本碩士論文裡的研究主要設計用來檢測目前現有的國際化理論，以依據公司1970至1999年的母公司年報來研究一間多國企業的藥廠 — 必治妥施貴寶其部分具有知名度的代表性產品之國際化路徑如此的研究方法。本論文的最終目標就是透過這樣的實務研究來回答以下問題來挖堀出現有國際化理論的一些缺口及提供寶貴的意見來修正這些缺口，研究問題如下： i. 一間多國企業藥廠通常採用何種進入策略，而這些策略是否會隨著時間而改變？是否有任何經驗傳承的證據？ ii. 多國企業所選擇進入的外國市場是否會隨著時間的改變而改變？如果有，是否一間多國企業會先選擇進入與其母國文化較相近或地理位置較相近的國家？ iii. 哪一個國際化理論比較適合用來描述必治妥施貴寶其國際化路徑？ 本研究的結果有以下四項重要的發現： 1. 在某些國家的進入策略的改變是循序漸進的，但是在某些國家則是有同時間採用兩種以上不同的進入策略。 2. 循序漸進進入策略的改變在九十年代必不明顯。 3. 必治妥施貴寶所選擇進入的外國市場會隨著時間的改變而改變，而且其新產品會選擇與其母國美國文化距離較近的國家先進入，然後再慢慢的選擇進入離美國文化距離較遠的國家。但是這樣的證據並不是相當明顯。其他的因素也會影響一家多國企業在國外市場選擇的決定。 4. 部分結果顯示出一些經驗傳承的現象，在九十年代必治妥施貴寶所開發出的產品相對於八十年代所開發出的產品在全球上市所花的時間明顯較短。 結論就是本研究結果有部分與循序漸進理論為主的國際化理論 – ‘The Stages Internationalization Theory’一致，此理論主張國際化是一種循序漸進對於國際市場知識的累積及資源的投入。部分結果則顯示出此理論尚有其不足之處。此理論是在七十年代被Johanson及Vahlne兩位學者所提出，當時的國際企業環境與現在比起有相當大的差異，因此此理論在某種程度上太過簡化，而且並不適用於所有的產業。有許多會影響某企業其國際化路徑的因素應該一併納入，尤其在面對像製藥產業如此特別的產業，因素例如不同國家的製藥產業法規、產品特性、專利保護、在不同時間點的國際企業環境都會影響企業的國際化路徑的發展。因此後續與本碩士論文類似的實務研究需要更充分的資料來檢測現有國際化理論的主張。 / This Master thesis is designed to test the currently existing internationalization theory by studying the internationalization processes of some of the representative products of a foreign multinational pharmaceutical firm – The Bristol-Myers Squibb using the data contained in the annual reports of the period from 1970’s to 1990’s. By answering the following questions, the ultimate goal is to provide useful suggestions that will help to make corrections to any possible flaws in the Internationalization theory as they are uncovered during the course of this study by answering the following questions: i. What entry modes to foreign markets does a multinational pharmaceutical firm adopt and do entry modes change over time? Is there any sign of experience transfer? ii. Do foreign markets served by a multinational pharmaceutical firm also change over time? iii. Which theory depicting the internationalization process of firms is more applicable to Bristol-Myers Squibb? The results of the analysis of the data show four important findings: 1. Progressive changes in entry modes took place in certain countries and the employment of multiple entry modes was also observed. 2. The progressive changes in entry mode were barely observed during the 1990’s. 3. The choices of foreign markets did change over time and the marketing activities of new products tended to commence in countries that are the most culturally proximal from the U.S., and then gradually shifted to countries that are more culturally distant from the U.S. However, other factors might also influence a firm’s choice in the foreign markets apart from culture. 4. There seemed to be a sign of experience transfer since the some of the results showed that the time it took to introduce a product developed in the 1980’s in foreign markets was relatively shorter than the time it took to launch a product of the 1990’s. In conclusion, the results of study were partly consistent with ‘The Stages Internationalization Theory’ which argued that the internationalization was a process of knowledge accumulation of foreign markets and resource commitment gradually. However, there might be some flaws in the theory which needed to be refined. The theory was developed in the 70’s and it might not be perfectly applicable to describe the internationalization processes of the firms in every industry. It should also take other factors apart from culture into considerations such as the nature of products, regulations and policies of different countries, competitive scope of the industry or the international business environment at different time points, especially when dealing with some special industries such as that of the pharmaceuticals in which regulations of different countries, patent protection and the nature of the products might influence the pattern of internationalization of the firms. However, further empirical studies with more adequate data would be necessary in the future in order to justify the propositions of different theories of internationalization.