Return to search

公司治理與企業發展決策之研究-以A個案公司為例 / The research of company governance and enterprise development decision-A copmany case

企業在彼此競爭以爭食市場大餅時,除了須要持續監控外部商機,積極掌握市場脈動,並推出符合其需求的商品以滿足顧客需求之外、也須要有效率地運用有限資源,妥善處理如採購、資金規畫、廠房設置乃迄於人員調派等各類非屬核心的支援性創價活動,綜言之,即透過高效率的公司治理,才有可能達成永續經營的終極目標。本研究透過個案研究,利用個案公司– A公司各類資料,以公司治理之理論架構為基礎,據此深度觀察A公司所採取之各類關鍵策略、行動和結果,乃迄於最終的財務面經營績效,據此釐清決定個案公司經營績效的關鍵失敗因素,以及公司治理在其中發揮的功能,作為實務界的參考。
本研究針對A公司2003年至2008年發展及決策進行深入探討,據此瞭解A公司為何2006甫上櫃,2008年就因資金周轉不靈而跳票下櫃。經研析後,可得知A公司在2003年至2008年之間,遭遇以下各類關鍵經營問題:
1.本業經營績效逐年下滑
2.投資規劃過於樂觀,未考量當不如預期時對公司之可能影響。
3.對新產品營收過於樂觀,未考量由於新產品送樣期過長,產線建置過早,致使相關設備閒置。
由於A公司管理階層與外部股東之間存在「帝國建立」的代理矛盾,再加上A公司的董事長兼任總經理,因此具有「所有權與經營權重疊」現象。此時則A公司便極有可能因為負責人「帝國建立」的傾向,導致決策失誤,進而危害到公司所有利害關係人之利益。本研究利用中華公司治理協會所提出之公司治理實地評量表進行研析,亦得知造成A公司跳票下櫃之主要原因在於其未積極「強化董事會職能」,並未強化「管理階層的紀律與溝通」。
由於A公司管理階層具有「帝國建立」傾向,再加上A公司由於未能保持「經營權與所有權分離」,並「強化董事會職能」、「強化管理階層的紀律與溝通」,終而使得「本業經營績效逐年下滑」,但仍於短時間內進行大量投資,終而使得「投資過速且投資標的所產生之現金流量過少、速度過慢,投資效益未能顯現」等兩類原因,最終因跳票而黯然下櫃。
關鍵字:公司治理、董事會職能、被動元件產業 / Firms shall efficiently allocate limited internal resources, dealing with all kinds of activities including procurement, capital planning, etc. so as to raise up chances of effective competition against other competitors. In others words, firms must rely on effective company governance to assure sustainable development & profitability.
Based on company governance related theory & structure, the paper pays attention to conducting cases study method on Company A. Via in-depth digging how Company A performed during the period of 2003 to 2008, why Company A over-invested during 2003 – 2008, why Board of Directors didn’t function well so as to correct the causing-disaster decision by kinds of analyses, this paper finds out below reasons to cause Company A to be delisted in 2008:
1.Performance of core business (manufacturing and sales of ferrite core) getting worse gradually.
2.Over-investment due to overconfidence regarding internal resources allocation.
3.Overconfidence regarding sales of new product.
The root causes why Company made above mistakes could be generalized as below list:
1.“Empire Building” agency conflict existed between managers and stockholders.
2.The un-separation of Ownership and control.
3.Independent directors of Board of Directors don’t function well to provide insightful, effective-monitoring opinions. Managers are under loose monitoring of Board of Directors.
4.There is little discipline regarding how managers behave in daily operation and critical decision making.
Keyword: Company governance, Board of Directors, Passive Component Industry

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0094932201
Creators黃家馨
Publisher國立政治大學
Source SetsNational Chengchi University Libraries
Language中文
Detected LanguageEnglish
Typetext
RightsCopyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders

Page generated in 0.0015 seconds