本論文由三篇相關的文章所組成，第一篇文章討論勞動能力分配如何影響國際分工的型態，可分割生產技術的採用對所得分配的影響，以及國際貿易在這當中所扮演的角色。第二篇文章分析開放體系下，廠商滿足大眾訴求的核心能力和生產模式間的關係。第三篇文章建構動態的產業調整模型，分析廠商的異質性在生產模式的變遷過程中所扮演的角色，以及國際貿易如何進一步影響產業的調整時徑。 第一篇文章以一般均衡的異質性勞動模型，探討國際垂直分工的比較利益來源，以及從整合生產到國際垂直分工的經濟效果。各財的產出受象徵知識與經驗的勞動能力所影響，異質性最終財的生產涉及勞動能力邊際生產力遞增，與線性技術兩種不同性質的生產任務。在整合生產，兩種任務需一起執行，勞動能力在不同任務間具有模組互補的現象；在可分割生產時，不同的任務可以獨立由不同的生產單位執行，因此可以分地進行生產。第一篇文章的主要結論是：1. 國際垂直分工的比較利益來自於兩國勞動能力的絕對差異，或分配上的相對差異，這與傳統資源秉賦理論的精神相符；2. 當生產技術由不可分割演進到可分割時，兩國的所得分配均更為惡化，國際分工進一步影響兩國的所得分配。 第二篇文章探討最終廠商在消費價值創造上所擁有的核心優勢強弱，與其最適生產模式的關係。最終財廠商將一單位的中間投入，輔以消費價值的創造，才能將所得到的最終財銷售給消費者，而消費價值的創造直接反映在消費的效用水準。對於中間投入，最終廠商需決定整合生產或委外分工，二者均需考慮南北的區位選擇。企業家在決定其生產模式時面臨以下兩難問題：首先，垂直分工的價值來自供應商的專業經營，但除不完全契約問題外，還需要額外的固定成本。其次，在區位選擇方面，南國的工資水準較低，但組織成本要比北國高。本文說明在創造消費價值創造上所擁有的專業能力不同，上述兩難問題的得失輕重也有所不同。此外，關於國際委外的組織成本下降如何影響國際委外活動之進行，以及對各階層所得的影響，本文也提供相當直覺的剖析。 第三篇文章建構動態的產業調整模型，分析廠商的異質性在生產模式的變遷過程中所扮演的角色，以及國際貿易如何進一步影響產業的調整時徑。當中，最終廠商在滿足大眾訴求的專業能力各不相同。廠商可以將生產工序標準化為可交易的中間財，並與專業供應商垂直分工。委外分工可以降低生產成本，但也存在隨時間遞減的調適成本，最終廠商要決定的是最適化的調整時點。這篇文章的主要結論是：1. 對消費大眾愈具吸引力的廠商，調整生產模式的時點愈早； 2. 國際貿易同時具有催化延緩產業調整時徑的作用，開放體系下，外銷廠商的調整時點較封閉體系早，內銷廠商較封閉體系晚；3. 互惠性的降低貿易障礙或技術進步所致的貿易成本下降，將使外銷廠商的調整時點提前，內銷廠商則延後。

近年來，我國筆記型電腦產業不論是出貨量、產值或成長率，皆呈現持續性的高度成長，對台灣與全球筆記型電腦產業影響甚巨。然而，在全球激烈競爭的壓力下，筆記型電腦價格逐漸下滑，國際品牌大廠遂將降價壓力移轉至台灣代工廠商，迫使台灣代工廠商的整體獲利空間縮減，進而尋求降低成本的可能。根據文獻資料，台灣筆記型電腦代工廠商的關鍵成功因素包括：健全的供應練結構、高度彈性的製造與配銷、傑出的生產製造效率等，這些因素皆有賴價值鍊上下游間的密切配合，意即垂直整合策略乃扮演了關鍵的角色。 綜觀台灣筆記型電腦代工廠商，多年來持續加強上下游間的垂直整合程度，如今已展現出相當不錯的成效。因此，本研究乃由垂直整合策略的角度出發，探討台灣筆記型電腦產業與垂直整合策略之關連，進而為台灣筆記型電腦產業提出實質之建議。本研究欲探討下列議題：(1)企業採取垂直整合策略的動機；(2)影響垂直整合策略的因素；(3)垂直整合策略的效益與成本。 本研究以文獻探討為基礎，進行研究架構之發展，而在個案公司應具代表性的考量下，選擇產業內的領導廠商廣達、仁寶與緯創為研究對象。透過個案分析與命題發展，本研究獲得如下之結論：(1) 「穩定關鍵零組件之供應來源」與「配合公司整體發展之需要」為企業採取垂直整合策略的動機；(2)「零組件未來發展性」與「零組件關鍵性」將影響企業的垂直整合策略；(3)當企業之總體策略的佈局與觀點不同，將形成不同的垂直整合作為；(4)企業傾向於採取「非完全」垂直整合策略。此外，本研究亦發現，在以代工業務為主的產業中，當廠商的垂直整合程度越高，其經營績效越佳；因此，本研究建議在以代工業務為主的產業裡，若廠商自身的能力與資源許可，應盡可能地垂直整合上游關鍵零組件，以獲取較佳之經營績效。

企業的策略制定與執行並非一成不變的，必須依產業的變化、競爭的動態況、及本身的資源多寡，隨時檢視是否需要加以修正，如此才能讓企業立於不敗之地，達成永續經營。在產業的生命週期步入成熟期以後，單靠『產品創新』與『流程創新』均不足以維持企業的競爭力，必須藉由『策略創新』來接續企業的生命力，所謂的『策略創新』也就是重組價值鏈，傳統上，許多企業對於重組價值鏈的做法是進行『垂直整合』。但在核心能力（Core Competency）的觀念普遍化之後，管理的鐘擺又朝向了垂直分工，於是降低垂直整合反而成為風尚，企業開始更加注重專注、輕裝、簡捷，把競爭力的重點放在自己最為優勢的領域，對於非核心能力價值活動，企業改以外包的方式來取代。 關於垂直整合策略或分工策略的相關研究，過去雖有諸多文獻探討，但其研究方向多著重在策略形成的動機、效益、成本、影響因素及與經營績效的關係，對於垂直整合的關鍵成功因素，及垂直整合策略在執行過程，若面對外在環境的變化需要調整時，引發策略需要改變的內外在因素為何？如何進行策略調整？以及如何進行策略調整後的管理，這些在過去的文獻中則較少學者加以探討，因此，本研究擬以與民眾生活密不可分的小家電產業為研究對象，探討以下問題，並希望能為小家電產業帶來實質的貢獻。 一、 導致企業由『垂直整合策略』走向分工的因素為何？ 二、 企業應如何由『垂直整合策略』調整至『分工策略』？ 三、 如何進行分工後外包的管理？ 本研究以文獻探討為基礎，進行研究架構的發展，而在個案公司應具有代表性的考量下，選擇全球最大的小家電供應商-燦坤集團的小家電部門為研究對象，透過個案分析與資料整理，本研究獲得如下的結論： 一、 導致企業由『垂直整合策略』走向『分工策略』的因素 (一)、內在因素：垂直整合項目若未掌握關鍵成功因素，尤其是背離了『在可以成為核心能力的價值活動進行整合』，在經歷一定時間後，將會導致文獻中所提及的垂直整合的成本，且不斷地升高。 (二)、外在因素：當『產業規模經濟』的良性循環所彰顯的利益超越企業進行垂直整合的利益時，企業將會將『垂直整合策略』調整至『分工策略』，改以外包取代自製。所以，企業進行外包的動機，從個案公司的研究中得知，除部分項目與文獻所提的不同外，其餘項目諸如專注於核心能力，將資源聚焦，避免或減少資本支出、減少材料的損耗，及降低無效率，以取得較低的成本，改進服務的績效等，均與學者Lomas (1997) 與 Mariotti (1996) 提出的企業進行外包的動機相符。 二、 企業應如何由『垂直整合策略』調整至『分工策略』？ 關於企業由『垂直整合策略』調整至『分工策略』的方法，結合文獻與個案研究的結果，本研究認為應包含三個部分，第一是決定外包的標的，第二是遵循外包的流程，第三是掌握外包的關鍵成功因素。在選擇外包的標的上，企業應將非核心或無效率的值值活動予以外包；而在外包的流程上，有二十一項的程序必須加以遵循。 外包的流程與外包的關鍵成功因素，兩者為一體兩面。 三、 如何進行分工後外包的管理？ 關於如何做好分工後外包廠商的管理，本研究獲致的結論包含兩大部分： (一)、中心思想：企業在進行分工後的管理，必須與供應商構築穩固的關係，經由更好的協調，共同降低價值鏈中的成本，同時持續加以管理。 (二)、具體作法：此包括兩個部分，第一個部分是『建立分工後的管理作業程序』，包括改善作業流程及建立標準作業規範、組織與工作權責調整；第二個部分是『建立中衛體系運作的管理模型』。包括成立外包廠輔導小組主動協助改善外包廠之體質，包括管理、財務、技術、製程、行銷等功能，並透過衛星工廠管理辦法之建立及以衛星工廠聯誼會為溝通平台，使中心廠與外包廠之間保持連繫，發揮互相依賴、庇護、相輔相成的作用。 最後，本研究對個案公司及其他小家電企業提出如下的建議： (一)、對個案公司的建議 1、慎選有競爭力的外包廠。 2、以平等地位對待外包廠，互相合作、共存共榮。 3、快速落實合約，及標準作業規範，縮短磨合期。 4、規劃導入中衛發展中心所建議的，分工後管理外包的作法。 5、朝OVM的模式發展，研發更高附加價值的產品，以更多的專利，建立競爭障礙。 6、在中國市場重塑並發展自有品牌。 (1)、增加研發資源，積極開發符合中國人消費特點的小家電產品。 (2)、以代理、借牌、併購等方式取得國際品牌，進入中國小家電市場。 (二)、對其他小家電企業的建議 1、當產業具有產業規模大、企業數目多的特徵時，企業採取垂直整合所達成的規模經濟可以藉由產業之間的分工來達成，因此，垂直合策略與分工策略的選擇上，採取『分工策略』是較佳的策略選擇。 2、若企業因公司整體策略的需要，必須進行垂直整合時，必須把握垂直整合的關鍵成功因素(如表5-1)。 3、原本採取『垂直整合策略』的企業，若需要調整為『分工策略』時，在作法上，企業必須審視自身在『產業價值鏈』的地位，找出『核心能力』所在，集中資源予以強化；對於非核心的價值活動，則適當予以『外包』，借由『產業規模經濟』提升效率、降低成本。而為了確保『外包』的作法能夠成功，企業必須掌握外包的關鍵成功因素，選擇優秀的供應商，以公平、對等的合約與供應商建立起長期而穩定的『夥伴關係』，代替過去的『競爭關係』；同時對外包後的供應鏈進行持續的管理，如此才能成功的達成策略轉折的目的。 / To ensure sustainable development of a company, the relevant business strategies should be reviewed and adjusted from time to time, taking into account changes in the industry, dynamic status of competition and the availability of resources. Once the industry has entered the maturity stage of its life cycle, “Product Innovation” and “Process Innovation” no longer suffice the needs of a company to maintain its competitiveness in the market. “Strategic Innovation”, therefore, would be the key to maintain the vitality of an enterprise. “Strategic Innovation” implies the restructuring of value chain. To achieve this purpose, many companies adopt the traditional approach, i.e., vertical integration. With the popularity of the “Core Competency” concepts, however, the management focus has been shifted to “Vertical Disintegration”. Business entities have since paid more attention to achieving a concentrated, efficient and easily-mobile organizational structure, endeavoring to build up the company’s competitiveness by enhancing its key advantages. Value activities which do not involve the core competencies, therefore, are outsourced. From the existing literature, we can find that a lot of research has been done on both vertical integration and disintegration strategies. Less literature was found, however, about the key success factors for vertical integration, the internal/external factors necessitating strategic adjustments due to relevant changes in the external environment, methodologies for such strategic adjustments, as well as the management direction after the strategic adjustment, etc. In this research, therefore, we shall probe the following issues, focusing on the small home appliances industry: 1. What are the factors causing the shift of business focus from the “Vertical Integration Strategies” to the “Disintegration Strategies”? 2. Methodologies for companies to make strategic adjustments from the “Vertical Integration Strategies” to the “Disintegration Strategies”. 3. Outsourcing management after the disintegration process. By means of case studies and information integration, we have reached the following conclusion: I. Factors causing the shift of business focus from “Vertical Integration Strategies” to the “Disintegration Strategies”. (I) Internal Factors: Vertical integration may lead to a higher integration cost if the company failed to grasp the key success factors in the integration process, particularly if it failed to conduct the integration “within the scope of value activities which may develop into core competencies of the company”. (II) External Factors: Once the profit generated from the positive cycle of the “industrial economy of scale” has exceeded the profit resulted from the vertical integration, the company will adjust its business direction from the “vertical integration strategy” to the “disintegration strategy”, i.e., outsourcing of business rather than self-manufacturing. II. Methodologies for companies to make strategic adjustments from the “Vertical Integration Strategies” to the “Disintegration Strategies”. Based on results of documentation review and case study, we conclude that the strategic adjustments involve three parts: (1) Determine the business items for