本研究的主要目的為探討三星電子、宏達電和台積電，除了可能因產品面、營運面的操作影響公司價值外，在面臨外匯波動的競爭環境時，是否有做好足夠的避險措施來抵銷外匯風險，採取的實證方法為，曝險彈性模型、現金流量迴歸模型和股價迴歸模型等，資料時間由2003年至2012年。 從實證結果來看，三星電子在營運避險和財務避險的操作都相當合適，都能有效的降低外匯風險。而台灣的主要企業-宏達電和台積電均有相似的避險問題，融資現金流量過度的曝險，推測為外幣負債操作的不足，造成財務避險不足，無法有效降低外匯風險，這部分相較於主要競爭對手-三星電子而言是比較可惜的地方，必須盡快改善財務避險策略，以防止公司在外匯波動上承受匯兌損失。 而在台幣是否該貶值以刺激出口的論點裡，可以發現不同時間點，公司對於台幣貶值的反應不同，時間點若是近十年來，則台幣貶值對於公司的幫助並不大，故不應該支持台幣貶值以刺激出口。但若把時間點分成金融海嘯前後，兩間公司對於台幣貶值的反應則有反轉的現象，在金融海嘯後，台幣貶值對於這兩間公司均是有利的結果，故由此應該支持台幣該大幅貶值以刺激出口。

隨著競爭的激烈，現今半導體晶圓代工產業面臨研發支出不斷增加以及晶圓製造廠的投資門檻越發提高之環境。然而在這晶圓代工競賽中，金融市場投資者也開始關注到金額龐大的資本資出是否能為公司創造更多的價值，以及其投資決策與融資決策對晶圓代工公司營運績效影響為何。 本研究以經濟附加價值(Economic Value Added; EVA)作為衡量半導體晶圓代工產業的公司價值指標，利用縱橫資料模型(panel data)驗證晶圓代工公司的EVA與市場價值之關連性，並探討影響半導體晶圓代工公司的價值創造的因子。此外，本研究亦針對半導體景氣循環指標及晶圓代工公司價值創造的關係進行研究。最後本研究以個案方式分析半導體晶圓代工公司價值創造之原因。 實證結果發現晶圓代工公司的EVA與市場價值具有高度的關連性與解釋能力，代表EVA確實能反映企業的真實價值。本文亦發現公司投入愈多的資本支出、追求高的營業利潤率、降低資金成本都會為半導體晶圓代工公司創造更多的價值。然而營收增加、營運資金投入的多寡及半導體景氣循環指標等因素對晶圓代工公司價值創造並無明顯之影響。此外，本文個案研究歸納出晶圓代工公司創造公司價值之因素共有下四點：一、擴大對現有的投入資本的報酬率。二、利用低利率環境和低β值，以降低資金成本。三、維持技術領先的競爭優勢，使公司擁有一段較長的時間能產生高於正常報酬率。四、加大資本資出進行新的投資，以賺取超額報酬。 / Advanced semiconductor manufacturing is at an inflection point with escalating R&D intensity and capital expenditure requirements for new fabrication plants of leading process. However, investors are concerned whether tremendous capital expenditure could generate return and create value to the company in this competition. Therefore, the objective of this study is to examine the foundry firms’ value by adopting the concept of Economic Value Added (EVA), measuring the excessive return that a company can generate over the cost of capital. At first, this study tests the power of EVA to capture the relationship between a company’s market value and EVA of foundries. As EVA may be affected by numerous financial value drivers, this research examines and ascertains which factors are relevant. Furthermore, this study also monitors the EVA of these firms to determine their relationship with the semiconductor cyclical index. The primary findings of this study are illustrated as below. EVA is systematically linked to market value in foundry industry. In addition, foundries with higher operating profit margin and higher capital expenditure could create more firms’ value while foundries with higher cost of capital and financial flexibility would destroy its value. Moreover, foundries’ EVAs are not been significantly affected by growth of sales, investments in working capital, and semiconductor cycle index. Furthermore, this paper also conducts a case study to analyze why TSMC creates EVA continuously: (1)TSMC increases returns on existing capital while holding WACC and invested capital constant. (2)TSMC reduces the cost of capital by leveraging low interest rate and low beta. (3)TSMC makes new investments that earn returns greater than the WACC. (4)TSMC sustains the competitive advantage of technological leadership which enables the company to generate above-normal returns for a longer period.

