公司為了延續經營效益，除了常需要針對外部環境與內部環境的變化制定適當之經營策略，更需要有效地衡量公司自身之經營成效。資料包絡分析法(Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA)是一套可衡量相對績效之方法論，DEA假設受評單位為相同性質之決策單位，然而在實務上，縱使在相同產業中，公司與公司間的經營性質也未必完全相同，而有經營特性差異的存在。因此，若使用DEA進行公司績效評估，其所運算出之效率值與差額變數未必符合公司經營決策的需求。
自組織映射圖網路(Self-Organization Map, SOM)是一套可有效區別特性差異之類神經方法論，藉由其特性聚類之功能，將可彌補DEA無法辨識特性差異之缺點。本研究有鑑於此，擬採取DEA及SOM的優點，建立一個績效排序與分類的結合方法，能以公司自身為出發點，藉由SOM先一步聚類出與自身經營特性較為相似之公司，並據此劃定適合其作為經營標竿之參考範圍，用以改良DEA運算時未能將經營特性差異納入考量之情形，從而建構鑑別度更高之二階段的公司績效衡量。
本研究最後以建設公司之財務績效為例，藉由上述之衡量概念，說明DEA與SOM在結合上之實際運用情形，並驗證本結合方法在理論與實務上均為合理且可接受，適合作為公司績效衡量之有效工具。

To sustain business benefits, enterprises need to set up appropriate management strategies according to the changes of the external environment and internal performance and effectively measure their performances. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is a method that could be used to measure relative performances of an enterprise. It assumes that all the units to be measured are homogeneous. However, in practice, enterprises may not be completely homogeneous. Direct use of DEA on the assessment of performance of enterprises in the same industry may derive efficiency values and slack variables that do not meet the needs of enterprises.
Self-Organization Map (SOM) is a neural network methodology that can effectively distinguish characteristic differences. Its feature clustering function can be utilized to make up the weakness of DEA in discrimination of characteristic differences. Conceptually, this study aimed to focus on a single enterprise and use SOM to find enterprises with similar features. With the derived enterprises, proper benchmarks can be defined. To improve DEA’s weakness of not including characteristic differences between enterprises, a two-stage corporate performance measurement model featuring a higher level of discrimination was thus constructed.
Finally, using financial performance of building companies as an example, applicability of integrating DEA and SOM as proposed in this study was validated to provide a reference for enterprises on performance measurement.

1.Ruekert, R. W. , Walker, O. C., Roering, K. J.(1985). The organization of marketing Activities: a contingency theory of structure and performance, Journal of Marketing, 49:13-25.
2.Venkatraman, N. , Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance on Strategy.
3.J. Dixon, A. Nanni, T. Vollmann，“The New Performance Measurement Challenge: Measuring Operations for World-Class Competition”，Dow Jones-Irwin/APICS， Homewood, IL，1990.
4.Charnes, A., Cooper, W., and Rhodes, E., ”Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.2, pp. 429-444,1978.
5.Golany, B. and Roll, Y., “An Application Procedure for DEA,” OMEGA, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1989, pp.237-250.
6.高強，黃旭男，Toshiyuki Sueyoshi，「管理績效評估資料包絡分析法」，華泰文化，2003。
7.張斐章，「類神經網路理論與實務」，東華書局，2003。
8.簡圳宏，「以類神經網路建構建設公司之財務績效評估模式」，國立台灣科技大學營建管理系，2005。
9.Kangari、R.; Farid、F.; Elgharib、H.M.，”Financial performance analysis for the construction industry”，Journal of Construction Engineering and Management; 1992 Vol. 118 Issue 2、p349-361、13p.
10.Langford、D.; Iyagba、R.; Komba、D. M.，”Prediction of solvency in construction companies.”，Construction Management & Economics、Sep93、Vol. 11 Issue 5、p317、9p.
11.Fisher、D. J ，”Benchmarking in construction industry”; Magmt Eng; 1995 Vol. 11 Issue 1、p50-57、8p.
12.Tang Y.H. & Ogunlana S.O.，“Modeling the dynamic performance of a construction organization”，Construction Management and Economics, Volume 21,Number 2, February-March 2003, pp. 127-136(10).
13.Cheah、C. Y. J.; Garvin、M. J.; Miller、J. B. J.，”Empirical study of strategic performance of global construction firms”; Constr. Eng. Manage.; 2004 Vol. 130 Issue 6、p808-817、10p.
14.M. Emin Öcal, Emel Laptali Oral, Ercan Erdis and Gamze Vura，“Industry financial ratios-application of factor analysis in Turkish construction industry”，Building and Environment, Volume 42, Issue 1, January 2007, Pages 385-392.
15.Lee、Sang-Hoon; Thomas、Stephen R.; Tucker、Richard L., ”Web-Based Benchmarking System for the Construction Industry.” Journal of Construction Engineering & Management、Jul2005、Vol. 131 Issue 7、p790-798、9p.
16.Construction Industry Institute (CII)，”enchmarking and metric program.”，http://www.cii-benchmarking.org/，2002.
17.Yee、Chung Yan、Cheah Charles Y. J.，”Fundamental Analysis of Profitability of Large Engineering and Construction Firms.” ，Journal of Management in Engineering、Oct2006、Vol. 22 Issue 4、p203-210、8p.
18.Belle、R. A. J.，”Benchmarking and enhancing best practices in the engineering and construction sector”; Manage. Eng.; 2000 Vol. 16 Issue 1、p40-47、8p.
19.R.R. Ramirez, L.F.C. Alarcon and P. Knights, ”Benchmarking system for evaluating management practices in the construction industry.” Journal of Management in Engineering, ASCE 20，2004、3, pp110–117.
20.S. Thomas Ng, Kam Pong Cheng and R. Martin Skitmore，“A framework for evaluating the safety performance of construction contractors”，
Building and Environment, Volume 40, Issue 10, October 2005, Pages 1347-1355.
21.鄭超文，「營建公司財務績效評估模式之研究」，國立中央大學土木工程研究所，1999。
22.蔡孟澤，「建設公司財務績效衡量之研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建管理系，2003。
23.陳春宏。「採用DEA/AHP分析方法探討多重個案之標的選擇-以建設公司之房地產開發決策分析為例」，國立高雄第一科技大學資訊管理所，2004。
24.章定宣，「上市(櫃)建設公司財務結構與效率衡量之研究-土地持有與開發觀點檢視」，國立政治大學地政研究所，2005。
25.王偉嘉，「PCM專案施工階段服務績效評估系統之研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，2005。
26.廖崇伯，「建築統包專案服務績效評估模式之建立」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，2006。
27.吳姿儀，「從效率觀點評估建設公司財務績效之研究」，國立台灣科技大學營建管理系，2006。
28.Phil Rosenzweig，” The Halo Effect：and the Eight Business Delusions That Deceive Managers (中文譯：「光環效應：科學分析成功模式的九大陷阱」)”，商智文化，2007。
29.Scherer, F.M.& Ross,D., Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 2nd ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company，1990。
30.林左裕，「不動產投資管理」，智勝出版社，2007。