跨國企業人力資源管理實務移轉成效之研究｜國立中央大學博碩士論文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	林筱珮 Hsiao-Pei Lin
論文名稱：	跨國企業人力資源管理實務移轉成效之研究
指導教授：	林文政 Wen-Jeng Lin
口試委員:
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	管理學院 - 人力資源管理研究所 Graduate Institute of Human Resource Management
畢業學年度：	93
語文別：	中文
論文頁數：	55
中文關鍵詞：	人力資源管理實務、移轉效能、內化程度、制度執行
相關次數：	點閱：7 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

為了因應全球化的變動與挑戰，多國籍企業會移轉具有核心競爭力及優越的經營實務到其他單位以發揮綜效與提升經營效率，而人力資源管理實務在近年來也被視為是達成組織核心能力的利器，因此人力資源管理實務的移轉勢在必行。然而，在實際移轉的過程中，實務移轉仍受到極大的挑戰，尤其在面臨了跨國的環境時，社會文化、法令規範等等因素皆會對實務的移轉造成衝擊，因此，本研究試圖以組織內部人力資源管理實務移轉之角度切入，探討相關因素對於跨國企業內部實務移轉成敗之影響。而因子公司資料收集較為困難，本研究便以台灣母公司的角度為出發點，以母子公司間的管理依賴、技術依賴、決策自主權、信任程度、整合機制以及文化相似性做為自變數，移轉效能與內化程度作為依變數，制度執行作為中介變項，探討台商母子公司間人力資源管裡實務移轉之成效。
本研究採用問卷分析的方式，以台商在大陸投資的子公司為研究對象，發出了600份問卷，獲得有效問卷102份，將資料經由相關分析及迴歸分析後，產生了以下的研究發現：
一、在平均移轉率上，以「新進員工訓練」、「廣泛技能訓練」及「晉升制度」的運用程度最廣，其次是「成果導向之績效評估」、「績效導向薪資」、「激勵性薪資」與「甄選」；而「員工參與」、「員工發展」、「自主管理團隊」與「工作輪調」的運用程度稍嫌不足，「工作保障」及「訴願程序」的使用程度則為最低。
二、在影響移轉效能的各項因素中，以「決策自主權」及「文化相似性」對於移轉效能影響最為顯著，其次為依賴關係中的「管理依賴」，此意味著當子公司對於母公司的管理依賴程度越高、決策自主權越大、母子公司的文化越相似時，人力資源管理實務的移轉效能會越好，至於技術依賴、信任程度及整合機制等其餘因子則未產生顯著的影響。
三、在影響內化程度的各項因素中，同樣也以「決策自主權」及「文化相似性」對於內化程度影響最為顯著，也意味著當子公司的決策自主權越大、母子公司的文化越相似時，人力資源管理實務的內化程度會越好，至於管理依賴、技術依賴、信任程度及整合機制等其餘因子並未產生顯著影響。
四、「制度執行」在移轉效能及內化程度上產生的中介效果都十分顯著，因此，若子公司想擁有較高的移轉效能與內化程度，除了各項因素的搭配外，也須著重於「制度執行」這項環節，才能使得中介效果的發揮更為顯著。

None

第壹章  緒論...........................................................................................1
?臚@節  研究背景...............................................................................1
第二節  研究動機...............................................................................2
第三節  研究目的...............................................................................3
第貳章  文獻探討...................................................................................4
第一節  人力資源管理實務...............................................................4
一、人力資源管理實務之重要性..........................................4
二、人力資源管理實務之分類..............................................4
第二節  移轉成效..............................................................................5
第三節  影響人力資源管理實務移轉成效之因素..........................8
一、母子公司間之依賴關係..................................................8
二、母子公司間之信任程度................................................10
三、整合機制........................................................................11
四、文化相似性....................................................................12
第四節  研究假設.............................................................................13
一、依賴關係與制度執行、移轉成效之關係....................13
二、信任程度與制度執行、移轉成效之關係....................15
?T、整合機制與制度執行、移轉成效之關係....................16
?|、文化相似性與制度執行、移轉成效之關係................16
五、制度執行與移轉成效之關係........................................17
六、制度執行之中介效果....................................................18
第參章  研究方法.................................................................................19
第一節  研究架構.............................................................................19
第二節  問卷設計與研究變項.........................................................21
第三節  研究對象.............................................................................25
?艦|節  資料分析方法.....................................................................28
第肆章  研究結果.................................................................................29
第一節 因素分析與信度分析......................................................29
一、因素分析........................................................................29