outsourcing, (2) Follow the procedures for outsourcing, (3) Grasp the key success factors for outsourcing. III. Outsourcing management after the disintegration process. Based on the results of our study, successful supplier management for outsourced business involves two major aspects: (I) Key Business Philosophy: To achieve successful management after disintegration, the company should build up a solid relationship with its suppliers and, through better coordination and mutual efforts, achieve a cost reduction for the value chain. Continuous efforts should be made in managing the outsourced business. (II) Specific Measures: This also involves two parts: (1) Establishing the “Post-disintegration Management Procedures”, including improved work flow, establishment of standard operational procedures and adjustment of organization and job contents, (2) Building up a management model for the corporate synergy system (CSS). Finally, we have the following recommendations to the target companies of our case study, as well as other small home appliances companies: (I) Recommendation to the target companies of our case study: 1. Carefully select the outsourced suppliers, ensuring their competitiveness in the market. 2. Treat the suppliers fairly. Build up a good partnership to achieve mutual prosperity. 3. Implement the contents of agreements and standard operational procedures speedily and effectively to shorten the period of mutual adaptation. 4. Introduce the methodologies for outsourcing management as recommended by the CSS Development Center. 5. Shift the business direction to the OVM model; make R&D efforts on high-value-adding products; build up barriers to competition by acquiring more patents. 6. Rebuild the brand image and develop self-owned brands in the China market. (1) Increase R&D resources. Aggressively develop small home appliances that can fully meet consumer demand in the China market. (2) Access to the small home appliances market of China through alliance with international brands, by means of distributorship, license-borrowing or acquisition, etc. (II) Recommendations to other small home appliances enterprises 1. For industries featured by large scope and number of companies, an “Economy of Scale” can be achieved by disintegration, rather than the conventional way of vertical integration. Between the options of vertical integration and disintegration, therefore, “disintegration” is a better strategy. 2. In the event that a company needs to adopt the vertical integration strategy to meet its overall strategic requirements, the company should ensure that the key success factors for vertical integration are fully grasped (Table 5-1). 3. For an enterprise contemplating a shift from the “vertical integration” strategy to “disintegration strategy”, it should first review its own position in the industrial value chain and identify its core competencies. The company should then focus its resources on enhancing its core competencies and outsourcing the value activities which do not involve core competencies, wherever deemed appropriate. In other words, the company should endeavor to improve its efficiency and lower costs by achieving an “industrial economy of scale”. To ensure the success of outsourced business, the company should also grasp the key success factors for outsourcing, select high-quality suppliers and build up a long-term and stable “partnership” with the supplier by means of a fair and equally-positioned agreement, instead of the “competitive relationship” in the past. Continuous efforts should be made to manage the value chain after the outsourcing to ensure a successful strategic change.

