100% Likert : () () () : i

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "100% Likert : () () () : i"

孵闵
5 years ago
Views:

1 Non-profit organizations effect on organizational performance by agency theory perspective :

2 100% Likert : () () () : i

3 Abstract The access to valuable resources becomes much tougher because of the rapid change of the environment recently. Due to minimize the budget the NPO focuses more intensions on using limited resources efficiently. Thus, the performance or commissioned projects of the NPOs would be much more concerned by the government or related agencies. The government is as principal and the NPOs are as agents. This study concentrates on the interactions between the Government (or related agencies) and NPOs which may have positive effects on successful projects directly or the achievements of the organization indirectly. The study arranges literatures of NPOs and agency theories followed by developing a research framework which including monitor, goal conflict, shirking and task programmability that may affect the performances of the organizations. Performance assessments are composed of organization continuity, achieve rate of projects and image of organization. The study use Modified Delphi Method with seven-point Likert scale as the research tool. 100% response rates were achieved in both of the two terms of the questionnaire studies for 8 related specialists. The results can be summarized as two points: (a) Conflicts between NPOs and clients can be minimized through communications. (b) Monitor must be regularly spend time meeting with the human or the supervision process. It caused increase agency cost. (C) The reputation and performance of the NPO can be promoted through aggressive and positive attitudes and providing fine services or products for the clients. In the last, the consistency indicators of recognition can provide the government as a guideline to evaluate the goal achievements in organizations in the future. Key wordsnon-profit organization, agency theory, modified Delphi method ii

4 paper ; ; ; Mon ; ;! iii

5 iv

6 v :...57 :

7 vi

8 ! vii

9 Mahaney & Lederer(2003) (1999)CORPS Michel Soto Chalhoub (2009) viii

10 (Non-profit OrganizationNPO) 98 () 44, , , ,179 ( ) ( ) ; Brown2005 1

11 2

12 (Modified Delphi Method) 3

13 1-1 4

14 ( ) 1-2 (96) 50% 35% % : 5

15 啓 : 2-1 啓 1. ( )1. ( 2. ) ( ) ( ) : : 6

16 74 ( ) : 7

17 2-2 : : 8

18 2-3 (1) (2) (3) : 9

19 30 ; ; ; : 10

20 ( : ) ( ) / 3. : : 11

21 : ; ; ( ) 12

22 Jensen and Meckling(1976) ;Eisenhardt1989 Eisenhardt1989 Mahaney and Lederer(2003) : ; Eisenhardt1989 : (1) : ; (2) : ( ) Chris Guilding, Jan Warnken, Allan Ardill and Liz Fredline (2005) 13

23 Lambert (2001) (1) : / (2) (3) ( 10 ) Bongjin Kim, Prescott and Sung Min Kim(2005) ; Hillman and Dalziel (2003) Mahaney and Lederer(2003)

24 3-1Mahaney and Lederer(2003) Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 12 : 1 Tosi et al.(1997) Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 3-1 : 15

25 : Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 16

26 2 Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 3-2: : Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 3 Baiman (1990) Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 17

27 8 3-3 : : Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 4 Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 3-4 : 18

28 : Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 5 Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 3-5 : 19

29 Case : Mahaney and Lederer(2003) Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 20

30 3-6 Case : Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 19

31 (Non-Profit Organizations, NPO)Thomas Wolf (1990) (88)CORPS client( ) operations ( )Resources( )participants( )services( ) NPO 3-2: Participants Service Operations Client Resources 3-2 (88)CORPS Lowell et al.(2001) :

32 1999 (United Nations Development Programme, UNDP) Michel Soto Chalhoub(2009) () : (96) (96) () Ying Zhu and David Purnell (2006) David Lewis(2003) () Michel Soto Chalhoub (2009) David Lewis(2003) 21

33 () Michel Soto Chalhoub(2009) () (98) (97) : : () (3-7): 3-7 Jackson and Holland (1998) Kaplan(2001) Ritchie and Kolodinsky (2003) : 22

34 () : 1. Brown(2005) Webb DJ, Green CL, Brashear TG (2000) Ewing and Julie Napoli (2005) 2. Kaplan(2001) Michel Soto Chalhoub(2009) Michel Soto Chalhoub(2009) ( 3-1); 23

35 Michel Soto Chalhoub(2009) : 3-3Michel Soto Chalhoub (2009) Poole et al. (2000) Program Accountability Quality Scale (PAQS) : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 24

36 David Lewis(2003) : () () () 25

37 3-4 (89) Top-Down () 1. / 2. / 3. () ( ) ( ) Funding( ) () 26

38 () 1. TQA Time Card / () ABCDE 3. 27

39 ; ; ; ; Murry and Hammons1995 Delphi Method Rowe and Wright1999 : () (Anonymity) () (Iteration) 28

40 () (Controlled feedback) () (the statistical aggregation of group response) () () () 29

41 () 50% () 1. : ()

42 Modified Delphi Method Murry & Hommons(1995) Mahaney and Lederer(2003) Likert Mahaney and Lederer(2003) Michel Soto Chalhoub (2009) ; Tapp (1996) Ewing and Napoli(2005) 31