二、信度分析........................................................................32
第二節  相關分析.............................................................................33
第三節?j歸分析.............................................................................34
一、自變數對移轉效能之迴歸分析....................................34
二、自變數對內化程度之迴歸分析....................................36
三、自變數對制度執行之迴歸分析....................................38
第四節  中介效果之探討.................................................................40
一、中介變項對於移轉效能之迴歸分析.............................41
二、中介變項對於內化程度之迴歸分析.............................42
第五節  假設驗證結果.....................................................................43
第伍章  研究結論與管理意涵.............................................................45
第一節 研究結論...............................................................................45
一、各項實務之使用狀況....................................................45
?G、影響人力資源管理實務移轉效能之因素探討............45
?T、影響人力資源管理實務內化程度之因素探討............46
四、執行程度之中介效果探討............................................47
?迭B相關文獻之比較與探討................................................48
第二節 管理意涵...............................................................................50
第三節 研究限制與後續研究建議...................................................54
參考文獻.................................................................................................56
一、中文部分.................................................................................56
二、英文部分.................................................................................57

                                

一、中文部分
1. 王中元，1996。連鎖藥局經營知識之國際移轉與擴散研究，台北：國立台灣大學國際企業研究所未出版碩士論文。
2. 李文瑞，2000。海外市場進入模式對經營績效影響之研究：2000海峽兩岸財經與商學研討會。
3. 林聖岳，1997。知識資源之跨地域移轉與蓄積策略，台北：國立政治大學科技管理研究所未出版碩士論文
4. 徐千惠，1996。知識系統跨國移轉—倉儲量販店之個案研究，台北：國立台灣大學國際企業研究所未出版碩士論文。
5. 邱奕進，2004。台商母公司與大陸子公司間內部知識移轉效果之研究，桃園：中央人力資源管理研究所為出版之碩士論文。
6. 賴榮仁，1985。日在台企業管理技術移轉之研究，台北：國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版之碩士論文。
7. 蔡旻樺，2000。影響組織實務移轉效能因素之研究—以在台外商子公司為例，台南：國立成功大學國際企業研究所未出版碩士論文。
8. 趙必孝，1998。海外子公司人力資源控制之決定因素－大陸台商之實證研究，中山管理評論，第六卷第三期：763-796。
9. 羅可擎，2005。新興市場崛起的全球龍頭企業，天下雜誌，第321期：26-28。
二、英文部分
1. Aldrich, H., 1976. Resource dependence and interorganizational relations. Administration and Society, 7：419-454.
2. Argote, L. & Ingram, P., 2000. Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1)：150-169.
3. Barney, J. B., 1991. Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1): 99-120.
4. Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A., 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research：Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6)：1173-1182.
5. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S., 1989. Managing Across Borders：The Transnational Solution, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
6. Baughn, Christopher, Johannes Denekamp, John Stevens & Richard Osborn, 1997. Protecting intellectual capital in international alliances. Journal of World Business, 32(2)：103-117.
7. Beamish, P. W. 1985. Joint Venture Performance in Developing Countries. Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of Western Ontario. Canada.
8. Becker, B.& Gerhart, B., 1996. The Impact of Human Resource Management on Organizational Performance：Progress and Prospects. Academy of Management Journal, 39：779-801.
9. Buchko, A.A., 1992. Employee ownership, attitudes, and turnover：an empirical assessment. Human Relations, 45(7)：711-733.
