臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

第三代(3G)行動通訊的應用服務已在先進國家蓬勃發展，歐盟針對行動數據傳輸的費率訂定上限，因此預期未來歐盟國家消費者對行動上網的資料傳輸需求將大幅成長，以及多元化的應用及服務將整合至寬頻行動網路之中。在後3G產業生態系中，產業鏈的生態不像以往般單純，新的技術或產品創新或服務創新，例如Apple的i-Phone與iTune服務，都會對原有產業鏈中每個角色的價值產生劇大的衝擊。因此，如何先期窺知後3G行動通信產業變遷的趨勢，並掌握其發展契機，乃是任何通信業者經營管理的一大課題。
本研究以產業生態系理論為基礎，探討後3G行動通信產業之發展趨勢及價值鏈變遷，希望特別針對後3G行動通信產業建立一個生態系理論分析模型，除了藉以分析後3G行動通信技術之發展趨勢，推論行動通信產業體系內成員間的依存、互動、價值創造與分享模式能產生之影響力，並分析其對行動通信產業生態體系之衝擊。此外，此模型將建議台灣廠商如何掌握後3G行動通信產業生態體系與如何善加運用生態體系內資源，產生競爭優勢。並以國內經營者之角度，針對全球後3G行動通信市場之商機，分析台灣廠商面對的挑戰與機會，並提出經營競合策略和營運模式建議。
第四代(4G)行動通信系統將會是由LTE或是WiMAX兩者中哪個技術標準勝出?本研究以產業生態系理論為基礎，建立一個評估LTE和WiMAX在後3G行動通信產業競爭優劣態勢的理論框架。本研究結果指出雖然WiMAX在標準與佈建上稍早於LTE，但LTE的優勢是能借力於現有3G生態系的豐沛資源與高市佔率所衍生的規模經濟，將演變成為4G行動通信產業的主流。
本研究之生態系理論分析模型除了運用來評估行動通信產業新技術之競爭外亦可使用來分析台灣通信產業之優劣勢及機會，透過理論分析模型可以提供政府未來制定產業政策時快速簡易之比較分析，並以WiMAX為案例提供政府檢討產業政策之建立模式。

The application service of Third Generation (3G) mobile telecommunications is gradually progressing in developed countries. By setting a maximum rate for mobile data service, the European Union (EU) is able to anticipate the substantial growth in the consumers’ mobile internet demand for data transmission in European countries, as well as to integrate the wide range of applications and services into the broadband mobile networks. In the post-3G era, the new technology and innovation is changing the ecosystem of the value chain.For instance, the iPhone with iTune service has brought big impact to the existing players in the value chain.Therefore, trying to forsee the changing and migration of the mobile communication industry and catch up the opportunity is the key aspect in the management of technology.
This research is based on the industry ecology theory to discover the trend of post-3G mobile communication industry and the shifting of value chain.A theoretical analysis model is established to evaluate the interdependence as well as value sharing of players inside the ecosystem.In addition, this model give an assessment and recommendation to Taiwan communication company the way of leveraging resources in the ecosystem to create competitiveness and overcome the challenge.
With regard to Fourth Generation (4G) mobile communication system, which of the two technological standards, LTE or WiMAX, will prevail? This research uses the industry ecology theory to assess the merits and drawbacks of both LTE and WiMAX in the midst of industry trends. The results show that although WiMAX proved superior to LTE in certain technological capabilities, the abundant 3G ecology resources provide LTE with a strong leverage and thus allowing it to develop its way to the mainstream of the 4G mobile communication industries.

