• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 1
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

非營利組織策略合作之研究-以台灣農會為例 / A Study of Strategic Cooperatoin Among Non-profit Organizations: Farmers' Associations in Taiwan

張榮農, Chang, Jung-nung Unknown Date (has links)
本研究以非營利組織策略合作為主題,以策略性思維,嘗試探索較能解釋非營利組織策略合作型式選擇決策之合作內涵特性,且以此發現為基礎,從較具解釋效果之合作內涵特性分析,進一步針對非營利組織策略合作之價值共創與關係管理機制,探索較具策略管理意涵之機制變數,以建構本研究所欲探討之非營利組織策略合作型式選擇模式,以及價值共創與關係管理機制之概念模式,並提出規範性之命題。   為此,本研究選擇了具有近百年歷史且經營模式獨特之台灣農會(會員導向之擬公法人商業-互益型非營利組織)作為研究對象,結合非營利組織與營利組織之相關理論及文獻,針對實務現象進行分析。由於所欲探討主題屬特定現象之初期探討,本文採質性多重個案研究設計,針對由三家(含)以上農會所參與組成之聯盟機構蒐集資料,並以聯盟機構或策略合作網絡之主導機構為主體之組織間合作關係為分析單位,進行資料蒐集及探索性研究。   首先,歸納文獻與實務現象觀察結果,本研究依非營利組織策略合作「是否共組獨立機構」及「是否採非營利性」兩項選擇決策,將聯盟機構歸納分類成四種策略合作型式:非營利性合營機構、營利性合資機構、非營利性聯盟及營利性聯盟,此項分類方式也作為本研究後續進行個案分析之基礎。   由於不同策略合作型式傾向採取不同之組織原理與思考邏輯,本研究認為非營利組織(農會)進行策略合作,若要持續共同創造所欲追求之價值並妥善管理組織間關係,應策略性地選擇較能發揮效能之合作型式,再據以設計其價值共創與關係管理機制。因此,本研究之個案分析分成兩個階段進行,第一階段個案研究主要嘗試從實務個案資料分析歸納較能解釋不同策略合作型式之合作內涵特性變數;第二階段個案研究主要聚焦探討「非營利性聯盟」及「非營利性合營機構」兩種非營利性質之合作型式,並以第一階段有關合作內涵特性變數之發現為基礎,進一步探索兩種合作型式之價值共創與關係管理機制變數。   本研究第一階段個案分析歸納發現,如果合作內涵涉及高度業務可切割性及高度關係專用資產投入必要性時,較宜採取共組獨立機構之合作型式;反之,如果合作內涵涉及低度業務可切割性或低度關係專用資產投入必要性時,較宜採取不共組獨立機構之合作型式。另外,如果合作內涵涉及高度投入共同性、低度投入可衡量性、高度產出共同性或低度產出可衡量性時,較宜採取非營利性之合作型式;然而,如果合作內涵涉及低度投入共同性、高度投入可衡量性、低度產出共同性或高度產出可衡量性時,較宜採取營利性之合作型式。   至於第二階段有關價值共創機制之個案分析發現,如果合作內涵涉及低度業務可切割性時,非營利性聯盟可以採取幾項價值共創機制:合作夥伴專業分工、合作夥伴選擇、任務小組負責人選派制度、合作夥伴創新能力、外部資源有效分配方式,以及外部專家專業諮詢;相對地,合作內涵涉及高度業務可切割性時,非營利性合營機構可以透過專業團隊經營、董(理)監事選聘制度、領導人甄選制度、創新經營模式、組織設計決策管理與控制分離政策,以及設立外部獨立董(理)監事等機制來營造彼此價值共創之氛圍。   如果合作內涵涉及低度關係專用資產投入必要性時,要有效利用合作夥伴既有資源及外部取得資源以共同營造合作網絡之綜效價值,非營利性聯盟可以採取幾項價值共創機制:任務小組負責人選派制度、資源有效利用方式、合作夥伴之資源與技術有效整合,以及合作夥伴網絡關係運用;相對地,合作內涵涉及高度關係專用資產投入必要性時,非營利性合營機構可以採取董(理)監事選聘制度、具體資源運用計畫、合營機構領導人組專業團隊之權力,以及有效專業服務平台等價值共創機制。   針對關係管理機制之探討,經個案分析發現,如果合作內涵涉及高度投入共同性時,兩種非營利性質之策略合作型式可以透過可接受之合作規範、建立共同標準、資訊對等溝通,以及能力不足補救措施來提升合作夥伴配合共同投入意願。合作內涵涉及低度投入可衡量性時,可以賦予投入較多之合作機構主導資源利用方向之決策權以維持其投入意願;涉及高度產出共同性時,可以透過共同品質控管、不符標準產出配套處理措施及外部誘因來提升合作夥伴配合共同產出要求之意願;至於涉及低度產出可衡量性時,可以透過目標達成度評核措施、外部專家專業認定及可接受之利益分配方式來協調合作夥伴關係。   過去文獻對非營利組織之合作關係,較少以策略性思維進行探討,本研究之發現可延伸應用並補強現有合作相關理論與文獻對非營利組織間合作有關實務現象之解釋,對未來有關非營利組織合作關係之研究,也提供另一個思考方向;加上組織間策略合作也是當前政府輔導農民團體因應台灣加入WTO後之政策加強重點,本研究配合組織思索轉型所需,實務上期能提供農會研擬組織間合作策略及政府推動農民團體輔導政策之參考。 / Strategic cooperation is taken as an alternative resort for solving problems facing non-profit organizations (NPO) which suffer a bottleneck in operations resulting from mounting resource scarcity and external threats. It is especially deemed so for farmers’ associations in Taiwan, which were closely associated with the development of agriculture on the island in the past century and have been seriously affected after Taiwan entered the World Trade Organizations(WTO)in 2002. Given this understanding, we conduct a two-phase study to observe the phenomena by studying farmers’ associations in Taiwan. Research 1 attempts to explore the cooperation characteristics which can most explain the decision on strategic cooperation types chosen by at least 3 farmers’ associations in each network. Research 2, based on the findings of Research 1, attempts to explore the value-co-creating and relation-maintaining mechanisms for such relations. As part of the methodology, we apply an exploratory multiple-case-study design and refer to NPO and PO (for-profit organization) literature for analytical induction. Prior to the case study, we first categorize the NPO strategic cooperation relations into four types: Non-profit joint operations, for-profit joint ventures, non-profit alliances and for-profit alliances. This categorization made in accordance with literature review and observed phenomena serves as a basis for our further research. In Research 1, we examine 5 theoretically sampled cases and find out 2 characteristics variables which can most explain the decision on whether to organize an independent institution, and 4 variables which can most explain the decision on whether to keep the cooperation for