10. Child, J. & Yan, Y., 1999. Investment and control in international joint venture：the case of China. Journal of World Business, 34(1)：3-15.
11. Cohen, S.G. & Ledford, G.E., 1994. The effectiveness of self-managing teams：A quasi-experiment. Human Relations, 47：13-43.
12. Cohen, W. M., ＆ Levinthal D. A., 1990. Absorptive capacity：A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35：128-152.
13. Conn, H. P. & Yip, G. S., 1997. Global transfer of critical capabilities. Business Horizons, Jan.-Feb., 22-31.
14. Cummings, J. L. & Teng, Bing-Sheng, 2003. Transferring R&D knowledge: the key factors affecting knowledge transfer success. J. Eng. Technol. Manage, 20： 39-68.
15. Das, T. K. and B. S. Teng, 1998. Resource and Risk Management in the Strategic Alliance Making Process. Journal of Management, 24(1): 21-42.
16. Davenport, T.H. & Prusak, L., 1998. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston：MA.
17. Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A., 1996. The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1)：88-171.
18. De Long, D. W. & Fahey L., 2000. Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(4)：113.
19. Dessler, G., 1994. Human Resource Management, 6th ed, Prentic Hall.
20. DeVellis, R. F., 1991. Scale Development Theory and Applications, London：?SAGE.
21. Dierickx, I. & Cool K., 1989. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12)：1504-1513.
22. Dogson, M., 1993. Learning, trust, and technological collaboration. Human Relations, 46(1)：77-95.
23. Don, V. & Van, D. L., 1995. Psychological ownership：An empirical examination of its consequences. Group & Organization Management, 20(2)：210-226.
24. Fey, C. F. & Bjorkman, I., 2001. The Effect of Human Resource Management Practices on MNC Subsidiary Performance in Russia. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1)：59-75
25. Goh, S.C., 2002. Managing effective knowledge transfer: An integrative framework and some practice implications. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(1)：23.
26. Grant, R.M., 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage：?Implications for strategy. California Management Review, 33：114-135.
27. Green, D. H. & Ryans A. B., 1990. Entry strategies and market performance Causal modeling of a business simulation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, l.7：45-58.
28. Gupta, A.K., Givubdirajan, V. & Malhora, A., 1999. Feedbacking seeking behavior within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 20： 205-222.
29. Hakanson,L. & Nobel, R., 1998. Technology characteristics and reverse technology transfer. In: Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of International Business, Vienna, Austria.
30. Hamel, G.., 1991. Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12：83-103.
31. Hamilton, R. D. & Kashlak, R. J., III., 1999. National influences on multinational corporation control system selection. Management International Review：167-189.
32. Heenan, D.A. & Perlmutter, H.V., 1979. Multinational Organization Development, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
33. Huselid, M. A., 1995. The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38：635-672
34. Inkpen, A. C.,1996. Creating knowledge through collaboration. California Management Review, 39(1)：123-140.
35. Inkpen,A.C.,1998. Learning and knowledge acquisition through international strategic alliances. Academy of Management Executive, 12(4)：69-80.
36. Johanson, J. & Mattson, L.G.., 1987. Interorganizational relations in industrial systems: A network approach compared with the transaction cost approach. International Studies of Management and Organization, 17(1)：34-48.
37. Kedia, B. L. & Bhagat, R. S., 1988. Cultural constraints on transfer of technology across nations: Implications for research in international and comparative management. Academy of Management Review, 13(4)：559-571.
38. Kostova, T., 1997. Success of the transnational transfer of organizational practices within multinational companies. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.
39. Kostova, T., 1999. Transnational transfer of strategy organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2)：308-324.
40. Kostova, T., 2002. Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations：institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1)：215-233
41. Lawler, E.E., Mohrman, S., & Leoford, G., 1995. Creating High Performance Organizations. San Francisco, CA：Jossey-Bass.
42. Lippman, S. A., & Rumelt, R. P., 1982. Uncertain limitability：An analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under competition. Bell Journal of Economics, 13：418-438.
