在知識經濟時代裡，跨國界競爭、新科技演進以及新商業模式，使得資訊服務與電信等產業競爭型態急遽變化。傳統跨產業經營的大型企業所具有的競爭優勢一，乃倚賴跨產業內垂直整合的能力，或產業間之水平整合。而所轄之策略事業單位間聯合營運活動，便成為企業競爭力的來源之一。
具有數個策略事業單位的大型企業，常常因為其中策略事業單位間的本位主義以及利益糾葛，加上企業總部缺乏有效的協調能力與考核方法，使得在推展平衡計分卡的過程中，無法完全顯露原本所應該產生的合作綜效。
本論文以我國電信產業中之C公司作為研究個案，探討個案公司在推展平衡計分卡以及繪製策略地圖的過程中，對於總公司與策略事業單位間在經營層面的影響。透過與企業總部和策略事業單位高階主管之訪談，實際了解個案公司現階段平衡計分卡推展現況，以及企業總部與策略事業單位間的綜效情形。同時並以Goold & Campbell (1998)的論點為基礎，透過檢視六種綜效類型的顯現程度，來探討個案公司推展平衡計分卡對於企業經營綜效的影響。
本論文發現個案公司推展平衡計分卡，確實創造出些許經營綜效，在「分享訣竅」、「共用有形資源」與「聯合協商能力」這三項綜效類型上確實有較為顯著的效果。然而，在「協調策略」、「垂直整合」與「結合創造商機」三項綜效類型上，卻僅能部分地顯現或者無法顯現。
若要使平衡計分卡在個案公司產生更大的經營綜效，本研究對個案公司提出的建議如下：一、強化KPI (Key Performance Indicator) 指標的完整性；二、保持策略事業單位的自主性；三、提升總公司協調與仲裁能力；四、成立策略管理辦公室。

In the era of knowledge-based economy, the competition models in information service and telecom industries have been affected by rivals across the countries, evolutions of cutting-edge technologies and new business models. The competition advantages of traditional cross-industry large firms depend on the capability of vertical or horizontal integrations. The joint operational movements have become one of the core competences of enterprise.

The large firm which has several strategic business units (SBUs) often faces complications of beneficial conflicts between its SBUs. In addition, cooperative achievement which should be produced by deploying balanced scorecard (BSC) could be affected due to poor communication and evaluation between headquarter (HQ) and the SBUs.

By choosing the C telecom company as a case study, this thesis explores how BSC and strategy map which are deployed inside this company affect HQ and SBUs in operational aspect. By interviewing the senior managers from HQ and SBUs of the C telecom company, we can actually access the status of implementing BSC and the synergies between HQ and SBUs in this firm. Moreover, with Goold & Campbell (1998) as the theory basis, we analyze how BSC affects synergies by reviewing the signs of six synergy types.

We found in this thesis that BSC in the C telecom company apparently have created significant effects in three synergy types, such as “shared know-how”, “shared tangible resources” and “combined business creation”. However, only partial or none of effects have appeared in other synergy types, including “coordinated strategies”, “vertical integration” and “combined business creation”.

In order to produce more significant effects of synergies, we provide the following suggestions to C telecom company while functioning BSC.
1. Reinforce the integration of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
2. Maintain the autonomy of SBUs.
3. Enhance the coordination and intervention competences of HQ.
4. Organize the Office of Strategy Management (OSM).

致謝詞 I
中文摘要 III
Abstract IV
目錄 V
圖目錄 VI
表目錄 VII
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究目的與流程 2
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 平衡計分卡與策略地圖 5
第二節 企業總部與策略事業單位間策略運用的探討 11
第三節 企業經營綜效 16
第三章 研究方法 27
第一節 資料分析法 27
第二節 個案研究法 29
第三節 深度訪談法 30
第四節 研究架構 30
第五節 研究限制 31
第四章 產業及個案分析 33
第一節 產業分析 33
第二節 個案分析 37
第五章 個案研究結果 43
第一節 個案訪談對象背景資料 43
第二節 訪談初步結論 44
第六章 結論與建議 51
第一節 研究結論 51
第二節 研究建議 52
第三節 未來研究方向 53
第七章 參考文獻 56
附錄 i
附錄一：訪談問卷範本 i
附錄二：訪談內容摘要 iv