有關既有廠商面對技術改變時為何會失去領導地位，現有文獻多以技術和廠商能耐互動的供給面切入討論，其原因可能是領導廠商無法及時轉換技術、調整能耐或組織惰性等因素；對於少數新興國家的後進廠商成功挑戰既有領導廠商，成為全球領導廠商的研究，也大多依循這種供給面觀點，認為建立並不斷提升技術能耐是成功的關鍵。 深入檢視既有廠商面對技術改變失去領導地位的原因，不完全是來自供給面的問題，市場需求面也是重要的影響因素。在討論市場需求面的相關理論中，斷裂性創新架構是最典型的觀點，該觀點認為新興廠商推動斷裂性創新會持續破壞現有市場遊戲規則，造成競爭基礎的改變與產業結構的變化，此觀點主要在說明市場顧客需求的變化對新舊廠商競爭的影響，並據以補充說明技術供給面的不足。 至今斷裂性創新研究並未發展出一個有系統的架構來檢測某種創新情境是否為斷裂性創新？因而，本研究根據斷裂性創新架構觀點及個案研究法中描述性理論架構的要求，發展出斷裂性創新描述架構的相關特性要件，並用此架構來檢測台灣積體電路公司及其所促進高度發展的全球晶圓代工產業，檢測結果發現過程符合斷裂性創新的特性。後續研究將可由斷裂性創新的觀點切入，重新詮釋台積電成功成為全球領導廠商的原因。 本研究發展出來的描述架構是一個檢測斷裂性創新的良好基礎，可以作為測試其他產業是否存在斷裂性創新的參考。 / Why established incumbents loosed their leading positions facing the disruptive technology, explanation of current literatures tended to focus on the supply-side interaction of technologies and firms’ capabilities. The research on latecomer firms catching up technological gap in newly development countries also focused on the supply-side perspective and argued that consecutive advancing technological capabilities was the key to success. Closer examination of technology competition, however, reveals that technology or market transitions are not necessarily due to the supply-side difficulties, like incumbent technology’s inherent limit, incumbents’ inability to master new skill, or organizational inertness. The market demand-side is also an important factor offering a complementary set of explanations that highlight the influence of consumers’ need on technology trajectory. The most influential expression of a demand side role in technology competition is the disruptive innovation that will break the market rule, shift the bases of competition and change the industry structure. Current researches, however, did not develop systematically analytical tool or framework to identify disruptive innovation. This study followed the major perspectives of disruptive innovation and the rules of case study to develop the descriptive framework for testifying the phenomenon of disruptive innovation. The semiconductor industry development in Taiwan was identified and described under the conditions of this framework. This descriptive framework is a systematic tool for testing disruptive innovation in any industry.

現今產業環境變化加速，知識工作者高度流動、產品生命週期越來越短、以及研發成本不斷提高，「創新」出現了革命性的變化。封閉已經成為過去，現在是「開放式經營模式」的時代，要掌握決勝未來的關鍵，就必須掌握與合作夥伴創新的能力。這個新模式，不只改變了企業的成長動能，更重要的是它改變了遊戲規則。「開放式經營模式」已經成為跨越地理疆界、打破速度、解決資源匱乏的新存亡關鍵。 / 企業向外尋找創新來源的過程中，必須積極地自外界搜尋、截取新的想法、資源，同時也要讓企業內部所研發創新的技術向外流出，讓外界運用。此外，企業必須進行經營模式的創新，與更多的供應商、顧客形成一新的產業生態系，企業主導其經營模式成為平台，與經營的夥伴共同承擔風險，同時共享其利潤，從中為整個產業生態系創造更大的價值，也為自己的企業創造更大的價值，此即為「開放式經營模式」的典範。 / 本研究將分析探討究竟企業是如何逐漸從原先的經營模式逐漸演進為開放式經營模式，理解其演進發展的過程中關鍵的成功因素為何，企業需經歷哪些重大的變革，以及企業欲成為開放式經營模式之平台的主導廠商，需要哪些關鍵的能力及資源。本研究採用歷史研究法及個案研究法，以台積電作為個案之例進行研究，發現從企業的核心策略演進分析、策略性資源演進分析、顧客介面演進分析、價值網絡演進分析，分別找出了企業演進為開放式經營模式的關鍵因素，且發現這些關鍵之間彼此有著緊密地互動與連結，而「開放式經營平台」即扮演著此一重要的角色。 / 透過本研究的分析探討，提供業界企業經營模式的演進以成為開放式經營模式之模型參考，以及企業欲實踐開放式經營模式實務上的作法，對於Chesbrough（2006）所提出之開放式經營模式的理論得到了實務上的驗證。此外，本研究亦提供了一結合Chesbrough（2006）開放式經營模式觀點以及Hamel（2000）經營模式理論之基礎架構，可作為研究探討企業開放式經營模式之演進歷程分析的理論基礎，且針對原先學者所提出的理論進行相關的討論與進一步的詮釋與修正。此外此一基礎架構也提供產學界對於未來開放式經營模式相關的管理議題，有更多後續的研究與發展。 / The environment of industry is rapidly changing and highly turnover rate of knowledge workers. Product lifecycle become shorter. R&D cost increases constantly. “Innovation” has the revolutionary change. Closing has already become the history. Now, it’s the era of “Open Business Model”. For controlling the key of success in the future, we should control the ability to innovate with partners. This new model not only transforms the growth kinetic energy of the enterprise but also changes the game rule more importantly. “Open Business Model” have become the live or dead key of crossing over the geographical boundaries, breaking the limitation of pace, and solving the problem of deficient resources. / In the process of enterprise finding innovative sources from the outwards, enterprise must search for the external world actively, acquire the new ideas and resources, and let the internal technology of R&D innovation flow to the outwards for the application of external world at the same time. Besides, enterprises must proceed the innovation of business model and collaborated with more suppliers and customers to sustain in the new eco system. Enterprises will lead and change business model in e-platform, undertake the risks with business partners, and share the profits together at the same time. In the process, not only it creates more values for the entire eco system, but also it creates much more values for itself. It’s the paradigm of “Open Business Model”. / The research analyzed and observed how the enterprise developed from the original business model to the open business model gradually. We realized what the critical successful factors are in the development period of evolution process, what the significant changes the enterprise need to experience, and what the keys of capability and resources the enterprise need to become the leading manufacturer of the open innovation platform. The research adopts historical research and case study method, and takes the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) as a case study for the research. Based on the open business model perspectives, “core strategy”, “strategic resources”, “customer interface” and “value network”, the research find out the key factors in the evolution period. Moreover, the research observed the “Open Innovation Platform” plays an important role on interactive relationship between these critical factors. / The research also provides enterprise the framework of how to evolve into open business model, as well as the practical experience of how to approach the open business model. The theory of open business model which Chesbrough (2006) proposed is verified in real business. In addition, the research also provides the basis of the theoretical framework which is the combination of Chesbrough (2006) open business model perspective and Hamel (2000) business model theory. It could be used as the foundamental theory of analyzing the open business model evolution for the following research. This research also provides the topics of the following open business model or other related managerial issues for the academic and practical research.

