生技產業為典型知識產業，同時也因醫藥研發的突破，而使國人受惠享受健康的生活，惟因與人類健康相關，涉及複雜的知識領域、道德倫理、法規管理、產業合作及商業化等過程。近年來國內新設生技公司莫不以開發新藥為職志，且都有其獨特經營哲學與營運模式來達成其企業終極目標。 本研究以國內開發新藥的生技公司為研究對象，採個案研究方法透過分析個案公司之過去策略發展，實地訪問經營團隊以描述策略形態及勢態，發展策略地圖及平衡計分卡四大構面具體內容並進而以相關係數驗證各策略衡量指標與策略目標間之關聯性，最後試圖連結PwC企業價值報告中價值平台，據以建構個案公司內部策略態勢與策略管理報導。 本研究之主要研究結論包括： 一、 個案公司已有明確的企業願景，亦已積極分析未來的策略形態，除定期性財務資訊外，應系統化建置一策略管理報導，使組織資源聚焦，形成共識，改善組織策略執行力。 二、 經由驗證相關分析，現階段策略形態的部分衡量指標間呈現顯著正相關，亦有大多數衡量指標因產品商品化時間過長尚無明確關聯，故個案公司應持續追縱現行策略衡量指標因果關聯狀況。 三、 個案公司可運用內部策略管理報導具體呈現策略活動執行結果，建立評估策略目標達成程度之價值管理報表，成為內部策略檢討會議之共同基礎，利用策略思考、澄清與共識之達成。而長期系統化之分析比較，除可提供更具攸關內部價值報告及管理資訊外，亦可作為外部報導企業價值資訊的基礎。 / Pharmaceutical industry is a typical knowledge industry. At the meantime, people can enjoy healthy life because of the breakthrough of medicine research and development. However, this industry is closely connecting to human health, thus there are various and complex domains involved, including knowledge, ethics, laws and regulations, collaboration of industry and commercialization, and etc. In recent years, local newly established pharmaceutical companies set their goals in developing new drugs, and have their own unique operating philosophy and operating models in order to reach their ultimate corporate goals. The object of this study is a local new drug developing pharmaceutical company. Through the analysis of strategic development of the past based on the methodology of case study and describing strategic posture and strength via interview with the managing team, the strategic plan and contents of four scopes for balanced scorecard are developed. Further, the relationship between strategic measurement indicators and strategic objectives are verified through correlated coefficients. And lastly, linking to the value platform of PwC Corporate Value Reporting in order to construct internal strategic move and strategic managerial reporting of the case company. The conclusions of this study including: 1. Case company has clear business vision, and is actively analyzing future strategic form. In addition to periodic financial information, the case company should construct a strategic managerial reporting in order to focus organizational resources, draw consensus, and improve organizational strategic executive. 2. Based on the correlation coefficient analysis, there is positive correlation among partial measurement indicators of current strategic posture. However, there is no clear correlation for most of the measurement indicators due to long span for product commercialization. The case company should continuously follow up the correlation for current strategic measurement indicators. 3. The case company can apply its internal strategic managerial reporting to specifically present the results of its operations, and establish value managing statements for assessing the achieving of strategic targets, to formulate the common basis for internal strategic review meeting, and utilize strategic thinking, clarification and reaching of consensus. In addition, long-term systematic analysis and comparison can be used not only for more relevant internal value reporting and managerial information, and be the basis for external corporate value reporting.

我國於1988年修正證券交易法時將公開收購納入規範，係預期資本自由化與經濟國際化之發展，我國企業將來可能亦有實行有價證券公開收購之需要，參酌英、美、日法制所引進之前瞻性法律。隨著近來企業併購以公開收購方式為之有日益增多的趨勢，案例迄今已超過十餘件，公開收購法制追尋著實務的腳步成長。日本於1971年將公開收購納入證交法之規範時，也非因為公開收購之實例造成弊害所以加以規範，僅是參照美國之情況，未雨綢繆先行規範。而日本於早年以公開收購方式達成企業併購之案例也多侷限關係企業之間，直至2003年後才多用於敵意併購，例如2003年Steel Partners對於YUSHIRO化學工業以及SOTOH股份有限公司進行敵意併購、2005年日本放送事件、夢真控股公司對於日本技術開發進行公開收購以及樂天大量收購東京放送等事件。 我國關於公開收購等企業併購之法制，多參考英美法之規範及案例，檢視我國與日本公開收購法制導入之背景與發展之相似度，適逢日本於2005年發生的重大併購案件以及於2006年修正公開收購之規範，希望藉由介紹日本關於公開收購法制之發展，及分析比較日本及我國公開收購規範之具體內容，檢討我國規範之不當之處，以期將來法制之發展。故本文架構上於第二章介紹日本公開收購規範修正之沿革，第三章介紹其規範之具體內容及實務案例，第四章說明及比較檢討我國公開收購規範之內容。 　　觀察日本公開收購規範之發展及內容，本文認為我國證券交易法關於公開收購之規範有大幅調整之必要。首先，應明確化公開收購規範適用之範圍。應對於公開收購人收購後持股比例有所規範，避免於不變動目標公司控制權之收購上浪費規範成本。並應對「公開收購行為」重新定義，免去對「非特定人」定義之爭議。其次，修正強制公開收購規範，使其符合強制公開收購制度原本之立法目的並避免脫法行為之產生，以利股東權益之維護。第三，大量持有申報制度應有獨立之規範。查大量持有申報制度雖與公開收購制度息息相關，但於規範結構上應有區別，不應混於同一法條中規定，且一項之文字亦道不盡大量持有申報制度應具備之規範內容。第四，於實體規範上，例如公開收購期間之調整、應賣人得隨時撤回應賣之權利、撤回公開收購法律用語之明確等實體規範之補足。