供應鏈整合程度對競爭優勢的影響－以產銷型態為干擾變數

THE EFFECTS OF SUPPLY CHAIN INTEGRATION LEVEL ON COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE－PRODUCTION TYPES AS A MODERATOR

陳建宇(Jian-Yu Chen)

指導教授 ： 葉焜煌

大同大學/經營設計學院/事業經營學系所/碩士(2012年)

摘要

據Dyer and Nobeoka (2000)的研究，Toyota在美國成功整合供應網絡後，透過組織學習與資訊分享，Toyota所屬的協力廠商從1990 年到1996 年之間，在零組件不良率的降低、員工生產力的提升、存貨水準的降低等項目的表現都優於其它體系的供應商，這使得Toyota 美國分公司能以更低的成本、更好的品質和美國其它車廠進行競爭(Dyer and Nobeoka, 2000) 。Gunalay (2011)的研究指出，Make to order (MTO)和Make to stock (MTS)都能在給定的最佳化庫存水準中，使總成本達到最小。Yen and Sheu (2003)年針對美國與台灣企業的個案研究中，發現不同產銷類型的公司擁有不同的競爭優勢。Koh and Simpson (2007)對英國製造業的研究中，發現不同製造環境(MTO和MTS)下，公司的延遲交貨績效有不同的結果。因此本研究以台灣製造業為例探討供應鏈整合對競爭優勢影響中，並瞭解產銷類型的干擾作用。
本研究共郵寄發出700份問卷，回收160份問卷，回收率達23%，有效問卷為140份，有效問卷回收率為20%。本研究利用SPSS 14版的統計軟體進行描述統計分析、信度分析、效度分析、 再利用AMOS 16版進行結構方程式模型分析。
根據SEM分析，結果如下：(1) 客戶整合程度會正向影響競爭優勢；(2)內部整合程度會正向影響競爭優勢；(3) 供應商整合程度不會影響競爭優勢。本研究迴歸分析之結論為：(1) 客戶整合程度會正向影響競爭優勢；(2)內部整合程度會正向影響競爭優勢；(3) 供應商整合程度會正向影響競爭優勢；(4)不同產銷型態對客戶整合程度與競爭優勢的關係沒有顯著的影響；(5)不同產銷型態對內部整合程度與競爭優勢的關係沒有顯著的影響；(6)不同產銷型態對供應商整合程度與競爭優勢的關係沒有顯著的影響。

關鍵字

存貨生產 ； 競爭優勢 ； 供應鏈整合 ； 訂貨生產

並列摘要

According to Dyer and Nobeoka (2000) study, Toyota in the United States to successfully integrate the supply network through organizational learning and information sharing, Toyota the third-party component defect rate decreased from 1990 to 1996, employeesincreased productivity, lower inventory levels, the performance of the project better than the other system suppliers, which makes the Toyota U.S. subsidiary to lower costs, better quality, and other U.S. depots competition (Dyer and Nobeoka, 2000 ). Gunalay (2010) study, Make to Order (MTO) and Make to Stock (MTS) can be given to optimize inventory levels, bringing the total cost to a minimum. Yen and Sheu (2004) for the case study in the United States and Taiwan enterprises, found that different types of production and marketing company has a different competitive advantage. Koh and Simpson (2007) study of UK manufacturing, the manufacturing environment (MTO and MTS), the company's delay in delivery performance with different results. Therefore, this study is to explore supply chain integration on the competitive advantage of Taiwan's manufacturing, for example, and understand the role of production and marketing types of interference.
This study mailed 700 questionnaires were distributed and recovery of the 160 questionnaires, 23% of the recovery rate of valid questionnaires was 140, the effective response rate was 20%. In this study, the SPSS 14 statistical software to describe the statistical analysis, reliability analysis, validity analysis, use of the AMOS 16 version of the structural equation model analysis.
According to SEM analysis, the results are as follows: (1) Customer integration has a positive influence on competitive advantage. (2) Internal integration has a positive influence on competitive advantage. (3) Supplier integration doesn’t has a positive influence on competitive advantage. The conclusions of regression analysis are: (1) Customer integration has a positive influence on competitive advantage. (2) Internal integration has a positive influence on competitive advantage. (3) Supplier integration has a positive influence on competitive advantage. (4) Production type doesn’t positively moderate the relationship between customer integration and competitive advantage. (5) Production type doesn’t positively moderate the relationship between internal integration and competitive advantage. (6) Production type doesn’t positively moderate the relationship between supplier integration and competitive advantage

並列關鍵字

MTS ； MTO ； competitive advantage ； supply chain integration

參考文獻

林則孟，生產計畫與管理，初版，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司出版，(2006)：125-130。

Anderson, J. C. and D. W. Gerbing, “Structure Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach”, Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), (1998): 411-423.

Armistead, C. G. and J. Mapes, “The Impact of Supply Chain Integration on Operating Performance”, Logistics Information Management, 6(4), (1993): 9-14.

Armstrong, J. S., and T. S. Overton, “Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys”, Journal of Marketing Research, 14, (1977): 396-402.

Aryee, G., M. M. Naim, and C. Lalwani, ”Supply Chain Integration Using a Maturity Scale”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19(5), (1993): 559-575.