43. Martinez, J.I. & Jarillo, J.C., 1989. The evolution of research on coordination mechanisms in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 20(3)：489-514.
44. Meyer, A., & Zucker, L.1988. Permanently failing organizations. Huntington Park, CA：Sage.
45. Meyer, J., & Rowan, B., 1977. Institutionalized organizations：Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83：340-363.
46. Nunnally, J. C., 1978. Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York：McGraw-Hill.
47. Nohria, N. & Ghoshal, S. 1994. Differentiated fit and shared value：Alternatives for managing headquarters-subsidiary relations. Strategic Management Journal, 15：491-502.
48. Olk, Paul.,1997. The effect of partner differences on the performance of R&D consortia, In P. Beamish & J. Killing, editors, Cooperative strategies, American perspectives, The New Lexington Press, San Francisco.
49. Pan, Y. S. Li & Tse D. K., 1999. The impact of order and model of market entry on profitability and market share. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1)：81-103.
50. Pfeffer, J., 1981. Power in organizations, Marshfield, Mass: Pitman.
51. Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G.., 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York：Harper & Row.
52. Pierce, J. L., Rubenfeld, S. A. & Morgan, S., 1991. Employee ownership：A conceptual model of process and effects. Academy of Management Review, 16： 121-144.
53. Pierce, J. L., Van Dyne, L. & Cummings, L. L., 1992. Psychological ownership： A construct validation study. Proceedings of the Southern Management Association：203-211.
54. Pinto, J. K. & Mantel, S.J.J., 1990. The causes of project failure. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 37.
55. Robbins, S.P., 1990. Organization Theory: Structure designs and applications. Prentice Hall International, Inc., 3rd. ed.
56. Roth, K., Schweiger, D. M. & Morrison, A. J., 1991. Global strategy implementation at the business unit level：Operational capabilities and administrative mechanisms. Journal of International Business Studies, Third Quarter, 369-400.
57. Prahalad, C. K. & Doz, Y. L., 1981. An Approach to Strategic Control in MNCs. Sloan Management Review, 22(4)： 5-13.
58. Prahalad, C. K. & Hamel, G.., 1990. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3)：79-91.
59. Rosenzweig, P. M., & Nohria, N., 1994. Influences on human resource management practices in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 25：229-251.
60. Schein, E., 1996. Three Cultures of Management：The Key to Organizational Learning. Sloan Management Review, Fall, 9-20.
61. Simonin, B. L.,1999. Transfer of marketing know-how in international strategic alliances: An empirical investigation of the role and antecedents of knowledge ambiguity. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3)：463-490.
62. Snell, S.A, & J.W. Dean, 1992. Integrated manufacturing and human resource management: A human capital perspective. Academy of Journal, 35(3)：467-504.
63. Szulanski, G.., 1996. Exploring Internal Stickiness：Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17：27-43.
64. The Economist, 23 October 1993. A spanner in the works：75-81.
65. Ulrich, Dave& D.Lake, 1990. Organizational Capability：Competing from the Inside Out. New York：Wiley
66. Wathne, K., Roos, J., von Krogh, G.., 1996. Towards a theory of knowledge transfer in a cooperative context, In Managing Knowledge Perspectives on Cooperation and Competition, eds G. von Krogh and J. Roos. Sage Publications, London.
67. Yip, G. S., 1992. Total Global Strategy：Managing For Worldwide Competitive Advantage. Englewood Cliffs, NJ：Prentice Hall.
68. Yip, G. S., Johansson, J. K. & Roos, J., 1997. Effects on nationality on global strategy. Management International Review, 37：365-385.
69. Zander, U. ＆ Kogut, B., 1995. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities：An Empirical Test. Organization Science, l6(1)：76-92.
70. Zucker, L. 1987.Institutional theories of organization. In W. R. Scott & J. F. Short, Jr. (Eds.), Annual review of sociology, 13：443-464. Palo, CA：Annual Reviews.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文