non-profit purpose or change it into for-profit relations. According to our findings, if cooperation involves high business separability and high necessity for relation-specific asset input, we suggest a choice for organizing another new independent institution (i.e. non-profit joint operations or for-profit joint ventures). If cooperation involves low business separability and low necessity for relation-specific asset input, we suggest a choice for not organizing an independent institution (i.e. non-profit alliances or for-profit alliances). In terms of the “non-profit or for-profit” decision, if cooperation involves high input commonality, low input measurability, high output commonality and low output measurability, we suggest a non-profit choice (i.e. non-profit joint operations or non-profit alliances). If cooperation involves low input commonality, high input measurability, low output commonality and high output measurability, we suggest a for-profit choice (i.e. for-profit joint ventures or for-profit alliances). For the second research, we focus our study on the two non-profit cooperation types and examine 8 theoretically sampled cases including 5 non-profit alliances and 3 non-profit joint operations. We explore the value-co-creating mechanisms by analyzing case data from the two characteristics variables which can most explain the “organizing an independent institution or not” decision in consideration that the two studied types take different cooperation forms and may apply different mechanisms for co-creating synergetic value in the network. Meanwhile, we explore the relation-maintaining mechanisms from the four characteristics variables which can most explain the “non-profit or for-profit” decision because the two studied types is of non-profit nature and involve high input commonality, low input measurability, high output commonality and low output measurability. It is of strategic significance to heighten partners’ will for continued cooperation in such non-profit relations. Our findings of the value co-creating mechanisms suggest 6 mechanism variables for the non-profit alliances and non-profit joint operations, respectively, depending on their levels of business separability. Analysis from the characteristics of necessity for relation-specific asset input, in similar manner, suggests 4 variables for the two studied types, respectively. In the exploration of relation-maintaining mechanisms, results suggest 4 mechanism variables for the non-profit types if cooperation involves high input commonality, 1 variable for relations involving low input measurability, 3 variables for relations involving high output commonality, and 3 variables for relations involving low output measurability. Although there may be many mechanisms which can help partners to co-create value and maintain relations in their cooperation, this research attempts to explore only the variables which can be of more strategic significance for the two focus types. Following our findings in Research 1 and 2, we provide normative propositions and build a decision-making model for the choice of strategic cooperation types and another integrative conceptual model of the value-co-creating and relation-maintaining mechanisms for non-profit alliances and joint operations. Farmers’ associations, which boast of a history of nearly 100 years in Taiwan, are unique in their business models as compared to other non-profit organizations. On top of that, NPO inter-organizational cooperation relations are seldom examined from strategic perspective. Theoretically speaking, findings of this dissertation can further extend and supplement the explanation and the application of present theories and literature to the phenomena in this regard. Implications and recommendations for managerial practices of inter-organizational cooperation among farmers’ associations are also discussed.

Page generated in 0.0226 seconds