摘 要 i
ABSTRACT ii
誌 謝 iii
目　錄 iv
表目錄 v
圖目錄 1
第一章　緒論 2
1.1　研究背景與研究動機 2
1.2　研究目的 3
1.3　研究範圍 3
1.4　研究架構與流程 3
第二章　產業生態體系文獻分析與評論 5
2.1　簡介 5
2.2　價值鏈與價值網絡理論探討 5
2.3　生態系理論探討 6
2.4　組織生態理論 7
2.5　產業演化理論 10
2.6　競合理論 21
2.7　標準化理論 26
第三章　行動通信產業生態體系模型 29
3.1　產業生態系分析模型 33
3.2　產業標準 33
3.3　生態系統領導者 33
3.4　營運作業模式 34
3.5　政府政策與法規 35
3.6　產品與服務創新 35
3.7　協力廠共生與共同演化 36
3.8　市場需求與特性 37
3.9　投資者與利益相關者 37
第四章　運用行動通信產業生態體系模型分析LTE與WiMAX產業之競爭態勢 39
4.1　全球行動通信產業市場 39
4.2　全球行動通信技術與標準發展趨勢 43
4.3　3G/3.5G產業分析 48
4.4　WiMAX產業分析 57
4.5 WiMAX與3.5G/LTE之競爭分析 69
第五章　後3G行動通信產業生態中台灣廠商的挑戰與機會 100
5.1　台灣通信產業現況 100
5.2　台灣廠商發展WiMAX之機會 102
5.3　台灣行動通信設備廠之現況 108
5.4　台灣行動通信廠之挑戰與機會 110
第六章　結論與建議 115
參考文獻 118

中文期刊
楊丁元、陳慧珍(1996)《業競天擇—高科技產業生態》，台北:工商時報。
羅德興（2004），中原大學企業管理學系碩士論文，IC設計產業生態之競合與演化關係之研究。
中文專書
財團法人資訊工業策進會(MIC)(2005)，後3G Eco-system變遷中探討行動電話產業發展契機。
吳思華(1996)，策略九說，台北：臉譜出版社。
MIC, 2007，西歐行動通訊服務市場分析。
MIC, 2009， 全球行動電話用戶數預測, 2006~2013。
英文期刊
Andersson, P., Hulten, S. & Valiente, P. (2005). Beauty contest licensing lessons from 3G Process　in Sweden. Telecommunication Ploicy, Vol.29(8), 577-593.
Baum, Joel A. & Oliver, C. (1992). Institutional embeddedness and the dynamics of organizational populations. American Socilogical Review, Vol.57(4), 540-559.
Baum, J. A.C. & Singh, J.V. (1996). Dynamic of organization response to competition. Social Forces, Vol.74(4), 1261-1297.
Benson, B., Sage, A. P. & Cook, G. (1993). Emerging Technology-Evaluation Methodology:
With application to Micro-Electromechanical Systems. IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management, Vol.40(2), 114-123.
Burgelman, R.A. (1991). Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organization Science, Vol. 2(3), 239 - 262.
Bruderer, E. & Singh, J.V. (1996). Organizational evolution, learning and selection: A genetic-algorithm- model. Academy of management journal. Vol.39(5), 1322-1349
Chessborough, H., & Rosenbloom, R.S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies. Industrial and Corporate change, Vol. 11(3), 529-555.
David, P. A. and Greenstein, S. (1990). The Economics of Compatibility Standards: An Introduction to Recent Research, Economics of Innovation and New Technology,Vol.1(1-2).3-41.
Fjeldstad, O. D., Becerra, M. & Narayanan, S. (2004). Strategic action in network industries: an empirical analysis of the European mobile phone industry. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 20(1-2), 173–196.
Farrel, Joseph and Garth Saloner (1985). Standardization, compatibility and innovation. RAND Journal of Economics,Vol.16(1), 70-83.
Gadiesh, O., and Gilbert, J. L. (1998). How to map your industry’s profit pool. Harvard Business Review (May-June): 149-162.
Gallagher, S. & Park, S.H. (2002). Innovation and Competition in Standard-Based Industries: A Historical Analysis of the U.S. Home Video Game Market. Engineering Management, Vol.49(1), 67-82.
Holm, D. B., Eriksson, K. & Johanson, J. (1999). Creating value through mutual business network relationships. Strategic Management Journal.Vol. 20(5), 467– 486.
Ianstiti, M. & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as Ecology. Harvard Business Review, March, 68-78.
Johanson, J. & Mattsson, L. G. (1985). Marketing Investments, and Market Investment in Industrial Networks. International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol.2(3), 185-195.
Johanson, J. & Mattsson, L. G. (1987). Interorganizational Relations in Industrial Systems: A Network Approach Compared with the Transaction-Cost Approach. International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol.17(1), 34-48.
Lambkin, M. & Day, G.S. (1989). Evolutionary processes in competitive market: Beyond the product life cycle. Journal of Marketing, Vol.53(3), 4-20.
Lee, J.-R., O’Neal, D.E., Pruett, M.W. & Thomas, H. (1995). Planning for dominance: a strategic perspective on the emergence of a dominant design. R&D Management, Vol. 25(1), 3-15.
Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and Prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 75-86.
Morganti, F. (2002). Value Chain in Telecommunications: The Growing Importance of Content is Transforming Industry Structures. InterMedia,Vol. 30(1), 18-19.
Peppard, J. & Rylander, A. (2006). From Value Chain to Value Network: Insight for Mobile Operator. European Management Journal, Vol.24(2-3), 128-141.
Stabell, C. B. & Fjeldstad, O. D. (1998). Configuring value for competitive advantage: on chains, shops and networks. Strategic management Journal, Vol.(19), 413-437.
