在過去，我們認為有形資產是公司最重要的資產，然而到了現今知識密集產業當道的時代，取而代之的是無形資產：專利，品牌，商業秘密等成為決定公司存亡與進步與否的關鍵，因此研究無形資產的價值成為主流之一。本研究第一部份使用因素分析法捕捉專利四大指標：前引證數、後引證數、專利家族數與請求項個數共同影響專利的因素，我們稱之為「專利品質」，並用此方法來建構台灣上市上櫃電子業公司於2003年至2012年各公司各年度的創新力指標。 本研究第二部分探討員工薪酬對於公司創新力的影響，並且以2008年員工分紅費用化政策作為一工具變數，試看該政策對於公司研發創新的影響。本研究結果顯示，分紅費用化政策對於公司研發創新並無顯著影響。整體來看，費用化後高、低股價公司間的薪酬差距縮小，然而創新研發能力差距卻擴大；若分產業來看，台灣電子業發展有往技術密集產業之高股價公司集中的現象，例如：半導體業、電腦及週邊設備業、通信網路業、其他電子業在費用化後研發產出增加最多，即使該產業亦為費用化後總薪酬下降最多之產業。

依產業全球化的發展態勢觀察，產業由初期水準分工結構，生產基地往低成本的區域發展（即生產全球化），協助維持企業在國際產業供應鏈上的競爭力，漸次發展成一方面以開發新市場商機（即市場全球化）為主的成長策略，另一方面則逐步走向以整合全球各地研發資源（即研發全球化），以建構最具優勢的競爭基礎，實現全球的商機。 快速技術變遷與技術擴散而帶來的市場競爭，是促成科技產業廠商致力於事業分工營運的主要因素，在知識產業□由於產品系統規模愈趨龐大，整合度更完整的前提下對透過專業分工整合各地資源可以分散風險，建構獨特與專業的產業影響力。此一趨勢發展，在產業全球化且高度分工的環境下，是廠商發展核心能力，建構競爭優勢的策略作為。 近來大部份台灣廠商以大陸投資策略為其全球化策略的第一步，因此在本研究中，希望採用行動研究方法(action research method)，探討知識產業公司在全球化策略的思維，透過先行在大陸設立協同合作子公司實際經營管理，將所遭遇管理問題，透過擬具之行動方案--創新研發管理、服務管理、人力資源管理等經營管理工作進行操兵演練，經由不斷的調整改變以符合各子公司的經營環境，以達到厚基核心競爭力、強化高執行力之企業目標，以為日後擴及其他國家或地區時可作為典範。 關鍵字：創新研發管理、服務管理、專案管理、知識管理 / According to the industrial globalization trend, the initial models of level-cooperation and low-cost region development (production globalization) have been changed. Instead, the industry has been significantly developed to the new strategy of market opportunity (market globalization) along with worldwide resource integration (research & development globalization) that builds up a competitive foundation for global commercial opportunities. Rapid technology movement and spreading have formed a highly competitive market, which is the primary fact of facilitating the hi-tech manufactures to focus on the business cooperation. In knowledge industry, because the scale of product system is getting grown and completely integrated, a unique and significant production influence has been settled to reduce risks via the professionalism cooperation and resource integration from all regions. Under the trend of industrial globalization and intensive cooperation, the main strategy implementation of manufacture is to develop its core capability as well as competitive superiority. In recent development, majority of manufactures in Taiwan makes their first step to the globalization by investment to Mainland China. As a result, in this research, we apply a mechanism, Action Research Method, to explore the concept behind the knowledge industry’s globalization. It is executed through the management experience from pre-established sub-company to draw up a scheme, including innovation and research management, service management, and human resource management. From the constant adjustments according to running status of sub-company, the ability of core competency is expected to be solid and concreted. In addition, it strengthens the target of paramount execution that can be the standard model using in other countries and business areas in the future. Keywords: Innovation & Research management, service management, project management, knowledge management

本研究試圖以每個具有生命力組織的特性，亦即當組織需要適應環境以求得生存繁衍時，所必然具備的，適應環境的行為能力、組織內各環節間的運作規律與互動模式，以及組織需能構築自己的保護機制等這三種能力。來探討企業創新研發中心在資訊通訊代工產業中實際操作時所常面臨到的困境與問題，並藉由C公司之實例探討來找出可能的解決方向。 在研究中，也將這三種能力轉化為企業創新研發中心的語言。亦即企業創新研發中心之經營模式、企業創新研發中心之創新專案管理模式，以及企業創新研發中心之智慧財產權管理模式來進行探討。研究中也藉由這三個構面的討論，定義出個案公司利用鉗練模式的經營創新，使得原先在系統產業環境中容易失焦的負面因素，卻反而轉化成了正面的有利因素。也推動了一套針對創新技術管理的專案模式，並且讓這套創新技術管理的方法，充分結合於原有C公司的核心能力-產品專案執行流程中，內化成組織新的生命力。最後，也對C公司專利技術室組織的萃取智慧財產權的機制-專利專案協同計畫，做了詳盡的解釋。 / Running a Corporate Research Center well in 3C ODM industry is always a questionable task, ODM based companies are used to follow industry standard to build huge mass production capacity and also hope can create better gross margin be creating something different. This is really a dilemma. In this thesis, we use a real case C Company to study how the corporate research center operates inside the 3C ODM industry by three examining scopes. There are operation strategy, innovative technology project management and intellectual property right management. According to this study result, we concluded a few successful factors for corporate research center in C Company. There are innovative clamping economics model for operation strategy, Dorothy’s theory based technology project phase management and project based IP mining system. All the above factors should work together to make the whole research center running smoothly.

