Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 企業績效管理對軟體產業有益嗎?以一軟體公司之績效管理為例
Does Corporate Performance Management Matter in a Software Company？作者 陳偉弘
Chen, David Wei Hung貢獻者 尚孝純
Shang, Shari S. C.
陳偉弘
Chen, David Wei Hung關鍵詞 企業績效管理
預算計畫
驅動因子基礎計畫
專案成本
軟體產業
Corporate Performance Management
Budget Planning
Driver-based Planning
Project Costing
Software Industry日期 2013 上傳時間 29-Jul-2014 16:05:14 (UTC+8) 摘要 企業績效管理對軟體產業有益嗎?以一軟體公司之績效管理為例
Continuous innovation capability is seen as the engine to grow for knowledge-intensive industry, specifically for software companies. Along with evolvement of information technology, software industry expanded dramatically with blooming tide from personal computers, Internet, to the cloud era to date. Software industry enjoyed high growth over the past four decades, but it has begun to experience weak growth as profit margins continue to drop in recent years. Examining and reviewing the overall corporate performance management processes in order to figure out root causes are becoming equally important as innovation capability to the industry. \nAn effective performance management process which enables efficient budget planning in response to external challenges and provides timely visibility of operation is thus critical. Driver-based planning and project costing are cornerstones of the budget planning process that is introduced and automated through seamless integration of data spreading out in various business applications. \nThe process model has changed standard operation approach from free-to-organize to resource management. Extra overheads were developed in order to comply with it. Stakeholders had to embrace new concept and transform their behaviour to adapt.\nAny control or performance management is usually viewed as a constraint to innovation and an impedance to grow, hence there seems to be a constant trade-off between compliance and innovation about adapting a new budget and planning processes. It becomes a dilemma for any corporation, especially for software companies, to commit a sizable portion of resources to innovation without properly determining a reasonable method to justify such investment. \nThis paper offers an understanding about the dilemma of striking the right balance between corporate controls and maximising innovation potential of one software company in order to shed some light on the matter through reflecting the deployment of Corporate Performance Management (CPM). The paper also aims to provide findings and summarize them to a practical reference for software companies in terms of effective corporate control and maximisation of innovation potential.參考文獻 Adler, Paul S, Goldoftas, Barbara, & Levine, I. David. (1999). Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System. Organization Science, 43-68.\nAdler, S. P., (1988). Managing flexible automation. California Management Review, 34-56.\nAllen, M. J., (1970). A Survey into the R&D Evaluation and Control Procedures Currently Used in Industry. Industry Economy, 161-181.\nBagozzi, P. R., Davis, D. F., & Warshaw, R. P. (1992). Development and test of a theory of technological leaning and usage. Human Relations, 660-686.\nBarrett, Richard. (2007). Planning and Budgeting for the Agile Enterprise - A driver-based budgeting toolkit. Oxford, UK: CIMA Publishing.\nBowen, E. David, & Lawler, Edward E. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: what, why, how, and when. Sloan Management Review, 31-40.\nBoyett, H. Joseph, & Boyett, T. Jimmie. (2001). The Guru Guide to the Knowledge Economy (pp 46-47). John Wiley& Sons.\nBrand, Stewart. (1999). The Clock of the Long Now: Time and Responsibility (pp 37). Basic Books.\nBurns, Tom, & Stalker, Georage. (1961). The Management Innovation. London.\nBushe, R. Gervasc, & Shani, BA. (1991). Patallel Learning Structures: Increasing Innovation in Bureaucracies. Reading: Addision-Wesley.\nBusiness Performance Management. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Performance_Management\nClark, Kim. (1996). Competing through manufacturing and the new manufacturing paradigm: Is manufacturing strategy passe? Production and Operations Management, 42-58.\nCollins, Kimberley. (2003). Profitability Analysis: Strategic Financial Service CPM Tool. Gartner Research, pp 1-5.\nDavis, D. F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319–340.\nDuncan, B. Robert. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dualstructures for innovation. The Management Organization Design, pp 167-188.