過去傢俱業的產業價值鏈，大多採取專業分工模式。近年來，傢俱業整體產業經營環境開始產生轉變，導致國內傢俱業的外銷市場受到嚴重威脅，更重要的是，隨傢俱產業逐漸走向高級化、精緻化及多樣化，傳統廉價大量生產模式的傢俱業，已漸漸被取代。因此，台灣傢俱業者已逐漸體認到技術整合與技術升級的重要性。近來許多傢俱業者開始紛紛從專業分工模式，轉為朝向上、下游整合的經營模式，從專注少樣多量轉為多樣少量的生產模式。個案公司在本身資源相對不足的情況下，再加上為了加速回應市場變化的速度，以及提高對消費者的服務價值，即藉由虛擬垂直整合模式，間接減少消費者交易成本，策略性的採取上、下游虛擬整合模式，提供全方位的整合性服務。本研究即探討個案公司如何架構更具彈性的新興商業模式，有效進行產業價值鏈的整合，架構一個整合各方資源的虛擬平台，維持經營彈性，同時探討虛擬垂直整合模式的可行性及成功要素。 / The value chain of furniture mostly appears professional job assignment in the past years. Recently, furniture industry changes in operating environment caused export market to be seriously threatened. Furniture industry had transferred mass production mode into sophistication and diversity. Therefore, Managers with furniture industry have become conscious that technology integration and upgrades are very importance. Besides, many managers transferred specialization mode into up-and downstream integrated business model. In this paper, the case company which is relative shortage of resources adopts up-and downstream integrated business model to provide total solution services in order to response to changes in the market. The paper discusses the issue of how to build up a new business model, integrate value chain and creative a resources pool of virtual platform. Finally, the feasibility and success factors of virtual vertical integration are also discussed.

本研究以經濟部2007年「製造業對外投資實況調查」問卷資料赴中國大陸地區投資採垂直整合及水平整合共計1, 194家廠商為研究對象，利用OLS多元計量模型進行實證分析，並以勞動生產力作為衡量經營績效的指標，首先欲探討「廠商特性」、「投資動機」與「整合模式」對勞動生產力的決定因素，進而分析不同整合模式下的「廠商特性」與「投資動機」對勞動生產力的影響。整體實證結果發現「垂直整合」對台商赴中國大陸投資勞動生產力具有顯著影響，「資本密集度」、「國際化程度」與「政策因素」之垂直整合廠商，亦均對勞動生產力具有顯著影響。就廠商特性而言，「廠商規模」、「研發密集度」、「資本密集度」是影響台商赴中國大陸投資勞動生產力的決定因素；當廠商不考慮「研發密集度」因素時，「資訊電子工業」及「國際化程度」方為影響勞動生產力的重要因素。而投資動機方面，僅「政策因素」是影響勞動生產力的決定因素。

本文透過特定之賽局設計，欲觀察廠商在相互整合之現象與原因。內文中之賽局有以下玩家：上游有一獨佔之中間財供應商，而下游有兩種不同類型共三家之最終財生產廠商，而其中一間下游廠商之技術優於其他兩家，其生產最終財之邊際成本較低。賽局之設計為一動態賽局，上游先決定是否進行垂直整合，下游將會觀察到上游垂直整合之意願，並將水平整合視為對上游釋放之友善信號，接著上游廠商將對水平整合之廠商，進一步進行垂直整合；若下游未因上游之意願而進行水平整合，則上游廠商將隨機選擇一間下游廠商進行垂直整合。 廠商於互動時，我們加入不確定性並加以計算並分析；首先是廠商間整合時存在不確定性，由於下游廠商之技術水準為一不透明資訊，換言之，無論是上游觀察下游，或者下游廠商間，皆不了解對方之技術水準，僅知技術水準佳與較差的下游廠商之比例與數量，因此在廠商整合時將面臨整合綜效與技術衰退之風險性；另外，在模型中，加入一整合失敗之懲罰額，當技術較差之兩間下游廠商相互水平整合時，將面臨整合失敗之風險。 經試算後發現，根據這樣的模型設定，若下游未水平整合，或者水平整合之雙方生產技術相異，將會排擠技術較差之下游廠商進行生產；此外，我們亦發現，若進一步分析均衡結果，我們發現，不同技術類型之下游廠商，水平整合之成功(失敗)率，以及兩間技術較差之下游廠商整合後之懲罰金額，皆將影響下游廠商水平整合之意願，若下游廠商不願意進行水平整合，上游廠商經衡量後，將不對下游釋放垂直整合之意願信號，此時廠商間之結構將維持原狀。 本文欲透過加入不確定性，試圖找出與前人研究之異同處；而透過本文之模型設定，我們發現了與前人相似之結論，亦即存在上下游之廠商結構中，將有可能出現廠商間完全分離(沒有任何水平或垂直整合發生)之現象。 / This thesis tries to find out the interaction between firms, especially when these firms face the decision of merging. We also try to figure out the reason why these firms try to merge than stay separation. Here we design a game with some specific conditions for firms to observe the process they merge and the outcomes. In this dynamic game, we design 2 layers, 3 kinds, total 4 firms to be the players of the game. Upstream firm has to make decision whether to merge the downstream firms. Then downstream firms try to merge horizontally after they receive the signal that they knows that upstream firm’s willingness to vertical merge. Here we have to kinds of downstream firms, the one who has better technology has lower marginal cost, in this thesis we assume the marginal cost to be zero. The game have 3 downstream firms totally, so the other 2 downstream firms have the same technology and have the marginal cost above zero. While the downstream firms merge horizontally, they face the uncertainty of the marginal cost changes and the rise of fixed cost, recognized as the failure of integrations. Then the upstream stick to its promise to vertical merge, it will tend to merge the downstream firm which had horizontal merge previously. The result is far beyond the expectation we had before we run this model. The inferior downstream firms will not join the game, even they won’t produce any when the superior downstream firms is vertically merge by upstream firm, no matter the downstream firms merge each other. More, the probability of success in horizontal merge will affect upstream firm to make the decision of vertical merge. The game has only two equilibriums in the end, one is all firms stay separately, and the other outcome is one inferior downstream firm will rule out from the game, and other firms will be merge to one firm and become the monopoly firm in the entire market.

