本文主要以平衡計分卡(Balanced Scorecard, BSC)為基礎，結合資料包絡分析法(Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA)用以評估國內銀行、國際汽車及電腦業等三種行業之營運績效。樣本係選取最近兩年(2005至2006年) 國內23家銀行；汽車業則選取國際34家廠商；電腦業則選取33家電腦廠商作為研究對象。本研究的目的乃在了解上述三種產業之營運效率及生產規模，據以提出各產業之標竿廠商(benchmark firms)，並指出各受評單位之差額變數(slack)供改進參考。
本研究結果：1. 影響營業收入之因素，銀行業為員工能力以及設備之利用度；汽車業則為研發能力及商譽(goodwill)；電腦業為庫存及商譽。2.標竿夥伴方面，各產業中，受評單位效能最佳之標竿夥伴的比重依序為電腦業有54.55%，其次是汽車業有38.24%，再次是銀行業有32.16%。3.規模報酬方面，三種產業受評單位中，處於最適規模報酬之比率依序為汽車業有61.76%；電腦業有57.58%；銀行業有47.83%。4.差額變數方面，員工人數須縮減的受評單位中，以銀行業的36.96%最多，電腦業有12.45%次之，汽車業只有5.88%最少。
薪資成本應縮減的僅銀行業有30.43%之受評單位。資產總額中，銀行業有26.09%之受評單位配置太多。5.效率強度方面，三種產業受評單位中，屬強勢效率佔所屬產業之比率依序為電腦業的48.48%最佳；汽車業的38.24%次之；銀行業的32.61%敬陪末座。希望本研究的結果能作為以後學者在相關主題研究的基礎，更盼能供企業各界在投資與管理決策之參考，並提高其營運績效。
關鍵字：平衡計分卡，資料包絡分析法，標竿夥伴，差額變數，規模報酬

This research combines Balanced Scorecard (BSC) with Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to assess the operation performance in domestic banks, international automobiles and computer industry. In this research, 23 domestic banks in recent two years (from 2005 to 2006), 34 international automobile firms, and in the computer industry, 33 computer firms are chosen as decision making units (DMU). The purpose of this research is to understand the operational efficiency and production scale of these three kinds of industries mentioned above in order to propose benchmark firms of every industry, and point out the slack for improving consulting.
The results of the studying include 4 respects: 1.The factors influencing the business income, in the banks, are the ability of staffs, the equipment in use; in the automobile industry, the factors are the ability of research and development and goodwill; in the computer industry, they are inventory and goodwill. 2. Benchmark partners ranked with the highest proportion, 54.55% of the firms are in the computer industry, 38.24% in the automobile industry, and in the banking 32.16%, the least of the three. 3. In the respect of optimal returns to scale, the rate in order is the highest in the automobile industry, 61.76%, the computer industry the second, 57.58% and 47.83% in the banking. 4. In the aspect of slack. 36.96% of the banking is commented to reduce the number of staffs, the computer industry the second, 12.45%, and the lowest, 5.88% in the automobile industry. Furthermore, 30.43% of the bank should control their wages cost, and up to 26.09% of them are assets over allocated. 5. In the respect of intensity of efficiency, the rate in order is 48.48% in the computer, which is the best, 38.24% of the automobile industry takes second place and 32.61% of the banking offers the least prominent.

Key words: Balanced Scorecard, Data Envelopment Analysis, benchmark partners,slack, returns to scale

一、中文部分
1. 吳萬益、林清河，2000，企業研究方法，台北，華泰文化事業公司。
2. 吳安妮、周其武及Kamal Haddad，2000，企業推行平衡計分卡之可結構--台灣經理人員之觀點(二)，會計研究月刊，第175期，107-113頁。
3. 林文雄，1998，經營績效平衡卡，管理會計，第45期，1-12頁。
4. 高強、黃旭男、Toshiyuki Sueyoshi，2003，管理績效評估—資料包絡分析法，台北，華泰文化事業公司。
5. 張世其、李宗耀、虞孝成，2003，我國IC設計上市公司經營效率之分析，產業論壇，第5卷第1期。
6. 張石柱、蕭幸金、譚文華，2004，以策略觀點探討新舊銀行之經營效率-結合平衡計分卡及資料包絡分析法，當代會計，第5卷第2期，207-234頁
7. 張淑昭、何明方、王耀斌，2005，利用資料包絡法評估以平衡計分卡為基礎之經營績效：以台灣與越南觀光旅館為例，崑山科技大學學報，第2期，105-126頁。
8. 張錫峰、周齊武，1992，資料包絡分析法及其在效率評估上之應用，會計評論，第26期，76-92頁。
9. 黃旭男、吳國華，2001，台灣地區壽險業經營績效之衡量，管理與系統，第八卷第4期，401-420頁。

二、英文部分
1. Agrell, P. & West, B. M. (2001). A caveat on the measurement of productive efficiency. International Journal of Production Economics, 69, 1-14.