\nFrolick, N. Mark, & AriyachandraThilliniR. (2006). Business Performance Management: One Truth. Informantion Systems Management, pp 41-48.\nGarvin, David, & Levesque, Lynne. (2005). Emerging Business Opportunities at IBM (A). Harvard Business Review, pp 13.\nGarvin, David, & Levesque, Lynne. (2005). Emerging Business Opportunties at IBM (B). Hardvard Business Review, pp 3-5.\nGlobal Business Services, IBM. (2011). Key of Implementing to Executing Strategies. IBM Global Services.\nGlobal Business Services, IBM. (2011). Strategic Alignment and Performance Management from A Financial Perspective. Global Services, IBM.\nGregory, A. Marianne. (2004). Keys to Successful Performance Management: Getting Past The Excitement of Technology to Achieve Results. Business Intelligence Journal, pp 41-48.\nHackman, J. Richard, & Oldham, R. Greg. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.\nHayes, Robert, & Gary, Pisano. (1996). Manufacturing strategy: At the intersection of two paradigm shifts. Production and Operations Management, pp 25-41.\nHerriot, E. R., & Firestone, A. W. (1983). Multi-site qualitative policy research: optimising description and generalisability. Educational Researcher, pp 14-19.\nHostmann, Bill, & Strange, H. Kevin. (2002). Data Model Options that Support CPM Deployments. Gartner Research, pp 1-3.\nIBM. (2003). Growth Platform Guardian.\nIBM. (2013). IBM IPD and Project Management Sharing.\nIervolino, C. (2012, 10 31). Assess CPM Maturity to Rate Your Performance Management. Gartner, pp. 2-14.\nIervolino, Christopher, Van Decker, E. John, & Chandler, Neil. (2014). Strategic CPM as a Driver for Organizational Performance Management. Gartner, pp 3-10.\nKelly, Kevin. (1998). New Rules for the Wired Economy (pp 26).\nKnott, Anne Marie. (1996). Do Manager Matter? Unpublished dissertation, UCLA.\nKrishnaswamy, N. K., SivakumarIyer Appa, & Mathiraj, M. (2006). Management Research Methodology: Integration of Methods and Techniques.\nKurke, B. Lance. (1988). Does adaptation preclude adaptability? Strategy and Performance. Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment, pp 199-222.\nLewler, E. Edward, & Mohrman, A. Susan. (1985). Quality circles after the fad. Harvard Business Review, pp 64-71.\nLiberatore, Matthew, & Titus, George. (1983). The Practice of Management Science in R & D Project Management. Management Science, pp 962.\nMcGill, E. Michael, SlocumJohn, & LeiDavid. (1992). Management Practices in learning organizations. Organization Dynamics, pp 5-17.\nMintzberg, Henry. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.\nNelson, Richard, & Winter, Sidney. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA.\nPorter, E. Michael. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York.\nPorter, E. Michael. (1998). Clusters and the New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review, pp 77-90.\nPridemore, Charles. (1983). Software Development Costs: Expense or Capitalize. Management Accounting, pp 33.\nRayner, Nigel, Buytendijk, Frank, & Geishecker, Lee. (2002). The Process That Drive CPM. Gartner Research, pp 1-5.\nSkinnerWickham. (1985). Manufacturing: The Formidable Competitive Weapon. New York: John Wiley.\nSoftware Industry. (2012). Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_industry\nStewart T. (1986). Task fit, ease-of-use and computer facilities. Managing computer impact: An international study of management and organizations, pp 63-76.\nTornatzky, G. L., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The Processes of Technological Innovation. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books.\nTornatzky, G. L, & Klein, J.R. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, pp 28-45.\nTrend Micro Inc. (2013). Trend Micro FY2012.4Q Results. http://www.trendmicro.com/cloud-content/us/pdfs/finance/2012q4_e__final.pdf\nTrend Micro Inc, & Accenture. (2005). Change Management Plan. Taipei.\nTrend Micro Inc., & Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd. (2011). FIAT Phase II Workshop. Taipei, Taiwan.\nUlaga, W., & Sharma A. (2001). Complex and strategic decision making in organisation: Implications for personal selling and sales management. Industrial Marketing Management, pp 427-440.\nVan Decker, J. E. (2013, 7 30). Understanding the Costs Beyond Hardware and Software When Estimating Financial Management Projects. Gartner, p. 1.\nVenkatesh, V., & Davis, D. F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, pp 186-204.\nWhite, Colin. (2005). The Next Generation of Business Intelligence: Operational BI. DM Review, pp 35-37.\nWikipedia. (2007). The general interaction between the main three groups. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SoftwareHouse-GroupsSequence.jpg 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
