臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究以TFT-LCD產業為例，從USPTO資料庫蒐集了自1976年至2012年的TFT-LCD相關專利資料，透過社會網絡分析探討專利交易市場網絡，隨時間演進在各個階段的形態變化，並分別從網絡的總體層面、群體層面以及個體層面探討網絡形態、以及廠商之間的組成結構和相對位置的變化情形。從三個層面來探討主要是希望可以完整地分析出技術在各階段的不同特性，無論是總體、群體抑或個體層面，都有著緊密的互動關係牽繫著彼此，如此也可以探討出更多的面向的特色，而避免忽略掉其一型態的完整性。
在過去的文獻中大部分都著重在專利引證相關的研究，而本研究從專利引證以及專利交易的觀點出發，依照上述的三種結構層面來探討不同的結構之特性，更能提出過去以往被忽略掉的重要性。此研究的資料可代表了TFT-LCD的發展史歷程，在研究結果中證實了廠商在總體、群體或是個體裡都有著密切的關係，而影響到廠商在不同層面還是會有相似的特性。另此研究所提出的競合四宮格裡，也整理出幾間代表性的廠商現況，其中的研究結果可作為公司在擬定專利方案時的參考依據，協助公司的管理決策者有更多的考量方向，讓公司的經營運作更臻完善。

As the time goes by, the development of technology has been advanced and changed rapidly in the few decades. For business companies, how to launch the key products are the important factors determining success or fail of the company fate. The research focuses on the TFT-LCD industry via the patent data of USPTO from 1976 to 2012 to construct the patent citation matrix and patent transaction matrix for the further explore. There are three levels to discuss about: the macro level for configuration role; the meso level for structural role; and the micro level for ego role. By analyzing the different perspectives is much complete to explore the characteristics each networks they are in the various patterns. Moreover, the paper applies the methodology Social Network Analysis (SNA) to measure. There are some indexes to discuss such as the Degree Centrality and the Betweenness Centrality in the whole network; the Network Cohesion, the Structural Equivalence, and the Blockmodeling for the cluster players; the Structural Holes, and the Co-opetition for the ego firms.
The research finds that it is to know most of the patents are from the citation side to the transaction side that after considering clearly the company would make the accurate action on the transaction steps. That the phenomenon could be seen as the progress the TFT-LCD truly developed that is much likely to verify the situation form then on. Moreover, there are fewer researches focus on the exploring on the both citation side and transaction side. Each of the matrices has its own characteristics for the further analysis that the two matrices are with the close relationship between each other that could help the decision-makers for the complete management.

