衡量半導體零組件通路商之相對經營績效

沈瑞程(Jui-Cheng Shen)

指導教授 ： 張東生

國立中央大學/管理學院/企業管理學系碩士在職專班/碩士(2007年)

摘要

半導體市場隨著中國市場的蓬勃發展而呈現戰線逐漸拉長，戰局不斷擴大的情勢，這使得能協調上游半導體供應商與下游電子產品製造商的半導體零組件通路商之重要性日益突顯。雖然有數百家公司或多或少扮演著通路商的角色，但是真正能夠持績發展，深耕半導體通路領域而符合國內外供應商、客戶所需的，並且經營績效突出的，到底是何種性質的通路商呢?
本研究嘗試藉由各上市櫃通路商於「臺灣證券交易所」所屬的「公開資訊觀測站」上公開之每年年報擷取績效評比資料，利用資料包絡分析法來找出具有顯著績效的通路商，並以各通路商之跨年度表現來了解各通路商之經營狀況屬於何種。其次，探討各通路商的財務特性，尋找並檢視標竿與非標竿通路商在財務特性上是否有顯著的不同。
本研究結果如下：
一、我國通路商在經營績效上，呈現強者恆強、弱者恆弱的局面，在年度績效排行上，標竿通路商最多不超過三家，多為「至上」、「益登」、「倍微」為領先群。而在績效長年不佳者，則為「振遠」、「品佳」、「增你強」三家。
二、依據跨期效率變動及經營效率指標，通路商可劃分為六種經營狀況，其中以資產規模最小之倍微表現最為突出，但資產規模遠超過同業之世平及友尚則表現欠佳，呈現出大型通路商並未能因規模優勢就能取得較好之經營績效。
三、進一步探討影響通路商績效因素：標竿通路商在償債能力上之流動比率/速動比率及經營能力上之存貨週轉率/平均銷貨日數，表現顯著比其他同業優良，非標竿通路商應努力追求之。
四、績效表現屬於後段班的通路商，在經營能力上之應收歀項週轉率/平均收現日數及獲利能力上之資產報酬率、股東權益報酬率、稅前純益佔實收資本比率，明顯遜於前段班之通路商，各通路商應小心這些指標，以免落後於同業。
五、檢視標竿通路商與非標竿通路商，在公司成立期間並未有顯著差異，顯示老牌通路商並不因卡位較早就能佔優勢。另外在員工久任上兩者亦未有顯著差異，表示通路商是否能夠長久留住員工並非重要因素。

關鍵字

資料包絡分析法 ； 半導體零組件通路商 ； 標竿學習

並列摘要

With the prosperous growth of semiconductor market in China, it is found that the supply chain is getting longer and harder to maintain. Therefore, semiconductor component distributor becomes more and more important and indispensable in this field. Today, there are more than hundred companies which play as distributors, but what kind of distributors could really satisfy both vendors and manufacturers?
In this research, raw data of each distributor is collected from public “Market Observation Post System” which is held by “Taiwan Stock Exchange Corporation”. DEA method is adopted to evaluate all distributors’ performance in order to realize the relative positions for all being-estimated distributors. Furthermore, this research tries to classify each distributor’s management status by 5-year-long performance change. Then, using the conclusions we have from above, this research studies each distributor’s financial characteristics in order to look for if there is any remarkable difference between benchmark and non-benchmark distributors.
Here summarize the conclusions of this research:
1. Regarding to management performance, this research shows that good performance distributors are getting stronger and vice versa. The benchmark group includes 3 companies, which are Supreme, Edom and PCT. The members of fall-behind group are Frontek, SAC and Zenitron.
2. This research classifies distributors into six types by Malmquist Productivity Index and CCR. Among these six groups, PCT, whose scale of asset is the smallest, is the one with the best performance. However, some distributors with far bigger asset than other competitors are not good enough as people think, like WPI and Yosun.
3. Getting further to analyze the root causes which could affect distributors’ performance, this research finds that benchmark distributors are doing excellent on following aspects: Current Ratio/Quick Ratio and Inventory Turnover Ratio/Days-Inventory Turn.
4. To analyze the performance fall-behind distributors, it shows they are poor at following aspects: A/R Turnover Ratio/Average Collection Period, ROA, ROE, and Pre-Tax Income Capital ratio.
5. This research shows that there is no obvious difference between benchmark and non-benchmark distributors on following aspects: Company Setup Duration and Employee on-job Duration. It concludes that old distributors or distributors with long on-job employees are not certainly with better performance.

並列關鍵字

Semiconductor Component Distributor ； Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) ； Benchmark Learning

參考文獻

4. 李仁(2005)，「IC設計業銷售代理之管理-以在台美商N公司為例」，淡江大學管理科學研究所企業經營碩士在職專班碩士論文

10.林建煌(2004)，「行銷管理」，智勝文化

14.高強、黃旭男、Toshiyuki Sueyoshi（2003），「管理績效評估：資料包絡分析法」，華泰文化事業股份有限公司

4. Charles, W. L. Hill and Gareth R. Jones (2004) “Strategic Management Theory,” Houghton Mifflin Company

24.龔明鑫(2006)，「2015台灣製造業發展願景與規劃」，台灣經濟研究院