在知識經濟(Knowledge Economy)的時代中，企業經營最重要的生產要素已由知識取代機器、資金、原料或勞工，亦是在商場上競爭與存活的重要武器。所以，能夠針對知識做重大投資的企業，其成長率最快，且其價值與產值亦最大，例如資訊業、半導體業、通訊業等的知識密集之產業。 我們可以發現許多高科技上市櫃公司的股價均很高，但其所擁有的有形資產並不多，其中更有些公司的市值可能達到有形資產的數十倍甚至百倍，其中的差距，並無法從財務報表一窺究竟，其實就是無形資產，也是所謂的智慧資本(Intellectual Capital)。因此，對企業而言，如何充分利用此智慧資本，將知識整合進新的核心能力，轉型成為一個知識導向的組織，就成為一個很重要的課題。 因此，在智慧資本議題受到普遍重視的同時，另外一個很重要的議題亦引起大家的注意，那就是知識管理。如前所述，知識管理乃透過創造、儲存、分享、維持等活動，進而鞏固企業的競爭優勢。然而企業的競爭優勢究竟為何？知識管理活動該如何有效地協助競爭優勢的建立與維持？知識管理活動的成效又是如何得以衡量？ 本研究的目的即希望能夠透過瞭解企業知識管理及智慧資本運作機制，並深入探討高科技公司創新研發中心的知識管理模式，包含其型成過程與要素，以辨別公司是否有足夠人力、結構，並適時由人力資源策略、組織學習來調節並幫助決策者做出正確的調整策略，順利推動知識管理制度，不致於使知識管理活動流於形式，而使得企業活動毫無目標與方向。 / In the “Knowledge economy” era Knowledge is being substituted for the machine, capital, materials or labors, and to be the most important competitive weapons for the enterprise. We observe many high technology companies, which have the very high stock price, but they do not have many tangible assets. Although some of them have hundred times of marketing values compare with their tangible assets. The main difference is the Intellectual Capital which can not be expressed by the financial statement. Therefore, for the businesses, it is the most important issue to integrate the knowledge and enterprise core competency. Furthermore, there is another important issue is “Knowledge Management.” Knowledge management is through creation, storage, sharing, and maintenance to consolidate the competitive advantage of enterprise. However, what is the exactly competitive advantage of enterprise? How to help enterprise to establish and maintain competitive advantage effectively by Knowledge Management? How to evaluate the performance of Knowledge Management related activities? In this study, we hope through understanding the business Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital operation mechanism, and probing into the Knowledge Management model of innovative research and development center in high-technology business to clarify the company if they have enough human power, structure with appropriately human resource and organizational learning strategy to help the decision maker to make the right strategy, thus can advance the knowledge management system.