43 4-1: 4-1 : : 32

44 100% 100% 4-2: % 100% 33

45 Likert Fahety 1979 Hollden and Wedman : 34

46 , ,

47 ,-5, ;

48 ; ;

49 ; ;

50 100% Likert 4.00 Fahety1979 Hollden and Wedman : ;

51 , ; , , ;

52 ,6, ,6, ; 1.00 ;

53 , , ; , , ;

54 : , , , , ,6, ,6,

55 , , , , : % % % % 44

56 % % % % : 45

57 , ; ,6, ,6,7 46

58 , ,6 ; , ; 47

59 Mahaney and Lederer(2003) 6-1 ( ) :

60 ; ; ( ) ; 6-2 ( ) : ; ; : David Lewis(2003) Mahaney and Lederer (2003) 49

61 Tosi et al.(1997) Kaplan(2001), Ritchie et al.(2003) Brown(2005) Webb et al. (2000) ; 50

62 () () () ; 51

63 : AHP 52

64 (2) (97) 4. (98) - 5. (96) Baiman, S.(1982). Agency research in management accounting: a survey.journal of Accounting Literature, Bergen, M., Dutta, S., Walker Jr., O.C.(1992).Agency relationships in marketing: a review of the implications and applications of agency and related theories.journal of Marketing, 56, Bongjin Kim, John E. Prescott, Sung Min Kim. (2005).Differentiated governance of foreign subsidiaries in transnational corporations: An agency theory perspective. Journal of International Management, 11(1), Chris Guilding, Jan Warnken, Allan Ardill& Liz Fredline. (2005). An agency theory perspective on the owner/manager relationship in tourism-based condominiums. Tourism Management, 26(3), David Lewis (2003). Theorizing The Organization And Management Of 53

65 Non-governmental Development Organizations Towards A Composite Approach.Public Management Review, 5(3), Eisenhardt, K. M.(1989).Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy Management Review, 14(1), Fahety, V. (1979). Continuing Social Work Education: results of a Delphi Survey. Journal of Education for Social Work, 15(1), Hillman, A. J., &Dalziel, T. (2003).Boards of Directors and Firm Performance: Integrating Agency and Resource Dependence PerspectivesAcademy Management Review, 28(3), Holden, M. C. & Wedman, J. F. (1993). Future issues of computer-mediated communication: The results of a Delphi study. Educational technology research and development, 4(1), Jackson, D. K., & Holland, T. P.1998.Measuring the Effectiveness of Nonprofit Boards. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27(2), Jensen, M. C. & Meckling, W. H.(1976).Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), Julie. Napoli, &Michael T. Ewing Developing and validating a multidimensional nonprofit brand orientation scale. Journal of Business Research, 58(6), Kaplan, Robert S.(2001).Strategic Performance Measurement and Management in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 11(3), Lambert, R. A. (2001). Contracting theory and accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32(1),

66 15. Lowell S, Silverman L, &Taliento L.2001.Not-for-profit management: the gift that keeps on giving. McKinsey Q, 1, Mahaney, R. C. &Lederer, A. L.(2003).Information systems project management: an agency theory interpretation. The Journal of Systems and Software, 68(1), Michel Soto Chalhoub. (2009). The Effect of Management Practices on Corporate Performance: An Empirical Study of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Middle East International Journal of Management, 26(1), Murry J. W. & Hommons, J. O. (1995). Delphi: A versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research. The Review of Higher Education, 18(4), Poole, Dennis L.; Nelson, Joan; Carnahan, Sharon; Chepenik, Nancy G.; Tubiak, Christine(2000).Evaluating performance measurement systems in nonprofit agencies: the program accountability quality scale (PAQS)American Journal of Evaluation, 21(1), Ritchie, W. J., & Kolodinsky, R. W Nonprofit Organization Financial Performance Measurement: An Evaluation of New and Existing Financial Performance Measures. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 13(4), Rowe, G., & Wright, G.,1999. The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool : issues and analysis. International Journal of forecasting, 15, Tosi, H.L., Katz, J.P., Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Disaggregating the agency contract: the effects of monitoring, incentive alignment, and term in office on agent decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 40 (3),

67 23. Webb DJ, Green CL, Brashear TG, (2000). Development and validation of scales to measure attitudes influencing monetary donations to charitable organizations Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,28(2), William A. Brown (2005). Exploring the Association Between Board and Organizational Performance in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15(3), Wolf, T., (1990). Managing A Nonprofit Organization. (New York: Simon& Shuster, Ying Zhu &David Purnell (2006). Multinational NGOs and Expatriation: A Case Study of a NGO in Vietnam Asia Pacific Business Review, 12(4),

68 57 :

69 58

70 59

71 60

72 61

73 62

74 63 :

75 64

76 65

77 66

78 67

79 68

80 69

81 70

82 71

83 72

Ansell Gash ~ ~ Rhodes ~ H. Haken 20 90

Ansell Gash ~ ~ Rhodes ~ H. Haken 20 90 2012 4 162 2012 7 Comparative Economic & Social Systems No. 4 2012 Jul. 2012 C916 A 1003-3947 2012 04-0157-12 158 2012 4 1999 284 1 Ansell Gash 2007 543 ~ 571 2006 34 ~ 35 2009 2011 2011 1 2001 200 2002