.廖大穎（2008），企業行動與公司治理法制化方向之探討－21世紀日本企業的社會責任論，公司治理與企業社會責任論壇，理律文教基金會與政治大學法學院合辦，頁68-95。
37.廖佳雯（1996），營建上市公司代理問題之初步探討，台灣科技大學營建工程技術研究所碩士論文。
38.蔡志揚（2005）；論建造執照結構審查與施工勘驗之國家管制義務－從集合住宅於1999年集集地震震損案例談起，輔仁大學法律研究所碩士論文。
39.賴英照（2009），股市遊戲規則：最新證劵交易法解析，作者自版，元照總經銷。
40.劉春堂（2004）；民法債編各論（中），三民書局。
41.劉渝生（2009），公司法總則，新學林。
42.劉連煜（2008），現代公司法，新學林圖書。
43.劉連煜（2006），揭穿公司面紗與否認法人格理論在我國實務之運用，摘自氏著：公司法理論與判決研究（四），頁137-158。
44.劉瑞華（2007），人際間的不確定性－一種適用於制度分析的交易成本理論，發表於：台大法學院舉辦之「2007年科技整合法學研討會（二）：法學、經濟學與管理學」。
45.薛明玲、蔡朝安，從資訊揭露看公司治理，月旦法學雜誌，2003年，(96)：335-343。
46.蕭家芳（2005）公司治理與公司價值關聯性之研究－以台灣上市營建業為例，朝陽科技大學財務金融系碩士論文。
（二）、英文書籍及期刊
1.Bainbridge, S. 2002. Director primacy: The means and ends of corporate governance, UCLA, School of Law Research Paper No. 02-06 pp.1-70.
2.Bauman, J.D. 2010. Corporations Law and Policy: Materials and Problems. West Publishing.
3.Bebchuk, L.A. & Roe, M.J. 1999. A theory of path dependence in corporate ownership and governance. 52 Stanford Law Review, 127.
4.Beltratti, A. 2005. The complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility, the Geneva Paper, 30(3): 373-386.
5.Berelson, B. 1952. Content Analysis Communications Research, Free Press.
6.Berelson, B & Steiner, G.A., 1964. Human Behavior－An Inventory of Scientific Findings, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., New York, USA.
7.Berle, A.A. & Means, G.C. 1932. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York, Nacmillan.
8.Bourne, L. & Walker, D.H.T. 2006. Visualizing stakeholder influence－Two Australian examples. Project Management Journal 37(1): 5-22.
9.Chang, C.Y., Chou, H.Y., & Wang, M.T. 2006. Characterizing the corporate governance of UK listed construction companies. Construction Management and Economics (24), 647-656.
10.Cheah, Y.J. 2002. Fundamental analysis and conceptual model for corporate strategy in global engineering and construction markets. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.
11.Chen, H.L. 2009. Model for predicting financial performance of development and construction corporations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135(11), 1190-1200.
12.Cheung, N.S. 1970. The Structure of a Contract and the Theory of a Non-exclusive Resource. Journal of Law and Economics 13(April): 49-70.；Cheung, N.S. 1984. The Contractual Nature of the Firm. Journal of Law and Economics 26: 1-21.
13.Clark, K.D., Doh, J.P. and Stumpf, S.A. 2005. Management and governance of professional services firms, Cited from－ Handbook on Responsible Leadership and governance in Global Business, Edited by Doh, J.P. and Stumpf 2005. Edward Elgar, UK. pp. 275-303.
14.Coase, R.H. 1960. The Problem of Social Cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3(1): 1-44.。
15.Dignam, A. & Lowry, J. 2009. Company Law, Oxford University Press, UK.
16.Egan, J. (1998)：Rethinking construction. Report from the Construction Task Force, Department of the Environment, Transport and Regions. London.
17.Filatotchev, I. & Wright, M. 2005. The Life Cycle of Corporate Governance, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp.1-19.
18.Freeman, R.E.1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.
19.Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times, September 13: 33.
20.Gioia, D. 1992. Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5/6): 379-389.
