台灣的製造型企業目前正處於腹背受敵的窘境，先進國家之企業以巨資和科技應用優勢持續地擴大其市場空間，開發中國家之企業也運用其充沛的勞力資源而逐漸地擴充其規模，台灣製造型企業之生存空間因此受到嚴重的壓迫，為低毛利生產陷入了生產效率和成本導向之惡性競爭中。此時，台灣製造型企業所需要的是一套超越競爭的思考模式，而價值創造導向的策略思維正是破局而出的關鍵。它不依循過去的成功經驗，也不受制於競爭者之作為，反而聚焦於本身核心能力的延伸，使競爭與自己無關，並透過與顧客和關係夥伴合作、與自然環境和社會共生的方式，以及價值創造導向的組織轉型，來為企業開創全新的價值網域和生存空間。本論文提出顧客價值、企業價值、環境價值、社會價值等四種價值創造導向，配合變革三部曲的策略性再思考、組織轉型、變革管理等三項進程，來呈現日本製造型企業的價值創造導向之企業轉型內涵。企業可以顧客需求為思考點，提供整合性的解決方案，創造顧客價值；以關係夥伴的利益為考量，整合價值網絡的總體流程，創造無疆界事業，提升企業價值；以自然環境的長期發展為出發，創造環境價值；或以增添社會福祉為目標，創造社會價值。論文中的個案顯示，任何價值創造導向所產生的結果，最終都可以有利於企業本身；其中顧客價值應是價值創造的近程目標，而環境價值與社會價值的創造才是價值創造的長期根本。

在微利的時代下，須從硬體的架構下發展無限的創意發展空間，從中衍生附加價值，而價值創造正式企業突破流血式競爭框架最佳的新思維模式。企業的經營模式已從量轉向質的發展，甚至從幫助顧客解決問題上，提供創新的價值，其可透過技術與人才的融合、平台與服務的整合、軟體與硬體的結合、機能與感性的統合，使組織活化、再造，展現出價值創造為導向的企業。 本論文將價值創造分為三類主要的意涵，企業可以從和顧客共創價值、和供應商及關係夥伴共創價值、以及為所生存的環境創造價值：整個價值網域是連動的關係，企業整合關係網絡夥伴，透過網絡能量的整合，創造無疆界的事業，以顧客需求出發，提供整合性的解決方案，創新顧客價值，且將眼光提升至整個大環境、大社會，以追求永續經營的環境來創造永續的企業。因此，企業透過顧客價值提供、企業價值創造、環境價值經營三個價值創造導向，突破產品與服務的疆界進而突破產業疆界，以創新者、整合者、促進者的目標邁進。企業可以價值創造為導向，以變革三部曲為轉型步驟，從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，提早預見產業的未來發展，選擇與集中於本身的核心能力；並打造企業願景，擬定五到十年的中長期變革計畫，進行組織轉型；在變革管理中，建立企業一致的價值觀和企業文化，灌輸新內涵與新衝擊於企業文化中，給予對挑戰的生命力一記響鐘，藉以改變員工的行為與態度。本論文以六種經營模式，來呈現價值創造導向的日本企業轉型內涵，以變革三部曲為經，以價值創造導向為緯，舖成論文架構。 本論文個案的特色：Origin以提案經營結合專業研發能力與客製化的能力創新顧客價值；Shiseido以感性工程來探索顧客的感性品質結合其研發產品的物理品質來滿足顧客並讓顧客驚艷；Hitachi以解決方案提供者為人類打造新時代的生活基礎創造與人類生活息息相關的支援系統；NTT DoCoMo以跨平台整合服務創造整個通訊與生活的整合價值；Olympus的社會關懷務求使社會更為美好來創造產品與服務；Toyota的環保使命重新定義了汽車產業的未來。 對我國企業經營的啟示為跳脫代工製造的角色，以優異的製造、學習、設計能力，整合價值網絡，爲顧客提供整合性的解決方案；強調創新的突破與人才長遠的培育，整合多元性的資源，創造統知型的企業能力；跨越國際的疆界、打破事業的疆界，利用科技與感性的統合、管理與技術的統合、國內外創造力的統合，釋放組織活力，重新在世界舞台上定位。 / In this tiny profit era, we should develop infinite creative space from the hardware structure, and thus deriving added value. The value-creation is the best new thinking model for a business to break through the trap of a blooding competition. The business model has developed from quantity to quality, and even developed as creating new values by helping customers solving the problems. Also, a business can blend technology and talent, integrate platform and service, combine software and hardware, and merge functionality and sensation to vitalize and reengineer the organization to perform value creation orientation. The research categorizes value-creation orientation as three parts: a business can co-create value with customer, co-create value with value net, and create value for the environment. This value dimension is correlating: “a business integrates partners and creates a boundless business by the power of integrating value net. Driven by customer demands, a business provides total solutions and innovates customer values. Furthermore, a business enlarges his insight for the whole environment and the whole society to create a permanent business by pursuing a permanent environment.” Therefore, a business oriented by “value co-creation with customer”, “value co-creation with value-net”, “value creation for the environment” can break through the boundary of product or service as well the boundary of business, and achieve the goal of being an innovator, an integrator and an improver. A business takes 3 change steps as strategic rethinking, organizational transformation and change management. Strategic