After the law makers in Taiwan passed the bills of “Act of Financial Holding Company” in 2000, the banking industry has been facing tremendous challenges, threats and opportunities caused by internal and external micro economical changes. By applying Michael Porter’s “Five Forces Analysis”, every participant including commercial banks, investment banks, and securities, insurance companies and financial institutions, and stakeholders including regulators, foreign financial institutions, scholars as well as system service providers, has realized that this industry has been changed; the state of the situation will only evolve faster and reinforced tighter in the future. The internal market changes are influenced by the rapid mergers and acquisitions. 14 Financial Holding Companies (FHC) have established since early 2001 in Taiwan. The evidence of saturation can be seen from the number of existing FHCs, when it is compared with the market size in both Japan and the United States and their number of FHCs, the density is too high to create the scale of economy. FHC does understand that the essential target is to compete in global financial business. If every FHC’s mission and definition to the “globe competence” is to be the leading financial services company in world only for Chinese society, unfortunately, China, the most risky but last potential emerging market, denied it due to political issues, it is not possible to build a globe competence capabilities like Taiwan’s IT manufacturing does. The base market is too small to sustain these 14 competitors, there is no significant segmentation in market, product and services difference, consequently, only competes in price. The external threats are from top Fortune 100 companies, which include numerous of the largest financial companies in the world; such as Citigroup, HSBC, ABN AMRO Bank, Credit Suisse First Bank (CSFB). These influential banks can take WTO and financial market deregulations into their advantages in order to penetrate into any countries they are interested including Taiwan. If under no regulatory issues and obstacles, these companies may buy out targeted local banks easily. Subsequently, they can deploy their new products more quickly through the acquired local channels. They can deploy their existing advanced systems in the bases of the bank’s Assets Book which is in compliance with Basel II. To adequately utilize a minimal amount of capital and allocate properly the risk-weighted economical capital, the banking book addresses new applications in core banking system and the trading book requires sophistic STP systems. This will have a tremendous impact over local bankers, who are eager to start on business reforming and reengineering, and can work in alliance with world-class consulting and technology management firms, such as Accenture and McKinsey. However, there is a trend that consulting firms usually deliver almost identical solutions to all of their clients, because in order to provide clients with a quick solution, firms tend to use the existing business models as the solution. Therefore, reengineering organization structure is based on Citibank or other large financial institutions, and their new plans for investment in technology and assets are also being copied by these banks. As for building a new core competence in the future, FHCs have made similar strategies. However, one has to ask that does this new core competence have differentiated their services? The answer is no. In the lower margin of the competitive market, banks and FHCs are struggling to develop a new fee-based business which has to be in alignment of goals, and give incentives with adequate business workflow. However, there will be no fruitful yields to the bank, if the top executives’ decision is to acquire a system which has been used in the world-class banks or recruiting an executive officer who may have the expertise and experience working with foreign banks. The purpose of this paper is trying to analyze an existing solution provider, which will be called “A” company. “A” company has been faced with rapid changes and uncertainties brought by FHCs. A new set of strategies, business objectives and business models have to be developed simultaneously. It is very hard since “A” company’s current core competence has become its core rigidity. “A” company realizes that it needs to prove that it is capable of delivering their tomorrow needs sooner in today. How to develop a new core competence within an existing organization? Although this new core competence aligns with the new organization, new technology, new business flow and new customers, “A” company proceeds to take on the Bills Online Clearing and Settlement Systems (BOSS) to build its next generation business model. According to pervious references and documents, if any initiatives were to project as innovations in the company, it could not be successful unless separating this project from the core business. It seems the uncertain result to be merely expected its return. There are lots of problems in front of the project, a loosely couple project-based matrix organization, unfamiliar technology and an often change specifications and so on, that are all new to “A” company.. “A” company’s challenge is that they knew it is not an incremental, but a radical, business innovation; nevertheless they had no other alternatives. This story describes the mission and vision they have, and how the BOSS project may affect the implementation of their strategies in each phase. Also, to show how the implementation which includes monitoring and check points align with their strategic objectives through the BOSS project. The final section is to apply the Economy Value-added (EVA) to survey this proceeded project and to see what tangible and intangible values this project brought to the company.

