2008年金融海嘯震憾了全球，並由金融面蔓延至實質面，隨著各國消費急凍、世界貿易驟降，台灣這些依賴出口的產業已面臨極大的衝擊，造成台灣景氣急遽萎縮，堪稱台灣產業近十年來，所面臨最嚴峻的考驗。而現在企業的人力需求也由過去要求「足夠的量」，轉變成為「質」、「精」。因此，要如何讓旗下員工都能成為公司的「資本」而非「負債」，都在考驗經營者的智慧。

從相關文獻中可以發現，智慧資本是企業競爭力的核心，亦是企業價值的核心來源，而構成智慧資本的要素中，是以人力資本為最根本及重要，在此波金融海嘯裡，許多公司均採取裁員政策，當人力資本發生變動時，智慧資本的相關變化又是如何？因此管理當局要如何重新整合公司內部資源做適當的調整，並找出競爭利基加以發展，所以管理當局需要一個量化智慧資本效率模式，來做管理決策的調整參考。

智慧資本是企業無形的競爭力，應是長期累積而來，短期間變化不大，但在金融海嘯下，企業人力在持續的精減，智慧資本的變化超過以往，故本研究使用資料包絡分析法建立企業智慧資本的衡量和量化效率分析模式，以某一個案公司為例，觀察2007年1月到2009年9月共計33個月的月資料，目的為在時間推移之下，如何快速掌握企業競爭能力資源的改變、修正以茲永續經營。

The financial tsunami, extended from the financial to the essential aspect, swept the whole world in 2008. With consumption grinding to a halt and a downturn in world trade, the export industry in Taiwan has borne the brunt of these events, causing a recession, which has said to be the toughest ordeal of the decade in Taiwan industry. Currently, the “quality” instead of the “quantity” of employees has became the main concern for corporate. Therefore, making employees the company’s investment—and not liabilities—puts managers’ wistom to a test.

It has been found in relevant literature that the key to corporate competition and corporate value resides in intellectual capital, with human capital being the primary and crucial component. Many companies have turned to lay-off policy during this financial tsunami. And how will intellectual capital change along with the shift in human capital? The executives will have to use a model to measure intellectual capital efficiency as a referrance for managerial decisions when reincorporating the company’s inner resources to make duely adjustments and develop its competitive niche.

Intellectual capital, underlying competitive advantage for corporations, accumulates over time. Great changes cannot be expected within a short period of time. But as corporates continue to trim their workforce in the face of financial tsunami, the change in intellectual capital has been more than ever. That is why this study uses data envelopment analysis as method for evaluating corporate intellectual capital and efficiency analysis. We did a case study of a company of its monthly data between January 2007 and September 2009, a total of 33 months, so as to hurry grasp the shift and modification of corporate competitiveness towards sustainable management in the course of time.

目錄
誌謝辭…………………………………………………………………I
中文摘要…………………………………………………………………II
Abstract ………………………………………………………………III
目錄……………………………………………………………………IV
表目錄…………………………………………………………………V
圖目錄…………………………………………………………………VI

第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………1
1.1研究背景與動機……………………………………………………1
1.2研究目的……………………………………………………………4
1.3研究流程……………………………………………………………6
第二章 文獻回顧………………………………………………………7
2.1金融海嘯……………………………………………………………7
2.2智慧資本的定義……………………………………………………10
2.3智慧資本的分類……………………………………………………12
2.4智慧資本的衡量指標………………………………………………15
2.5資料包絡分析法……………………………………………………21
第三章 研究方法  ……………………………………………………31
3.1研究架構建立………………………………………………………31
3.2研究變項的選定與說明……………………………………………32
第四章 個案實證分析…………………………………………………39
4.1個案公司簡介………………………………………………………39
4.2實證分析與解釋……………………………………………………41
第五章 研究結果與建議………………………………………………52
5.1研究結果……………………………………………………………52
5.2建議…………………………………………………………………53
5.3後續研究……………………………………………………………54
參考文獻 ………………………………………………………………55
附表1……………………………………………………………………62
附表2……………………………………………………………………63
附表3……………………………………………………………………64
附表4……………………………………………………………………65

 
表目錄
表2.1 Stewart的智慧資本衡量指標…………………………………15
表2.2智慧資本指標揭露頻率………………………………………17
表2.3智慧資本應有項目量表………………………………………18
續表2.3智慧資本應有項目量表……………………………………19
表3.1 DMU選定表……………………………………………………33
表3.2智慧資本操作型定義…………………………………………35
表3.3個案公司智慧資本投入項與產出項…………………………36
表4.1個案公司主要產品及營業比重………………………………40
表4.2個案公司DMU效率值…………………………………………43
表4.3各DMU差額變數改善幅度表-A部門…………………………45
表4.4各DMU差額變數改善幅度表-B部門…………………………46
表4.5各時期均值差額變數改善幅度表-A部門……………………49
表4.6各時期均值差額變數改善幅度表-B部門……………………50