rethinking is to redefine the industry, rethink the positioning and direction of a business, to foresee the future development of the industry, and to select and concentrate the core competence. To establish a vision and make a mid- to long-term change plan(5~10 years) is to carry out an organizational transformation. In change management, we have to establish a consistent value and business culture, and install new intension and new strike to the business culture, so as to change the behavior and attitude of the employees. The research takes 6 business models to present Japanese business transformation oriented by value creation, which takes 3 change steps as longitude and value creation as latitude to construct the structure of the research. The characteristics of the cases in this research: Origin takes Proposal-type management to combine the R&D ability and customized ability to create customer value; Shiseido takes KANSEI engineering to dig out the KANSEI quality of customers and combine it with physical quality of products to satisfy the customers and surprise them; Hitachi as a Total solution provider creates a new era lifeline support system and the life infrastructure; NTT DoCoMo privides Cross-platform integration service to create the total value of the communication and the life; Olympus’s Social-IN is to make life better by creating new products and services; Toyota’s Environment mission is to redefine the future of the car industry. As for the revelation for the management of our business, we can take good advantage of the excellent producing, learning, designing abilities and integrate value net to provide total solutions for customers. We can emphasize on the breakthrough of innovation and the long-term development of talents, and integrate diversification of resources to create “knowledge-integration” business ability. We can cross the boundary of continents and break up the boundary of business by integrating functionality and sensation, management and technology, inside and outside innovation, to release the vigor of organization and restart to position on the world stage.

本研究以非營利組織策略合作為主題，以策略性思維，嘗試探索較能解釋非營利組織策略合作型式選擇決策之合作內涵特性，且以此發現為基礎，從較具解釋效果之合作內涵特性分析，進一步針對非營利組織策略合作之價值共創與關係管理機制，探索較具策略管理意涵之機制變數，以建構本研究所欲探討之非營利組織策略合作型式選擇模式，以及價值共創與關係管理機制之概念模式，並提出規範性之命題。 　　為此，本研究選擇了具有近百年歷史且經營模式獨特之台灣農會（會員導向之擬公法人商業－互益型非營利組織）作為研究對象，結合非營利組織與營利組織之相關理論及文獻，針對實務現象進行分析。由於所欲探討主題屬特定現象之初期探討，本文採質性多重個案研究設計，針對由三家（含）以上農會所參與組成之聯盟機構蒐集資料，並以聯盟機構或策略合作網絡之主導機構為主體之組織間合作關係為分析單位，進行資料蒐集及探索性研究。 　　首先，歸納文獻與實務現象觀察結果，本研究依非營利組織策略合作「是否共組獨立機構」及「是否採非營利性」兩項選擇決策，將聯盟機構歸納分類成四種策略合作型式：非營利性合營機構、營利性合資機構、非營利性聯盟及營利性聯盟，此項分類方式也作為本研究後續進行個案分析之基礎。 　　由於不同策略合作型式傾向採取不同之組織原理與思考邏輯，本研究認為非營利組織(農會)進行策略合作，若要持續共同創造所欲追求之價值並妥善管理組織間關係，應策略性地選擇較能發揮效能之合作型式，再據以設計其價值共創與關係管理機制。因此，本研究之個案分析分成兩個階段進行，第一階段個案研究主要嘗試從實務個案資料分析歸納較能解釋不同策略合作型式之合作內涵特性變數；第二階段個案研究主要聚焦探討「非營利性聯盟」及「非營利性合營機構」兩種非營利性質之合作型式，並以第一階段有關合作內涵特性變數之發現為基礎，進一步探索兩種合作型式之價值共創與關係管理機制變數。 　　本研究第一階段個案分析歸納發現，如果合作內涵涉及高度業務可切割性及高度關係專用資產投入必要性時，較宜採取共組獨立機構之合作型式；反之，如果合作內涵涉及低度業務可切割性或低度關係專用資產投入必要性時，較宜採取不共組獨立機構之合作型式。另外，如果合作內涵涉及高度投入共同性、低度投入可衡量性、高度產出共同性或低度產出可衡量性時，較宜採取非營利性之合作型式；然而，如果合作內涵涉及低度投入共同性、高度投入可衡量性、低度產出共同性或高度產出可衡量性時，較宜採取營利性之合作型式。 　　