2. Aly, Hassan Y; Grabowski, R., Pasurka, C.and Rangan, N. (1990). Technical, scale, and allocative efficiencies in U.S banking: An empirical investigation. Review of Economics & Statistics, 72(2), 211-218.
3. Banker, R.D.,, Chang, H., Janakiraman S.N., and Konstans, C. (2005). A Balanced scorecard analysis of performance metrics. European Journal of Operational Research, 154, 423-436.
4. Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W.W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale indifferencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1079-1092.
5. Booth, R. (1996). Accountants do it by Prosy. Management Accounting, May, 48.
6. Bowlin, W.F. Charnes,A., Cooper,W.W., and Sherman, H.D. (1985) Data envelopment analysis and regression analysis to efficiency estimation and evaluations. Annals of Operations Research, 15, 331-332.
7. Braam, G. J. M. and Nijssen, E. J. (2004). Performance effects of using the balances scorecard: A note on the Dutch experience. Long Range Planning, 37(4), 335-349.
8. Brady, L.D. (1993). Implementing the balanced scorecard at FMC corporation: An interview with Larry D. Brady. Harvard Business Review, September/October, 143-147
9. Brown, E.. (1998). Bank America: An open dialogue. Fortune, August, 98-99.
10. Carroll, S. J. & Schneiner, C. E. (1982). Performance appraisal and development of performance in ions. Glenview Illionis, 9-25.
11. Chang, Y.H. & Yeh, C. H. (2001). Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making. Omega, 29, 405-415.
12. Charnes A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring The efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2（6）, 429-444.
13. Charnes A., Cooper, W. W. and Rhodes, E (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: an application of DEA to program follow through. Management Science, 27（6）, 668-697.
14. Charnes A. and Cooper, W. W. (1984). The non-Archimedian CCR ratio for efficiency analysis: a rejoinder to Boyd and Fare. European Journal of Operational Research, 15, 333-334.
15. Charnes A., Cooper,W. W. Divine,D. Ruefli,T.W. and Thomas,D. (1989). Comparison of DEA and existing ratio and regression systems for efficienting efficiency evaluations of regulated electric cooperatives in Texas. Research in Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting, 5, 187-210.
16. Chen, T.Y., and Yeh, T.L. (1998). A study of efficiency evaluation in Taiwan’s banks. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9（5）, 23-40.
17. Chow, W. C., and Haddad,M. (1997). Applying the balanced scorecard to small companies. Management Accounting, August,21-48.
18. Clarke, R. L. (1992). Evaluation USAF vehicle maintenance productivity over time: An application of data envelopment analysis. Decision Science, 23(2), 376-384.
19. Clinton, B. D. and Hsu,K. (1997). JIT and the balanced scorecard: linking manufacturing control to management. Control Management Accounting, September, 18-24.
20. Corrigan, J. (1996). The balanced scorecard-the new approach to performance measurement. Australian Accounting, 47-48.
21. Denton, G. A. and White, B. (2000). Implementing a balanced scorecard approach to managing hotel operations. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41（1）, 94-108.
22. Doyle, J. R. and Grew, R. H. (1991). Comparing products using data envelopment analysis. Omega, 19（6）, 631-638.
23. Eccles, R. G.., and Pyburn, P. J. (1992). Creating a comprehensive system to measure performance. Management Accounting, 74（4）, 41-44.
