多角化、事業部組織、人力資源管理與組織績效之關聯

The relationship of diversification, multidivisional structure, human resources management and it effects on the organization performance

梁正學(Cheng-Shyue Liang)

指導教授 ： 劉念琪

國立中央大學/管理學院/人力資源管理研究所/碩士(2007年)

摘要

在企業開始開拓新的市場，經營新的事業或是開始製造另一項新的產品時，多角化（diversification）的概念也開始受到注意與討論。企業多角化最早由併購而來，會了善用資源，事業體之間必須有彈性的管理，因此企業因應的多角化的策略是要求能夠提高企業綜效（Synergy）（Ansoff, 1965; Carter, 1977）。現今企業無論經由內部發展或是外部併購，多角化策略型態已普遍存在於各大企業之中，而為此衍生出的策略議題已廣為在各學術領域裡被討論。其中包含了多角化策略與其組織績效機的關聯，更重要的是哪種類型的多角化策略是可以創造較佳的組織績效。而從策略的執行轉換成組織績效中間的變數，將是一直受到關注和挖掘議題。
本研究在探討企業產品採相關或非相關多角化策略時，該策略與組織的人力資本運用的配適，對組織績效的影響。而人力資本的運用包含組織結構的設計與人力資源管理。因此，多角化企業是否會受到其與事業部組織結構，以及人力資源管理系統的適配與否，而影響其績效。在針對全台灣216家上市櫃的製造業公司的調查中，研究結果發現（1）採用事業部組織與否，對於多角化企業的組織績效的確有顯著的影響。其中又以相關多角化企業在以銷售額作為績效指標的估計邊緣平均數上，採用事業部組織者明顯優於不採用者。然而非相關多角化企業採行事業部組織，並沒有較佳的績效。此研究證明組織結構的運用不同，的確會對多角化企業產生影響，尤其是相關多角化企業會因此創造出較佳的組織績效。（2）高績效人力資源系統的運用與否，與多角化企業的績效無顯著影響。因此推論光單單倚靠人力資源系統，可能是不足以支撐多角化企業所需的管理需求，必須具有更巨觀或是其他的管理配套措施。（3）多角化同時採行事業部組織和高績效人力資源系統者，對其組織機績有顯著的影響。其中此三者配適的好處又以相關多角化最能反應在績效上。由研究結果可推知，產業性質有其關聯的多角化型態，最能利用範疇經濟和綜效的理論概念，也因此最能明顯的藉由宏觀和微觀的人力資本運用，將其優勢發揮出來。

關鍵字

人力資源管理 ； 多角化 ； 事業部組織

並列摘要

Most firms today produce more than one product. In order to using resources more efficiently or risk aversion, companies often choose to diversify as their business strategy when they are growing up. However, there are still some components to be explored to ensure that the diversification strategy can lead the superior performance. In fact, there are extensive literature discussing about the relationship between diversification and performance and which kind of the diversification strategy will create higher performance. Until now, whether related or unrelated diversification, they both have many empirical evidences to support their advantage but there is no consistent agreement. To decide how the organization performance will be, the usage of human capital might be an important factor. For this reason, this study examines the relationship among diversification strategy, multidivisional structure, high performance human resources system and the organizational performance.
The study including 216 manufacturing companies in Taiwan and results show that (1) the diversification strategy and multidivisional structure has a significant interaction effect on organizational performance. For related diversification firms’ performance, the estimated marginal means will be higher when using multidivisional structure. However, the performance will be lower for unrelated diversification ones which use multidivisional structure. (2) The diversification strategy and high performance human resources system do not have significant interaction effect on organizational performance. (3) The interaction effect of diversification strategy, multidivisional structure and high performance human resources system is significant on organizational performance. Furthermore, related diversification companies obviously have outstanding organizational performance under this interaction.
Our findings show that human resources management plays an important role in diversification strategy, related diversification especially. High performance human resources system can help related diversification firms which also use multidivisional structure to have superior organizational performance.

並列關鍵字

diversification ； human resources ； multidivisional

參考文獻

Allen, S.A., (1978). Organizational Choices and General Management Influence Networks in Divisionalized Companies, Academy of Management journal, 21（3）：341-365

Amit, R.and J. Livant, (1988). Diversification strategies, business cycles and economic performance, Strategic Management Journal, 9（2）：99-110

Amihud, Y. and B. Lev, (1981). Risk Reduction as a Managerial Motive for Conglomerate Mergers, Bell Jjournal of Economics, 12（2）：605-617

Amihud, Y. and B. Lev, (1999). Does Corporate Ownership Structure Affect Its Strategy towards Diversification？, Strategic Management Journal, 20（11）：1063-1069

Arthur, J., (1992). The Link between Business Strategy and Industrial Relations Systems in American Steel Minimills, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 42（3）：488-506