至於第二階段有關價值共創機制之個案分析發現，如果合作內涵涉及低度業務可切割性時，非營利性聯盟可以採取幾項價值共創機制：合作夥伴專業分工、合作夥伴選擇、任務小組負責人選派制度、合作夥伴創新能力、外部資源有效分配方式，以及外部專家專業諮詢；相對地，合作內涵涉及高度業務可切割性時，非營利性合營機構可以透過專業團隊經營、董(理)監事選聘制度、領導人甄選制度、創新經營模式、組織設計決策管理與控制分離政策，以及設立外部獨立董(理)監事等機制來營造彼此價值共創之氛圍。 　　如果合作內涵涉及低度關係專用資產投入必要性時，要有效利用合作夥伴既有資源及外部取得資源以共同營造合作網絡之綜效價值，非營利性聯盟可以採取幾項價值共創機制：任務小組負責人選派制度、資源有效利用方式、合作夥伴之資源與技術有效整合，以及合作夥伴網絡關係運用；相對地，合作內涵涉及高度關係專用資產投入必要性時，非營利性合營機構可以採取董(理)監事選聘制度、具體資源運用計畫、合營機構領導人組專業團隊之權力，以及有效專業服務平台等價值共創機制。 　　針對關係管理機制之探討，經個案分析發現，如果合作內涵涉及高度投入共同性時，兩種非營利性質之策略合作型式可以透過可接受之合作規範、建立共同標準、資訊對等溝通，以及能力不足補救措施來提升合作夥伴配合共同投入意願。合作內涵涉及低度投入可衡量性時，可以賦予投入較多之合作機構主導資源利用方向之決策權以維持其投入意願；涉及高度產出共同性時，可以透過共同品質控管、不符標準產出配套處理措施及外部誘因來提升合作夥伴配合共同產出要求之意願；至於涉及低度產出可衡量性時，可以透過目標達成度評核措施、外部專家專業認定及可接受之利益分配方式來協調合作夥伴關係。 　　過去文獻對非營利組織之合作關係，較少以策略性思維進行探討，本研究之發現可延伸應用並補強現有合作相關理論與文獻對非營利組織間合作有關實務現象之解釋，對未來有關非營利組織合作關係之研究，也提供另一個思考方向；加上組織間策略合作也是當前政府輔導農民團體因應台灣加入WTO後之政策加強重點，本研究配合組織思索轉型所需，實務上期能提供農會研擬組織間合作策略及政府推動農民團體輔導政策之參考。 / Strategic cooperation is taken as an alternative resort for solving problems facing non-profit organizations (NPO) which suffer a bottleneck in operations resulting from mounting resource scarcity and external threats. It is especially deemed so for farmers’ associations in Taiwan, which were closely associated with the development of agriculture on the island in the past century and have been seriously affected after Taiwan entered the World Trade Organizations（WTO）in 2002. Given this understanding, we conduct a two-phase study to observe the phenomena by studying farmers’ associations in Taiwan. Research 1 attempts to explore the cooperation characteristics which can most explain the decision on strategic cooperation types chosen by at least 3 farmers’ associations in each network. Research 2, based on the findings of Research 1, attempts to explore the value-co-creating and relation-maintaining mechanisms for such relations. As part of the methodology, we apply an exploratory multiple-case-study design and refer to NPO and PO (for-profit organization) literature for analytical induction. Prior to the case study, we first categorize the NPO strategic cooperation relations into four types: Non-profit joint operations, for-profit joint ventures, non-profit alliances and for-profit alliances. This categorization made in accordance with literature review and observed phenomena serves as a basis for our further research. In Research 1, we examine 5 theoretically sampled cases and find out 2 characteristics variables which can most explain the decision on whether to organize an independent institution, and 4 variables which can most explain the decision on whether to keep the cooperation for non-profit purpose or change it into for-profit relations. According to our findings, if cooperation involves high business separability and high necessity for relation-specific asset input, we suggest a choice for organizing another new independent institution (i.e. non-profit joint operations or for-profit joint ventures). If cooperation involves low business separability and low necessity for relation-specific asset input, we suggest a choice for not organizing an independent institution (i.e. non-profit alliances or for-profit alliances). In terms of the “non-profit or for-profit” decision, if cooperation involves high input commonality, low input measurability, high