Table of Contents
CH1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background & Motivation 1
1.2 Research Object 2
CH2 LITERATURE REVIEW 3
2.1 The Definition of Social Network 3
2.2 Patterns of Diffusion 4
2.2.1 Knowledge Diffusion 5
2.2.2 Technology Diffusion 7
2.2.3 The summary of Diffusion 8
2.3 Technology Market 9
2.3.1 Patent in Technology Market 10
2.4 Co-opetition 11
CH3 METHODOLOGY 13
3.1 Research Framework 14
3.2 Research Data 15
3.2.1 Retrieval Data 16
3.2.2 Tools 17
3.3 Social Network Analysis (SNA) 18
3.3.1 Macro level- Configuration 20
3.3.1.1 Degree Centrality 20
3.3.1.2 Betweenness Centrality 21
3.3.2 Meso level- Structural Roles 22
3.3.2.1 Network Cohesion 22
3.3.2.2 Structural Equivalence 23
3.3.2.3 Blockmodeling 24
3.3.3 Micro level- Ego 25
3.3.3.1 Structural Holes 25
CH4 RESEARCH RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 27
4.1 Configuration Roles on Macro View 28
4.1.1 Degree Centrality 30
4.1.1.1 From the View of Citation Matrix 30
4.1.1.2 From the View of Transaction Matrix 30
4.1.2 Betweenness Centrality 32
4.1.2.1 From the View of Citation Matrix 32
4.1.2.2 From the View of Transaction Matrix 32
4.1.3 Brief Summary 32
4.2 Structural Roles on Meso View 34
4.2.1 Cohesion of firms -cooperation 34
4.2.1.1 From the View of Citation Matrix 34
4.2.1.2 From the View of Transaction Matrix 35
4.2.1.3 Brief Summary 35
4.2.2 Structural Equivalence -competition 36
4.2.2.1 From the View of Citation Matrix 36
4.2.2.2 From the View of Transaction Matrix 37
4.2.2.3 Brief Summary 37
4.2.3 Blockmodeling 38
4.2.3.1 From the View of Citation Matrix 38
4.2.3.2 From the View of Transaction Matrix 39
4.2.3.3 Brief Summary 41
4.3 Ego Roles on Micro View 44
4.3.1 Structural Hole 44
4.3.1.1 From the View of Citation Matrix 44
4.3.1.2 From the View of Transaction Matrix 45
4.3.2 Co-opetition 48
4.3.3 Brief Summary 53
CH5 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 54
5.1 Research Conclusions 54
5.1.1 Macro View 55
5.1.2 Meso View 56
5.1.3 Micro View 59
5.2 Management Implications 61
5.3 Research Limitation 62
5.4 Research Suggestion 62
Reference 63
Chinese Reference 63
Internet Information 64
English Reference 64
Appendix 68
Appendix 1. THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE PLAYERS 68
Appendix 2. CITATION MATRIX- DEGREE CENTRALITY 72
Appendix 3. TRANSACTION MATRIX- DEGREE CENTRALITY 74
Appendix 4. CITATION MATRIX- BETWEENNESS CENTRALITY 76
Appendix 5. TRANSACTION MATRIX- BETWEENNESS CENTRALITY 78
Appendix 6. CITATION MATRIX- COHESION (Optimization of cluster) 80
Appendix 7. TRANSACTION MATRIX- COHESION 85
Appendix 8. CITATION MATRIX- NETWORK CONSTRAINT 90
Appendix 9. TRANSACTION MATRIX- NETWORK CONSTRAINT 92
Appendix 10. CITATION MATRIX-BLOCKMODELING 93
Appendix 11. TRANSACTION MATRIX- BLOCKM0DELING 96
Appendix 12. THE NETDRAW OF THE CITATION MATRIX Matrix 99
Appendix 13. THE NETDRAW OF THE TRANSACTION MATRIX 99
Appendix 14.THE NETDRAW OF THE BOTH MATRIX 100



List of Figure
Figure 1. Research framework 14
Figure 2. The concept of structural holes 25
Figure 3. The density flow of the citation matrix 41
Figure 4. The density flow of the transaction matrix 41
Figure 5. The flow from citation phase to transaction phase 43



List of Table
Table 1. The definition of Network 4
Table 2. The important notions of the well-known scholars 5
Table 3. The patterns of the contents 8
Table 4. The region composition of the patents 15
Table 5. The retrieve flow of the patents 16
Table 6. The measure index for research methodology 18
Table 7. Overall density 27
Table 8. The inference of the relationship among indexes 28
Table 9. The correlation coefficient between citation and transaction 29
Table 10. The density of the citation matrix in the blockmodeling index 39
Table 11. The density of the transaction matrix in the blockmodeling index 40
Table 12. Network Constrain Index of Citation Matrix 46
Table 13. Network Constrain Index of Transaction Matrix 47
Table 14. The co-opetition model 48
Table 15. The International representatives-HITACHI 49
Table 16. The International representatives-LG_PHILIPS 49
Table 17. The Taiwanese representatives-CHIMEI 50
Table 18. The Taiwanese representatives-INNOLUX 51
Table 19. The Legal Entity representatives-UNIV_TOKYO 51
Table 20. The Legal Entity representatives-INDUSTRIAL 52
Table 21. The Patent Troll representatives-ACACIA 52
Table 22. The Patent Troll representatives-GRARDIAN 53