資源與能力薄弱的新興國小型後進廠商，為何能超越歐美先進廠商搶佔新興市場？在此研究動機之下，本研究透過質性研究之紮根理論，利用次級資料、廠商訪談、通路觀察等方法，收集產業體系、創新平台、經營環境等背景因素，以及產品/廠商定義、競爭優勢、創新特性、廠商樣貌等資料，解析中國手機產業之山寨廠商創新模式，並經由汽車、筆記型電腦等跨產業應用個案之對照，藉以延伸從創新獲利（Profit from Innovation）、顛覆式創新（Disruptive Innovation）、後進廠商（Late Entrant）的理論架構，作為新興國家後進廠商發展創新事業模式的思考架構。 本研究發現：山寨模式能迅速、持續地佔有新興市場，關鍵在於價值活動重組、垂直聯盟、市場試驗。首先，透過「重組價值活動」，在既有產業體系的邊陲地帶建構獨特的價值網絡，以提升市場反應速度、塑造成本優勢、調適不同作業流程。其次，在爭取生存空間的前提下，各自發揮核心能力，合力建構共同創新的「垂直聯盟」，彌補自身資源、能力的不足，並分散技術、市場風險，與機動形塑組織樣貌。再者，透過多樣化、高性價比、快速反應市場的產品，進行「市場試驗」，從動態、模糊的利基市場出發，逐步前進主流市場。 / Why the overall market shares of international companies in the Chinese market dropped from over 90% in 2000 to under 50% due to competitions from local brands and Shanzhai phones? Why Nokia, the company that dominates the Chinese and Indian mobile phone markets has a 60% market share in India, but less than 30% in China? The key to this difference lies in differences in degree of industrial system development, resulting in varied market competition conditions. In recent years, through the “simplicity/reduction/ frugality” Shanzhai model, small local companies have dominated the local market and replaced the local brands under active government promotion. The products have been exported to India, Southeast Asia, and other emerging markets, making MediaTek Inc. one of the world’s top 5 IC design companies as well as the rapid development of the “Shanzhai model” in other sectors. Many firms now attach great importance to the challenges and underlying business opportunities ahead. The Government in Mainland China even changed from initially rejecting the idea into positioning it as the “primary innovation” for underdeveloped countries. So, is “Shanzhai Model” a speculative bubble from the underground economy of the emerging markets or is it a unique and innovative business model or a competitor that deserves firms’ attention? Most people raise questions over its sustainable business development from perspectives of copying, illegality, and hit-and-run. However, for more than four years since its development (specifically since the emergence of Shanzhai phones in the Chinese mobile phone market in 2005), there has been considerable increase in growth and market share (i.e., over 30% market share in 2008). In view of some firms’ successful transformation into the leading local brands (such as Tianyu, Beijing), interdisciplinary development (T.V., notebook computer, automobile, T.V. programs), etc., by analyzing the innovations in development strategies will perhaps help solve the puzzle of their competitiveness. The Shanzhai model is defined as “The flexible use of capabilities and resources in and outside the organization not bound by organizational boundaries through industrial vertical alliance of new firms in emerging countries. In consideration to Price-to-Performance Ratio, in order to reduce costs and enhance the target of customer value perception, accept or reject product features freely, quality (lifespan, safety), intellectual property, brand, taxes, and breakthroughs in consumer income, region, and time. Moreover, through consumer information feedback, products are quickly adjusted to meet consumer needs, surpass advanced American and European firms, gain entry in the “good-enough segment” market, and in turn create revenues. In view of the practical implications, this study is expected to shape two dimensions including the capability of the “Price-to-Performance Ratio” in reducing costs and the speed of market response through interviews with middle stream and downstream mobile phone, automobile, and notebook PC firms in the Greater China Region in order to analyze the strategic alliance underneath Shanzhai firms in Mainland China and the possibility of long-term survival. Theoretically, the literature reviews cover firms with abundant resources and capabilities in process innovation and complementary assets according to Christensen and Rosenbloom. Based on the value network perspective, although first movers with inferior technology defeat the leading firms that chose the existing major clients over the opportunity to invest in the latest technology and the late-entrants succeeded at the expense of the established firms. Therefore, the focus lies in resolving the established firms’ management agendas in response to disrupted innovation while research cases and the late-entrants’ framework of thought are relatively scarce. Therefore, the innovative business model for late-entrants of emerging countries shall serve as basis in exploring the late-entrants with scarce resources and capabilities and how they surpass the first movers in the emerging market. The vertical strategic alliance framework will be elaborated. The key to the first movers’ success is further discussed as basis for the late-entrants’ framework of thought in the innovative business model. The existing literature generally attributes the success of attackers to the failure of first movers. First movers’ failure to cultivate process capabilities (Abernathy & Utterback, 1978, 2004), inability to secure technological appropriability, lack of complementary assets required for commercialization (Teece, 1986, 2006), restrictions of sunk costs (Richard A. D‘Aveni, 1994), or limitations in investment decision making due to considerations of the existing mainstream customers (Christensen & Rosenbloom, 1995) gave the attackers the chance to flourish. Although we know the reasons that contribute to the first movers’ failure, we are unable to find out the secret to the innovative attackers’ success. Just as Jacobides, Knudsen and Augier (2006) mentioned, in order for firms to derive profits, other than taking appropriability of value into consideration, the creation of value is also worth noting. Also, Teece et al. (1997) believe that in terms of privately owned resource creation, discovering new opportunities and efficient and effective organization to seize the opportunities are of fundamental importance rather than engaging in strategies that cause