output commonality and low output measurability, we suggest a non-profit choice (i.e. non-profit joint operations or non-profit alliances). If cooperation involves low input commonality, high input measurability, low output commonality and high output measurability, we suggest a for-profit choice (i.e. for-profit joint ventures or for-profit alliances). For the second research, we focus our study on the two non-profit cooperation types and examine 8 theoretically sampled cases including 5 non-profit alliances and 3 non-profit joint operations. We explore the value-co-creating mechanisms by analyzing case data from the two characteristics variables which can most explain the “organizing an independent institution or not” decision in consideration that the two studied types take different cooperation forms and may apply different mechanisms for co-creating synergetic value in the network. Meanwhile, we explore the relation-maintaining mechanisms from the four characteristics variables which can most explain the “non-profit or for-profit” decision because the two studied types is of non-profit nature and involve high input commonality, low input measurability, high output commonality and low output measurability. It is of strategic significance to heighten partners’ will for continued cooperation in such non-profit relations. Our findings of the value co-creating mechanisms suggest 6 mechanism variables for the non-profit alliances and non-profit joint operations, respectively, depending on their levels of business separability. Analysis from the characteristics of necessity for relation-specific asset input, in similar manner, suggests 4 variables for the two studied types, respectively. In the exploration of relation-maintaining mechanisms, results suggest 4 mechanism variables for the non-profit types if cooperation involves high input commonality, 1 variable for relations involving low input measurability, 3 variables for relations involving high output commonality, and 3 variables for relations involving low output measurability. Although there may be many mechanisms which can help partners to co-create value and maintain relations in their cooperation, this research attempts to explore only the variables which can be of more strategic significance for the two focus types. Following our findings in Research 1 and 2, we provide normative propositions and build a decision-making model for the choice of strategic cooperation types and another integrative conceptual model of the value-co-creating and relation-maintaining mechanisms for non-profit alliances and joint operations. Farmers’ associations, which boast of a history of nearly 100 years in Taiwan, are unique in their business models as compared to other non-profit organizations. On top of that, NPO inter-organizational cooperation relations are seldom examined from strategic perspective. Theoretically speaking, findings of this dissertation can further extend and supplement the explanation and the application of present theories and literature to the phenomena in this regard. Implications and recommendations for managerial practices of inter-organizational cooperation among farmers’ associations are also discussed.

