演進中經營模式結構之紮根研究：後深次微米時代TSMC與UMC之比較分析

A Grounded Study on Evolutionary Business Model Structure: A Comparative Analysis on TSMC and UMC in the Post Deep-Submicron Generation

張博閔(Po-min Chang)

指導教授 ： 蘇雅惠

國立中央大學/管理學院/資訊管理學系/碩士(2008年)

摘要

自2001年半導體走入0.13微米時代後，隨著製程進步也伴隨著更多的半導體物理效應，讓先進製程IC製造與設計的議題越來越複雜，先進製程所需的資本投資也隨之倍數膨脹，導致許多半導體業者放棄追隨莫爾定律，被迫採取不同的經營方式。晶圓代工業中的領導業者台灣積體電路公司（Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, TSMC）自2001年始終保持領導廠商的地位，TSMC經營模式其成功的理由不只是純粹技術的進步，必定有一些獨特的理由存在。
Ackoff（1999）指出系統是由系統內個別元素，以及其互動關係所構成；過去本研究團隊（郭冠甫，2006）對TSMC與聯華電子公司（United Microelectronics Corporation, UMC）的經營模式的研究當中，發現TSMC與UMC經營模式內地元件會不斷地互相「跟進」。但是並未明TSMC與UMC經營模式的異同之處，以及解釋TSMC於晶圓代工績效遠勝過UMC的原因。
本研究欲透過經營模式元件與元件間互動關係形成的經營模式結構來探究TSMC與UMC經營模式上的差異，本研究採用陳銑鈞（2006）對於經營模式所提出的十大構面做為為基礎，針對TSMC與UMC兩家具有代表性的公司個案，以紮根理論為研究方法以及因果脈絡圖之網路結構分析，以結構及演進的觀點進行經營模式之比較分析，以回答出「深次微米時代之後TSMC與UMC經營模式的發展重心與演進過程為何？」以及「造成TSMC和UMC經營績效的差異點（point of differences）為何？」兩大問題。
本研究發現TSMC與UMC在經營模式結構與演進上有相同點與差異點，相同點可代表領導晶圓廠共有的核心經營結構，可供同業晶圓代工業者一個尋求成長的參考範例，差異點則可提供未來學者探討TSMC經營模式勝出原因的切入點。協助業界內新創企業進入該產業的指標與方針與提供產業內既有成員尋求成長時，其下一步經營模式創新的規劃藍圖。對學界則藉由視覺化的網路圖形表示抽象的企業經營模式元件與元件之關係，提供後來研究者在探討經營模式與經營模式元件互動的關係之基礎。

關鍵字

因果脈絡圖 ； 紮根理論 ； 聯電 ； 台積電 ； 經營模式 ； 經營模式結構 ； 演進中經營模式

並列摘要

Since 2001 when technology process moved forward to the generation of 0.13 mircon, the semiconductor industry has faced tremendous physical effects which lead to more complex integrated circuit (IC) manufacturing and design issues of advanced process. The growing capital-intensive nature of the semiconductor industry has driven numerous companies to consider alternative ways to run their businesses such as fablite strategy.
Accordingly, we have conducted several longitudinal exploratory case studies about the evolutionary business model innovation and the developing process of dominant design of business model in the foundry industry. Our preliminary study found that the dominant design of business model is developed from the continually imitating processes of the major competitive firms, TSMC and UMC, in the foundry industry. That is, TSMC may follow, imitate, or learn a new business model from UMC, and vice versa. Consequently, it is very clear that TSMC and UMC have almost 90% of parity in their designs of business model. In other words, the dominant design of business model becomes the “common asset” of TSMC and UMC. However, The research results still remained a critical and interesting question to be studied. If the business models of TSMC and of UMC are similar, then why does TSMC become the winner with more than 50% market share in the foundry industry? The answer may be the points of difference of TSMC and UMC. This study, therefore, attempts to find the answer by dissecting the business model structures of these two leading foundries.
Grounded theory qualitative research method, casual map, and structure characteristics were imported to collect and analyze various data for the business model structures of TSMC and UMC. Data were analyzed by following three coding procedures of the grounded theory technique. We find that the structure of TSMC and of UMC incorporates both similarities and differences. The similarities, which represent common core business model structure of leading foudries could provide a referential example for fledging foundries. Morerover, the differences could provide insightful discussion about why TSMC wins the foundry market. The results would give researchers more tangible concepts of the structure of a business model. We hope that the findings could give hints on design of business model from structural and evolutionary perspective for the next development of Taiwan’s foundry industry.

並列關鍵字

business model ； business model structure ； evolutionary business model ； TSMC ； UMC ； grounded theory ； causal map

參考文獻

[7]張曉環(2006)。電子設計自動化工具供應商與晶圓專製廠互動關係演進之探索性研究。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。

[17]蕭佳嫻(2006)。晶圓代工廠與設計服務供應商垂直合作模式之研究。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。

[18]賴以代(2006)。技術演進下垂直分工廠商經營疆界變遷之研究－以台積電及聯電為例。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。

[19]謝文淵(2004)。矽智財供應商經營模式之研究。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。

[2]Barr, P. S., & Huff, A. S. (1997). Seeing isn’t believing: Understanding diversity in the timing of strategic response. Journal of Management Studies, 34, pp. 337-370.