Shapiro, C. & Varian, H.R. (1999). The art of standard wars, California Management Review, Vol.41 (2), 8-32.
Singh, Jitendra V. and Charles Lumsden. (1990). Theory and Research in Organizational Ecology. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.16, 161-95.
Tegarden, L. F., Hatfield, D. E. & Echols, A. E. (1999). Doomed from the start: What is the value of selecting the future dominant design?, Strategic Management Journal. Vol.20(6), 495-518.
Yu, H.C., Lee, Z.Y. & Chang, S.C. (2005). Using fuzzy mult-criteria decision making approach to evaluate alternative licensing mechanisms. Information & Management, Vol.42(4), 517-531.
Yuan,Y., Zheng,W., Wang,Y., Xu, Z., Yang，Q. & Gao, Y. (2006). Xiaolingtong versus 3G in China: Which will be the winner? ,Telecommunication Policy,Vol.30(5-6), 297-313.
Yan, X. (2004). 3G licensing in Hong Kong: The debate. Telecommunication policy, Vol.28(2), 213-226.
英文專書
Aaker, D. A. (1988). Strategic Market Management, 2nd ed., New York; John Wiley & Sons, Ins.
Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. (2001). Internet business models and strategies. New York: McGraw-Hill International Editions.
Allee V. (2002). A Value Network Approach for Modeling and Measuring Intangibles. Presented at Transparent Enterprise, Madrid, November 2002.
Auyang, S.Y. (1998). Foundations of complex-system theories : In economics, evolutionary biology, and statistical physics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Barnett, William P. (1993).Organizational ecology approaches to institutions. pp. 171-181 in Lindenberg and Schreuder, eds., Interdisciplinary perspectives on organizations, Riverside, NJ: Pergamon Press.
Brandenburger, A. M. & Nalebuff, B. (1996). Co-opetition: A Revolution Mindset That Combines Competition and Cooperation... The Game Theory Strategy That's Changing the Game of Business. Currency, ISBN 0-385-47949-2.
Cargill, C. F. (1982). Information technology standardization: Theory, Process, and Public Policy, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Carroll, G.R. & Hannan, M.T. (1995). Organizations in Industry: Strategy, Structure, and Selection, Oxford University Press. NY.
Darwin, Charles (1859). On the Origin of Species (1st ed.), London: John Murray,
ISBN 0801413192.
Owen, D.F. (1974). What is Ecology?, London;New York:Oxford University Press.
Forrester, J.W. (1968). Principle of System. MIT press, Cambridge. MA.
Grant, V. (1991). The Evolutionary Process. A Critical Study of Evolutionary Theory(2nd ed), Columbia University Press. NY.
Grindley, P. (1995) Standards Strategy and Policy: Cases and Stories, Oxford University Press.
Grove, A.S. (1996). Only the Paranoid Survive: How to Exploit the Crisis Point That Challenge Every Company and Career, Harper Collins.
Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational Ecology, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hawken, P. (1993). The Ecology of Commerce, HarperCollinsPublishers.
Hill, C.W. and Jones, G.R. (1998). Strategic Management Theory. 4nd ed., Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company.
Johanson, J. & Mattsson, L. G. (1988). Internationalisation in Industrial Systems─ A Network Approach, in Hood and Vahlue (eds.), Strategies in Global Competition.
Krebs, C.J. (1978). Ecology, Harper&Row. New York.
Macglade, J. (1999). Bridging disciplines: The role of scientific advice, especially biological modelling. In Kooiman, J., van Vliet, M. and Jentoft, S. eds. Creative governance---opportunities for fisheries in Europe, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limite.
Moore, A.G. (1999). Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling High-Tech Products to Mainstream Customers, Rev. Edition, NJ: Harperbusiness.
Moore, J. (1996). The Death of Competition, Harperbusiness.
Porter, M.E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. The Free Press.
Porte, M.E.(1985). Competitive advantage-Creating and sustaining superior performance, New York, The Free Press(Macmillan).
Porter, M.E. (1990). Competitive Advantage of Nations. The Free Press.
Scherer, F.M. (1990). Industrial Market Structure and Economic performance. 2nd ed., Boston︰Houghton Mifflin Company
Tapscott, D., Ticoll, D. & Lowy, A. (2000). Digital Capital: Harnessing the power of business webs, Harvard Business School Press.
Timmers, P. (1999). Electronic Commerce: Strategies and models for business-to-business trading, New York: Wiley.
Weidenbaum, M. L. (1977). Business, government, and the public, NJ: Prentice-Hall.