【作者】 李娜；

【导师】 邵剑兵；

【作者基本信息】 辽宁大学 ， 企业管理， 2023， 博士

【摘要】 企业数字化转型,既是国家战略需要,又是行业竞争、企业生存发展需要。数字时代企业进行数字化投资已然是大势所趋,但同时企业面临的是外部环境以及内部决策情境的模糊性与复杂性。围绕这一主题,学者们已从外部环境以及内部组织结构对企业数字化投资的影响因素展开分析。外部环境包括IT基础设施建设、政府研发补贴、行业同群效应等方面,内部因素包括IT能力、CIO领导力、高管团队特征等。当前学者对企业数字化投资的前置影响因素分析多从制度基础观、能力(资源)基础观入手,假定决策者能够完全理性地做出数字化投资决策。不过,考虑到数字化决策的独特性,数字化投资风险高且投入较大,基于决策者有限理性的假定更贴近于现实,而企业行为理论为有限理性的决策分析提供了重要的理论支撑。在面临绩效反馈时,企业存在多参照点,组织将实际绩效与自身过往绩效(历史绩效期望)及同类组织的绩效(行业绩效期望)相比较,从而调整决策行为,历史与行业是企业决策最常用的参照点,传统业绩反馈理论所提及的“反馈-反应”模式是否也适用于数字化投资决策行为,这一问题尚未有学者涉猎。中国情境的研究背景具有独特性,制度的不完备性、分割性以及不连续性使企业十分关注“外部合法性”的问题,企业的“认知-行为”同时也具有“制度同构”的需要。在中国数字时代背景下地区数字经济发展、产业链支撑无疑为企业数字化投资发展提供了助力,提倡构建的“决策者数字化领导力”也为企业数字化投资提供了“强心剂”,地区数字经济发展、产业链支撑以及决策者特征是企业在双重绩效反馈下做出战略决策的重要影响因素。本文探究了双重绩效反馈对企业数字化投资的影响,探究了双重绩效反馈异质性以及相关性对企业数字化投资的作用,并从“认知-行为”视角考察了企业数字化注意力在此过程中的作用,探究了地区数字经济发展水平、产业链现代化水平以及研发背景高管权力对双重绩效反馈与企业数字化投资关系的影响,通过对2011-2021年沪深A股上市公司数据进行实证分析得到如下结论:第一,就双重绩效反馈异质性与企业数字化投资的关系来说,历史绩效反馈落差越大,企业数字化投资水平越高;历史绩效反馈顺差与企业数字化投资水平呈“U型”关系;行业绩效反馈落差正向作用于企业数字化投资;行业绩效反馈顺差与企业数字化投资呈现“U型”关系。企业数字化注意力在双重绩效反馈异质性与企业数字化投资间发挥了中介作用,双重绩效反馈异质性与企业数字化投资的作用在企业远离自身破产点、冗余资源存量较高以及非国有企业、数字产业化企业中更明显。双重绩效反馈异质性情境下企业数字化投资的经济后果表明,在历史绩效反馈落差以及行业绩效反馈落差情境下,企业数字化投资与未来主业业绩呈“U型”关系,表明未来业绩的提升在一定时期内才得以显现;而在历史绩效反馈顺差以及行业绩效反馈顺差情境下,企业数字化投资与数字化创新呈“倒U型”关系。第二,就双重绩效反馈相关性与企业数字化投资的关系来说,双重绩效反馈相关性与企业数字化投资呈现“U型”关系。就双重绩效反馈相关性的状态进行细分,双重绩效反馈一致性顺差、双重绩效反馈不一致性均驱动了企业数字化投资。就双重绩效反馈与企业数字化投资的中介机制来说,企业数字化注意力在双重绩效反馈相关性与企业数字化投资中起到了中介作用。进一步研究表明,在非国有企业、数字产业化企业以及未违规企业样本中,双重绩效反馈相关性对企业数字化投资的作用基本得到验证。第三,就双重绩效反馈与企业数字化投资的调节因素分析可知,地区数字经济发展水平强化了双重绩效反馈异质性与企业数字化投资间的关系;地区数字经济发展水平在“双重绩效反馈异质性-企业数字化注意力-企业数字化投资”的中介作用中调节了前半段路径。产业链现代化水平弱化了历史绩效反馈顺差/行业绩效反馈顺差与企业数字化投资的关系;产业链现代化水平也弱化了历史绩效反馈顺差/行业绩效反馈顺差与企业数字化注意力的关系;产业链现代化水平调节了历史绩效反馈顺差/行业绩效反馈顺差与企业数字化投资的中介作用的前半段/后半段路径。对研发背景高管权力结构进行分析可知,研发背景高管权力深度强化了历史绩效反馈落差/行业绩效反馈落差与企业数字化投资间的关系,研发背景高管权力深度也强化了历史绩效反馈落差/行业绩效反馈落差与企业数字化注意力间的关系;研发背景高管权力深度调节了历史绩效反馈落差与企业数字化投资中介作用的前半路径以及行业绩效反馈落差与企业数字化投资的前半/后半路径。研发背景高管权力广度弱化了历史绩效反馈落差与企业数字化投资的关系;也弱化了历史绩效反馈落差与企业数字化注意力的关系,并在历史绩效反馈落差与企业数字化投资中介作用的前半路径发挥了调节作用;研发背景高管权力广度弱化了双重绩效反馈相关性与企业数字化投资的关系,也调节了双重绩效反馈相关性与企业数字化投资中介效应的前半路径。本研究的研究贡献在于:其一,本研究致力于从企业行为理论视角揭示企业数字化投资的内在动机,助力解决企业数字化转型不敢转、不能转的问题。其二,本研究从数字化投资视角拓展了双重绩效反馈的作用维度,丰富了企业行为理论的研究,目前较少有学者关注到双重绩效反馈下企业数字化投资行为。其三,本研究从注意力基础观视角探究了双重绩效反馈与数字化投资的机制作用。最后,本研究拓展了企业行为视角下双重绩效反馈与企业数字化投资的调节因素研究。对于双重绩效反馈与企业数字化投资的影响因素,以往学者考虑了冗余资源、决策者特征、外部环境变化等因素,但尚未结合中国独特情境对权变因素进行系统梳理。本研究结论对企业如何制定数字化决策提供参考。其一,企业的绩效反馈是“认知-行为”过程,决策者在不同的绩效反馈状态应制定不同的数字化投资决策,增强数字化投资意愿。其二,企业在制定数字化转型战略的决策时,还要关注自身的“生存参照点”,例如破产点、资源存量水平等。若逼近生存“警戒线”,企业应着力提升自身经营业绩,不应过度追求数字化投资等冒进战略,在资源存在冗余时,可以积极投资于数字化相关活动,这也有助于提升企业财务绩效与企业数字化创新水平。其三,企业也认识到数字化投资到绩效实现需要一个过程,企业不应对短期内财务绩效以及数字化创新水平的下降“望而却步”,要平衡好企业短期与长期目标的发展。其四,企业要合理运用内外部权变因素助力自身数字化投资。企业要洞悉双重绩效反馈下企业的战略行为选择并非是“机械”或“一成不变”的过程。企业要利用好地区数字经济发展、产业链集群以及研发背景高管的职能角色,合力促进企业数字化投资与发展。最后,对数字产业化企业来说,应积极向其他企业输出先进技术、数字化资源及管理理念,发挥好自身的“领头羊”作用,破除企业面临的“数字化迷雾”。本研究也对政府部门如何制定数字化驱动政策具有启示作用。其一,政府应继续出台数字基础设施政策、数字经济支持政策,提高区域内底层技术、数据资源以及技术应用等公共服务的质量;其二,政府应出台相关政策拓宽企业获取转型融资的渠道,从信贷资源获取方面解决企业数字化转型“不敢转、不能转”的问题;其三,政府在政策实施过程中要以点带面、有所侧重。尤其针对非国有企业、中小型企业、非数字产业化企业,要因势利导,分类精准政策,依据企业发展特征、自身资源禀赋等,探究特色的企业数字化转型路径,实现企业高质量发展;其四,政府也要利用好产业链集群的优势。对于非数字产业化企业,尤其像服务业、农业,数字化转型程度仍较低,政府应鼓励产业链间的协同融合,减少行业间数字化发展的差异。更多还原

【Abstract】 The digital transformation of enterprises is not only a national strategic need,but also a requirement for industry competition and enterprise survival and development.It is a trend for enterprises in the digital era to make digital investments,but at the same time,they face the ambiguity and complexity of the external environment and internal decision-making context.Scholars have analyzed the impact factors of external environment and internal organizational structure on enterprise digital investment around this topic.The external environment includes aspects such as IT infrastructure construction,government research and development subsidies,and industry peer effects.Internal factors include IT capabilities,CIO leadership,and executive team characteristics.Currently,scholars often analyze the antecedents of digital investment in enterprises from the perspectives of institutional foundation and capability(resource)foundation,assuming that decision-makers can make digital