投資者被動收入分析之研究

Research on the Passive Income of Investors: An Example of Suite for Rent

10.6459/JCM.202003_17(1).0010

陳恒毅(H. Y. Chen)

社會交換理論 ； 社會資本觀點 ； 關鍵事件法 ； Social Exchange Theory ； Social Capital ； Key Event Method

危機管理學刊

17卷1期（2020 / 03 / 01）

99 - 105

繁體中文

投資者如何讓承租人居家生活品質良好，降低彼此轉換成本、時間成本的議題，至今一直是共同契約者所思索議題。有鑑於過往社會交換理論雖可解釋個體面利益關係之交換行為，卻無法闡述個人如何鑲嵌於集體關係的社會網絡、群體價值、社會組織之過程。茲此本文以社會資本觀點當作本研究的理論基礎，解釋社會交換理論不足之處。由於租賃套房的個案，此對象不同於以往公司管理員工的方式，為了讓研究更客觀的呈現，研究者先以關鍵事件法釐清承租人過往經驗（不舒服案件），當成借鏡。據此設計問卷，經重要屬性分析發現，投資者管理上主要優勢是實踐義務、正直信用、逃生動線規劃良善及彈性變通規則的修訂。劣勢是共同簽約者的互動關係、集體住戶間的認同感及共享願景。

The issue of how investors can make tenants have a good quality of life in the suite and reduce conversion costs and time costs has been the subject of contemplation. In the past, social exchange theory can explain the exchange behavior of individual interests, but it cannot explain how individuals are embedded in the social network, group value, and social organization of collective relations. The perspective of social capital was regarded as the theoretical basis in this study. Due to the case of renting a suite, this object is different from the way the company manages employees . In order to make the study more objective, the researcher first used the key event method to clarify the lessee's past experience (uncomfortable cases) as a mirror. Based on this, a questionnaire was designed, it was found through important attributes analysis that the main advantages of investor management are the practice of obligations, integrity, good planning of escape lines, and revision of flexible work rules. Disadvantages are the interactive relationship between co-signers, a sense of identity among collective households, and a shared vision.

1. (2019)。幸福熟齡, 他從被裁員變超強包租公。今週刊
2. CCWasserman, S.,Galaskiewicz, J.(1994).Advances in social network network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.
3. Chiu, C. M.,Hsu, M. H.,Wang, E. T. G.(2006).Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories.Decision Support Systems,42(3),1872-1888.
4. Coleman, J. S.(1988).Social capital in the creation of human capital.The American Journal of Sociology,94,95-120.
5. Dholakia, U. M.,Bagozzi, R. P.,Pearo, L. K.(2004).A social influence model of consumer participation in network and small-group-based virtual communities.International Journal of Research in Marketing,21(3),241-263.
6. Emerson, R. M.(1962).Power dependence relations.American Sociological Review,27(1),31-41.
7. Hanifan, L. J. (1920). The community center. Boston, M.A.: Silver Burdette and Company.
8. Homans, G. C.(1961).Social behavior:Its elementary forms.New York:Harcourt.
9. Jarvenpaa, S. L.,Tractinsky, N.,Vitale, M.(2000).Consumer trust in an internet store.Information Technology and Management,1(1-2),45-71.
10. Kankanhalli, A.,Tan, B. C. Y.,Wei, K. K.(2004).Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation.MIS Quarterly,29(1),113-143.
11. Nahapiet, J.,Ghoshal, S.(1998).Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage.The Academy of Management Review,23(2),242-266.
12. Ostrom, E.(1990).Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action.New York:Cambridge University Press.
13. Ouchi, W. G.(1980).Markets, bureaucracies and clans.Administrative Science Quarterly,25(1),129-141.
14. Putnam, R. D.(2000).Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.New York:Simon and Schuster.
15. Ritzer, G.(1983).Sociological theory.New York:Knopf.
16. Tsai, W.,Ghoshal, S.(1998).Social capital and value creation: The role of intra-firmnetworks.The Academy of Management Journal,41(4),464-476.
17. Wasko, M.,Faraj, S.,Teigland, R.(2004).Collective action and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice.Journal of the Association for Information Systems,5(11),493-513.