 
圖目錄
圖1.1研究流程…………………………………………………………6
圖2.1金融海嘯形成圖…………………………………………………8
圖2.2金融海嘯時間圖…………………………………………………8
圖3.1研究架構圖 ……………………………………………………31
圖4.1裸片價格走勢圖 ………………………………………………40

參考文獻

陳世哲、許淑君，1999，競爭策略、人力資源管理系統與組織績效之研究，亞太管理評論，第4卷第4期：413-429。

蔡明田、余明助，2000，企業文化、組織生涯管理與組織績效之關係研究－以台灣高科技產業為例，管理評論，第19卷第3期：51-75。

劉正田，2002，無形資產、成長機會與股票報酬關係之研究，會計評論，第35期：1-29。

林文晟，2006，結合平衡計分卡與智慧資本建構定期航運業經營績效評估模式之研究，國立台灣海洋大學航運理學系博士論文。

吳安妮，2002，剖析智慧資本，會計研究月刊，第204期，57-66。

吳安妮，2004，平衡計分卡之重點發展方向，會計研究月刊，第224期，98-108。

吳安妮，2006，智慧資本管理，華泰文化，361-303。

吳安妮、劉俊儒，2001，員工面、內部營運面、及顧客面對財務績效影響之實證研究，台灣管理學刊，第1卷第1期：125-150。

吳濟華，何柏正，2008，組織效率與生產力評估-資料包絡分析法，前程文化。

水野和夫，2009，新的明天－金融大崩壞之後的世界變局，城邦文化。

郭鎮球，2005，結合智慧資本與平衡計分卡觀點之經營績效評估，國立成功大學工業與資訊管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。

邱垂昌、洪福讚，2008，在不同企業生命週期下智慧資本與企業價值關聯性之研究，當代會計，第9卷第2期:201-236。

王文英，2008，從企業策略觀點分析會計人員所需具備的知識與能力，當代會計，第9卷第2期:131-166。

黃家齊，2002，人力資源管理系統與組織績效－智慧資本觀點，管理學報，第19卷第3期：410-450。

黃家齊，2003，人力資本投資系統、創新策略與組織績效－多種契合觀點的驗證，管理評論，第22卷第1期：99-126。

歐進士，1998，我國企業研究發展與經營績效關聯之實證研究，中山管理評論，第6卷第2期：357-386。

歐進士、陳博舜、李貴富，2003，訓練活動之企業價值－以資訊電子業為例，2003年會計理論與實務研討會。台南市成功大學。

黃則智，2002，專利、研發支出與廠商市值－半導體產業之實證研究，台灣大學經濟學研究所未出版碩士論文。

林清河、周福星、譚伯群、施坤壽，1998，品質管理與組織氣候及績效之關聯性分析，中山管理評論，第6卷第4期：1057-1080。

林清河、施坤壽，2003，組織結構、全面品質管理、ISO9000與競爭優勢、組織績效之結構化模式分析，管理學報，第20卷第5期：965-992。

傅坤泰，2002，智慧資本於企業績效評估之應用－以IC設計產業為例，輔仁大學金融學系研究所未出版碩士論文。

李坤致，2001，智慧資本與價值動因對企業價值影響之研究，中正大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。

王文英、張清福，2004，智慧資本影響績效模式之探討：我國半導體業之實證研究，會計評論，第39期：89-117。

梁証揚，2001，人力支出與價值攸關性之研究，中原大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。

陳世宗，2006，資料包絡分析在企業績效分析之運用與實證探討，國立空中大學管理與資訊學報，11期，159-194。

高強，2003，管理績效評估－資料包絡分析法，華泰文化。


 
Abowd, J. M. 1990. Does performance-based managerial compensation affect corporate performance? Industrial and Labor Relations Review 43 (3): 52-73.

Andriessen, D. 2004. Intellectual Capital Valuation and Measurement: Classifying the State-of-the-art, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 230-242.

Arthur, J. B. 1992. The link between business strategy and industrial relations systems in American steel minimills. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 45 (3): 488-506.

Barlett, C.A. and S. Ghoshal. 1989. Managing Across Borders: the Transnational Solution, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Bosworth, D., and M. Rogers. 2001. Market value, R&D and intellectual property: An empirical analysis of large Australia firms. The Economic Record 77 (239): 323-337.

Canibano, L., M. Garcia-Ayuso, and P. Sanchez. 2000. Accounting of intangibles: A literature review. Journal of Accounting Literature 19: 102-130.

Chan, S. H., J. D. Martin, and J. W. Kensinger. 1990. Corporate research and development expenditures and share value. Journal of Financial Economics 26 (2): 255-276.

Chauvin, K. W., and M. Hirschey. 1993. Advertising, R&D expenditures and the market value of the firm. Financial Management 22 (4): 128-140.

