企業併購是一項重要的金融活動，旨在將獨立公司合併為更大的實體，藉由協同效應和創新實現價值的提升，其主要目的通常包括快速切入市場、擴大市場占有率、獲取新技術與通路，甚至實現市場壟斷。透過公司合併，企業能迅速拓展至新市場並提升技術實力，不僅能實現上下游垂直整合以擴大經營規模，還能透過水平整合實現多角化經營，從而促進企業的進一步成長與盈利能力提升。因此，作為一種關鍵的外部成長策略，企業合併能幫助組織透過規模擴大與資源整合來增強市場競爭力，特別對於尋求快速擴張的企業而言，更顯得至關重要。同時，收購作為一種外部公司治理工具，能有效對低效率的管理層施加壓力，因而在現代公司治理改革中扮演著不可或缺的角色。然而，企業合併的成功與否不僅取決於財務與市場整合，更在於能否妥善處理併購過程中的人力資本管理問題。本研究旨在探討維護人力資本權益對併購效益的影響，並以某電子公司在被併購過程中面臨的管理挑戰作為案例，深入剖析相關問題的根源與解決方案。
案例公司於 2024 年因股權轉移成為集團子公司，但由於進行併購的公司管理層未充分考量員工權益，導致內部矛盾激化。該公司在被併購的過程中面臨多重挑戰。首先，因採用股權轉移的變更方式，公司規避了法定補償義務，並未與員工進行有效溝通便削減福利，進一步削弱了員工對管理層的信任。其次，新管理層在經濟不景氣的背景下，為追求短期財務績效，對員工設定過高的業績目標，但缺乏足夠的資源與支持，導致員工承受過大的工作壓力，進而削弱組織效能，甚至引發被併購公司員工陸續自發性離職的情況。此外，企業在文化與管理整合上也存在缺失，未妥善處理不同部門間的文化差異及管理模式變更的適應問題，甚至在無充分準備的情況下降職或調動部分主管，導致員工士氣低落與人員流失風險增加。最後，股權轉移方式雖能簡化併購流程，但因未提供法定資遣補償或其他權益保障，可能違反相關勞動法規，使勞工權益受損，進而增加企業的法律風險。
研究結果顯示，維護人力資本權益對於併購的整體效益具有重要影響。若能妥善處理併購過程中的員工權益保障問題，將有助於穩定員工士氣、減少人力流失，同時提升組織的協同效能與整體競爭力。因此，企業在進行併購時，應重視人力資本的管理，透過加強內部溝通、完善資源支持、注重文化整合以及確保合法合規等措施，實現併購後的長期效益。

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are significant financial and strategic activities aimed at combining previously independent entities into larger organizations to enhance overall value through synergy and innovation. The primary objectives of M&A typically include rapid market entry, expansion of market share, acquisition of critical technologies and distribution channels, and, in some cases, the achievement of market dominance. Through M&A, companies can swiftly expand their operational footprint and technological capabilities. By implementing vertical integration, firms strengthen their control over the supply chain, while horizontal integration allows them to diversify their product lines and services. These strategies ultimately enhance operational efficiency and profitability. As such, M&A serves not only as a pivotal external growth strategy for modern enterprises seeking rapid expansion but also as a vital mechanism for strengthening competitive advantage in highly dynamic and competitive industries.
Moreover, acquisitions are often regarded as instruments of external corporate governance. By allowing market forces to restructure underperforming or inefficient companies, M&A can exert pressure on existing management teams and play a key role in advancing corporate governance reforms. However, the success of M&A does not depend solely on financial restructuring, legal arrangements, or market consolidation. A critical, and often underestimated, factor lies in the effective management of human capital throughout the M&A process. Previous studies and practical experiences have repeatedly demonstrated that failure to protect employee rights, manage cultural integration, or establish effective communication mechanisms can result in low employee morale, increased turnover, internal resistance, and ultimately the erosion of anticipated post-merger synergies.
