在全球化市場、國際化競爭的環境中，企業需加強對競爭對手的了解、對競爭市場變動的認知，並致力於開發有特色創意的商品、開發多元化的行銷通路、及提供多元化的創新服務，此一趨勢，突顯競爭智慧(Competitive Intelligence, CI)的重要性。競爭智慧是一種過程，蒐集分析競爭環境的變化、競爭對手相關資訊，包括企業的競爭對手是誰、他們在產業的地位如何、競爭對手的策略等資訊，所產生的產品為智慧與謀略，提供給企業高層進行決策因應，以取得競爭優勢，而競爭智慧也是企業預警的必要條件，企業可以在更彈性更快的回應市場的變化。 本研究以市場定位為追隨者之個案公司進行案例分析，探討在人身保險產業環境劇烈變動及個案公司經營不善情況下，個案公司應採取何種策略來改善現況，從五力分析推論出個案公司應改善其商品設計及服務之提供，故本研究選擇商品設計為研究方向，根據商品屬性及影響消費者購買因素之分析，設計資料模型儲存商品資訊。 研究結果發現，商品競爭智慧之建立能幫助個案公司相關人員提高作業效率，亦可藉由此模型所提供的服務，提升顧客滿意度，間接提高企業品牌能見度，建立品牌優勢。此資料模型可降低產業內競爭、人力資源及購買者議價能力對企業之威脅，提高企業在產業中的競爭力。因此市場追隨者更應建置競爭智慧流程，以提升本身的競爭優勢。

2007年6月，華碩電腦發表Eee PC精簡式筆記型電腦，此創新產品俟後由臺灣資訊工業策進會市場情報中心（MIC）統稱為精簡型小筆電，簡稱小筆電，英文名稱則採用美商英代爾對於這款產品的統稱：Netbook。 Eee PC所設定的目標市場著眼於消費性市場，將產品定位於已開發國家使用者的第二臺電腦以及開發中國家使用者的第一臺電腦。產品上市後掀起銷售高潮，由於小筆電的加入，筆記型電腦在2008年第三季出貨量首度超越桌上型電腦，比先前2007年預估提早兩年，Eee PC因而被譽為臺灣電腦廠商價值創新的一大步。 本研究主要的探討問題有四：核心技術能耐發展策略對於產品創新的影響為何？ 品牌與ODM廠商在創新產品開發上的合作與分工為何？ 品牌廠商因應競爭者之破壞性創新的作法為何？ 核心技術能耐為基礎的產品創新在市場上所需具備的成功條件為何？ 在研究設計上以策略與組織、技術、市場三構面做為主要分析架構。策略與組織構面由領導者企圖心、核心競爭優勢、企業文化、組織架構、企業網絡定位等變項構成；技術構面上由產品研發經驗、內部知識傳遞、外部資源網絡、產品開發管理等變項構成；市場構面由品牌效益、顧客需求、產品行銷、產業合作網絡等變項組成用以探討對於破壞性創新產品構思及開發階段的影響。研究方法上採用「個案研究法」，以領導廠商華碩與宏碁為研究對象。在資料上透過企業訪談與次級資料蒐集的方式來了解個案公司在創新產品的發展過程，並結合核心競爭力、產業價值鏈、破壞性創新、新產品開發程序、吸收能耐與知識傳遞、技術面競爭策略等學理加以分析，本研究所獲得的研究發現如下： 一．建立核心競爭能耐的方向及重點決定了企業在產業價值鏈的位置與所從事的價值活動。 二．企業基於核心技術能耐發展策略而對產品創新方向做出技術領導者與技術追隨者的不同策略選擇。技術領導者著重產品的破壞性創新設計，技術追隨者著重於產品成熟技術的市場性。 三．品牌廠商與ODM的研發製造合作關係上，考量中心點在於顧客對企業的認知價值。品牌廠商並以平均分配（Allocation）與相互制衡（Leverage）為策略，取得各家資源之長為己用。 四．設計代工廠從OEM經營模式進入ODM經營模式，在逐步接手研發價值活動後，ODM設計製造廠開始投入自主研發，成為個人電腦產品技術提供者。但在缺乏通路品牌下，所創造的產品創新價值只能透過品牌廠技術採用將創新價值傳達至消費者。 五．企業發展破壞性創新產品時，原價值網絡上具產業主導地位的供應商透過關鍵技術的掌握，並經由品牌行銷掌握終端使用者，形成不易突破的慣性，對於廠商產品創新產生鉗制作用。 六．企業發展破壞性創新產品若無法取得市場客戶對產品的價值認同，則雖有技術成就，但難以成為產品的競爭優勢。 七．企業在發展破壞性創新產品過程中，若缺乏行銷業務部門參與，將可能造成產品上市後的市場資訊掌握失準。 八．破壞性創新產品所設定於原價值網絡的目標市場，往往因為高科技產業的不確定性因素，在實際執行時意外產生新應用，產品因而進入新價值網絡的新市場。 九．破壞性創新產品進入新市場時不確定因素多，廠商因需求不易掌握而經常發生嘗試錯誤的探索行為，但市場晚入者觀察先驅者經驗，往往能立即掌握正確資訊而迅速反應市場需求。 十．企業發展破壞性創新產品，若未造成有效技術差距，技術領導者與市場先驅者將不易維持首動者優勢。技術追隨者與市場晚入者藉由學習領導者經驗將有機會快速超越。 本研究最後並提出一些實務上建議，以做為產業界發展核心技術能耐策略與發展破壞性創新產品的參考。 / In June, 2007, Asus Computer announced her Eee PC in Computex Taipei, Taiwan International Computer Exhibition. The simplified notebook then named “Netbook” due to its lightweight design and focused internet application. Eee PC was aimed on consumer market of developed countries, targeted as “Secondary Computer” for existing computer users, as well as first computer to the user of the developing world, the name “Eee” derives from "the three Es", an abbreviation of its advertising slogan for the device: "Easy to learn, Easy to work, Easy to play". By third quarter of 2008, notebook shipped quantity including netbook, had exceeded desktop computer, two years advance from prior market research report’s estimation made before netbook product rollout in 2007. Eee PC was praised as stride-out of value innovation of Taiwan computer industry. Problem discoveries and definitions in this research are: first of all, what is the influence of core technology development strategy toward product innovation? Second, how