民國九十年左右，正值國內傳統行業轉型的年代，許多中小企業紛紛從所謂的夕陽工業轉型到科技業。近幾年來，政府也極力鼓勵民間企業自創品牌。但轉型成為自創品牌的企業寥寥可數，真正成功者更是少數。本研究試圖從台灣某家由傳統行業轉為自創品牌的中小企業來了解其建立品牌的經驗，除文獻探討及收集該公司之歷史資料外，並專訪該公司經理人後，進行個案分析及建立理論架構。此外，收集2000個顧客的調查資料與公司過去兩年來的銷售績效，以試圖了解競爭環境如何影響新自創品牌公司營運策略的調整，以及公司營運策略調整下，其創新研發與行銷之管理與運作。 本研究所得的重要結論有以下幾點： 一﹑新「自創品牌」公司面對競爭激烈的產業如何動態調整「營運策略」? 1. 新「自創品牌」公司的經營者對於所處競爭環境須有高度的靈敏度與機動性。 2. 資訊科技的運用可增加新「自創品牌」公司資訊的透明度與決策系統的正確性。 3. 新「自創品牌」公司正派的經營理念與形成的「品牌形象」與「企業形象」可獲得代工大廠的支持。 二﹑新「自創品牌」公司的「創新研發」與「行銷」之管理與運作為何？ 1. 新「自創品牌」公司內部「創新研發」機制是提升新「自創品牌」公司品牌知名度的關鍵。 2. 新「自創品牌」公司在「創新研發」的組織方面，會考慮藉由與異業的合作，以突破傳統的設計觀念。 3. 新「自創品牌」公司在選擇目標市場上，會鎖定利基市場與被忽略的市場，同時強調產品設計的「差異化」。 4. 集中於特定市場是擴張知名度是一較有效率的方法。 5. 新「自創品牌」公司初期階段會先以「創新研發」設計導向為主，當產品陸續被接受且市場擴大後，再轉為行銷導向。 6. 「自創品牌」公司基於產品價值的概念，其定價模式以「價值定價」而非一般傳統OEM廠商的成本加成定價。 7. 「產品品質」、「設計」與「服務體系」的整合對於新「自創品牌」公司品牌知名度與品牌認同的提升有很大的助益。 8. 新「自創品牌」公司的經營者品牌承諾的兌現，及品牌策略與產品定位的一致性，能獲得通路商及客戶的支持。 關鍵詞：營運策略，自創品牌，創新研發，行銷，差異化。 / Many small and medium-sized enterprises in Taiwan started to transform from conventional industries into high technology ones in the beginning of the 2000s, an era of transformation of the domestic industries in Taiwan. In recent years, the government also urges the private enterprises to establish their own brand . However, those that have transformed into new own brand manufacturers (OBMs) are few, and those successful even less. The study aims to explore the experience of a small and medium-sized enterprise that has transformed from a conventional industry into an own brand manufacturer. In addition to literature review and the collection of historical information of the company, the top executives and managers are interviewed in order to analyze the case and establish the theoretical framework. Furthermore, customer information and the sales performance over the past two years are collected to explore the influence of the competitive environment on adjustment of the business strategies of an OBM, and the company’s management and operation of the innovative research and development and marketing based on the adjustment. The conclusions drawn from the study are as following: 1. How does a new OBM dynamically adjust its business strategies to the keenly competitive environment of the industry? A. The CEO of a new OBM tends to show higher sensitivity and mobility to the competitive environment. B. The application of information technology enhances the transparency of the information of a new OBM and the accuracy of the decision-making system. C. The decent corporate ideology of a new OBM, its brand image and the corporate image are more likely to gain the support from the major original equipment manufacturers. 2. What is a new OBM’s management and operation of the innovative research and development and marketing? A. The innovative R&D mechanism of a new OBM is the key to the enhancement of its brand awareness. B. A new OBM may consider the inter-industry cooperation in order to make a breakthrough of traditional design concept. C. A new OBM may focus on niche markets and markets that are ignored, and put emphasis on the differentiation of product design simultaneously. D. Focusing on a certain market is a more efficient way to enhance brand awareness. E. A new OBM tends to adopt a design-oriented approach in the early stage, and consider turning to a customer-oriented or market-oriented approach when products are gradually accepted. F. A new OBM tends to adopt value pricing instead of traditional pricing. G. The integration of product quality, design and service system contributes a lot to the enhancement of brand awareness and brand identification. H. The fulfillment of the commitments of a brand by the manager of a new OBM and the consistency of brand strategy and product positioning are more likely to obtain the support from the distributors and the customers. Keywords: business strategy, own brand, innovative research and development, marketing, differentiation

