English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 49287/83828 (59%)
Visitors : 7153168      Online Users : 70
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/87342


    Title: 論金控體系下銀行保險業務經營模式與問題
    Other Titles: On the financial holding company system bancassurance business strategy and problems
    Authors: 許志豪;Hsu, Chih-Hao
    Contributors: 淡江大學保險學系保險經營碩士在職專班
    郝充仁
    Keywords: 共同行銷;合作推廣;銀行保險;金控公司;Joint marketing;Cooperative Extension;Bancassurance;Financial Holding Company
    Date: 2012
    Issue Date: 2013-04-13 10:58:36 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究旨在瞭解在金控公司下進行銀行保險業務,如使用共同行銷模式與合作推廣模式間之差異與其產生之問題,進行提出各自之優、劣勢,並依研究結果提出建議。
    首先進行各項法規及文獻探討,作為架構研究的理論基礎;接著,參考同業間相關銀行保險相關資訊與詢問相關作法與看法以分析現況與二種模式間之差異,在本次研究中主要發現:
    一、 在研究中發現銀行保險發展至今僅十年左右,成長之速度是極為快速,然而在法規制定與監理上,似乎無法迎合上其成長之速度,以致法規及規範似乎都未盡周延,也或許是由於二項業務結合的銷售模式有別於過往單一金融產品單純,主管機關或可成立專責單位,直接負責管理銀行保險業務。
    二、 金控公司不管是執行共同行銷模式或是合作推廣模式,其主要目的都是為創造收益,但是共同行銷有直接使用客戶基本資料而引發的私密權問題,然而合作推廣有客戶書面同意取得困難的問題,二種模式間,何者可以產生比較大的收益,在本次研究中還未能看出。
    三、 在本次研究中,以保險公司為轉換主體之金控公司,在執行共同行銷模式態度較為積極,相較以銀行為轉換主體之金控公司,則希望以合作推廣模式發展。
    最後,本研究根據研究的發現,提出相關建議,俾供後續研究參考。
    This study aims to understand the financial holding company with banking and insurance business, such as the use of the difference between the joint marketing and joint promotion model generated to conduct put forward their respective superior, weaknesses, and make recommendations in accordance with the findings.
    First the regulations and literature explore the theoretical basis of architecture study of; Then, the reference with the inter-related banking and insurance-related information and Inquiry-related practices and views in order to analyze the current situation with the two kinds of mode between the differences, in this study is mainly found :
    Found in the study so far only a decade or so, the speed of growth is extremely rapid development of banking and insurance, however, the regulatory and supervision can not seem to cater to the speed with its growth, a result, regulations and norms seem to have not entirely comprehensive, but also perhaps because the two businesses combined sales model is different from the simple past a single financial product, the competent authority or the establishment of dedicated units directly responsible for managing the bank insurance business.
    Second, the financial holding company is regardless of the execution of co-marketing model, or the Cooperative Extension mode, whose main purpose is to create income, but the common marketing caused by the direct use of customer information, right to privacy, however, the Cooperative Extension clients agree in writing to obtain difficult problem, two kinds of patterns and what you can produce large gains in this study have not been able to see.
    In this study, the insurance company to convert the main body of financial holding companies, in the implementation of co-marketing model attitude is more positive, compared to the bank to convert the main body of the financial holding company, hopes to promote model development.
    Finally, this study based on the findings of the study, make recommendations in order for future researches.
    Appears in Collections:[保險學系暨研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML98View/Open

    All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - Feedback