１．研究目的：本研究的目的在探討產業發展歷程的各階段，企業所面臨的產業形態 與企業競爭策略間的互動關係，一方面印證現有的理論，另方面經由不同產業的比較 ，歸納出一般性的命題，並希望提出有價值的結論，供實務界參考。 ２．文獻：包括五大部份。一為有關產業分析的理論；二為有關產業生命週期研究的 文獻；三為有關企業競爭策略的研究；四為有關政府產業政策方面的研究；五為九關 汽車、機車產業的研究。 ３．研究方法：本論文採用個案研究方法。透過與產業專家的深入訪談，各種產業相 關資料的蒐集，個案撰寫、分析與比較，瓜「經史合參」的方式，整合學理與實務。 ４．研究內容：分為四大部份。一為產業環境與產業發展，包括產業發展階段的劃分 ，各階段的環境因素與產業特色，產業演進的動力與結果，各階段的策略重點與關鍵 因素的確認等；二為競爭策略分析，包括各階段的策略組群，策略組群的移動及進入 障礙、移動障礙等；三為產業環境因素與企業競爭策略的關係，包括環境因素對企業 策略選擇的涵意，競爭優勢分析等；四為政府政策之檢討，包括政府政策與產業發展 ，產業政策對各別企業影響的比較，產業政策的時機與成效。 ５．研究結果：一、產業環境影響產業形態，產業形態影企業策略形態；二、寡佔廠 商常以大量的閑置產能做為進入障礙，阻止新競爭者加入，以確保其利益；三、客觀 的環境變化，對個別企業有不同的主觀感受；四、國際分工，是我國汽車，機車產業 將來發展的趨勢。

文化創意產業乃近年來政府所大力推動的重點產業，儘管文化究係一種「服務」或「產業」，爭議頗多，然而睽諸世界先進國家，如英國設有事權統一之文化媒體體育部(The Department of Culture, Media and Sport)職司全英文化政策之擬訂，並以發行彩券部份收入，鼓勵新穎多元之創作；再如丹麥政府早就發現企業界和文化界的語言渾然不同，發現國家需要教育課程來訓練學生如何經營文化事業，這包括建立對整個產業的知識，能夠斡旋協調、解決衝突，並擁有處理預算、智慧財產權、合約及版稅的能力，於是當務之急，是希望商學院可以把注意力多放在文化界的發展潛力上，增加相關主題、課程和所謂「第三級教育」的訓練；澳洲則就文化產業核心，從精英藝術與社區藝術之論述，進一步發展到休閒與娛樂；其文化態度，亦跳脫文化公民權之爭論，邁入文化消費期。凡此種種，皆從發展文化創意「產業」之角度，作為施政方針。 　　反觀台灣文化創意產業之經營環境日益艱困，至今未有事權統一之「文化部」，文化創意政府分工上，教育部獨置身事外以及至今未能建立諸如好萊塢的「完工保證」制度以吸引投資者等，因此本研究所欲探討之主題計有四項： 1.文化創意產特質為何？與過去台灣所擅長的製造業的價值鏈、商業模式等，有何不同？ 2.政府政策之制訂與產業界之需求，其緊密度為何？是否尚有政策調整之空間與方向？ 3.文化創意產業之經營者係一「守門人」之角色，此守門人之角色如何整合「線上成本」與「線下成本」中之各個成員角色，在「彈性專業化」的合作關係中，形成一種商業模式？ 4.文化創意人普遍缺乏避險觀念，因此如何「以銷定產」，透過「創業財務」理論，經由「高概念」與「國際分工」募集資金，迴避風險，是為本研究所要深入探討的主題。 / The idea of developing cultural and creative industries has been putting forward by the government in recent years even though the arguments of culture being as a service or an industry remains disputable. However, policymakers in more advanced countries have moved beyond the debate and recognized the importance of the industries at different level: The United Kingdom sets up the Department of Culture, Media and Sport as the solo division in charge of policy formulation. Part of the income from National Lottery is devoted to encourage creation; Being aware of the differences between business professionals and creative talents, Denmark educates students with the know-how of cultural industry management, including the skills of negotiation and conflict solving and the abilities to deal with budget, copyright, contract and royalties. It also urges business schools to enhance entrepreneurial potential by adding more topics, classes and so-called “tertiary education” to their curriculums. Australia, on the other hand, has extended the core value of culture and creative industries from elite and community arts to recreation and entertainment. It has moved from the phrase of debating cultural citizenship into cultural consumption. With reference to the experience of other countries, we can conclude that culture and creativity sectors should be considered as “industries” rather than “services” for policy measures. On contrary, the business environment has become difficult for the cultural and creative sectors in Taiwan. There’s no one single government entity to take account of cul-tural factors and attach greater importance to promoting the development of cultural indus-tries in the course of policy formulation and implementation; Ministry of Education has not partake in studying the vision for development and direction for the industries; Lacking of completion guarantees leaves investors with big doubts and consequently hider the estab-lishment of finance resources. To solve the above-mentioned issues, this research will fo-cus on: 1.The characteristics of cultural/creative industries. How are they different from the value chains and business models of manufacturing that has dominated Taiwan's industrial sector? 2.The gaps between current policies and the real needs of the industries. What can be done to favor the development of the sectors? Any adjustment to make or ap-proach to establish? 3.The role of decision makers in cultural/creative industries as “gatekeepers.” How do they control the above and below the line costs and utilizing the concept of flexible specialization to manage their businesses? 4.The sales and marketing of creative products. Traditionally, creative talents have little knowledge on risk control. How to develop new products or services in the context of existing provision in the market? How to avoid risk and raise money by bringing in the notion of “high concept” and “co-production” in filmmaking?