21.Gordon, J. & Roe, M.J. 2004. Convergence and Persistence in Corporate Governance, Cambridge University Press, UK. 69-113.
22.Handy, C. 2003. December. What’s a business for? Harvard Business Review.
23.Hague, R. & Harrop, M. 2010. Political Science－A Comparative Introduction, Palgrave Macmillan, UK.
24.Hansmann, H. And Kraakman, R. 2001. The End of History for Corporate Law, 88 Geo. L.J.439.
25.Harper, J. 2007. Chairing the Board－A practical guide to activities and responsibilities. Kogan Page, UK.
26.Hart, O. 1995. Corporate governance: some theory and implications. The Economic Journal 105(430), 678-689.
27.Hartman, E.M. 2001. Moral philosophy, political philosophy and organizational ethics: a response to Phillips and Margolis, Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(4), 643-687.
28.Hillebrandt, P.M. & Cannon, J. 1995. The Construction Company in and out of Recession. Macmillan Press, London, UK.
29.Hsieh, N. 2006. Justice, management, and governance. Corporate Governance, 6 (3): 261-267.
30.Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and capital structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3(4), 305-360.
31.Jones, P., Comfort, D. & Hillier, D. 2006. Corporate social responsibility and the UK construction industry. Journal of Corporate Real Estate 8(3), 134-150.
32.Keay, A. 2010. Moving towars stakeholderism? Constituency statutes, enlightened shareholder value, and all that: Much ado about little? Working paper, Center for Business Law and Practice, School of Law, University of Leeds.
33.Lan, L.L. and Heracleous, L. 2010. Rethinking agency theory: the view from law. Academy of management Review 35(2): 294-314.
34.Margolis & Walsh 2001. People and profits? The search for a link between a company’s social and financial performance, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35.Murray, M. & Dainty, A. 2009. Corporate Social Responsibility in the Construction Industry. Taylor & Francis, UK.
36.Petrovic-Lazarevic, S. 2010. Good corporate citizenship in the Australian construction industry. Journal of Corporate Governance. 10(2), 115-128.
37.Phillips, R., Freeman R.E. & Wicks, A.C. 2003. What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4), 479-502.
38.Phillips, R. & Margolis, J. 1999. Toward an ethics of organizations, Business Ethics Quarterly, 9(4), 619-638.
39.Rawls, L. 1971. A Theory of Justice, Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA., USA.
40.Rebeiz, K.S. & Salameh, Z. 2006. Relationship between governance structure and financial performance on construction. Journal of Management in Engineering. 22(1), 20-26.
41.Nordberg, D. 2011. Corporate Governance－Principles and Issues, Sage, London, pp.4-7.
42.Roe, M.J. 2006. Political Determinants of Corporate Governance, political context, corporate impact, Oxford University Press, pp.1-10.
43.Schaufelberger, J. 2009. Construction Business Management. Prentice Hall, USA.
44.Sexton, M., Barrett, P., & Lu, S.L. 2009. The evolution of Sustainable development. Cited from Corporate Social Responsibility in the Construction Industry, Edited by Murray, M. & Dainty, A. pp.191-213.
45.Siems, M.M. 2008. Convergence in Shareholder Law, Cambridge University Press, UK.
46.Stout, L. 2007. Why we should stop teaching Dodge v. Ford. Research paper No. 7-11, Law and Economic Research Paper Series, UCLA School of Law.
47.Thompson, R.B. 1991. Piercing the Corporate Veil: An Empirical Study, 76 Cornell Law Review. 1036.
48.Yang, J., Shen, G.Q., Drew. D.S., & Ho, M. 2010. Critical success factors for stakeholder management: construction practitioners’ perspectives. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 136(7), 778-786.
49.Yu, I., Kim. K.; Jung, Y., & Chin S. 2007. Comparable performance measurement system for construction companies. Journal of Management in Engineering 23(3), 131-139.
50.Uff, J. 2009. Construction Law，10th Edition，Sweet & Maxwell，UK.
51.Zahra, S.A. & Filatotchev, I. 2004. Governance of entrepreneurial threshold firm: a knowledge based perspective, Journal of Management Studies, (41): 885-898.