本文以1999至2006年間，台灣22家上市之中游石化業廠商為研究對象，針對市場結構環境、廠商資源投入、競爭行為與組織結構等四方面解釋變數，利用一般最小平方估計法（OLS），探討影響廠商獲利率之可能因素。實證結果顯示：廠商規模、過去獲利表現及產能利用率對廠商獲利率有顯著正向影響；資本密度、勞動密度、員工平均年資及負債比率對廠商獲利率有顯著負面影響；而市場需求成長率、市場佔有率、研發密度、員工分紅及海外投資對廠商獲利率之影響則不顯著。

根據EOLembrain東方快線2011年11月份所進行的調查發現，雖然團購市場發展蓬勃，依然有高達44%的人沒有團購經驗。顯現出團購固然方便，還是有其風險所在，像是商品不如預期、等待時間過長、被盜用帳號等，使人們有所顧慮。過去針對團購的研究中，大多將知覺風險當成團購行為的前因，卻忽略知覺風險事實上也被不同因素所影響著。本研究提出一個中介模式來探討團購中知覺風險的前因（消費者性格特質、資源投入感知）與團購行為的關連性。研究結果發現，知覺風險低者，有團購經驗的可能性越高，而知覺風險又會中介信任特質、多疑特質、資源投入感知與團購行為的關係。信任特質高者其知覺風險低，故越可能有團購經驗，多疑特質高者其知覺風險低，故抑制其團購行為，而消費者因感知較大的資源投入，而有較大的知覺風險，因此也抑制了團購行為。 / According to EOLembrain’s survey, 44% Taiwanese people don’t have group buying experience. It shows that people have different levels of perceived risk in terms of group buying owing to their different characters. Also, there are some worries behind the trend, such as product issue, long waiting time and account privacy issue.While past researches focus on how perceived risk affects consumption behavior, they ignore the fact that some factors also have influence on perceived risk. This study aims to understand how perceived risk is affected by different antecedents like personalities (adventurousness, trust, distrust and cautiousness) and perceived resources input. The study also proposes a mediation model to explore the relations between the antecedents, the risk perception and group buying experience. The result shows that people with higher level of trust have lower perceived risk and higher chance to attend group buying. On the contrary, people with higher level of distrust have higher perceived risk and lower chance to attend group buying. Furthermore, people with higher cautiousness also have lower chance to attend group buying. While adventurousness has no significant relevance to perceived risk and group buying experience, people with higher level of adventurousness will have higher frequency of group buying.

企業之競爭策略，對於其生存與發展具有舉足輕重的影響力，而董事會依法對策略負有監督與協助制定之責，以提升企業績效，極大化股東財富。各理論學派也均同意董事會在策略制定上具有重要影響力。故本研究參考Baysinger and Robert (1990)及Pearce and Zahra (1992)等學者的理論架構，納入策略資源投入(衡量企業策略)，並依He and Mahoney (2006)之建議，將董事會特性劃分為董事會動機與能力兩部份，探討董事會動機與能力、策略資源投入及經營績效之關聯性。 本研究之主要研究結論包括： 1.董事會動機和能力與研發策略資源投入有顯著關聯性，但對其餘三種策略資 源投入(降低成本、行銷、品牌)無顯著影響。而Pearce and Zahra (1992)認為策略會影響董事會組成之看法，本研究實證結果並不支持。 2.董事之參與程度越高，企業之經營績效越好，而監察人之參與程度則與經營 績效無顯著之關聯性。 3.納入策略資源投入變數後，董事會動機與能力變數仍維持與企業績效呈顯著 相關，而整體模型解釋力提升。 4.董監持股與經理人持股對所有策略資源投入與經營績效關聯性有顯著影響， 而機構投資人持股、董事會規模、董事會專業性與董事會參與程度則對部份 策略資源投入與經營績效關聯性有顯著影響。 / A company’s competitive strategy plays a crucial role in its sustainable development. In order to escalate the performance of the company and maximize the wealth of the shareholders, the board should oversee in the process of formulating a strategy and assist when the strategy is under its way. All corporate governance theorists agree that the board has important influence on strategy planning. Adopting the framework of Baysinger and Robert (1990), and Pearce and Zahra (1992), this study takes “strategic resource input”(measuring corporate strategy) into another consideration. This research also divides the board characteristics into board motivation and capability according to the advices of He and Mahoney (2006). The present study aims to investigate the relationship among board motivation and capability, strategic resource input and operating performance. Several conclusions can be summarized as follows: First, the board motivation and capability is significantly related to R&D strategic resource input while the other three strategic resource input(cost-down, sale, patent) plays little role in this study. In addition, the empirical results don’t support what Pearce and Zahra (1992) claim that strategy will affect the board’s composition. Next, the results indicate that better operating performance is associated with higher participation figure of the directors but not the inspectors. Next, incorporating strategic resource input into the study enhances the explanatory power of the model whereas the effect of board motivation and capability on operating performance remains the same . Finally, the present study suggests that stock holdings of the board and the manager seem to have significant effect on the relationship of strategic resource input and operating performance. In addition, other factors, such as the board scale, professionalism and participation figure, have partial effect on the relationship between strategic resource input and operating performance.