investment decisions completely rationally.However,considering the uniqueness of digital decision-making,the assumption based on decision-makers’bounded rationality is closer to reality,and the theory of corporate behavior provides important theoretical support for the analysis of bounded rationality in decision-making.When facing performance feedback,enterprises have multiple reference points.Organizations compare their actual performance with their past performance(historical performance expectations)and the performance of similar organizations(industry performance expectations)to adjust decision-making behavior.History and industry are the most commonly used reference points for enterprise decision-making.Is the"feedback response"model mentioned in traditional performance feedback theory also applicable to digital investment decision-making behavior,This issue has not yet been explored by scholars.The research background of the Chinese context is unique.The incompleteness,segmentation,and discontinuity of the system make enterprises pay close attention to the issue of"external legitimacy".The"cognition behavior"of enterprises also has the need for"institutional isomorphism".In the context of China’s digital era,the development of regional digital economy and industrial chain support undoubtedly provide assistance for the development of digital investment by enterprises,The"digital leadership of decision-makers"advocated for construction also provides a"booster"for enterprise digital investment.The development of regional digital economy,support of industrial chain,and decision-maker characteristics are important influencing factors that affect enterprises to make strategic decisions under dual performance feedback.This article explores the impact of dual performance feedback on corporate digital investment,explores the heterogeneity and correlation of dual performance feedback on the role of corporate digital investment,and examines the role of corporate digital attention in this process from a cognitive behavioral perspective The modernization level of the industrial chain and the executive power of the R&D background explored the impact of the relationship between dual performance feedback and corporate digital investment.Through empirical analysis of the data of A-share listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen in 2011-2021,the following conclusions were obtained:First,as far as the relationship between the heterogeneity of dual performance feedback and corporate digital investment is concerned,the greater the gap in historical performance feedback,the higher the level of corporate digital investment;There is a"U-shaped"relationship between the historical performance feedback surplus and the level of digital investment in enterprises;The feedback gap of industry performance has a positive effect on the digital investment of enterprises;There is a"U-shaped"relationship between industry performance expectation surplus and enterprise digital investment.The digital attention of enterprises plays a mediating role between the heterogeneity of dual performance feedback and digital investment of enterprises.The role of dual performance feedback heterogeneity and digital investment of enterprises is more obvious in enterprises that are far from their own bankruptcy points,have a high inventory of redundant resources,and are non-state-owned enterprises and digital original enterprises.The economic consequences of corporate digital investment in the context of dual performance feedback heterogeneity indicate that in the context of historical performance feedback gap and industry performance feedback gap,there is a"U-shaped"relationship between corporate digital investment and future main business performance,indicating that the improvement of future performance will only be apparent within a certain period of time;In the context of historical performance feedback surplus and industry performance feedback surplus,there is an"inverted U-shaped"relationship between enterprise digital investment and digital innovation.Secondly,in terms of the