Reference
Chinese Reference
1.劉軍 (2009)，「整體網分析講義: UCINET 軟件實用指南」，上海世紀出版集團格致出版社。

2.謝超然 (2005)，「以網絡分析的觀點來看貿易全球化與地區化和不平等貿易」，國立暨南國際大學國際企業學系碩士論文。

3.賴致廷 (2005)，「廠商技術擴散與技術能力之動態研究-以網絡觀點探討」，國立暨南國際大學國際企業學系碩士論文。

4.李焕仁、魏志賓 (2006)，「我國TFT-LCD產業發展情境與策略分析」，科技發展政策報導。

5.張淑卿 (2003)，「國際知識擴散之分析：電子業專利引證資料之應用」，國立台灣大學法教分處經濟研究所碩士論文。

6.張婉貞 (2013)，「以社會網絡觀點探討LD產業廠商之競合關係」，國立暨南國際大學國際企業學系碩士論文。

7.林莉陵 (2009)，「從社會網絡觀點探討廠商專利引證之關係」，國立暨南國際大學國際企業學系碩士論文。

8.羅家德 (1997)，「社會網絡分析講義」，社會科學文獻出版社。

9.黃鴻鈞 (2005)，「國際技術擴散之網絡效應與結構」，國立暨南國際大學國際企業學系博士論文。

10.謝榮峻 (2004)，「TFT-LCD專利的科學關聯性分析」，國立中興大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。

11.林欣潔 (102)，「以網絡分析觀點探討專利交易市場-TFT-LCD產業為例」，國立暨南國際大學國際企業學系碩士論文。

12.許萬龍、林建揚、謝明峰、劉展光、王文萱 (2006)，「探討美國IP HOLDING COMPANY之經營模式」，經濟部跨領域科技管理研習班論文。


Internet Information
1.科技產業資訊室(2003)，http://iknow.stpi.narl.org.tw/Post/patentsearch.aspx

2.WIPO. Licensing and Technology Transfer (2013)
http:// www.wipo.int/patent-law/en/developments/licensing .html


English Reference
1.Allen, James, Andrew D. James, and Phil Gamlen. (2007), "Formal versus informal knowledge networks in R&D: a case study using social network analysis." , R&D Management 37.3: 179-196.

2.Arora, A. (1996). Contracting for tacit knowledge: the provision of technical services in technology licensing contracts. Journal of Development Economics,50(2), 233-256.

3.Autant-Bernard, C., & Massard, N. (2009). Underlying mechanisms of knowledge diffusion. IAREG Working paper 4.7.

4.Barnett, G. A. (2001). A longitudinal analysis of the international telecommunication network, 1978-1996. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(10), 1638-1655.

5.Bascavusoglu, E. (2004). Patterns of technology transfer to the developing countries: differentiating between embodied and disembodied knowledge.European Trade Study Group, 4, 112-121.

6.Burt, Ronald S (1982), "Toward a structural theory of action: network models of social Structure, Perception, and Action.” , New York: Academic Press

7.Burt, Ronald S (2004), “Structural Holes and Good Ideas.”, American Journal of Sociology 110:349-99

8.Borgatti, Stephen P., Martin G. Everett, and Linton C. Freeman (2002), “Ucinet for Windows: Software for social network analysis.” , Harvard: Analytic Technologies

9.Buchanan, M. (2003). Nexus: small worlds and the groundbreaking theory of networks. WW Norton & Company.

10.Cao, Y., & Nee, V. G. (2000). Comment: Controversies and evidence in the market transition debate. American Journal of Sociology, 1175-1189.

11.Chesbrough, H. (2013). “Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape.” Harvard Business Press.


12.Eaton, J., & Kortum, S. (1999). International technology diffusion: Theory and measurement. International Economic Review, 40(3), 537-570.

13.Ernst, D., & Kim, L. (2002). Global production networks, knowledge diffusion, and local capability formation. Research policy, 31(8), 1417-1429.

14.Escher, J. P. (2001). The process of external technology exploitation as part of technology marketing: a conceptual framework. In Management of Engineering and Technology, 2001. PICMET'01. Portland International Conference on (Vol. 1, pp. 241-242). IEEE.

15.Evenson, Robert. "International invention: implications for technology market analysis." R&D, patents, and productivity. University of Chicago Press, 1984. 89-126.

16.Festinger, Leon, and Harold H. Kelley. "Changing attitudes through social contact." (1951).

17.Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification.Social networks, 1(3), 215-239.

18.Gambardella, A., Giuri, P., & Luzzi, A. (2007). The market for patents in Europe.Research Policy, 36(8), 1163-1183.

19.Griliches, Z. (Ed.). (2007). R&D, patents and productivity. University of Chicago Press.