本論文從IBM在軟體的策略，尤其是軟體的產業解決方案作為研究的核心。2008年的金融海嘯造成全球經濟大衰退，IBM適時提出了智慧的地球的計劃與願景，並積極推動從客戶實際需求與價值思考出發的產業解決方案(Industrial Solution)，結果IBM驗證了其營運與業績不但沒有受到影響並且在營收與獲利上繼續穩健成長。本論文首先依時間軸對IBM自1993年葛士納總裁接任後針對服務與創新的轉型；到2003年帕米沙諾接班後的併購計劃與智慧的地球創新策略；乃至於2012年羅美蒂繼任後推動之商業分析，軟體產業解決方案以及最重要的2015年成長計劃等各項重要改革與執行策略做一詳細的整理與分析，個案研究針對IBM公司所面臨的挑戰與企業經營策略及轉型架構進行分析與探討並延伸至軟體產業解決方案，以Michael Porter的五力分析架構對IBM公司在軟體產業與產業解決方案的產業競爭態勢予以深入探討分析，並針對IBM與其主要競爭對手的軟體產業解決方案以SWOT做一完整的分析，此外也從IBM的軟體事業群的成長與轉型策略，來驗證IBM對軟體的產業解決方案的重視與策略意涵，並針對軟體之產業架構(Industry Framework)的發展與導入的「客戶導向與客製化產業解決方案開發策略(client focused & tailored execution strategy)」與成功要素予以分析並歸納。 最後結論中對國內軟體產業以Michael Porter的鑽石模型做一分析，並對未來台灣軟體產業可能的發展方向提出建議以提供產業與政策制定者參考，如何面對與開發國際市場以及如何從人才面發展並建立台灣的軟體產業競爭優勢將是值得我們仔細深入思考的方向，希望未來台灣的軟體產業也能創造出典範移轉，發展出如同IC設計與製造產業的規模與競爭優勢。 / The development of this paper is focused on IBM`s software strategy，especially on the strategy of IBM`s software industrial solution as the research focuses。When the financial tsunami caused the serious economic recession around the world during 2008 year end，IBM raised the「smarter planet 」initiative and vision to drive the execution of series of industrial solution centric projects according to the client real requirements and values。IBM proved that its operation and business performance were not affected by this crisis，moreover IBM continued to grow steadily in the areas of both income and margin。In the context of this paper，I will first analyze the IBM`s transformation history in the three key stages under three CEOs，including Lou Gerstner`s service & innovation transformation since 1993；Sam Palmisano`s Merge & Acquisition plan & smarter Planet initiative；and Ginni Rometty`s 2015 roadmap plan to shoot for at least US$ 20 EPS by year 2015。 In the case study we will analyze the challenges which IBM was facing from corporate operation and transformation standpoints. For IBM`s software & software industrial solution strategy，Michael Porter’s five forces framework will be used to do an analysis to have a clear view on IBM`s competitiveness in the software & software industrial solution industry. SWOT analysis will also be applied to gain an in-depth view on IBM and its major software industrial solution competitors。From IBM software group’s growth and transformation strategy，we can also verify the strategic imperatives on IBM`s focuses on industrial solutions。Finally we use the example of how IBM successfully developed the various Industry Frameworks through client focused & tailored execution strategy to illustrate IBM`s asset-based solution development concept。From the recent organizational transformation of IBM software group in 2012，we can also prove that the transformation direction is toward solution centric。 In the summary of this paper I will analyze Taiwan`s software industry using Michael Porter’s Diamond model to come out several suggestions for the reference of software development vendors and government policy makers in Taiwan。How to develop the international market and build the talent resources to increase Taiwan`s competitiveness advantage will be the key focuses which we need to think deeply。Hopefully the software industry in Taiwan will have a paradigm shift and grow to the scale of the IC design and manufacturing industry with competitiveness。