This study examines the critical role of human capital rights protection in determining the overall effectiveness of M&A by analyzing a real-world case in Taiwan. Specifically, it investigates the challenges encountered during the 2024 acquisition of a medium-sized Taiwanese electronics firm, which was taken over through an equity transfer by a large domestic corporate group. Unlike cross-border M&A cases that often involve differences in legal frameworks and cultural systems, this case occurred within a single national context, where language, legal structure, and cultural background were relatively aligned. Nevertheless, the process revealed significant management gaps and risks, particularly in the realm of human resources and organizational integration.
The findings of this research reveal four major challenges that emerged during the post-merger integration of the case company. First, the acquiring company adopted a stock transfer method, thereby circumventing statutory labor termination procedures. As a result, no severance pay or alternative compensation was offered to employees, and changes to employee benefits were implemented without transparent communication or prior consent. This approach significantly undermined trust between the workforce and the new management.
Second, in an attempt to improve short-term financial performance amidst an economic downturn, the new leadership imposed aggressive performance targets on employees without providing the necessary support systems, training, or resource allocation. This placed considerable stress on frontline staff, diminished organizational efficiency, and triggered a wave of voluntary resignations among key personnel.
Third, the acquirer failed to adequately manage cultural and managerial integration. Differences in departmental cultures and management styles were not properly addressed, and several managers were either demoted or transferred without clear justification or adequate preparation. These abrupt changes led to confusion, decreased morale, and heightened the risk of internal instability and talent loss.
Finally, although the equity transfer method simplified the legal and procedural aspects of the merger, it failed to meet the ethical and legal expectations regarding employee protection. The lack of severance packages, formal consultations, or other mechanisms to safeguard labor rights exposed the company to potential violations of labor laws and increased its legal risks.
This case illustrates that even in domestic M&A transactions—where regulatory and cultural alignment might suggest smoother integration—there remains a pressing need to prioritize the management of human capital. When employee rights are disregarded or inadequately managed, it not only jeopardizes organizational cohesion but also compromises the long-term strategic goals of the merger itself.
In conclusion, the study underscores the pivotal role of human capital rights protection in maximizing the success of M&A activities. Companies undertaking mergers or acquisitions must adopt a more holistic and employee-centered approach to integration. This includes strengthening internal communication, implementing transparent and lawful HR policies, respecting organizational culture, and offering adequate support to employees throughout the transitional period. By doing so, firms can foster trust, enhance organizational resilience, and realize the full value of post-merger synergies.

1.工商時報（2020）。變革領導八大步驟：當一隻預見融冰的企鵝。工商時報。
2.中央社（2022）。企業文化衝突致併購失敗比率高達七成。
3.中華人事主管協會（2022）。企業併購與人力資源整合實務報告。中華人事主管協會出版。
4.中華人力資源學會（2021）。併購整合的HR管理新挑戰。中華人力資源學會出版。