relationship between dual performance feedback correlation and corporate digital investment,there is a"U-shaped"relationship between dual performance feedback correlation and corporate digital investment.Subdividing the status of the correlation between dual performance feedback,the consistency surplus and inconsistency of dual performance feedback both drive the digital investment of enterprises.In terms of the mediating mechanism between dual performance feedback and corporate digital investment,corporate digital attention plays a mediating role in the correlation between dual performance feedback and corporate digital investment.Further research has shown that in the sample of non-state-owned enterprises,digital industrialized enterprises,and non compliant enterprises,the role of dual performance feedback correlation in digital investment of enterprises has been basically verified.Thirdly,based on the analysis of the moderating factors between dual performance feedback and corporate digital investment,it can be concluded that the development level of regional digital economy strengthens the relationship between dual performance feedback heterogeneity and corporate digital investment;The development level of regional digital economy moderates the first half of the path in the mediating role of"dual performance feedback heterogeneity-enterprise digital attention-enterprise digital investment".The modernization level of the industrial chain has weakened the historical performance feedback surplus/industry performance feedback surplus and enterprise digital investment;The modernization level of the industrial chain has also weakened the relationship between the historical performance feedback surplus/industry performance feedback surplus and the digital attention of enterprises;The modernization level of the industrial chain regulates the mediating role of historical performance feedback surplus/industry performance feedback surplus and enterprise digital investment in the first/second half of the path.An analysis of the power structure of R&D background executives shows that the depth of R&D background executives’power strengthens the relationship between historical performance feedback gap/industry performance feedback gap and corporate digital investment,and the depth of R&D background executives’power also strengthens the relationship between historical performance feedback gap/industry performance feedback gap and corporate digital attention;The depth of executive power in research and development background regulates the first half path between historical performance feedback gap and the mediating role of enterprise digital investment,as well as the first/second half path between industry performance feedback gap and enterprise digital investment.The breadth of executive power in R&D background weakens the relationship between historical performance feedback gap and corporate digital investment;It also weakens the relationship between the historical performance feedback gap and the digital attention of enterprises,and plays a moderating role in the first half of the mediating role between the historical performance feedback gap and the digital investment of enterprises;The breadth of executive power in R&D background weakens the relationship between dual performance feedback correlation and corporate digital investment,and also regulates the first half of the mediating effect between dual performance feedback correlation and corporate digital investment.The research contributions of this study are as follows:firstly,this study aims to reveal the internal motivation of digital investment in enterprises from the perspective of corporate behavior theory,and help solve the problem of enterprises being hesitant or unable to transform in digital transformation.Secondly,this study expands the dimensions of dual performance feedback from the perspective of digital investment,enriching the research on corporate behavior theory.Currently,few scholars have paid attention to the digital investment behavior of enterprises under dual performance feedback.Thirdly,this