新的商業模式、滿足市場需求的產品或者是特別的技術等都可以是新興事業體的雛形，生醫技術的概念亦是如此，又生醫產業特性與一般產業迥異，因此該事業體的育成重點將不同於一般情況。本研究以生醫取向的學術型育成中心為研究對象，以個案研究方式從育成與業者兩端來探究此類育成中心應具備的成功條件為何，進而從中了解學術型生醫育成中心該強化哪些能力以及需要具備哪些條件再給予其發展之建議。 本研究發現台灣學術型生醫育成中心對業者而言屬於前育成的概念，即業者進駐育成中心的目的並非為取得商業經營知識，而是為取得技術及自主研發能力。本研究以一般育成中心的五項經營關鍵分類並個別為其設定適合學術型生醫育成中心發展的方向，分別如下： 一、育成中心目標及營運策略的制定及貫徹：育成中心需建置明確具體的營運計畫，包含目標、人才招募、招商方法、育成制度、資金籌措等。二、育成執行團隊：學術型生醫育成中心對業者之作用為取得技術能力的跳板以及與校方溝通的管道，因此建議育成執行團隊將扮演橋樑之角色與網絡整合者之角色盡善盡美即可。三、網絡關係與資源整合：基於前一要點以及受限於校方的工商管理資源，學術型生醫育成中心應拓展其外部網絡資源以提供業者全方位的創業網絡支援，藉此創造育成中心對業者之價值。四、硬體、行政支援：提供育成中心或校方所能提供的研究設備與實驗技術列表以及各項技術移轉、產學合作計畫案之情報資訊，此舉不僅方便業者查詢使用亦有利於育成中心對外招商活動的進行。五、育成中心品牌經營：育成中心可操作來自母組織之名聲並藉由大量曝光之機會建立育成中心的知名度與品牌形象。 / New business model, demand meted product and special know-how can be a prototype entity, the concept also works in the biomedical technologies. However, characteristics of biomedical industry are distinguishing from other industries that make the incubation for biomedical enterprise different. This study is focus on academic biomedical innovation incubator in Taiwan, and tries to find out some key successful factors for their operation. The study found that the enterprise thought the academic biomedical incubator is a pre-incubate stage for them, that means they choose it for obtaining technologies and self R&D capabilities not for the business knowledge from the incubator. In conclusion, this study uses five operational keys of general business incubator as classification to define the developing suggestion for an academic biomedical incubator. As follows: First, to develop and execute the operational strategy of incubator: incubator need to develop a definite operational plan which includes objective, human resource recruiting, tenants recruiting, incubation process, finical plan, etc. Second, incubation team: academic biomedical incubator is thought a channel for obtaining technologies and a bridge to parent organization by tenants. Therefore, the team is suggested to do its best effort for the bridged-service and network relationship coordination. Third, network relationship and resources integration: based on previous point and the resource limited, academic biomedical incubator should expand its external network to provide all the entrepreneurial resource for tenants. Forth, hardware and software supporting: providing the list of what the incubator and parent organization could support or provide, which is like equipment, techniques, industry-university cooperation projects information. Fifth, incubation branding: incubator could create self-image by massive exposure and leverage parent organization’s reputation.

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.