5.中華徵信所（2023）。台灣企業併購動態報告。中華徵信所出版。
6.王麗琴（2016）。企業併購對員工心理契約之影響。心理學報，48(3)，233–256。
7.天下雜誌（2022）。高科技業併購潮下的人力資源挑戰。
8.天下雜誌（2023）。高科技產業裁員潮中的併購風險管理。
9.台灣證券交易所（2021）。公開發行公司併購作業指引。台灣證券交易所出版。
10.全國法規資料庫（2023）。勞基法、公司法、公平交易法。
11.吳宗文（2008）。策略性人力資源管理與組織績效。經濟與管理研究，12(3)，101–118。
12.吳明隆（2009）。SPSS統計應用實務。台北：五南。
13.吳盈潔（2002）。企業併購之文化整合與人力資源管理策略〔未出版之碩士論 文〕。中央大學。
14.林建煌（2006）。研究方法與論文寫作。新陸書局。
15.林瑞陽（2013）。企業併購整合與領導風格。管理研究與實務，12(4)，119–136。
16.邱瓊華（2017）。以員工觀點探討併購後的組織變革歷程。組織學刊，8(1)，71–93。
17.商周專欄（2022）。併購案背後的人事風暴：企業如何重建員工信任。
18.商業周刊（2021）。併購成功關鍵：員工安置與企業文化。
19.許文耀（2011）。人力資本權益與企業績效之關聯性。企業研究季刊，9(2)，77–98。
20.郭瑞坤（2004）。企業併購後之整合與文化衝突管理。人力資源管理學報，4(1)，49–66。
21.郭馥琳（2020）。併購過程中之員工心理歷程分析。心理與管理學刊，25(3)，89–112。
22.陳志賢（2006）。從變革管理看企業併購整合。企業管理月刊，304，30–37。
23.陳春霖（2010）。組織變革理論與實務應用。行政管理季刊，55(3)，21–39。
24.陳淑美（2013）。企業社會責任對員工承諾與離職傾向之影響。企業管理學報，19(4)，33–58。
25.國際勞工組織（2023）。企業社會責任與勞工權益。
26.張至誠（2012）。企業文化衝突與調適機制。管理科學學刊，29(2)，45–63。
27.張靜如（2017）。從Lewin改變理論看企業併購的組織調整。組織與管理，11(2)，45–63。
28.勞動部（2023）。勞基法實務指引。勞動部出版。
29.黃俊英（2005）。企業策略。華泰文化。
30.黃冠文（2015）。併購後之組織認同重建。組織行為研究，19(1)，67–88。
31.黃昱程（2015）。併購後之員工工作壓力與適應策略。心理與職場，11(1)，39–59。
32.楊文輝（2006）。企業併購中文化整合的策略研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中南大學。
33.楊智凱（2018）。從人力資源管理觀點分析企業併購整合。人力資源管理評論，10(2)，55–77。
34.新新聞（2023）。企業併購引發勞資糾紛？專家分析四大原因。
35.溫金豐（2012）。組織理論與管理基礎與應用。華泰。
36.鄭如君（2014）。從組織支持理論探討員工參與變革意願。人力資源研究，22(1)，91–115。
37.經濟日報（2022）。從宏碁併購案例談文化整合。
38.經濟部工業局（2021）。企業轉型與人力資本政策白皮書。經濟部工業局出版。
39.聯合報（2023）。併購過程中如何維持員工信任？專家建議三要素。
40.薛勝夫（2000）。企業併購成功關鍵因素之研究—以企業文化整合觀點探討〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中山大學。
41.謝明慧（2009）。企業併購後組織文化整合歷程之研究。中山管理評論，17(2)，217–250。

1.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2.Buono, A. F., & Bowditch, J. L. (1989). The human side of mergers and acquisitions. Jossey-Bass.
3.Burnes, B. (2017). Kurt Lewin: 70 years on. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), 91–100.
4.Cummings, S., Bridgman, T., & Brown, K. G. (2016). Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin's legacy for change management. Human Relations, 69(1), 33–60.
5.Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
6.Financial Times. (2022). How Disney's acquisition of 21st Century Fox reshaped the media industry.
7.Gaughan, P. A. (2017). Mergers, acquisitions, and corporate restructurings. John Wiley & Sons.
8.Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job insecurity: Toward conceptual clarity. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 438–448.
9.Hiatt, J. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business, government and our community. Prosci Learning Center Publications.
10.Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
11.Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (2010). Joining forces: Making one plus one equal three in mergers, acquisitions, and alliances. Jossey-Bass.
12.McKinsey & Company. (2019). The keys to a successful M&A integration.
13.Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
14.Nahavandi, A., & Malekzadeh, A. R. (1988). Acculturation in mergers and acquisitions. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 79–90.
15.Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
16.Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
17.Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18.Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.Schuler, R., & Jackson, S. (2001). HR issues and activities in mergers and acquisitions. European Management Journal, 19(3), 239–253.
20.Stahl, G. K., & Voigt, A. (2008). Do cultural differences matter in mergers and acquisitions? A tentative model and examination. Organization Science, 19(1), 160–176.