20.Gemünden, H. G., Salomo, S., & Hölzle, K. (2007). Role models for radical innovations in times of open innovation. Creativity and innovation management,16(4), 408-421.

21.Han, J., & Kamber, M. (2000). Data mining: concepts and techniques (the Morgan Kaufmann Series in data management systems).

22.Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative science quarterly, 716-749.

23.Huang, H. C., Shih, H. Y., Ke, T. H., & Liu, P. Y. (2015). Elucidating How Environment Affects Patterns of Network Change: A Case Study of the Evolution of an Industrial Network in the Flat Panel Display Sector. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(1), 190-213.

24.Hung, S. W., Tsai, J. M., Cheng, M. J., & Chen, P. C. (2012). Analysis of the development strategy of late-entrants in Taiwan and Korea’s TFT-LCD industry.Technology in Society, 34(1), 9-22.

25.Keller, W. (2001). International technology diffusion (No. w8573). National bureau of economic research.

26.Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action, 216, 239.

27.Knoke, David, and Ronald S. Burt. "Prominence." Applied network analysis(1983): 195-222.

28.Lee, S. H. (2012). PATTERNS OF KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVER–An FDI perspective. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research Vol,1(10), 10-17.

29.Liu, C. H. (2011). The effects of innovation alliance on network structure and density of cluster. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 299-305.

30.Luczkovich, J. J., Borgatti, S. P., Johnson, J. C., & Everett, M. G. (2003). Defining and measuring trophic role similarity in food webs using regular equivalence. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 220(3), 303-321.

31.Maskus, K. E. (2004). Encouraging international technology transfer (Vol. 7). Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.

32.Mitchell, J. C. (Ed.). (1969). Social networks in urban situations: analyses of personal relationships in Central African towns. Manchester University Press.

33.Mogee, M. E. (2000). Foreign patenting behaviour of small and large firms.International Journal of Technology Management, 19(1-2), 149-164.

34.Nie, X., & Singh, R. P. (2003). Specific differentiation of recombinant PVY N: O and PVY NTN isolates by multiplex RT-PCR. Journal of virological methods,113(2), 69-77.

35.Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford university press.

36.Paci, R., & Batteta, E. (2003). Innovation networks and knowledge flows across the european regions.

37.Parsons, G. (1991). Cohesion coherence: Scientific texts. Functional and systemic linguistics: Approaches and uses, 55, 415

38.Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension.

39.Rice, R. E., & Aydin, C. (1991). Attitudes toward new organizational technology: Network proximity as a mechanism for social information processing.Administrative science quarterly, 219-244.

40.Ritter, T., Wilkinson, I. F., & Johnston, W. J. (2004). Managing in complex business networks. Industrial marketing management, 33(3), 175-183.

41.Rogers, E. M. (1983). Difiusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 18(20), 271.

42.Ryan, M. P. (2010). Patent incentives, technology markets, and public–private bio-medical innovation networks in Brazil. World Development, 38(8), 1082-1093.

43.Schweizer, T., & White, D. R. (1998). Revitalizing the study of Kinship and exchange with network approaches. Kinship, Networks and Exchange, 1-15.

44.Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management science, 51(5), 756-770.

45.Smith, M. A., Shneiderman, B., Milic-Frayling, N., Mendes Rodrigues, E., Barash, V., Dunne, C., ... & Gleave, E. (2009, June). Analyzing (social media) networks with NodeXL. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Communities and technologies (pp. 255-264). ACM.

46.Shih, H. Y. (2008). Contagion effects of electronic commerce diffusion: Perspective from network analysis of industrial structure. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(1), 78-90.

47.Shih, H. Y., & Chang, T. L. S. (2009). International diffusion of embodied and disembodied technology: A network analysis approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 821-834.

48.Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 172-187.

49.Tong, X., & Lifset, R. (2007). International copper flow network: A blockmodel analysis. Ecological Economics, 61(2), 345-354.

50.Von Wartburg, I., Teichert, T., & Rost, K. (2005). Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis. Research Policy, 34(10), 1591-1607.

51.Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications (Vol. 8). Cambridge university press.

52.Williamson, O. E. (1973). Markets and hierarchies: some elementary considerations. The American economic review, 316-325.