供應商績效評估一直都是供應鏈管理重要的課題，企業中的採購部門必須定期的評估供應商的績效，以期望供應商能達到企業的需求。在進行供應商評估時，必須同時考慮多個指標及決定指標的權重，由於指標間具有相依及回饋的情形，因此權重的決定也較為複雜，此外，由於績效指標有互相影響的情形，指標間的關連度也是評估供應商時必須考慮的問題。本研究提出一個新的供應商績效評估方法，結合分析網路程序法(Analytic Network Process, ANP)及決策實驗室法(Decision making trial and evaluation laboratory, DEMATEL)建構評估模式，以達到正確的評估供應商績效，及可回溯績效表現找出關鍵改善原因之目的。 在進行供應商績效評估時，利用分析網路程序法求出各指標的權重，量化指標並求得供應商的總分；另外利用決策實驗室法得知各指標的因果關係及關連度大小，當檢視供應商績效時，可從權重大或關連度大但表現差的指標回溯，以提供供應商改善的方向。最後以模擬的方式進行驗證，結果顯示本研究對指標之排序符合模擬之結果，因此可供企業參考使用。 / Supplier performance evaluation for some time now has been receiving increasing importance as a supply chain management component. Purchasing managers need to periodically evaluate supplier performance in order to retain those suppliers who meet their requirements. Buyers usually consider multi-criteria and must determine the relative weights of the criteria when evaluating suppliers. Because of these performance criteria usually exist interdependence and feedback, the weights of the criteria are hard to obtain. In addition, performance criteria usually affect each other, so the direct and indirect effects are also a crucial problem when evaluating suppliers. This paper proposes a model which combines the methods of the analytic network process (ANP) and the decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) to evaluate supplier performance accurately and can find out which criterion is the key factor to improve performance. When evaluating a supplier, ANP are used to determine the weights of performance criteria and can get the total performance of the supplier. DEMATEL are used to compute the effects between criteria. The model can propose the criterion which is the most important or affects other criteria the most, so buyers will know which criterion can improve the performance the most and can ask suppliers to modify it. Finally, a simulation is employed to verify our model. The result through the simulation is complied with our model, so it can provide the information for making decision concerning suppliers performance.

21世紀是供應鏈與供應鏈之間的戰爭。從近幾年Fortune雜誌調查發現，美國前500強企業多以創新的供應鏈管理見長，供應商管理能力已經躍升為今日企業之核心能耐，企業不再單打獨鬥，而是靠跨組織的合作才能贏得商戰。 為了管理日漸龐雜的供應商關係，「供應商計分卡」普遍運用於企業，然而實際走訪電子業界卻發現，供應商計分卡績效衡量指標非常不足，更大的問題是供應商計分卡績效衡量指標欠缺與總公司策略的連結！一個缺乏策略與戰術的衡量指標很容易使組織的管理走向明日黃花。 有鑑於此，本研究期以化策略為行動的績效管理工具平衡計分卡，為企業提供供應商績效衡量指標全新架構，我們稱這套嶄新的管理工具為「供應商平衡計分卡」，供應商平衡計分卡能帶領企業結合跨組織力量，不僅拉升企業績效，更能有效應付未來挑戰。 / The 21st century is the age of supply chain war. In recent years, Fortune magazine survey found that most of the top 500 US companies are known for innovation of supply chain management, and the supplier management capability has emerged as the core competence of today's enterprises. The enterprises can no longer compete solely on themselves, and “inter-organizational cooperation” will be the key to the success. In order to manage increasingly complicated and numerous supplier relationships, “supplier scorecard” is generally used in business. However, after actually interviewing with the electronics industry, we found that the performance measures of supplier scorecard are insufficient. In particular, the supplier performance measurement scorecard lacks for links with the head office strategy. In this study, we introduce a strategy tool which incorporates with the performance management tool Balanced Scorecard. It aims to provide enterprises with a new supplier performance metrics framework, and we call this new management tool “Supplier Balanced Scorecard.” The “Supplier Balanced Scorecard” not only can lead the enterprises to combine inter-organizational efforts, but also pull up business performance, more effectively in meeting the challenge of the new century.