24. Edwards, D. and Thomas, J.C. (2005). Developing a municipal performance-measurement system: reflections on the Atlanta dashboard. Public Administration Review, 65, 369-377.
25. Evans, H. and Ashworth,G.. (1996). Who needs performance management?, Management Accounting, December, 20-25.
26. Farell, M. J. ( 1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 120（3）, 253-290.
27. Fletcher, H. D. and Smith, D. B. (2004). Managing for value: developing a performance measurement system integrating economic value added and the balanced scorecard in strategic planning. Journal of Business Strategies, 24（1）, 1-18.
28. Franco, M. and Bourne, M.. (2003). Factors that play a role in managing through measures, Management Decision, 41（8）, 698-710.
29. Fried, H. O., Schmidt, S. S. and Yaisawarng, S. (1999). Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 12（3）, 247-267.
30. Frigo, M. L. and Krumwiede, K. R. (2000). The balanced scorecard. Strategic. Finance, 81（7）, 50-54.
31. Gautreau, A. and Kleiner, B. H. (2002) Recent trends in performance measurement systems - the balanced scorecard approach. Management Research News, 24（3/4）, 153-156.
32. Golany, B. and Roll, Y. (1989). An application procedure for data envelopment analysis. Omega International Journal of Management Science, 17（3）, 237-250.
33. Gonsalves, Frank A. J. and Eiler, R. G.. (1996) Managing complexity through performance measurement. Management Accounting, 7, 34-39.
34. Gosselin, M. (2005). An empirical study of performance measurement in manufacturing firms. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54(5/6), 419-438.
35. Griliches, Z. & Regev, H. (1995). Firm productivity in Israeli industry. Journal of Econometrics, 65, 175-203.
36. Gumbus, A. (2005). Introducing the balanced scorecard: Creating metrics to measure performance. Journal of Management Education, 29, 617-631.
37. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W.C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis,. (6th ed). Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall
38. Ho, C.T., & Zhu, D.S. (2005). Performance measurement of Taiwan’s commercial banks. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 53, 425-434.
39. Hsu K.H. (2005). Using balanced scorecard and fuzzy data envelopment analysis for multinational R&D project performance assessment, Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 7, 189-196.
40. Ittner, C.D. and Larcker, D.F. (1998). Innovations in performance measurement: trends and research implications. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, 205-239.
41. Jackson, P. M. (1999) Productivity and performance of public sector organizations. International Journal of Technology Management, 17, 753-766.
42. Jackson, S.E. and Schuler, R.S. (2000) Managing human resources-a partnership perspective,.7thed. Ohio: South-Western College Publishing.
43. Kanji, G. and Moura, P. (2001) Kanji’s business scorecard. Total Quality Management, 12(7/8), 898-905.
44. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1992). The balances scorecard-measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Review, 70 (1), 71-9.
45. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1993). Putting the balanced scorecard to work, Harvard Business Review, 71 ( 5), 34-47.
46. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2001). The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment,(1st ed). Boston, Ma: Harvard Business School Press.
47. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1996a). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74 (1), 75-85.
48. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1996b). The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
49. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2000) Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it. Harvard Business Review, September/October, 167-176.
50. Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (2001) The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment, (1st ed). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
51. Kaplan, R. S. and D.P. Norton.( 2005). The balanced scorecard: measure that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 83, 172-180.
52. Keegan, D. P., Eiler, R. G. and Jones, C. R. (1989). Are your performance measure obsolete. Management Accounting, June, 45-50.
53. Khalid, H., Zhang, Y. B. and Malak, N. (2002). Deternining key capabilities of a firm using analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Production Economics, 76, 39-51.
54. Kim, C.S., and Davidson, L.F. ( 2004) The effects of IT expenditures on banks’ business performance: Using a balanced scorecard approach. Managerial Finance, 30, 28-45.
55. Kotler, P., (2002) Marketing management, (7th ed). Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
56. Kurtzman, J. (1997). Is your company off course? Now you can find out why. Fortune135 (Feb 17), 128-130.
57. Laitnen, E.K. (2005). Microeconomic analysis of the balanced scorecard: a case of Nokia Corporation. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54, 325-340.
