企業創新策略、核心競爭力類型及其配適對經營績效影響之研究-以海峽兩岸台商企業網路互賴觀點實證

Strategic Fit of Business Innovation and Core Competence Types with Performance－Taiwanese Firm in Taiwan and Mainland China Interdependence View

王國烜(Kuo-Heng Wang)

指導教授 ： 呂鴻德

中原大學/商學院/企業管理研究所/碩士(2001年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200100356

摘要

Hamel(2001)認為創新是未來唯一不變有效的企業生存工具或能力」；Christensen(2001)認為核心競爭力可使組織競爭優勢更加持久。此外，兩岸貿易持續熱絡，國內企業西進大陸儼然形成，劉仁傑（民90）更明白指出，「國際分工就是兩岸分工」。
故本研究依據企業創新策略、核心競爭力兩個構面，配適而成「創新主導型」、「反應原生型」、「能力主導型」、「前瞻成熟型」等四種配適策略型態，代表企業在面臨競爭時所採行的四種不同策略，以探討對經營績效之影響。更進一步將產業、網路互賴類型納為本研究之中介變數；並將地理區域納為本研究之系絡變數，以分析其對於四種配適策略型態與經營績效之影響。
本研究以海峽兩岸製造業台商企業為研究對象，並實際郵寄各973份問卷，回收114份有效問卷，回卷資料經因素分析、集群分析、單因子、二因子與多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論如后：
1. 企業創新策略分為前瞻型與反應型二種型態，而前瞻型在「達成度」、「滿意度」與「整體經營績效」方面的績效較反應型為佳。
2. 核心競爭力分為原生型與成熟型二種型態，而成熟型在「達成度」、「滿意度」以及「客觀績效」與「整體經營績效」方面的績效較原生型為佳。
3. 無論在「達成度」、「滿意度」、「客觀績效」與「整體績效」方面，依前瞻成熟型最佳，能力主導型次之，創新主導型再次之，最後為反應原生型。
4. 就「滿意度」而言，高科技產業以創新主導型為最佳，傳統產業為前瞻成熟型為最佳。
5. 就「達成度」而言，高度互賴型以前瞻成熟型為最佳，低度互賴型以創新主導為最佳；就「客觀績效」與「整體經營績效」而言，不論高、低度互賴以前瞻成熟型為最佳。
6. 地理區域對產業、網路互賴及配適策略類型在「達成度」與「滿意度」產有顯著差異。

關鍵字

核心競爭力 ； 網路互賴 ； 經營績效 ； 創新 ； 台商

並列摘要

In 2001, Hamel pointed out “Innovation is the only instrument or capability which enterprises will exist.” Christensen also indicated that “ core competencies－internal processes－have been thought to make organization’s competitive advantage more enduring.” Furthermore, the trade in Taiwan and Mainland is frequent, the trend which domestic enterprises entry into Mainland is forming. Besides, Jen-Chieh Liu expressed that division of labor in international market is that division of labor in Taiwan and Mainland.
In accordance with two dimensions of Business-Innovation strategy and core competence are divided into four types: innovation-oriented, reactive original, competence-oriented, proactive maturity. These four typologies present different strategies which enterprises take in the competitive environment. In addition, this study is discussed the influence with performance. Furthermore, this empirical study also considers two immediate varieties-the types of industry and interdependence; One contextual variety –area. There, this study is discussed the relationship between strategic fit and performance, and the causes of the types of industry, organizational dependence and area influence above.
The Major research object is Taiwanese manufacturer in Taiwan and Mainland China 973 companies were requested to answer the questionnaires by mail and the effective respondents were 114 sets. After analyzing those data, the conclusions are summarized as following:
1. The strategy of business innovation is divided into two types: proactive and reactive then performance of proactive in achievement and satisfaction and entire is better, than reactive.
2. Core competence is divided into two types: original and maturity, then performance of maturity in achievement and satisfaction, objective and entire is better than original.
3. No matter in achievement, satisfaction or objective and entire performance, the proactive-maturity is the best one, second is competence-oriented, third is innovation-oriented and the last is reactive-original.
4. As to satisfaction, the performance of innovation-oriented in high-tech industry is better than others; However, the performance of proactive-maturity in traditional industry is better than others.
5. As to achievement, the performance of proactive-maturity in high-interdependence type is better than others; However, the performance of innovation-oriented in low-interdependence type is better than others. Besides, as to objective and entire performance, no matter what types of interdependence type are, the proactive-maturity is better than others.
6. It is insignificant different in area, industry, interdependence and strategic fit types with achievement and satisfaction.

並列關鍵字

Interdependence ； Taiwanese Firm ； Innovation ； Performance ； Core Competence

參考文獻

44. 陳明璋（民86），「數位化時代的企業創新策略」，貿易雜誌第13期，台北市進出口商業同業公會出版。

57. 曾寶玲（民88），企業核心能力與人力資源策略關係之研究，國立台臺灣師範大學工業科技教育研究所未出版碩士論文。

29. 林靈宏（民82），消費品類型、創新類型與新產品行銷策略關係研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。

1. Abernathy and Clark (1985), “Innovation: Mapping the Winds of Creative Destruction”, Research Policy, pg. 3, 19pgs.

6. Briance, M. et. al. (1998),“Dynamics of core competencies in leading multinational companies”, California Management Review, Berkeley, 40(4), pg. 117, 16 pgs.