本研究係透過實地訪談暸解企業在不同的新產品開發專案策略下所採行的供應商管理制度（包括供應商遴選、供應商發展活動與供應商績效評估與獎酬制度）具體內容為何，進而探討不同的新產品開發專案策略在供應商管理制度上的異同處為何，以期提供企業在選擇參與新產品專案供應商、進行供應商發展活動及評估供應商專案績效與設計獎酬制度時的參考。本研究依據個案分析之結果，提出以下三項結論以回應研究問題，並根據研究發現陳述相關建議，最後提出研 究限制與未來研究方向之建議。 一、新產品開發專案策略會影響遴選參與專案供應商時的遴選流程、優先重視的評估構面與遴選時間。 二、新產品開發專案策略會影響專案中進行供應商發展活動的活動內容、範疇與時間。 三、新產品開發專案策略會影響供應商之專案績效評估的目標訂定範圍與嚴苛程度。 / Conducted by field interviews, this research is primary to focus on the details of supplier management system including selection of suppliers, supplier development activities, supplier performance evaluation, and reward system) under different strategies of new product development projects. This research also discusses the similarities and differences of supplier management system under different strategies of new product development projects. According to the result of case analysis, we claim three conclusions in response to the research questions, and propose some relevant suggestions. Finally, we state research limitation and direction for future research. 1.The strategy of new product development project will affects the selection process, priority of assessment dimensions, and duration in selecting the suppliers who can join the project. 2.The strategy of new product development project will affects the content, scope, and period of supplier development activities in the project. 3.The strategy of new product development project will affects the scope and severeness of goals in evaluating suppliers' performance in the project.

整個產業的競爭已由企業個體對企業個體，轉變為供應者與購買者結合而成的供應鏈與供應鏈間的競爭，因此整個供應鏈管理被認為是一個新競爭優勢的來源。建構供應鏈管理之首要活動為供應商的評估與選擇，選擇良好的供應商為供應鏈運作順暢與發揮最大效益的基礎，因此如何選擇具有發展潛力的供應商以幫助自身策略之達成便格外重要。除慎選供應商外，為使供應商達到並維持企業設立之多項標準，企業尚須投入努力以執行供應商發展活動，藉以提升供應商之績效和能力，且企業亦須定期地仔細監督和評估供應商之績效，以確保現有供應商能符合企業之需求及未來非預期之需求。 企業與供應商並非保持單一關係類型，而是維持一個不同關係類型的組合，因而為了達到最適之供應商管理效率和效果，且分配最適之資源給不同的供應商，企業須針對不同關係類型之供應商採取不同之供應商管理模式。 本研究採個案研究法，再輔以問卷分析加以支持。以國內某資訊電子企業為對象，探討伴隨供應商與企業之關係類型不同，企業採取之供應商選擇評估標準、供應商發展活動以及供應商績效評估制度各為何以及有何異同，經整理分析，發現之結果如下： 一、個案公司與供應商之關係類型可分為三類。 二、個案公司對供應商之選擇評估標準會隨著與供應商之關係類型不同 而有所不同。 三、個案公司對供應商採行之供應商發展活動會隨著與供應商之關係類型 不同而有所不同。 四、個案公司對供應商採行之供應商績效評估項目會隨著與供應商之關 係類型不同而有所不同。 五、個案公司與其供應商之間，對於個案公司所採取之供應商管理制度具 有一些認知上差異。 六、個案公司對策略夥伴型供應商，在選擇評估標準、績效評估項目上重 視及要求的程度皆最高，且對其執行之發展活動亦最為頻繁。 / Competition in the industry is changing from among firms to among supply chains forming by suppliers and buyers. Thus, supply chain management is increasingly recognized as an important source of a firm’s competition advantage. The first step of supply chain management is to select and evaluate suppliers. Since selecting good suppliers is the basis of running supply chain smoothly and creating maximum benefits; therefore, how to select potential suppliers to help achieving the strategy goal has become the most important thing. Besides selecting suppliers carefully, in order to attaining and maintaining various standards set up by firms, they have to put effort to implement supplier development activities to promote the performance and abilities of suppliers. Also, firms must monitor and evaluate supplier performance carefully and regularly to ensure that its current suppliers are meeting the needs and unexpected future needs of the firm. Firms do not have a “one-size-fits-all” strategy for relationship types with suppliers, but manage a portfolio of relationships. Firms should adopt different types of supplier management in accordance with types of relationships to achieve the objective of managing supply chain efficiently and effectively and distribute proper resources to suppliers. This study uses case study research, and is supported by the questionnaire. This study takes certain electronic enterprise as the object company, and tries to discuss that with different relationship types between suppliers and firms, what will be the selection criterion, the development activity, and the performance evaluation system for suppliers; moreover, how are they different. Through collection and analysis, we found the following conclusions: 1.The types of relationship can be divided into three types. 2.Supplier selection criteria adopted by the firm are different from types of relationships. 3.Supplier development activities implemented by the firm are different from types of relationships. 4.Supplier performance evaluation items adopted by the firm are different from types of relationships 5.There are little agreements between the firm and it’s suppliers as for the supplier management system. 6.On the selection criterion and performance evaluation items, the firm pays most attention and requires most on strategic partnership suppliers. Moreover, the development activities are most frequently executed.