在產品研究開發階段, 決策者常面臨的分類問題是在給定一標準( 控制 )設計(Stand -ard Design)及K 個可行設計(Competitive Designs) 下, 如何將此K 個設計分類成 三個部分, 分別為:(1)比控制母體好(better than the standard);(2)與控制母體無 差異(indifference to the standard);(3)比控制母體差(Worse than the standard )。 當產品分析為韋伯分配(Weibull distribution),Patel and Kingston(1982) 在型Ⅱ 截略計劃(Type Ⅱcensoring plan) 下提出一直觀的分類法則(Classification Rule ),此法則之優點是很簡捷, 但所需之樣本數及截略數需要經由模擬求得。Tseng and Wu(1989)提出挑選較佳設計之局部最適的法則(Local Optimal Selection Rule)。本 論文擬修改此挑選法則, 來探討上述分類問題。 本文首先, 提出一演算法(Algorithm) 來計算型Ⅱ抽樣計劃所需之樣本數及截略數。 其次, 以模擬試驗來驗證此法則之穩定性。最后和Patel and Kingston方法作一比較 。

內容摘要： 人是組織中最重要之資源，人力運用是組織中之重要工作，而人力資源之運用得當與 否，則有賴於人事政策。目前有關研究發展工作之人事政策方面之研究非常少，本論 文即在以個案研究方式，針對復華研究開發公司之人事政策做一研究。 首章乃針對有關之研究方法作一闡述。次章就有關需求，工作與個人的關係做一理論 性探討。 第三至第五章則分別就人事管理功能中，有關招募、遴選、工作分派、績效評估、薪 水、升遷、人員訓練與發展及溝通等政策性方面，就目前狀況做一分析，並提出其缺 點。最後一章乃就以上各章之研究做一結論及建議。

研發計畫的評估是一個複雜且重要的問題，特別是在新興的生技醫藥產業，生技醫藥產業雖然爆發力強，卻具有研發時程長、風險大的特性，再加上投資金額龐大，回收期長，如何在有限的資源及高度的不確定性下，進行正確的投資評估變成了關乎未來公司存亡的關鍵。 一般而言，質化的評估方式，容易受決策者主觀意見所影響，造成決策品質的不確定性。而量化的評估方式，並不易讓企業管理者瞭解與使用，加上模式的限制可能只適用於某些特定情形，造成決策的真實情境無法完全由數學模式中表達出來，而降低了決策的參考性。 以藥物開發為例，針對生醫產業的特性，從評估參與人員、質化評估、量化評估、評估要求、評估標準、評估程序等不同的構面去探討與分析可能合適的研發評估模式。本論文進一步以個案訪談的方式，收集實際運作的經驗與意見，瞭解目前業界目前實務上使用的評估方式，並與先前的生醫產業評估模式對照比較，瞭解理論與實務上的落差，探討其關鍵要素，以整體的效益評估觀點，對公司決策者或研發主管提出建議。 / The evaluation for R&D project is usually regarded as an important and complicated issue for enterprises, especially in the biomedical industry. Such a concern may be highly applied to the biomedical industry, which is involved with lengthy R&D process, high level of risk, and large cost. This project, therefore, will attempt to study the appropriate approaches to determine whether a proposed R&D project is worthwhile to be launched for a biomedical enterprise with limited resources. In general, qualitative research may be involved with the evaluator’s personal experience, negatively influencing the evaluation results. On the other hand, not each of the selected models employed by quantitative research is fully compatible to evaluation process. This study suggests that either qualitative or quantitative research may not be the most appropriate tool to conduct R&D project evaluation. This study aims to use drug development as a study target and further to discuss the most appropriate evaluation approach from the five aspects, including reviewer’s professional, evaluation items of qualitative research, evaluation items of quantitative research, requirement for evaluation process, and criteria for project approval. This study also assumes that a final review process is required to be proceeded in addition to taking the above five aspects into account. This study begins with related references and collecting the opinions provided by the professionals working in the biomedical industry about real cases. Through the case study method, the study may better understand the difference between the theoretical models and real practices and further to identify the key successful factors for the evaluation model. Finally the study suggests a comprehensive evaluation model to decision makers or research managers.