透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.118.164.121
  • 學位論文

運用資料包络法及PZB模型衡量金控銀行與獨立銀行內外表現差異之研究

Applying Data Envelopment Analysis and PZB model to measure the differences in internal and external Performance between subsidiary bank of financial holding companys and independent banks

指導教授 : 劉大昌
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


2001年6月立法院通過「金融控股公司法」,在法令的鬆綁及鼓勵下,金融機構掀起一股巨大的合併峰潮;對民眾及政府機關而言,銀行對於金融業有一定的代表性及重要性,本研究希望能檢驗並且實證金控公司旗下銀行(以下簡稱金控銀行)的表現相較於非金控旗下銀行(以下簡稱獨立銀行),是否確切在內部經營績效與外部服務品質有明顯差異? 本研究對金控經營的表現衡量分為內部【經營績效】與外部【服務品質】兩部分;在經營績效方面利用deap軟體進行資料包絡分析法(Data Envelopment Analysis)CCR與BCC模式來衡量金控銀行及獨立銀行經營績效,分別得到總體效率、技術效率、規模效率,並進行差額變數分析、參考集合分析、規模報酬分析。在服務品質部分,以PZB模型設計問卷將問項區分為6個構面,並訪問金控銀行與獨立銀行之顧客,最後以統計軟體SPSS分析探討服務品質之差異。 就總體效率而言,金控銀行相對有效率比率為25%,獨立銀行比率為20%,可知在整體表現上金控銀行確實較獨立銀行表現為佳。在技術效率值方面,隸屬金控公司下子銀行為0.9525仍然比獨立銀行0.86表現為佳;隱含金控銀行在資源運用上,相較獨立銀行有較佳的管理決策及經營技術。在規模報酬部分,6家金控銀行為規模報酬遞減,表示半數金控尚未完全達成資源交互運用及降低成本的功效。在獨立銀行方面,由於資本規模較小,其資源能達到較高的利用程度,因而有19家呈現規模報酬遞增。在服務品質部分,金控銀行在六個構面的滿意度均高於獨立銀行,其中有形性及關懷性構面檢定達到顯著,同時有5個服務品質問項也達到顯著,表示金控的服務品質較優於獨立銀行。本研究最後依據研究結果在服務品質及經營績效部份,分別針對金控銀行、獨立銀行、主管機關做出建議。

關鍵字

金控 銀行 績效 服務品質 資料包絡法 PZB

並列摘要


In June 2001, parliament legislate for Financial Holding Corporation, because of this law financial institution make effort to merge the others. Bank is significance and importance of financial institution for people and government, This study try to prove the differences between subsidiary bank of financial folding companys(financial folding bank) and independent banks to make sure that is there evidence between the difference. This study measure perfoemance by two methods, use of deap program to execute DEA(Data Envelopment Analysis) to measure administration for inside performance. To obtain “productive efficiency”, “technical efficiency”, “scale efficiency”and “returns to scale,RTS” by CCR and BCC model. Next step exeute “Slack Analysis”, ”Reference Set Analysis”, “Return to Scale Analysis”. Using of questionnaire to measure service quality for outside performance. The content of questionnaire includes of six dimensions, all questionnaires were used by SPSS software package for analysis. The result of DEA, the production efficiency of financial holding banks is 25%, the production efficiency of independent banks is 20%, the overall administration performance of financial holding banks is better than independent banks. The technical efficiency of financial holding banks is 0.9525, it is better than 0.86 of independent banks. It is meaning that the ability to manage resource and decision of financial holding banks is better than independent banks. In return to scale analysis, six financial holding banks is in decreasing return to scale, it represents half of financial holding banks did not reach to mutual use of resource and reduce cost. Because of the small scale, independent banks reach to better utilization of resource, there were 19 independent banks is in increasing return to scale.In service quality, financial holding banks has better satisfaction than independent bank in six dimensions. Tangible and Empathy is reach significance level, Reliability, Responsiveness and Assurance is not significance, Five questions are significance,too. It means service quality of financial holding is better than independent.According to result of research, this study raises suggestions for financial holding banks, independent banks and government in administration and service performance.

參考文獻


[9] 陳如慧,員工分紅制度對企業經營效率影響之研究,中原大學會計學系碩士論文,2004。
[10] 黃意倩,台灣金融控股公司經營策略因素、企業顧客滿意度與經營績效關係之研究,中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,2004。
[12] 高子荃、陳振遠、周建新,「台灣地區產險業經營效率之研究-資料包絡法與Malmquist生產力指數之應用」,輔仁管理評論,第十一卷第11期,頁53-76,2004年3月。
[23] 黃偉松,服務品質、顧客滿意度與顧客忠誠度關係之研究-以證券商為例,淡江大學管理科學學系,2001。
[13] 王馨苓,銀行合併前後服務品質、顧客滿意度與員工認知暨改善服務品質之研究-以國泰世華銀行為例,國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士論文,2005。

延伸閱讀