我國傳統產業的發展由早期台灣經濟的中流砥柱，歷經產業變革、環保意識抬頭打壓後，至今被戲稱為「夕陽產業」，主因為產品生命週期進入低毛利成熟期。大部分傳統產業廠家積極尋求多角化轉型以突破困境，但在無法抽離製造代工心態下，積極投入非核心相關領域，無非是落入另一紅海。目前支撐台灣主要經濟命脈產業仍以資訊科技業為主，傳統產業雖非主流，但改變製造心態，堅持投入核心技術研發仍能伺機尋求切入點。 然而，過去強調創新升級轉型的研究不勝枚舉，但鮮少以國內傳統產業模範廠商為個案進行完整詳細地分析，基於此點，本研究針對我國傳統產業廠商「多角化」進行研究，以企業核心資源為基礎，試圖以較為整體性的架構，探討其多角化之相關議題，期能對「傳統產業多角化」，提供一些實務上與學理上的貢獻。 本研究之研究問題有五：（1）傳統產業廠商多角化的動機為何？（2）傳統產業廠商如何進行多角化？（3）傳統產業廠商企業核心資源為何？（4）傳統產業廠商多角化過程中新產品開發流程為何？（5）傳統產業廠商多角化後的新創組織作法為何？ 透過深度訪談個案公司高階經理人，並配合相關次級資料蒐集與整理，進行彙整及分析之後，本研究獲得以下之主要結論：（1）企業核心資源中之個人專長能力的展現為多角化轉型基礎；（2）創新研發過程中，知識資源的累積是技術發展的原動力；（3）順暢的組織內部溝通有助於新產品或新事業的發展；（4）對新產品開發而言，技術資源的彈性運用與高度整合有利於發展新事業；（5）以創新研發為導向之企業與智慧財產權之管理具高度關聯性。 / The domestic conventional industries were the mainstay of Taiwan economics. Because of the transformation of industries and then suffered from the lift of environmental consciousness. It ultimately turned to be the so-called “Sunset Industries”. The root cause was the low margin profit in mature stage of product life cycle. Most of conventional industries firms strove to break through the hardship by diversification. Not to withdraw the ideology from OEM mindset, the conventional industry firms invested in non-core relevant businesses painstakingly. It was just trapped to another red sea. For the moment, the dominant anchor of Taiwan economics was information technologies not the conventional industries. Nevertheless, just switched the manufacturing viewpoint and persevered to the development of core technologies to look for the niche points. Although, the studies in the past focused on innovative upgrading transformation were too numerous and there was scarcely to portray the leading company elaborately in domestic conventional industries. Based on this concept, the thesis paid attention to the study of diversification of domestic conventional industries. Endeavor to apply the comprehensive framework which was founded on the core resources of enterprises and discussed the correlative issues of diversification. Looking forward to the diversification of conventional industries could facilitate the contributions in practical and theoretical domain. The study aimed to investigate the questions: (1) What were the motivations drove the conventional industry firms to diversify? (2) How the conventional industry firms to execute the diversification? (3) What were the core resources of conventional industry firms? (4) What was the procedure of new product development in conventional industry firms during the duration of diversification? (5) What were the practices to construct the new business unit after diversification in conventional industry firms? This study exerted the deep interview methodology of qualitative researches and secondary data analyses to rearrange. The preliminary research findings included: (1) The performance of individual capability in enterprise core resources was the foundation of diversification. (2) During the innovative R&D process, the accumulation of knowledge resource was the motivation of technology of development. (3) The fluent communication in organization was conducive to develop the new products or new businesses. (4) As far as the new product development was concerned, the flexible exertion and high integration of technology resources was favorable for integrating and exploring new businesses. (5) Innovative R&D oriented enterprises were in high connection with management of intellectual property rights.

為了維護全球經濟的穩定與公平，近年來各國無不致力於反壟斷政策的執行，以期有效打擊卡特爾式的企業聯合行為。本文從三種不同的環境條件下，逐一探討採取聯合行為的廠商和反托拉斯政府之間的互動情況。透過本研究可發現，廠商在以利潤為優先考量下，來決定是否採取聯合結盟，以及合法或非法的合作型態。此外，為了朝全社會效率極大的目標邁進，本文針對三種環境設定下的均衡結果進行效率性的比較，得知其差異的成因在於政府和廠商報酬差異的大小。 / In order to keep the stability and fairness of global economy, most of the authorities around the world have been fighting for cutting down cartels by implementing Antitrust/Competition Law. In this paper, we analyze the interaction between joint ventures and antitrust authorities in three different cases. And we find that profit always takes priority in firms’ decision, no matter how the economic environment changes. Finally, in discussing social utility, we compare efficiency among the three cases, and reach our conclusion that the difference of government’s and firm’s return causes the efficiency or non-efficiency of those optimal strategies.