competitors to lose balance or increase costs, or barricading newcomers. In order for attackers to surpass the first movers, it takes more than beating the opponent that has made mistakes in the competition; it is the innovative business model that has created higher values for the customers. Therefore, in order to find answers to the outcomes, we must first review what mistakes the first mover has made and analyze what the attacker has done right. In addition, Teece’s PFI (1986, 2006), Christensen’s disruptive innovation (1995, 1997, 2003, 2004), and the victory of attackers’ in emerging countries and related literature mostly focus on the organizational level rather than analysis on industrial level. Most of them interpret the success of the attackers from the internal organization perspectives. And analysis on attackers’ good use of the industrial system despite their lack of resources and capabilities is not much covered. Although the Shanzhai model has been under development for a very long time, the real concern for all fields originated from China’s mobile phone industry.Shanzhai firms of mobile phones, automobiles, and notebook computers in China have been selected as the study objects. The main purpose of this study is to explore the late-entrants in emerging countries that are seemingly counterfeiting and lack innovation by analyzing the development strategies of Shanzhai firms in mobile phone, automobile, and notebook computer sectors in Mainland China and the reason why they grow year after year. Since analysis on the development of the underground economies of developing countries is involved, in the absence of credible information, the study has established its research validity through three different data. First of all, secondary data, media reports, and related reports of companies and research units were collected to gain a preliminary understanding of the industrial environment, market development status, and strategies and actions of firms. Secondly, in order to overcome factors such as Shanzhai firms’ covert action, concealed information, and differed strategic types, and avoidance of information from single source that result in “taking a part for the whole” and bias, the researcher scheduled interviews in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen China for a period of one week to half a month in Auguest 2006, June 2007, September 2008, November 2008, September 2009, and October 2009 and non-structural interviews by telephone interview. Presidents GMs, R and D vice presidents, business vice presidents, and marketing managers of 55 enterprises and units including 94 component manufacturers, design centers, assembly manufacturers, retailers, think tanks, and private equity firms were interviewed (136 interviews). In terms of analysis, this study focuses on industry in order to enhance the practical application value.In data analysis, we used the grounded theory techniques, and through three steps of analysis focusing on market competition dynamics, relative competitive advantage and innovative model respectively, we gradually uncovered the phenomenon and reasons why Shanzhai firms can build a strong presence in the emerging market. In view of Shanzhai firms’ innovative model of mobile phones, notebook computers and automobiles in China, three keys are summarized including: value activity restructuring, vertical alliance and market testing. (1)Value Activity Restructuring Due to failure to smoothly enter the global production network dominated by U.S. and European first-movers, the Shanzhai firms constructed a unique value network at border areas of industries through value-activity restructuring by using the industries’ existing infrastructure, gathering other industrial minority firms and expanding operation scope to make up for partners’ lack of capability. (2)Vertical Alliance Contrary to the global production networks under the dominance of U.S. and European firms., Shanzhai firms survived by means of their core abilities and collaborated to build a common innovation platform to make up for their own lack of resources and capacity. (3)Market Testing To conduct market testing of their highly diverse, high performance-price products to respond quickly to market changes, Shanzhai firms started in dynamic and ambiguous niche markets which first movers typically ignored to gradually move to the mainstream market. In exploring the process and the influencing factors of the dynamic reorganization of Shanzhai firms’ value activities, this study may compensate for the lack of business model in Teece’s PFI structure on the relatively static description of complementary assets. Moving the focus from technology to business model, this study, besides supporting the Christensen’s value network and disruptive innovation viewpoint, replaces the traditional and rigid market prediction model or reliance on business leaders’ wisdom by exploring the emerging dynamic markets by launching a range of high performance-price products to test the market and respond to market changes. Meanwhile, the study of the innovative business model of attackers in emerging countries adds another perspective to first movers’ failure stressed by Teece and Christensen. According to research by Bhattacharya & Michael (2008), Zeng & Williamson (2008), and Kim (1997) that focused on scientific and technological imitation, innovation strategies, and innovative types of less advanced countries’ late-entrants, this study suggests that manufacturers with weak resources and capabilities utilize the existing industrial system and build an innovation platform of the unique value proposition to create competitiveness through integration. It is found in this study that due to diverse industry features, the same innovation model may face different challenges in cross-industry applications. As most existing research work focuses discussions on the firm- or national level, this study suggests researchers ponder on the industry level related research.