study explores the mechanism of dual performance feedback and digital investment from the perspective of attention based perspective.Finally,this study expands the research on the moderating factors between dual performance feedback and corporate digital investment from the perspective of corporate behavior.Previous scholars have considered factors such as redundant resources,decision-maker characteristics,and external environmental changes regarding the impact of dual performance feedback on corporate digital investment,but have not yet systematically sorted out contingency factors in conjunction with China’s unique context.The conclusion of this study provides reference for enterprises on how to make digital decisions.Firstly,the performance feedback of enterprises is a"cognitive behavioral"process,and decision-makers should make different digital investment decisions in different performance feedback states to enhance their willingness to invest in digitalization.Secondly,when making decisions on digital transformation strategies,enterprises also need to pay attention to their own"survival reference points",such as bankruptcy points,resource stock levels,etc.If approaching the survival"warning line",enterprises should focus on improving their own business performance and not excessively pursue aggressive strategies such as digital investment.When resources are redundant,they can actively invest in digital related activities,which also helps to improve the financial performance and digital innovation level of enterprises.Thirdly,enterprises also recognize that achieving performance through digital investment requires a process,and they should not be deterred from the decline in short-term financial performance and digital innovation level.Instead,they should balance the development of their short-term and long-term goals.Fourthly,enterprises should make reasonable use of internal and external contingency factors to assist their digital investment.Enterprises need to understand that the strategic behavior choices of enterprises under dual performance feedback are not a"mechanical"or"static"process.Enterprises should make good use of the functional roles of regional digital economy development,industrial chain clusters,and R&D background executives to jointly promote digital investment and development of enterprises.Finally,for digital industrialization enterprises,they should actively export advanced technology,digital resources,and management concepts to other enterprises,play their leading role,and break the"digital fog"faced by enterprises.This study also has implications for government departments on how to formulate digital driven policies.Firstly,the government should continue to introduce digital infrastructure policies and digital economy support policies to improve the quality of public services such as underlying technologies,data resources,and technology applications within the region;Secondly,the government should introduce relevant policies to broaden the channels for enterprises to obtain transformation financing,and solve the problem of"dare not transfer,cannot transfer"in terms of obtaining credit resources for enterprises’digital transformation;Thirdly,the government should focus on the implementation of policies from a point to an area.Especially for non-state-owned enterprises,small and medium-sized enterprises,and non digital biological and chemical enterprises,it is necessary to guide them according to the situation,classify precise policies,and explore unique digital transformation paths for enterprises based on their development characteristics and resource endowments,in order to achieve high-quality development of enterprises;Fourthly,the government should also make good use of the advantages of industrial chain clusters.For non digital bio chemical enterprises,especially those in the service industry and agriculture,the degree of digital transformation is still relatively low.The government should encourage collaborative integration between industry chains to reduce differences in digital development between industries.更多还原