經營管理碩士學程(EMBA)
101932096
102資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101932096 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 尚孝純 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Shang, Shari S. C. en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 陳偉弘 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chen, David Wei Hung en_US dc.creator (作者) 陳偉弘 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chen, David Wei Hung en_US dc.date (日期) 2013 en_US dc.date.accessioned 29-Jul-2014 16:05:14 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 29-Jul-2014 16:05:14 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 29-Jul-2014 16:05:14 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0101932096 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/item?item_id=76230 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 經營管理碩士學程(EMBA) zh_TW dc.description (描述) 101932096 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 102 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 企業績效管理對軟體產業有益嗎?以一軟體公司之績效管理為例 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Continuous innovation capability is seen as the engine to grow for knowledge-intensive industry, specifically for software companies. Along with evolvement of information technology, software industry expanded dramatically with blooming tide from personal computers, Internet, to the cloud era to date. Software industry enjoyed high growth over the past four decades, but it has begun to experience weak growth as profit margins continue to drop in recent years. Examining and reviewing the overall corporate performance management processes in order to figure out root causes are becoming equally important as innovation capability to the industry. \nAn effective performance management process which enables efficient budget planning in response to external challenges and provides timely visibility of operation is thus critical. Driver-based planning and project costing are cornerstones of the budget planning process that is introduced and automated through seamless integration of data spreading out in various business applications. \nThe process model has changed standard operation approach from free-to-organize to resource management. Extra overheads were developed in order to comply with it. Stakeholders had to embrace new concept and transform their behaviour to adapt.\nAny control or performance management is usually viewed as a constraint to innovation and an impedance to grow, hence there seems to be a constant trade-off between compliance and innovation about adapting a new budget and planning processes. It becomes a dilemma for any corporation, especially for software companies, to commit a sizable portion of resources to innovation without properly determining a reasonable method to justify such investment. \nThis paper offers an understanding about the dilemma of striking the right balance between corporate controls and maximising innovation potential of one software company in order to shed some light on the matter through reflecting the deployment of Corporate Performance Management (CPM). The paper also aims to provide findings and summarize them to a practical reference for software companies in terms of effective corporate control and maximisation of innovation potential. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents ACKNOWLEDGEMENT II\nABSTRACT III\nCONTENT IV\nLIST OF TABLES VI\nLIST OF FIGURES VII\nCHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION - 1 -\n1.1 RESEARCH BACKGROUND - 1 -\n1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES - 4 -\n1.3 RESEARCH PROCESS - 5 -\nCHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW - 6 -\n2.1 PLANNING PROCESS AUTOMATION - 6 -\n2.1.1 Corporate Performance Management - 6 -\n2.1.2 Budgeting and Planning Process Model - 11 -\n2.2 SOFTWARE INDUSTRY - 13 -\n2.2.1 Characteristics of the Software Industry - 13 -\n2.2.2 Role of Research and Development in Software Company - 14 -\n2.2.3 Driver-Based Budget Planning - 17 -\n2.3 CONTROL VS. INNOVATION - 23 -\nCHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY - 26 -\n3.1 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK - 26 -\n3.2 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS - 31 -\nCHAPTER 4 CASE STUDIES AND DATA ANALYSIS - 35 -\n4.1 CASE ONE - COMPANY X - 35 -\n4.1.1 BACKGROUND - 35 -\n4.1.2 CPM AT COMPANY X - 37 -\n4.1.2.1 Current Planning process - 38 -\n4.1.2.2 Driver-based Model and Project Costing - 41 -\n4.1.2.3 IT Readiness for CPM - 43 -\n4.1.2.4 Behaviour Change - 44 -\n4.1.2.5 Post-Implementation Evaluation - 47 -\n4.2 CASE TWO: COMPANY Y - 50 -\n4.2.1 BACKGROUND - 50 -\n4.2.2 CPM AT COMPANY Y - 52 -\n4.2.2.1 The Driver-Based planning model and Project Costing - 52 -\n4.2.2.2 Innovation Capability - 59 -\nCHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION - 63 -\n5.1 CRITICAL SUCCESSFUL FACTORS TO IMPLEMENT CPM - 63 -\n5.1.1 TOP MANAGEMENT SUPPORTS - 63 -\n5.1.2 LINKAGE TO STRATEGY PLANNING - 63 -\n5.1.3 IDENTIFICATION OF KEY BUSINESS DRIVERS - 64 -\n5.1.4 STREAMLINING TO PROJECT COST PLANNING - 64 -\n5.1.5 SIMULATION OF BUSINESS CHANGES - 65 -\n5.1.6 INTEGRATION AND INTERCONNECTIVITY AMONG BUSINESS APPLICATIONS - 65 -\n5.1.7 COMPLETE PERFORMANCE MONITORING - 66 -\n5.1.8 CONTINUOUS CHANGE MANAGEMENT - 66 -\n5.2 IMPACT ON INNOVATION CAPABILITY - 67 -\nCHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION - 73 -\n6.1 SUMMARY - 73 -\n6.2 MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS - 75 -\n6.3 LIMITATION AND FUTURE WORK - 76 -\nREFERENCE - 78 -\nAPPENDIX - 82 - zh_TW dc.format.extent 3364146 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101932096 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 企業績效管理 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 預算計畫 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 驅動因子基礎計畫 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專案成本 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 軟體產業 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Corporate Performance Management en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Budget Planning en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Driver-based Planning en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Project Costing en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Software Industry en_US dc.title (題名) 企業績效管理對軟體產業有益嗎?以一軟體公司之績效管理為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Does Corporate Performance Management Matter in a Software Company？ en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Adler, Paul S, Goldoftas, Barbara, & Levine, I. David. (1999). Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System. Organization Science, 43-68.\nAdler, S. P., (1988). Managing flexible automation. California Management Review, 34-56.\nAllen, M. J., (1970). A Survey into the R&D Evaluation and Control Procedures Currently Used in Industry. Industry Economy, 161-181.\nBagozzi, P. R., Davis, D. F., & Warshaw, R. P. (1992). Development and test of a theory of technological leaning and usage. Human Relations, 660-686.\nBarrett, Richard. (2007). Planning and Budgeting for the Agile Enterprise - A driver-based budgeting toolkit. Oxford, UK: CIMA Publishing.\nBowen, E. David, & Lawler, Edward E. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: what, why, how, and when. Sloan Management Review, 31-40.\nBoyett, H. Joseph, & Boyett, T. Jimmie. (2001). The Guru Guide to the Knowledge Economy (pp 46-47). John Wiley& Sons.\nBrand, Stewart. (1999). The Clock of the Long Now: Time and Responsibility (pp 37). Basic Books.\nBurns, Tom, & Stalker, Georage. (1961). The Management Innovation. London.\nBushe, R. Gervasc, & Shani, BA. (1991). Patallel Learning Structures: Increasing Innovation in Bureaucracies. Reading: Addision-Wesley.\nBusiness Performance Management. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Performance_Management\nClark, Kim. (1996). Competing through manufacturing and the new manufacturing paradigm: Is manufacturing strategy passe? Production and Operations Management, 42-58.\nCollins, Kimberley. (2003). Profitability Analysis: Strategic Financial Service CPM Tool. Gartner Research, pp 1-5.\nDavis, D. F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319–340.\nDuncan, B. Robert. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dualstructures for innovation. The Management Organization Design, pp 167-188.\nFrolick, N. Mark, & AriyachandraThilliniR. (2006). Business Performance Management: One Truth. Informantion Systems Management, pp 41-48.\nGarvin, David, & Levesque, Lynne. (2005). Emerging Business Opportunities at IBM (A). Harvard Business Review, pp 13.