在政府將金融創新列為工作項目之一，台灣在金融創新的議題上也投入相當的研究，但多半是從產品的創新著手，鮮少從經營模式創新來分析金融創新，因此本論文將透過經營模式的創新來探討兩家日本銀行金融機構－瑞穗金融集團及新生銀行－如何在環境的變化中，重新尋求自己在產業中的地位，探討銀行業如何進行經營模式的創新，在競爭激烈的市場中為消費者創造價值，而進一步提升企業的獲利狀況，從日本銀行的經驗中獲得對台灣銀行業的啟示。 透過策略再思考:重新定義自身產業，重新思考企業的定位與方向，在創新的理論中找出創新的來源，透過經營模式的元素－核心策略、策略性資源、顧客界面、價值網絡－將之落實在改革的過程中，透過經營模式的創新變革，讓金融業可以了解如何在市場上與競爭者進行不同的競爭。 在分析完個案後，本論文也提出幾點結論：1. 追求規模的擴大不如追求如何去經營模式的創新：開創各種新的獲利模式，對獲利來源也要進行風險管理；2. 獲利結構的從傳統利差走向複雜管理收入：銀行如何適應新的競爭環境；3. 從分散到聚焦，從通才到專業化：專注於重點區域，妥善配置企業資源。銀行業未來的走向會越來越趨向專業化的方向，銀行組織設計會朝向以產品線或顧客為主的設計，而不是傳統的功能式設計；4. 從規模擴大走向深度成長：企業績效評估系統的改變，讓銀行經營的更有效率；5. 從外部綜效走向內部綜效的產生：綜效可以透過內部系統良好運作而產生，不一定要靠併購。 關鍵字：經營模式、策略性思考、經營模式創新 / Financial innovation has been one of government’s priorities, and the academia also puts much research into the topic, but most are from the product innovation perspective instead of business model innovation. In the research, we have analyzed two of Japanese financial companies- The Mizuho Financial Group and Shinsei Bank – and discuss how they redefine their positions in the industry in the changing environment, how they create value for consumers by business model innovations and further improve the profits states of enterprises. Finally, we want to get enlightenment from their experiences for Taiwan financial industry. Through strategic thinking: Redefining your industry, rethinking your positioning and directions of enterprises, finding out the sources of the innovation from theories; through the elements of business model – core strategies, strategic resources, customer interface, information technology- it could be implemented in the reforming process; through the business model innovation, financial enterprises are capable to understand how to compete in the market base on differentiation. After analyzing the cases, the thesis proposes some conclusions: 1. In order to create more new profits-making sources, pursuing new business model is more important than pursuing a larger scale simply. Also, risk management is needed in the topic of profit-making sources. 