C公司係台灣少數有能力以統包商角色進軍國際工程市場之工程公司，然在國際化經營發展過程中，C公司對本身在這個產業的定位是什麼？C公司的核心價值在哪裡？C公司的競爭策略有何優勢？C公司如何改變體質以迎接新世紀的挑戰？C公司如何為股東創造最大的價值？本研究以企業評價(Valuation)及價值創造(Value Creation)為主軸，檢驗C公司本身體質並探討未來經營策略可行之方案。 本研究針對C公司過去五年的財務資訊分析各項影響企業價值之因子，先評析C公司各項價值因子之優劣勢，判斷C公司目前之價值定位，再採用現金流量折現法評估股價並做敏感度分析，認為影響C公司企業價值之關鍵因子，其重要性依序為營業利潤率、營收成長率、競爭優勢期間、加權平均資金成本、營運資金投資、固定資產投資及現金稅率；根據這些關鍵價值因子，本研究建議C公司未來之營運策略、投資策略及融資策略之擬定應以價值創造為原則，可採行之方向歸納如下： 一、為了創造價值，個案公司之經營策略應朝產品定位與差異化方向發展。 二、短期以改善營業利潤率為首要目標，加強成本控管，改善盈餘品質。 三、把握國際工程景氣循環高點所帶來之商機，適度提升營收成長率。 四、為維繫競爭優勢期間，長期應從成本領導策略轉化為差異化策略，以此衍生創造差異化之購併策略及多角化策略。 五、購併策略以垂直整合優先於水平整合。 六、為降低加權平均資金成本，融資策略在不違反對銀行之財務承諾前提下，適度提高財務槓桿，維持最適資本結構。 七、加強在建工程與固定資產管理、儘量減少固定資產投資、處分非核心事業，並以不失去控制權原則引進外來資本擴張前景看好之關係企業。 八、財務構面的績效衡量指標應以現金流量為主要評量基礎，指標之設計以成長性為重點。

半導體產業自 1950/1960 年代創始以來, 即以高度垂直整合的型式存在. 電路設計, 製程技術開發, 晶圓製造, CP測試, 封裝, 以及 FT測試 都是在同一公司完成. 至今日為止, 雖然仍然有不少的高度垂直整合的半導體公司存在, 許多的半導體公司已開始轉向為較低度垂直整合的型式存在. 在現代的產業術語中, 這些不同的產業單位被稱為整合元件廠 (IDM), 輕晶圓廠公司 (Fab-lite), 無晶圓廠公司(fab-less), 晶圓代工(wafer foundry), 外包封裝測試公司 (OSAT), 等等. 半導體產業自高度整合的IDM模式走向設計與製造分離的商業模式是一個許多人有興趣探討的課題. 其中一項很明顯的因素就是半導體製程開發及產能建置所需的龐大資金所造就出的專業晶圓代工模式. 但是,當專業晶圓代工模式帶入大量的經濟效益的同時, 眾多的公司在半導體產業中跨公司的交易成本亦大量增加. 在本論文中, 作者試圖以個案分析的方法, 探討半導體產業中一家專業晶圓代工公司 (A 公司) 如何使用協同電子商務來降低與客戶之間的交易成本. Coase and Williamson為主所發展出的交易成本經濟學 (Transaction Cost Economics, TCE)為本論文提供了一個良好的理論架構. 這些專精不同的半導體公司(Firms)在半導體產業中(Market)交易(Transact). 當面對不同程度的交易障礙時, 都會努力使這些障礙降低. 本論文之目標是以 Coase/William的TCE為架構, 定性分析出晶圓代工產業的協同電子商務在降低交易成本的效益. 在針對Ａ公司的個案研究中，研究結果指出, 協同電子商務在降低監督成本上是相當顯著的. 其次為搜尋成本及訂約成本的降低. 效益較不顯著的則為違約成本的降低. / The Semiconductor Industry started out in the 1950/1960 time frame, in the form of highly vertical integration. Circuit design, process technology development, wafer manufacturing, circuit probe operations, assembly manufacturing and final testing operations were all performed within a company. Although vertically integrated semiconductor companies still have strong presence in today’s industry, many others have turned much less vertically integrated. In semiconductor industry’s jargons, these various entities are: IDMs (Integrated Device Manufacturers), Fab-lite, Fabless, wafer foundries, OSATs (Out Sourced Assembly and Test), etc… This phenomenon of the semiconductor industry going from being highly integrated towards being highly disintegrated is of interest to many. One of the obvious driving forces is the emergence of the wafer foundry segment in the industry due to the heavy investment in the process technology development and the manufacturing capacity build-up. Given the need for the tight collaboration among various semiconductor industry functions, this disintegration undoubtedly imposed much inter-company collaboration barrier along the value chain. In this paper, the study focuses on how a company (“Company A”) in the wafer foundry segment uses collaborative commerce to provide an integration platform for its trading partners to reduce the barrier of conducting business with each other. Transaction Cost Economy (TCE), a term coined by Coase and Williamson, provided an excellent research framework for this case. The barrier existing in these interdependent semiconductor companies along the value change can be viewed as “firms” in the “market”, while facing the significant barrier (transaction costs), looking for ways to maximize the profits for individual firms, and hopefully for the whole value chain as well. In short, this paper analyzes the qualitative effect of the collaborative commerce in a semiconductor foundry company in reducing the inter-company transaction cost within the Coase and Williamson TCE framework. Based on the case study of company A, the results indicate that Collaborative Commerce has significant impact on monitoring cost reduction. It also helps reduce the cost of searching and contracting. On the enforcement cost reduction, Collaborative Commerce plays a relatively weaker role. Key Words: Transaction Cost, Collaborative Commerce, Semiconductor, Foundry, Integration, Dis-integration

