分工策略因素、兩岸分工模式與經營績效關係之研究—以台灣電子業佈局大陸為例

A Study of Relationship among Strategic Factors, Division of Labor Models and Performances—An Empirical Study on Taiwan Electronics Industry Investing in Mainland China

蔡華展(Hua-Jan Tsai)

指導教授 ： 呂鴻德

中原大學/商學院/企業管理研究所/碩士(2003年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200300221

摘要

摘　　要
　　本研究旨在探討分工策略因素與兩岸分工模式之關係，以及不同的兩岸分工模式與績營績效之間的關係。本研究的核心概念是建立在「策略因素－策略－結構（機制）－績效」的基礎上，亦即提出影響企業兩岸分工佈局模式的策略因素的整合性架構，進而再進一步釐清企業應以何種「機構性安排」會使企業整體的績效達到最佳。
　　本研究首先依據「子廠價值活動完整性」及「子廠作業內容與母廠相似度」二個構面，來衡量分工標準的構念，並將兩岸分工模式區分成「生產製程分工」、「經營功能分工」、「產品層次分工」、以及「產品類別分工」等四種型態，進而再根據本研究所萃取出的四大分工策略因素（兩岸佈局動機、資產專屬性、區位優勢、國際化策略），來分別探討其與兩岸分工模式之間的關係。而在經營績效之探討上，本研究將影響兩岸分工模式的二個重要因素－子廠網絡定位與分工協調機制，納為本研究之干擾變數，以分析其對於兩岸分工模式與企業整體績效之間的關係。
　　本研究以台灣電子業赴中國大陸投資的廠商為研究對象，共寄發845份問卷，回收有效問卷共50份，回卷資料經因素分析、集群分析、T檢定、單因子與雙因子變異數分析等統計方法整理後，歸納出數點重要的實證結果：
1.經統計分析結果顯示，不同的兩岸佈局動機、區位優勢、國際化策略等三種分工策略因素均與兩岸分工模式之間具顯著差異，唯資產專屬性這項分工策略因素未具有顯著差異，這表示本研究之主要論點獲得支持，亦即不同的分工策略因素會造成不同兩岸分工佈局模式。
2.進一步分析兩岸分工模式、子廠網絡定位與分工協調機制之關係後，發現兩岸分工模式與子廠網絡定位有顯著的相關，而兩岸分工模式與分工協調機制則沒有顯著的相關，這顯示不同的兩岸分工模式會影響子廠網絡定的選擇，但不同的兩岸分工模式並不會影響分工協調機制的選擇。
3.最後，在探討不同的兩岸分工模式與企業整體績效的關係上發現，兩岸分工模式與企業整體績效有顯著相關，且二者之間的相關性將隨著子廠網絡定位這項干擾變數的調和，而產生不同的績效結果，然而，兩岸分工模式與企業整體績效二者之間卻不會受分工協調機制這項干擾變數的調和，因此，可獲致以下的研究結論：
a.在未考慮子廠網絡定位配適問題時，採產品層次分工的分工績效會最佳，其次才是產品類別分工，再其次則是經營功能分工，最後則是生產製程分工。亦即，就一般而言，水平分工模式的績效會大於垂直分工的績效。
b.為追求達到有效兩岸分工效益，應將兩岸分工模式配適適當的子廠網絡定位，亦即當採取水平分工模式時，應以合作型或夥伴型的中國大陸子公司網絡定位來搭配，而採取垂直分工的兩岸分工模式時，則須以競爭型或附屬型的中國大陸子公司網絡定位來搭配，才較能確保有效達成兩岸分工之效益。

關鍵字

電子業 ； 經營績效 ； 分工模式 ； 策略因素

並列摘要

ABSTRACT
The major subject of this thesis is focused on relationship between strategic factors and division of labor models, and on relationship between division of labor models and performances. The paradigm of research is based on ‘strategic factors - strategies -　mechanisms (institutional arrangement) – performances’; as provide an comprehensive about strategic factors affect corporations select division of labor models, and more further to discuss which institutional arrangement would make operational performances more better.
First, according to two dimension of complete of subsidiary’s function actives and similar operations between host and subsidiary’s, division of labor models are divided into four types (include product process division of labor, business function division of labor, product level division of labor, and product type division of labor). This study use for strategic factors (include investing motivations, assets specific, location of advantages, and international strategies), then discuss the relationship between strategic factors and division of labor models separately. Second, this empirical study also considers two immediate varieties (network positions of subsidiary and coordinated mechanisms of division of labor). Therefore, this study is discussed the relationship between division of labors and performances , and the causes of the network positions of subsidiary and coordinated mechanism of division of labor influence above.
Before December 2002 in Taiwan, corporate that had invested Mainland China was the frame of sampling. There were 845 companies were requested to answer the questionnaires by mail, fax and e-mail, and the effective respondents were 50 sets. This study used five statistical inferences (include factor analysis, cluster analysis, T test, One-way ANOVA, and Two-way ANOVA). After analyzing these data, the conclusions are summarized as following:
1.Through statistic analysis, we find that three strategic factors (as investing motivations, location advantages, and international strategies) and division of labor models exist significantly difference. The only one strategic factor of assets specific did not have significantly difference. The results show that different strategic factors will result in different types of division of labor models. It means different strategic factors will influences division of labor models and it also support the main hypotheses.
2.Further analysis the relationship among division of labor models, network positions of subsidiary, and coordinated mechanisms of
division of labors. We found division of labor models and network positions of subsidiary had significantly relationship, but there were not significantly relationship on division of labor models and coordinated mechanisms of division of labor. The results show that different division of labor models will result in different types of network positions of subsidiary, but different division of labor models will not result in different types of coordinated mechanisms of division of labor.
3.At last, after discussing the relationship on division of labor models and performances, we found division of labor models and performances had significantly relationship. And the relative will moderate by the subsidiary’s network positions, results in the different performances. However, the relationship on division of labor models and performances will not moderate by coordinated mechanisms of division of labor. Therefore, the results are presented as followings:
a.Before thinking about the fit of network positions of subsidiary, the best division of labor performances is product level division of labor, second is product type division of labor, third is business function division of labor, and the last is product process division of labor. As in generally, horizontal division of labor’s performances will always better than vertical division of labor’s.
b.For attend to effective division of labor result, the division of labor model will fit to suitable the network position of subsidiary. In other words, uses horizontal division of labor will fit types of partner or collaborator, and uses vertical division of labor will fit types of militant or vassal.

並列關鍵字

electronics industry ； corporate performances ； division of labor ； strategic factors

參考文獻

9.吳思華（1998），策略九說－策略思考本質，台北：臉譜文化事業股份有限公司

10.吳萬益、林清河（2000），企業研究方法，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司

15.高長、陳威如（1998），『台商赴大陸投資所有權進入模式決定因素的分析』，管理學報，第15卷，第3期，頁393-418

16.高長（2001），『兩岸電子產業分工現況與合作展望』，經濟前瞻，第78期，頁76-85

17.高長（2002），『台灣電子產業兩岸分工與全球佈局策略』，經濟前瞻，第83期，頁74-81