Cockburn, I., and Z. Griliches. 1988. Industry effects and appropriability measures in the stock market’s valuation of R&D and patents. American Economic Review 78 (2): 419-423.

Cowan, R. and van de Paal, G. 2000. Innovation Policy in the Knowledge-Based Economy, European Commission DG-Enterprise, Brussels. 



Deeds, D. L. 2001. The role of R&D intensity, technical development and absorptive capacity in creating entrepreneurial wealth in high technology start-ups. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 18 (1): 29-47.

Edvinsson, L., and M. S. Malone. 1997. Intellectual Capital: Realizing Your Company’s True Value by Finding its Hidden Roots. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Fey, C. F., I. Bjorkman, and A. Pavlovskaya. 2000. The effect of human resource management practices on firm performance in Russia. International Journal of Human Resource Management 11 (1): 1-18.

Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. 1994. Endogenous innovation in the theory of growth, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 8, pp. 23-44.

Guthrie, J. and Petty, R. 2000. Are company thinking smart? Australian CPA, 70, 6, 62-65.

Hall, B. 1993. The stock market’s valuation of R&D investment during the 1980’s. American Economic Review 83 (2): 259-264.

Hauschild, S., T. Licht, and W. Stein. 2001. Creating a knowledge culture. The McKinsey Quarterly (1): 74-81.

Heskett, J. L., T. O. Jones, G. W. Loveman, W. E. J. Sasser, and L. A. Schlesinger. 1994. Putting the service-profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review 72 (2): 164-174.

Hirschey, M., and J. J. Weygandt. 1985. Amortization policy for advertising and research and development expenditures. Journal of Accounting Research 23 (1): 326-335.

Johnson, W. H. A. 1999, An Integrative Taxonomy of Intellectual Capital: Measuring the Stock and Flow of Intellectual Capital Components in the Firm, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 18, No. 5/6/7/8, pp. 562-575.
Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 2001. The Strategy – Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 1996. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Knight, D. 1999. Performance measures for increasing intellectual capital. Strategy & Leadership, Mar/Apr, 27, 2, 22-25.

Kogut, B., and U. Zander. 1996. What firms do? Coordination, identity and learning. Organization Science 7 (5): 502-518.

Liebowitz, S. and S. Margolis, 1999. Winner, Losers and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology, Independent Institute, New York, NY.

Lynn, B. E. 1998. Intellectual Capital: Key to Value Added Success in the Next Millennium, CMA-the Management Accounting Magazine, Vol. 72, No. 1, pp. 10-15.

Muffatto, M. 1998. Corporation and individual competences: How do they match the innovation process? International Journal of Technology Management 15 (8): 836-853.

Pakes, A. 1985. On patents, R&D and the stock market rate of return. The Journal of Political Economy 93 (2): 390-409.

Pedrini, 2007. Human capital convergences in intellectual capital and sustainability reports. Journal of intellectual Capital, Vol. 8 No. 2, 2007, pp. 346-366

Pfeffer, J. 1994. Competitive Advantage Through People. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Romer, P. 1994. The origins of endogenous growth, Journal of Economic Perspective, Vol. 8, pp. 3-22.

Romer, P. 1998. Bank of America roundtable on the soft revolution, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 9-14.

Roll, Y. and Y. Hayuth. 1993. Port Performance Comparison Applying Data Envelopment Analysis, Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 153-161.

Roos, G., A. Bainbridge. and K. Jacobsen. 2001. Intellectual capital analysis as a strategic tool. Strategy & Leadership, Jul/Aug, 29, 4, 21-26.

Roos, J., R. Roos., Edvinnsson L.and N. Dragonetti. 1998. Intellectual capital： Navigating in the new business landscape. New York：New York University Press.

Sanjoy B. and T. Keith. 2007. Applying the balanced scorecard for better performance of intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital Vol. 8 No. 4, 2007 pp. 653-665

Shapiro, C. and H.R. Varian. 1999. Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Sougiannis, T. 1994. The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D. The Accounting Review 69 (1): 44-68.

Stewart, T. A. 1997. Intellectual Capital：The New Wealth of Organizations, New York：Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.

Sullivan, P.H. 2000. Value-driven Intellectual Capital. How to Convert Intangible Corporate Assets into Market Value, John Wiley and Sons, London.

Sveiby, K. E. and M. Barchan. 2000. Measuring the presenting intangible assets: The intangible assets monitor Charter. Sydney, Aug, 71, 7, 46-47 .




Ulrich, D. 1998. Intellectual capital. competence × commitment. Sloan Management Review 39 (2): 15-26.

Uzzi, B. 1996. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organization: The network effect. American Sociological Review 61 (4): 674-698.

Van der Meer-Kooistra, J., and S. M. Zijlstra. 2001. Reporting on intellectual capital. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 14 (4): 456-476.

Von Krogh, G. and S. Grand. 2002. From economic theory towards a knowledge-based view of the firm. The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Learning, New York: Oxford University Press.