\nGarvin, David, & Levesque, Lynne. (2005). Emerging Business Opportunties at IBM (B). Hardvard Business Review, pp 3-5.\nGlobal Business Services, IBM. (2011). Key of Implementing to Executing Strategies. IBM Global Services.\nGlobal Business Services, IBM. (2011). Strategic Alignment and Performance Management from A Financial Perspective. Global Services, IBM.\nGregory, A. Marianne. (2004). Keys to Successful Performance Management: Getting Past The Excitement of Technology to Achieve Results. Business Intelligence Journal, pp 41-48.\nHackman, J. Richard, & Oldham, R. Greg. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.\nHayes, Robert, & Gary, Pisano. (1996). Manufacturing strategy: At the intersection of two paradigm shifts. Production and Operations Management, pp 25-41.\nHerriot, E. R., & Firestone, A. W. (1983). Multi-site qualitative policy research: optimising description and generalisability. Educational Researcher, pp 14-19.\nHostmann, Bill, & Strange, H. Kevin. (2002). Data Model Options that Support CPM Deployments. Gartner Research, pp 1-3.\nIBM. (2003). Growth Platform Guardian.\nIBM. (2013). IBM IPD and Project Management Sharing.\nIervolino, C. (2012, 10 31). Assess CPM Maturity to Rate Your Performance Management. Gartner, pp. 2-14.\nIervolino, Christopher, Van Decker, E. John, & Chandler, Neil. (2014). Strategic CPM as a Driver for Organizational Performance Management. Gartner, pp 3-10.\nKelly, Kevin. (1998). New Rules for the Wired Economy (pp 26).\nKnott, Anne Marie. (1996). Do Manager Matter? Unpublished dissertation, UCLA.\nKrishnaswamy, N. K., SivakumarIyer Appa, & Mathiraj, M. (2006). Management Research Methodology: Integration of Methods and Techniques.\nKurke, B. Lance. (1988). Does adaptation preclude adaptability? Strategy and Performance. Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment, pp 199-222.\nLewler, E. Edward, & Mohrman, A. Susan. (1985). Quality circles after the fad. Harvard Business Review, pp 64-71.\nLiberatore, Matthew, & Titus, George. (1983). The Practice of Management Science in R & D Project Management. Management Science, pp 962.\nMcGill, E. Michael, SlocumJohn, & LeiDavid. (1992). Management Practices in learning organizations. Organization Dynamics, pp 5-17.\nMintzberg, Henry. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.\nNelson, Richard, & Winter, Sidney. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA.\nPorter, E. Michael. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York.\nPorter, E. Michael. (1998). Clusters and the New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review, pp 77-90.\nPridemore, Charles. (1983). Software Development Costs: Expense or Capitalize. Management Accounting, pp 33.\nRayner, Nigel, Buytendijk, Frank, & Geishecker, Lee. (2002). The Process That Drive CPM. Gartner Research, pp 1-5.\nSkinnerWickham. (1985). Manufacturing: The Formidable Competitive Weapon. New York: John Wiley.\nSoftware Industry. (2012). Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_industry\nStewart T. (1986). Task fit, ease-of-use and computer facilities. Managing computer impact: An international study of management and organizations, pp 63-76.\nTornatzky, G. L., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The Processes of Technological Innovation. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books.\nTornatzky, G. L, & Klein, J.R. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, pp 28-45.\nTrend Micro Inc. (2013). Trend Micro FY2012.4Q Results. http://www.trendmicro.com/cloud-content/us/pdfs/finance/2012q4_e__final.pdf\nTrend Micro Inc, & Accenture. (2005). Change Management Plan. Taipei.\nTrend Micro Inc., & Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd. (2011). FIAT Phase II Workshop. Taipei, Taiwan.\nUlaga, W., & Sharma A. (2001). Complex and strategic decision making in organisation: Implications for personal selling and sales management. Industrial Marketing Management, pp 427-440.\nVan Decker, J. E. (2013, 7 30). Understanding the Costs Beyond Hardware and Software When Estimating Financial Management Projects. Gartner, p. 1.\nVenkatesh, V., & Davis, D. F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, pp 186-204.\nWhite, Colin. (2005). The Next Generation of Business Intelligence: Operational BI. DM Review, pp 35-37.\nWikipedia. (2007). The general interaction between the main three groups. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SoftwareHouse-GroupsSequence.jpg zh_TW