brand owner works with ODM suppliers on innovative product development? Third, how brand owner reacts to disruptive innovation? Last, what are market successful factors of an innovative product which based on core technology competence? Analysis framework of this research consists of three aspects: strategy and organization, technology, marketing. As an exploratory study, research design is qualitative research and case study over certain firms: Asus and Acer, with 90% market shares of netbook in year 2008. For data gathering, primary data came from interviews to firms’ management team members, specifically R&D and PM Directors, secondary data studies came from varies sources: research reports, annual reports, and so on. To explore the influence of core technology competence toward product innovation in idea generation and product development stage, study of related theories in advance is necessary: core competence, value chain, disruptive innovation, new product development procedure, absorptive capability, knowledge transmission, and competitive strategy of technology. Discoveries of this research are: 1.Direction and focus of establishing core competence decides the firm’s position in value chain and the value activities firm engaged. 2.Core technology competence development strategy directs firm’s choice of technology leader or follower, leader focuses on innovative product design, follower focuses on mature technology’s market taking. 3.Customers perceive value is the key consideration that brand owners work with ODM suppliers. “Allocation and Leverage” are strategy that brand owners manage multiple ODM suppliers. 4.From OEM to ODM business model, ODM firms start to develop own independent research projects, this trend leads ODM to be technology supplier in foreseeable future. But, research results can only go through brand owners to consumer market. 5.Key technology suppliers of existing value network will obstruct disruptive innovation products through market’s inertia. 6.Technology based innovative products can’t have competitive advantage in the market without customer’s perceive value. 7.Sales marketing team’s participation is important for disruptive innovation during product development stage. 8.Unexpected new value network will emerge due to uncertainty of high-tech industry, new application out of target market leads to new value network which is different from existing one. 9.Pioneer frequently tries and error for disruptive innovation product due to uncertainty of market, late entrant learned from pioneer’s experience, and react to market demand efficiently. 10.Innovative product without technology gap, firm can’t maintain first mover advantage too long, technology follower have chance to transcend in short period. Conclusions of this research are summarized from above discoveries, and suggestions to industry firms made by this research can be reference to firms’ development strategy of core technology competence as well as product development of disruptive innovation.