當管理策略的發展開始從既有的「純競爭策略」，逐漸轉變為一種陰陽相依、競合相倚的觀念時，這種「陰」與「陽」同時存在或交替出現的「競合策略」便成為管理學者爭相研究的焦點。然而，即使有關於競合的理論與研究不勝枚舉，但是能以知識為探討的立足點，來瞭解廠商間創新研發競合關係的研究並不多見。再者，過去有關區域創新或是產業聚落的研究，多半強調合作創新，顯少討論區域內的競爭。進一步而言，對於區域內廠商在創新研發方面同時「競合並存」的研究，特別是針對「競爭導向的合作」與「合作導向的競爭」兩種創新競合的情境下，廠商間的知識分享與知識保護的情形，更是付之闕如。因此，本研究的目的，即在回應這些文獻缺口，對於廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，其知識互動的實際作為，做一深入的探究。 本研究在研究方法上採用多重個案研究方法，以全球最著名的區域創新系統之一台灣中部地區的工具機群聚為主要的研究場域。在研究的過程中，以兩階段的深度訪談，針對中部地區的工具機暨零組件產業之競合關係進行瞭解，並找出兩個特殊的創新研發競合案例。進一步地，針對此兩案例中廠商的創新研發「競合關係」與知識互動的實際作為，做深入的比較與分析。 本研究經歸納彙整研究命題後，進一步得到以下結論： 一、第三方單位在區域內廠商之創新研發競合關係與知識互動中扮演重要的角色，包括中介協調、主動催生與管理計畫、技術移轉與檢測驗證等。 二、廠商在不同的「競合關係」情境下，會因營運範疇相似度的不同，而有不同的知識分享類型與交流管道。在營運範疇相似度高的情況下，會以基礎理論知識來進行分享，且以正式的討論會議為主要的知識交流管道；在營運範疇相似度度低的情況下，會以應用層面的技術知識進行分享，在知識交流的管道上不僅會有正式的討論會議，還會透過非正式的方式進行交流。 三、廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，會因未來競爭的可能性與營業秘密的考量，而採取不同的知識分享方式，包括選擇性分享、不願意分享以及主動進行分享等。 四、廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，儘管知識保護的緣由不同，都會以契約內的保密協議做為最主要的知識保護方式。 在學術研究方面，本研究不同於以往的文獻從「市場」或是「資源」的角度來探究「競合關係」，而是以創新研發中最根本的要素–「知識」，來探究創新研發的「競合關係」。其次，不僅瞭解到第三方單位是促成競爭廠商形成合作研發聯盟的重要推手，亦從廠商不同的競合情境下，其知識互動的作為，整理出「知識互動的影響因素」。因此，本研究在學術研究上做出以下的貢獻： 一、過往競合方面的研究，主要是以一般性的策略領域為主，本研究則特別針對廠商在「創新研發」上的「競合」行為來加以探討。 二、過往的競合理論對於市場與資源的定義不夠完整與明確，且認為市場與資源是分別影響競爭與合作的不同要素。本研究更細緻地以「知識」的層次來加以探討，發現「知識」對廠商間的競合行為有很大的影響；此外，知識層次的觀點亦會使市場與資源間的界限變得模糊。 三、過往的競合理論概括性地提出既競爭又合作的概念，本研究進一步地提供「競爭導向的合作」（競中帶合）與「合作導向的競爭」（合中帶競）兩種情境的實證研究結果。 四、過往的研究較少提出第三方單位在競合關係中扮演的角色，本研究藉由實證並提出區域內廠商在進行創新研發競合關係時，第三方單位的主要角色與重要性。 五、過往區域創新系統或產業群聚的研究以探討廠商間的合作為主，本研究再加入「競爭」的要素做為研究廠商創新研發「競合關係」的基礎。 整體而言，本研究將「競中帶合」與「合中帶競」做清楚的定義，進一步地以知識作為廠商進行創新研發競合的根本要素，並提出第三方單位的重要性。在實務上，提供知識互動的影響因素作為廠商進行競合與知識互動時的參考依據。 / Management strategy has gradually transformed from “pure competition” to the coexistence of competition and cooperation, also known as co-opetition, where “co-opetition strategy” has become a popular research focus for scholars who study management. Scholars, upon observing such trend where “peace” and “warfare”- or “yin” and “yang”- exists either at the same time or occurs alternatively, begin to add the “cooperative” element (yang) into the traditional concept of “competition” (yin). Although immense theories and researches on the concept of co-opetition exist, researches that attempt to reveal the co-opetition relationship in the realm of R&D and Innovation among firms from the standpoint of knowledge have been scarce. Regional Innovation Systems is a field full of cooperation and competition, yet past research mostly focused on cooperation and innovation instead of discussing the competition among firms in the region. That is, few researches focused on discussing the cooperation and competition coexisting at the same time in the realm of R&D and Innovation among firms. Moreover, researches that particularly discuss the situation of knowledge sharing and knowledge protection among firms from two R&D and Innovation co-opetition types of “Competition-dominated cooperation” and “Cooperation-dominated competition” relegate said situations to the category of things unknown. Therefore, this research aims to fill the gap in such literature by conducting deep explorations into knowledge interaction among firms in one region, particularly from two R&D and Innovation co-opetition types. This research adopts a multi-case study method while the main field of research focuses on one of the most renowned global Regional Innovation Systems: the machinery cluster in central Taiwan. During the process of the research, a two-stage, in-depth interview was conducted to understand the co-opetition relationship among the machine tool and component firms in the central Taiwan, and has identified two special case studies of R&D and Innovation co-operation. Furthermore, this research focus on the R&D and Innovation co-opetition relationship among firms and their practices of knowledge interaction in these two cases, and conducts in-depth comparisons and analysis. By conducting two-stage in-depth interviews, this study summarizes the research propositions and further obtains the following conclusions: 1.Third party plays an important role in R&D and innovation co-opetition knowledge interaction among firms in the same region, including the roles of intermediary coordination, taking the initiative to spawn and manage projects, and transferring, testing and verification of technology. 