簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 蕭政宇
Hsiao, Cheng-Yu
論文名稱: 專屬性資產與依存程度對信任生成與治理行為之影響-以金屬材料A供應商為例
The Influence of Asset Specificity and Dependence on Trust Formation and Governance Behavior: The Case Study of Metal Materials Supplier A
指導教授: 許經明
Shiu, Jing-Ming
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 管理學院 - 企業管理學系
Department of Business Administration
論文出版年: 2025
畢業學年度: 113
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 51
中文關鍵詞: 專屬性資產依存度計算性信任關係性信任治理機制
外文關鍵詞: Asset Specificity, Dependency, Calculative Trust, Relational Trust, Governance Mechanisms
相關次數: 點閱:16下載:3
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 企業之間的合作關係在高度競爭且技術快速演進的市場環境中,往往涉及大量專屬性資產(Asset Specificity)的投入與高度依存(Dependence)的風險。本研究以信任理論為基礎,透過質性個案研究法,探討企業在半導體與面板產業中,如何根據專屬性資產投入程度與對客戶依存度的不同組合情境,選擇與動態調整「計算性信任」與「關係性信任」之間的相對比例,並發展相應的治理機制,以有效降低合作過程中的潛在風險。
    本研究以從事供應半導體以及面板產業的金屬材料A供應商為個案,分析其與重要客戶在「標準品」與「客製品」兩種不同產品策略下的合作歷程與信任形成模式。研究發現,採用標準品策略之企業,信任生成呈現逐步演進式,初期以計算性信任為主,隨著合作深化與依存度提高,逐漸發展為以關係性信任為主;而客製品策略則呈現風險承擔式模式,初期即投入大量專屬資產,仰賴關係性信任作為合作基礎,後續再逐步融入計算性信任,以有效控管合作風險。
    本研究進一步指出,企業在治理策略上多採用混合治理模式,動態調整正式契約治理與非正式關係治理之比例,以同時兼顧彈性調整空間與制度保障的需求。此種治理模式不僅有效控制專屬資產投入的沉沒成本風險,亦能在高度依存情境下,透過情感交流、技術共享與長期互惠承諾,提升合作穩定性與創新韌性。
    在理論貢獻上,本研究透過動態視角補足既有信任與治理理論的靜態侷限,並提出「四象限–雙路徑」的信任生成與治理調整架構,提供清晰的分析邏輯與實務操作參考。實務上,本研究亦提供具體的管理策略建議,協助企業在高度競爭與不確定性的市場中,有效地配置資源與管理合作風險,進而達成長期穩定與持續的競爭優勢。

    This study explores how firms manage interorganizational trust and governance mechanisms under different combinations of asset specificity and dependence. Focusing on a metal materials supplier in the semiconductor and panel industries, the research adopts a qualitative case study approach to investigate how firms dynamically adjust the balance between calculative trust and relational trust to mitigate collaboration risks. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with managers involved in two distinct cooperation types: standard products and customized products.
    Findings show that standard product collaborations typically begin with calculative trust, evolving toward relational trust as dependence increases over time. In contrast, customized product collaborations involve early, high asset-specific investments, relying on relational trust from the outset, followed by gradual integration of calculative trust to manage risks. The study also reveals that firms adopt hybrid governance strategies—adjusting the proportion of contractual and relational governance depending on the cooperation context.
    This research contributes to existing literature by proposing a dynamic “Four-Quadrant, Dual-Path” framework that illustrates how trust evolves across different cooperative scenarios. It highlights the strategic role of trust adjustment in balancing flexibility and control, enhancing long-term collaboration stability and resilience in high-risk, high-dependence contexts.

    摘要 i 致謝 vi 目錄 vii 表目錄 ix 圖目錄 x 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究問題與目的 3 第三節 研究內容與流程 3 第二章 文獻回顧 5 第一節 專屬性資產與依存度的理論基礎 5 第二節 傳統治理機制的因應邏輯與侷限 7 第三節 信任的理論基礎 9 第四節 文獻整合與研究定位 11 第三章 研究設計與方法 13 第一節 個案背景與簡介 13 第二節 研究架構 14 第三節 研究方法 16 第四節 資料蒐集 17 第五節 資料分析 19 第四章 個案研究 20 第一節 個案分析 20 第二節 標準品合作路徑分析 20 第三節 客製品合作路徑分析 26 第四節 標準品與客製品合作邏輯比較 30 第五章 理論與實務貢獻 33 第一節 研究發現與理論意涵 33 第二節 實務建議 34 第六章 結論與建議 36 第一節 研究限制與未來研究方向 36 第二節 研究結論 37 參考文獻 38

    Akrout, H., & Diallo, M. F. (2017). Fundamental transformations of trust and its drivers: A multi-stage approach of business-to-business relationships. Industrial marketing management, 66, 159-171.
    Bai, J., Su, J., Xin, Z., & Wang, C. (2024). Calculative trust, relational trust, and organizational performance: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Business Research, 172, 114435.
    Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of management review, 23(4), 660-679.
    Emerson, R. M. (2019). Power-dependence relations. In Power in modern societies (pp. 48-58). Routledge.
    Jap, S. D., & Anderson, E. (2003). Safeguarding interorganizational performance and continuity under ex post opportunism. Management science, 49(12), 1684-1701.
    Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734.
    Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic management journal, 23(8), 707-725.
    Poppo, L., Zhou, K. Z., & Li, J. J. (2016). When can you trust “trust”? Calculative trust, relational trust, and supplier performance. Strategic management journal, 37(4), 724-741.
    Riordan, M. H., & Williamson, O. E. (1985). Asset specificity and economic organization. International journal of industrial organization, 3(4), 365-378.
    Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of management review, 23(3), 393-404.
    Schilke, O., & Cook, K. S. (2015). Sources of alliance partner trustworthiness: Integrating calculative and relational perspectives. Strategic management journal, 36(2), 276-297.
    Shou, Z., Guo, R., Zhang, Q., & Su, C. (2011). The many faces of trust and guanxi behavior: Evidence from marketing channels in China. Industrial marketing management, 40(4), 503-509.
    Suh, T., & Kwon, I.-W. G. (2006). Matter over mind: When specific asset investment affects calculative trust in supply chain partnership. Industrial marketing management, 35(2), 191-201.
    Williamson, O. E. (1996). The mechanisms of governance. Oxford university press.
    Williamson, O. E. (2007). The economic institutions of capitalism. Firms, markets, relational contracting. Springer.

    下載圖示 校內:立即公開
    校外:立即公開
    QR CODE