技術評估策略與創新績效-以台灣半導體產業為例

Technology Evaluation Strategy and Innovation Performance-Case Studies of Semiconductor Sector in Taiwan

陳瑞祥(Jui-Hsiang Chen)

指導教授 ： 何建德

元智大學/管理學院/企業管理學系/碩士(2007年)

摘要

台灣為全球技術產品的主要代工國家，因此廠商常需要面對許多來自於內生或外生的技術改變。因此廠商如何透過技術評估，選取正確的技術，達到創新之目的，已成為台灣半導體產業的重要策略議題。
本研究提供一個研究架構，去檢驗技術評估策略與創新績效間的關係。並且採用策略流程觀點，而非常見的策略內容觀點。視技術評估策略為一組織流程：依據公司所處的組織策略背景，選取特定的參與人員及使用特定的方法，去評估技術。「採用流程」、「使用方法」、「參與人員」，為技術評估策略類型學的三個主要分類構念。
組織策略背景包含公司所處產業的「技術軌跡」與其「競爭策略」。在技術評估採用流程，可分類為正式化、非正式化流程。在技術評估方法，可分類為策略性、經濟性、綜合性方法。在技術評估參與人員，依據流程中參與的部門數目，可分類為單一部門、多部門參與，來區別受訪的個案公司。
本研究採用個案研究法中的「發展描述個案分析」為基本策略，發展出描述個案的研究架構，並使用「建立解釋」為分析方法，以敘述性之描述方式，來解釋分析技術評估的現象。此外，本研究亦使用類型學，將個案公司的技術評估策略分類成幾個型態。
本研究選擇台灣半導體業的四家個案公司作為分析對象。研究結果顯示出，在積體電路設計產業，有一種技術評估策略型態為「技術賭徒」(Technological gambler)；在動態存取記憶體產業，有一種技術評估策略型態為「費用-利基最佳者」(Expense-niche optimizer); 在封裝與測試產業，有一種技術評估策略型態為「成本效益最佳者」(Cost-benefit optimizer)。
本研究所提出技術評估策略的三個構念：「採用流程」、「使用方法」、「參與人員」，可有效將技術評估策略給予分類。並且在結論部份，提出由四家個案公司所得之管理意涵，與給予其具體之建議。

關鍵字

台灣半導體產業 ； 技術評估策略 ； 創新績效 ； 個案研究法 ； 類型學

並列摘要

Taiwan has become a major country of original equipment manufacturer (OEM) for global technological products industries where firms frequently encounter a lot of internal and external technological changes. How firms ensure innovation performance through technology evaluation has become a strategic imperative in Taiwan's semiconductor sector.
This research proposes a framework for examining the relationship between technology evaluation strategy and innovation performance. The study uses process perspective, instead of content perspective, that treats technology evaluation strategy as an organizational process, through which an organization selects participants and adopts specific methods to evaluate technology according to the organizational strategic context. Process, method and participant are the three-dimensional typology for technology evaluation strategy.
An organizational strategic context includes its technological trajectory and competitive strategy in this research. Regarding the processes of technology evaluation, this research uses formal or informal processes to discriminate the case study firms. The methods of technology evaluation are categorized into strategic, economic, and combinatory groups. The participants of technology evaluation are divisions involved in the process, which could be single or multiple divisions.
This research adopts case study method's “developing a case description” to develop a descriptive framework. It uses “explanation building” to explain the technology evaluation phenomenon with presumed set of casual links for further insights. Besides, typology methodology is also used to categorize firms’ technology evaluation strategy behaviors into types.
Four empirical case studies in Taiwan's semiconductor sector are provided. The results show that there is a technology evaluation strategy type, named “Technological gambler” in IC design industry. In DRAM industry, there is a technology evaluation strategy type, named “Expense-niche optimizer”. In testing & packaging industry, there is a technology evaluation strategy type, named “Cost-benefit optimizer”.
The proposed constructs of technology evaluation strategy including processes, methods, participants and innovation performance are found effective for classifying types of technology evaluation strategies. With the case studies in Taiwan's semiconductor sector, management implications and suggestions to the firms in this sector are also presented in this thesis.

並列關鍵字

technology evaluation strategy ； innovation performance ； case study ； typology

參考文獻

Schumpeter, J.A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (5th. ed.) London:George Allen & Unwin.

Abernathy, W. & K. B.Clark, (1985). Mapping the Winds of Creative Destruction. Reserch Poplicy, 14, 3-22.

Ansoff, H. I. (1986). Competitive Strategy Analysis on the Personal Computer. The Journal of Business Strategy, 6(3), 28.

Anuradha, N., & Will, M. (1998). Evolutionary Diffusion: Internal and External Methods Used to Acquire Encompassing, Complementary, and Incremental Technological Changes in the Lithotripsy Industry. Strategic Management Journal, 19(11), 1063.

Balachandra, R. & Friar, J. (1997). Factors for Success in R&D Project Innovation: A Conceptual Framework. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 44(3), 276-287.