本研究以台灣、大陸及日本的觸控產業為主要的研究對象，依據邱志聖(2010)提出的4C策略行銷作為理論的架構，並依據AHP分析模式，將4C設定為目標構面，並同時展開評估準則，依據不同的對象－整體觸控產業、專業型觸控廠商、垂直整合型廠商及水平多角化廠商作出4C整體及個別交叉比較矩陣的分析，以分析出目標構面及評估準則的相對權重，以作為有效行銷策略的制定。　 其中整體觸控產業及專業型觸控廠商在4C行銷構面的權重及一致性較高，行銷策略運用的順位（由大到小）分別為：道德危機成本(C3)、專屬陷入成本(C4)、單位效益成本(C1)以及資訊搜尋成本(C2)。 就個別廠商類型之行銷評估準則的權重分析來看，仁慈同理心、降低總生產成本及產品專屬資產都是相對權重比較高的項目。尤其是整體觸控產業、專業型觸控廠商和垂直整合型廠商都是將仁慈同理心列為最重要的行銷評估準則；而水平多角化廠商則是比較特殊的，將產品定位列為最重要的行銷評估準則。 另外，專業型觸控廠商相當重視信守合約的承諾及提升買方效益。重視信守合約的承諾主要是因為客戶對產品的規格要求很高，若是能承諾完全達到客戶的要求，或是超過客戶的期望，這對未來長期合作均有明顯的幫助。而提升買方效益則主要是以產品定位在高品質及技術領先的領導觸控廠商為主，這與降低總生產成本為主要行銷評估準則的成本導向的觸控廠商是完全不同的行銷策略。 垂直整合型廠商則是特別加強與客戶之間要建立有效人員專屬資產。因為此類型廠商主要是延伸既有LCD合作關係上，再逐次增加觸控面板的合作商機，因此建立在既有的高層主管之間的人員專屬資產是最有效的行銷策略。 而水平多角化廠商則是採取比較特殊的行銷評估準則，將產品定位列為最重要的行銷評估準則。強調可以整合現有客戶端的觸控既有的產品規格與水平多角化觸控廠商的產品作一定程度的結合，以建立廣義的產品專屬資產。 / This research to Taiwan, China and Japan of touch panel industry for research of object, according to Professsor Jyh-Shen Chiou (2010) proposed of 4C strategic marketing as theory of schema, and according to AHP analysis model, will analylze the object and criteria for marketing target, and while started assessment to different of touch panel industry including professional touch panel manufacturers, vertical integration manufacturer and horizontal diversification manufacturers to made 4C overall and the individual cross compared matrix of analysis together with the assessment guidelines of relative weight,　 To serve as an effective marketing strategy formulation, overall touch panel industry and professional touch manufacturers in the higher weight and consistency of 4C marketing perspective, marketing strategies using the sequence (from large to small) are as follows: cost of moral hazard(C3), cost of specific asset(C4), unit cost/utility(C1), and cost of information search(C2). The weight of individual manufacturers guidelines for assessing types of marketing analysis, benevolence , reduce the total cost, and product specific asset are the highest weight of assessment criteria. Especially the whole touch panel industry recognizes benevolence as the most important assessment criteria level. Horizontal diversification manufacturers are quite special to keep product positioning as the most important marketing assessment criteria. In addition, the professional touch manufacturers attach considerable importance to honor its contractual commitments (can do) and increasing utility of the buyer. Attention to honor its contractual commitments is mainly because of the high customer specifications, to undertake to fully meet the customer's requirements or exceed our customers ' expectations, which had obvious help for future long-term cooperation. Vertical-integration manufacturers are particularly strengthened with customers to establish an effective personnel specific asset because this type of firms mainly extends on both LCD partnership, again increasing cooperation between the touch panel, a major marketing strategy can build on existing senior management staff between exclusive is the most effective. Horizontal diversification manufacturers are taking product positioning as the most important marketing assessment criteria to establish a broad product-specific assets.