2. The profit-making structure of banking changes from traditional rate margin to complicated management expertise: how the banking adapts to the new competitive environment; 3.From dispersal to focus and from general to specialization: Future of banking will tend to focus on the key area, and allocate the enterprise resources properly. And the financial industry will be more specialized; the design of organization structure of banks will mainly rely on product lines or the customer, instead of traditional function. 4. from expanding the scale to deep growth: The change of assessing the enterprise's performance will bring banks better operational efficiencies.5. From external synergies to internal synergies: synergies can be generated through the internal well-operated system, not only depend on merging; Key words: Business Model、Strategic thinking、Business Model Innovations

臺灣兒童樂園型態的演進，受氣候、地域、服務等因素影響，從戶外逐漸轉型為室內，並不斷納入各種新元素，形成多元化類型。兒童教育方面，品格教育長期推動，教育部自2004年起推動「品格教育促進方案」、2000年起推動「臺灣有品運動」。另一方面，室內兒童樂園鼓勵孩童利用遊具，能夠盡情的活動，促進肢體與生理均衡發展。騎士堡國際事業股份有限公司進一步將遊具結合學習體適能、品格教育等內容，特別是品格教育為其重要特色之一。此企業經營模式的創新，藉由導入多元教育體驗服務模式，為臺灣室內兒童樂園帶入新的發展方向。 　　本研究的主要目的有三：第一為瞭解國內兒童品格教育推動的現況、問題、困難及突破的方法；第二藉由文獻蒐集及深度訪談，分析室內兒童樂園推動品格教育體驗活動的效益；第三探討室內兒童樂園導入品格教育結合商業平臺經營模式創新策略。 　　本研究為探索性個案研究（case study method），選擇體驗式服務極具代表性的騎士堡公司為個案研究對象，除了擁有兒童品格教育結合商業平臺的豐富經驗外，更創造出經營模式創新的實績。在經營模式及營運成效構面部份，選擇哈佛大學學者Applegate（2001）提出的經營模式，以概念、能力與價值三要素組成，探討室內兒童樂園導入品格教育對經營模式創新的影響。 　　研究結果發現，室內兒童樂園導入品格教育經營模式創新的策略有： 一、結合遊戲中學習「玩中學」經營策略，啟發孩童身心發展，創造安全遊戲、快樂學習的環境。 二、結合品格教育體驗活動策略，對孩童具有提升真實的體驗效果，從中得到快樂滿足，達到品格教育的目的，並吸引更多孩童參與體驗的機會。 三、結合童話主題遊具研發策略，以童話主題創新研發獨一無二的創意遊具，打造充滿創意、想像情境的兒童育樂環境，提升孩童學習動力。 四、結合體驗行銷提升品牌形象策略，將企業社會責任及創新的兒童生活教育體驗服務的理念傳遞給社會大眾，在行銷與商業交易過程中，與孩童、家長、通路產生新的互動與溝通模式。 五、結合產學合作與研究計畫策略，增進產業既有服務內容、元素、規格及組合，建立了新的服務運作方式、經營制度、作業程序與營運系統，改變現有的經營模式，形成了創新的經營技術。 六、結合異業結盟創造商機策略，創造企業和合作品牌的雙贏策略，不但發揮回饋社會的企業社會責任外，更建立騎士堡的品牌公益形象，提高品牌延展性，創造雙贏效益。 七、結合兒童生活教育體驗服務創新策略，能夠產生獨特的競爭優勢，成為一個全方位兒童品格教育體驗平臺；達到孩童、家長、通路、騎士堡四方共贏的經營模式創新效益。 關鍵字：室內兒童樂園、品格教育、經營模式創新、騎士堡

近年來在金融整合的趨勢下，國內外金融業透過購併整合成為大型的金控集團，使得金融產業結構大為改變。在整合的架構下發展出新的金融商品及市場。由於金控公司將銀行與證券商、保險業結盟合併，金控子公司可以進行交叉銷售(cross selling)，使金融商品多元化，提供給客戶包含保險、股票、信用卡、基金、債券等金融商品，這些多元化的金融商品與服務，金控公司亦可藉著交叉銷售擴大市場占有率及降低經營成本，進而強化整體獲利。 本研究以國泰金控和富邦金控的壽險子公司轉型為研究案例，進行個案分析探討，以了解個案公司組織轉型的原因、組織調整方式及轉型後的成效。本研究利用近十年的統計資料進行分析，研究產業的變化及觀察個案公司的市佔率及業務狀況。研究結果發現:1.壽險公司轉型成為提供多元服務的金融控股公司2.壽險業業務人員轉型成為全方位理財服務人員3.金融業相互整合，行銷通路多元化4.科技及產業變化創造出新通路新市場5.企業成長往多角化發展並兼顧核心競爭能力