2.In different “co-opetition” types, the types of knowledge sharing and exchange channels among firms are different according to how similar they are in operational scope. In the case of high similarity in operational scope, basic and theoretical knowledge is shared, and formal meetings are the main channel of knowledge exchange. In the case of low similarity in operational scope, technical and applied knowledge is shared, and the channels of knowledge exchange do not only have formal meetings, but also communicate informally. 3.In different “R&D and innovation co-opetition” types, firms will take different approaches in sharing knowledge (either being selective, not willing, or actively sharing) due to future competition possibilities and trade secrets. 4.Firms differ in their reasons for knowledge protection in different “R&D and innovation co-opetition” types, but will mostly rely on confidential agreements within their contracts as the main measure for knowledge protection. While past academic research mostly explores "co-opetition relationship" from the perspective of "market" or "resource", this research explores R&D and innovation co-opetition with the most essential element, “knowledge”. Not only is it understood that third-party units are important promoters of competitive firms in forming R&D alliances, "the influencing factors of knowledge interaction" from the perspective of their knowledge interaction under different co-opetition types is concluded. Therefore, this research aims to produce the following contributions in the academic field: 1.Past co-opetition researches mostly focus on generic and strategical fields, this research focuses particularly on bahviors of “co-opetition in R&D and innovation” among firms. 2.Past co-opetition theories’ definitions on markets and resources are insufficient and imprecise, for they describe markets and resources as different factors that affect competition and cooperation. This research offers a finer exploration from the aspect of “knowledge”. This research finds that “knowledge” has an immense impact on co-opetition behaviors. In addition, the knowledge-level viewpoint further blurs the boundary between markets and resources. 3.Past co-opetition theories offered the generic concept of simultaneous competition and cooperation This research further provides empirical research results of two scenarios: "competition-dominated cooperation" and "cooperation-dominated competition". 4.Past researches seldom discuss the role that third parties play in co-opetition. This research states the importance of third parties in the firms’ “co-opetition relationships” through empirical evidence when it comes to R&D and innovation in the region. 5.Past researches of regional innovation systems or clusters primarily focus on cooperation between firms, this research adds the factor of “competition” as a research basis for understanding firms’ co-opetition relationships in and R&D and innovation. Overall, this research clearly defines "competition-dominated cooperation" and "cooperation-dominated competition", and views “knowledge” as a fundamental element of R&D and innovation co-opetition, putting forward the importance of third-party units. In practice, provide the influential factors of knowledge interaction as a reference for firms to conduct co-opetition and knowledge interaction.