文具的歷史源遠流長，許多數百年老店，至今屹立不搖。國際文具市場的規模約六千億美金，以歐、美、亞太為三大市場。目前世界文具市場年成長僅約4%，歐、美、日更低於此數字，可見已有飽和趨勢。而台灣的現代文具產業，起始於二次大戰後。最早的業者有兩種: 一為台籍人士接下日人留下的設備與技術；另一則是從大陸播遷來台的文具商人另起爐灶。隨著70年代台灣出口導向型的經濟成長，文具業者開始進軍國際。挾日系技術、及當時低工資的優勢，搶下一席之地。然自1980年代後期起，大陸、東南亞的製造商，從低價市場搶進，藉由模仿開始做起。近年來更在不斷引進新設備及技術下，開始有足以與台灣文具業抗衡的業者出現。至此，台灣的文具業不得不開始改變策略，一部分開始外移到東南亞或大陸，尋找製造成本更低的生產地；一部分則投入研發，尋求高附加價值；更有業者是兩種策略都採取。顯然，在總體經濟環境改變、內外在競爭優劣勢消長的情形下，台灣文具業者的策略也跟著在因應、變動。然而，文具產品雖消耗數量大，但單價低，產值亦偏低，故多不受政府、學界重視，相關研究付之闕如。 / 自波特於1980年發表競爭策略(Competitive Strategy)一書以來，競爭優劣勢分析，成為現代企業策略訂定時必做之功課。本文對台灣文具產業的發展做一回顧，並詳述並分析目前市場環境，再以波特的競爭策略理論(五力分析、國家競爭優勢—鑽石體系)，分析個案P公司的競爭優劣勢，及未來策略的建議。研究結果顯示：(1)資訊流通的容易、技術門檻降低，易吸引文具業新進者，造成產業飽和；(2)現有業者的背景、實力相近，又為成熟產業，又本地文具業者多為家族企業，在情感包袱下無人輕易退出，造成競爭激化。再者，全球文具市場成長趨緩的情形，導致市佔率掠奪戰；(3)大型通路取得議價力量。且文具規格已定型化，網路搜尋又日益便利，買主轉換供應商的難度低。又各國不斷推出的新法規，大幅增加了成本；(4)個人電腦侵入了傳統文具的空間。但傳統文具的易攜帶性與低廉價格、美術顏料技法的多變性，仍非電腦設備所能取代；(5)我國文具上游廠商精密技術不足，關鍵零件掌握先進國家手中。但近年韓、大陸供應商漸成氣候，或許可扭轉此情勢。又，文具業多為中小型企業，採購量低，難取得議價力量。 / 最後，對P公司及文具業者的建議：(1)持續研發，創造新利基，建立難以模仿的核心能耐(core capability)；(2) 在低階大量產品市場，如無意繼續投資，則即應選擇退出(或淡出)；反之，可考慮製程外包，或考慮使用替代原物料以降低成本，更可努力提升生產自動化程度；(3)於高階市場，品牌行銷有賴耕耘，若中小型企業財力不足，可考慮自小區域做起，另更可考慮以OEM/ODM形式為歐、美品牌代工；(4)為對買主提升其轉移成本，應努力降低道德危機成本與建立共同資產；(5)專注電子產品尚無法取代的功能加以發揮，並進一步與電子產品結合；(6)持續尋求原物料來源分散；(7)善用專業經理人協助管理。又，對政府的建議為：(1)加強總體競爭力；(2)特別加強對中小企業的輔導；(3)協助廠商開拓大陸市場。 / Modern stationery industry of Taiwan sprouted since the end of World War II. Early industry players could be roughly divided into two kinds: (1) those stationery dealers emigrated from mainland China after Chinese Civil War; (2) locals that bought out manufacturing facilities left over by departing Japanese. With the roaring up of Taiwan’s export-oriented economy, stationery players extend their business into the international markets. With their Japan-rooted technologies and low labor costs, Taiwanese stationery makers became major suppliers for the world, elbowing their way through German and Japanese competitors. / With the economic reform and liberalization of mainland China since late 1980’s, however, Taiwan’s stationery industries went over a turning point. Those low-cost mainland Chinese makers, providing products mainly copying advanced counterparts in other countries, first entered low-price markets. After years of imitation, learning, and introduction of new facilities and technologies, they gradually establish capability strong enough to compete with Taiwanese. To cope with this change, Taiwan’s stationers either move to Southeast Asia or China to gain cheaper production cost or stay home and invest more in innovation for upgrading their produce and making more added values. Obviously, the change in macroeconomic environment and competition has forced Taiwanese stationers to adjust themselves accordingly. Studies on this developing progress, however, can hardly found within governmental authorities or academic communities. The absence of research on stationery industries could most likely be attributed to the fact that this business accounts for a truly tiny part of the world’s economic production. / In view of this, it arouses the interest in discussing the competitive advantages and disadvantages—an idea brought about by Michael Porter, with his publication of Competitive Advantages in 1980—of Taiwan’s stationery industries for finding a new way. Thus, this thesis is intended to provide an overview of Taiwan’s stationery industries—their history, development, and analysis of current environment. And then, through Porter’s competitive theories—five forces analysis and diamond of national competitive advantages—it looks into the current competitive advantages and disadvantages of Taiwan’s stationery industries and tries to find strategic suggestions for Taiwan’s stationers as well as government. / The conclusion is:(a) for the industries: (1) keep on investing in innovation and finding new niches in order to establish sustainable core capabilities; (2) as to low-end markets, either fade out or stay but pursue low cost by production outsourcing, using alternative materials, and automation; (3) for high-end markets, branding marketing could cost a great deal, a regional, small-scale trial to begin is a safer way; besides, OEM/ODM for existing foreign brands can be a choice; (4) for enhancing switching cost of buyers, lower their moral hazard risk and build up common assets; (5) focus on functions that electronic alternative products haven’t covered, and further incorporate electronic functions with traditional stationery; (6) diversify sources of materials; (7) make good use of professional managers;(b) for the government: (1) keep on enhancing macroeconomic competitive advantages; (2) render more assistances to small- and middle-sized business like stationery industries; (3) render more assistance to business planning to enter mainland China market.