1. ARC遠勤管理顧問公司策略績效事業部譯， Robert S. Kaplan，David P. Norton著，2001，策略核心組織：以平衡計分卡有效執行企業策略，台北市：臉譜出版：城邦文化發行
2. 于泳泓、陳依蘋著，2004，平衡計分卡完全教戰守策，台北市：梅霖文化
3. 文崇一、楊國樞著，2000，社會及行為科學研究法（下冊），台北：東華書局
4. 王雲東，社會研究方法：量化與質性取向及其應用，2007，台北縣深坑鄉：威士曼文化
5. 古永嘉譯，Donald R. Cooper& C. William Emory著，1996，企業研究方法（第五版），台北市：華泰書局
6. 朱道凱譯，Robert S. Kaplan，David P. Norton著，1999，平衡計分卡：資訊時代的策略管理工具，台北市：臉譜出版：城邦文化發行
7. 吳品清譯，Nils-goran Olve，Jan Roy，Magnus Wetter著，平衡計分卡實戰指南：提升績效的12堂必修課，2005，台北市：麗勤管理顧問
8. 杜強國，2004，以系統動力學探討平衡計分卡策略動態搭配原則，國立中山大學企業管理學系博士學位論文
9. 尚榮安譯，Robert K. Yin著，2001，個案研究法，宏智文化
10. 高子梅、何霖譯， Robert S. Kaplan，David P. Norton著，2006，策略校準，台北市：臉譜出版：家庭傳媒城邦分公司發行
11. 張芬芬譯，Matthew B. Miles & A. Michael Huberman著，2005，質性研究資料分析，台北市：雙葉書廊
12. 陳正平等譯，Robert S. Kaplan，David P. Norton著，2004，策略地圖：串連組織策略從形成到徹底實施的動態管理工具，台北市：臉譜出版：城邦文化發行
13. 陳雅惠，2006，以事業單位整合綜效為觀點探討平衡計分卡的整合規劃與執行，東海大學管理碩士在職專班碩士學位論文
14. 黃營杉，楊景傅譯，Charles W. L. Hill & Gareth R. Jones著，2004，策略管理，台北市：華泰，譯自Strategic Management Theory. 6e.
15. Emerald Management First. “An interview with Dr. Robert S. Kaplan and Dr. David P. Norton.” 2006. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. http://first.emeraldinsight.com/strategy/interviews/pdf/kaplan-norton.pdf?PHPSESSID=1423baeb156c88436a5b11
16. Anderson, C.R., & C.P. Zeithaml. 1984. Stage of the product life cycle, business strategy and business performance. Academy of Management Journal. 27:5-24
17. Atkinson, Anthony A. Robert S. Kaplan. S. Mark Young. 2003. Management Accounting. 4th Edition. Prentice Hall.
18. Creelman, James & Tor Inge Vasshus. 2006. The Balanced Scorecard Manager: A New Profession for the Knowledge-Era. Corporater. http://www.corporater.com/forums/http//www.corporater.com/Default.aspx?tabid=436
19. Creelman, James & Tor Inge Vasshus. 2007. From Performance Measurement to Strategic Alignment: the Balanced Scorecard has come a long way. Corporater. http://www.corporater.com/forums/alignment-review.aspx
20. Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. & D. Charles Galunic. 1999. Coevolving: At Last, a Way to Make Synergies Work. Harvard Business Review. January-February 2000
21. Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. & Shona L. Brown. 1999. Patching: Restitching Business Portfolios. Harvard Business Review. May-June 1999. pp. 72-82.
22. Goold, Michael & Andrew Campbell. 1998. Desperately Seeking Synergy. Harvard Business Review, September-October 1998
23. Govindarajan, V. and J. Fisher. 1990. “Strategy, Control Systems, and Resource Sharing: Effects on Business Unit Performance.” Academy of Management Journal. 33. pp.259-285.
24. Gupta, A. K. 1987, “SBU Strategies, Corporate-SBU Relations, and SBU Effectiveness in Strategy Implementation.” Academy of Management Journal. 30. pp.477-500.
25. Hambrick, D.C. 1983. High profit strategies in mature capital goods industries. Academy of Management Journal. 26:687-707.
26. Hamel, Gary. 2000. Leading the Revolution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. pp.71.
27. Hitt, Michael A., R. Duane Ireland, and Robert E. Hoskisson. 2003. Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization. 5th ed., Thomson Learning.
28. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1990. “Achieving Synergies: Value Added, Value Multiplied,” When giants learn to dance. New York : Simon and Schuster, 1990, c198
29. Kaplan, Robert S. & David P. Norton. 1992. The Balanced Scorecard- Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review. January-February 1992.
30. Kaplan, Robert S. & David P. Norton. 2000. Having Trouble with Your Strategy? Then Map It, Harvard Business Review. September-October 2000. 78(5):167-76, 202.
31. Kaplan, Robert S. & David P. Norton. 2005. The Office of Strategy Management. Harvard Business Review. October 2005.
32. Norton, David P. 1999. Use Strategy Maps to Communicate Your Strategy, Balanced Scorecard Report. September-October 1998. 1(2):1-4.
33. Norton, David P. 2000. The Corporate Scorecard: Making the Whole Greater Than the Sum of the Parts. Balanced Scorecard Report. January-February 2000.
34. Nørreklit, Hanne. 2000. The balance on the balanced scorecard--- a critical analysis of some of its assumptions. Management Accounting Research. 2000. 11. pp. 65-88
35. Parmenter, David. 2008. “How to implement a balanced scorecard in 16 Weeks not 16 months.” http://davidparmenter.com/2008/05/article-how-to-implement-a-balanced-scorecard-in-16-weeks-not-16-months
36. Porter, Michael. E. 1980. Competitive Strategy. New York: Fress Press
37. Porter, Michael E. 1996. What is Strategy? Harvard Business Review. March 2001.
38. Porter, Michael E. 2001. Strategy and the Internet. Harvard Business Review. November-December 1996. pp. 61-78.
39. Raynor, Michael E. & Joseph L. Bower. Lead from the Center: How to Manage Divisions Dynamically. Harvard Business Review. May 2001. pp.92-100
40. Yin, P. K. 1994. Case study research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.