近年來平台商業模式席捲全球，Google、Amazon、Facebook、Airbnb、Line等平台領導者們，改變了人與人之間的互動、翻轉現代的生活，並從平台中取得價值、獲得優勢，進行一場以生態系為主的競爭遊戲。此股炫風吹向經濟體中的不同環節，讓企業與企業、產業與產業之間的互動關係發生變化，同時造成許多無法因應平台經營模式與競爭策略的企業快速衰退。因此，在此股潮流之中，舊有企業如何成功轉向平台經營為本研究之重點。 有別於分析成立之際即以平台模式為主的個案公司，本研究結合了價值鏈經營模式、以及平台經營模式的觀點與相關學術理論，採用縱斷面研究方法探討典範企業—台積電30年來經營模式的轉變歷程，分析其如何一步步重塑半導體產業結構、佈局平台策略並成功轉型，成為半導體產業的巨頭之一，並形成台積大同盟的生態系與兩大IDM對手展開全面競爭。 透過本研究之分析與歸納，發現「價值鏈」與「平台」兩者的商業模式要素內涵與經營思維迥異，前者專注本業、著重內部優化，以低成本或差異化為主要的競爭策略；後者則強調擴張營運範圍、槓桿外部資源，共同創造更多價值獲得雙贏局面。而價值鏈模式之企業可從建立內部平台開始、轉變到供應鏈平台，接著發展至雙邊平台的演化方式進行轉型，但不是所有企業都具備成為雙邊平台領導者的潛力，必須確認自身提供的價值是否為整個技術系統所需、以及能否同時為產業中許多企業解決商業問題。當企業成功轉為雙邊平台之際，即可專注於提高平台的網路效應與轉換成本等策略行動上，追求大者恆大及生態系競爭之目的。 / In recent years, the platform business model sweeps the world. Google, Amazon, Facebook, Airbnb, Line and other platform leaders not only changed the way people lived but also obtained values from the platform’s network. These values are key competitive advantages for platform leaders to win the game of business. However, the new type of business model is threatening pipeline business, and some pipelines even rapidly declined after attacking by platforms. Therefore, how pipelines can survive and turn successfully to platform-based business is the main discussion in this research. This study combined the academic theories of two business model: value chain and platform to explore the transformation of business and strategy of TSMC, which is one of the leading semiconductor companies in the world, in the past 30 years. The case study followed by analyzing how TSMC reshaped the semiconductor’s value chain and then adopt the platform strategy for enterprise transformation. Now, TSMC has its own ecosystem that can beat with other two giant IDM competitors. With the in-depth case study of the changing in TSMC’s business model, we had three conclusions. Firstly, we find out that the business model of “value chain” and “platform” has the different connotation and strategic thinking. The former enterprises focus on its own business, pay attention to internal optimization, and take advantage of differentiation or low cost for competition. However, the later ones emphasize the expansion of operating scope, leverage external resources, and co-create with partners for more values to pursuit the win-win situation. Secondly, enterprises with the value chain business model can develop the platform business model by establishing the internal platform at the initial and then expand to supply chain platform and two-sided market platform. But it's worth noting that not all enterprises have the potential to become a platform leader. It must satisfy two prerequisite conditions: (1) the own value is essential within an industry, and (2) can solve the business problems of different companies at the same time. Thirdly, when enterprises successfully become the platform-based business, enlarging network effect and switching cost are two primary actions to pursue and keep platform leading strategy.

邁入21世紀，許多環境趨勢與變動如全球化浪潮、時基競爭、快速回應的壓力等，使現代組織面臨另一波的典範轉移。面對如此動盪的環境，近年來一些組織為了得以快速地感知與因應環境變動，開始由單一組織的營運活動逐漸轉變為「跨組織」、甚至「跨產業」的連結與互動，透過組織間價值利益交換與共同演化，產生高度的適應性與多樣性，得以與複雜不確定的動盪環境共存。組織間連結關係的普遍，使得學術界與實務界開始將關於企業競爭力的探討，由組織內在能力之強調轉移至與組織生存攸關之外部資源的管理上。而對於企業來說，發展的關鍵就是如何與其他企業相互協調、將資源集中起來為消費者創造價值。 本研究從複雜適應系統(Complex Adaptive Systems)角度出發，試圖剖析一「組織間連結」群體之現有樣貌與未來可能樣貌。本研究首先針對相關文獻、研究進行整理，由系統觀點找出複雜適應系統的組織發展光譜，並提出其中商業生態系統(Business Ecosystem)與混序式組織(Chaordic Organization)兩個組織類型將座落於此組織發展光譜之兩端，而混序式組織將可視為一複雜適應系統的最終理想境界，如同相關文獻所述。 本研究更進一步針對兩種組織類型內涵進行解構，並佐以現行個案：台積電公司與Visa國際組織進行實例驗證，歸納出「生態型」與「混序型」兩種經營模式，並於共同特徵與對稱差異分析下，得出以下結論與管理意涵： 1)未來動盪環境之下，組織協議力量(protocal)將取代傳統控制力量，促成網絡內部之複雜與多樣性；2) 協議力量下，未來組織之創新將發生在價值活動的任何一端，屬「激發創新」；3) 面對動盪環境，組織複雜與適應性的建立，將會是不斷重複且持續循環的任務與挑戰。