58. Lewin, A. Y. and Minton, J. W. (1986). Determining organizational efectiveness: Another look and agenda for research. Management Science, 32(5), 514-538.
59. Lohman, C., Fortuin, L., and Wouters, M. (2004) Designing a performance measurement system: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 267-286.
60. MacArthur, J. B. (1996). Performance measures that count: Monitorning variables of strategic importance. Journal of Banking ＆ Finance, 25（3）, 613-630.
61. Martinez-Budria, E, Diaz-Armas, R, Navarro-Ibanez, M and Ravelo-Mesa, T. (1999). A Study of the efficiency of Spanish port authorities using data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Transport Economics, 26, 237-253.
62. McNair, C. J., Lynch, R. L. and Cross, K. F. (1990). Do financial and nonfinancial measures of performance have to agree? Management Accounting, November, 28-36.
63. Goto, M. and Tsutsui, M.(1998). Comparison of productivity and cost efficiencies among Japanese and US electric utilities. Management Science, 26(2), 177-194.
64. Milind, S. (2000). X-efficiency in Australian banking: An empirical investigation. Journal of Banking ＆ Finance, 25（3）, 613-630.
65. Narasimhan, S. L. and Graham, A. W. ( 2005). Relative efficiency of computer and computer services companies.Business Review, 3(2), 47-50.
66. Niven, P. R. (2002). Balanced scorecard step-by-step. New York, NY: John Wiley＆Sons.
67. Norman, M., & Barry, S. (1991). Data envelopment analysis: The assessment of performance. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons
68. Olve, N., Roy, J., and Wetter, M. (1999). Performance drivers: A practical guide to using the balanced scorecard. New York,NY: John Wiley＆Sons.
69. Park, R.K. and De, P. (2004). An alternative approach to efficiency measurement of seaports. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 6, 53-69.
70. Pineno, C. J. (2000). The balanced scorecard: An incremental approach to product lines and distribution. Journal of Contemporary Business Issues, 8(2), 77-83.
71. Porter, M. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance.New York,NY: Free Press.
72. Rickards, R. C. (2003). Setting benchmarks and evaluating balanced scorecards with data envelopment analysis. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 10(3), 226-245.
73. Robbins, S.P. (1990). Organization theory: Structure, design, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
74. Roll, Y, and Hayuth, Y. (1993) Port performance comparison applying data envelopment analysis (DEA). Maritime Economics & Logistics, 20(2), 153-161.
75. Saaty,T. L. (1996). The analytic hierarchy process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.
76. Serrano-Cinca, C., Fuertes-Callen, Y., and Mar-Molinero, C. (2005) Measuring DEA efficiency in internet companies. Decision Support System, 38(4), 557-573.
77. Sherman, H. D. (1984), Improving the Productivity of Service Business, Sloan Management Review, 25(3), 11-23.
78. Stewart, T. A. (1997) Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations. New York, NY: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group.
79. Sveiby, K.E. (1997). The new organizational wealth-managing and measuring knowledge-based assets. Publisher: Berrett-Koehler Pub U.S.A.
80. Tongzon, J. (2001). Efficiency measurement of selected Australian and other international ports using data envelopment analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and practice, 35, 113-128.
85. Thore, S., Kozmetsky, G.., & Phillips, F. (1994). DEA of financial statements data: The U.S. computer industry. The Journal of Productivity Analysis, 5(2), 229-248.
86. Venkatraman, N.V. Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance on strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814.
87. Vitale, M., Mavrinac, S. C. and Hauser, M. (1994). DHC: The Chemical Division’s Balances Scorecard, Planning Review, 17, 45.
88. Wise, R.I. (1997). The balanced scorecard approach to strategy management. The Public Manager, Fall, 47-50.
89. Yap, C., Siu, E., Baker, G.R., and Brown, A.D. (2005). A comparison of systemwide and hospital-specific performance measurement tools, Journal of Healthcare Management, 5, 251-263.
90. Zhu, Joe (2000) Theory and methodology: multi-factor performance measure model with an application to Fortune 500 companies, European Journal of Operational Research, 123(1), 105-124.