臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

面對全球高科技產業的迅速發展，以及競爭廠商的新產品推陳出新，使得高科技產業經營環境日益嚴苛。而在建構企業專屬的競爭優勢之外，若能藉由與供應鏈上下游夥伴廠商的相互合作，達到整合優勢，發揮綜效，則對於企業而言，將可造就其競爭優勢。高科技產業之一的TFT-LCD面板業，是資本與技術密集之產業，此產業對於上下游生產的整合與集中化已成為不可避免的趨勢。此外為了因應迅捷的技術創新速度以及快速變動的市場需求，勢必要投入大量的研發工作來保持競爭力。因此本研究針對多層面新產品開發流程（NPD），以系統動態觀點模擬不同之開發流程及資源配置策略。開發流程分為平行式（parallel）及連續式（sequential）兩種。而在有限的開發產能限制下，資源之分配會影響不同開發活動中任務完成之速率。在開發過程中有兩種不同的資源配置策略：先將資源分配於開發週期早期，亦或開發週期晚期。在供應商涉入關係之模擬，本研究探討四種不同之供應商涉入關係對於新產品開發流程及資源配置之相互關係，其涉入關係定義為常規開發（arm’s-length development）、例行開發（routine development）、關鍵開發（critical development）以及策略開發（strategic development）。對於此新產品開發模型之穩健性及平衡分析，則藉由額外之工作負擔為外加衝擊以驗證。研究結果發現，當新產品開發流程為平行式時，其資源配置決策以先投入開發週期早期之績效為最佳；若開發系統為連續式流程時，則是將資源投入到開發週期晚期之績效較佳。此外，當平行式開發流程系統受到外加衝擊時，若衝擊強度大於三分之一時，系統將無法回復原來之穩定態而進入另一較差之平衡態；然而，當開發流程為連續式時，系統較不易受到外加衝擊之影響而能回覆到原始之穩定態。在平行式開發流程以且資源分配於開發週期早期之系統中，若系統忙碌程度增加或測試時間縮短時，會使得整個系統變得較為敏感而易於落到較差之績效表現中；反之，若系統忙碌程度降低時，則能使績效獲得改善。然而，過長的測試時間卻無法使系統在績效上具有大幅改善。在供應商影響之方面，若與供應商之關係為常規開發，系統將可藉由供應商提供之額外資源而使得系統績效獲得改善；在例行開發部分，雖然投入之資源可使得系統表現獲得改善，但比例之多寡並無明顯差別；若為關鍵開發，則製造商需注意投入之資源比例，投入過多並不能獲得改善績效之成果；策略開發則是製造商以及供應商都需注意投入之資源比例，若投入之資源不足，將無法使得雙方之合作達到較佳之成果。

This study investigates a multiple-phase new product development (NPD) project model which explicitly models process and resources allocation into different NPD process as a sequential, functional development process and a parallel process. The development process of a project defines the flows of work among development phases and the completion of development tasks within each phase. The effectiveness of resources constrains the rate at which different development activities are performed by limited development capacity. The resource allocations of such processes have two different strategies; one is assigning the resources to a project into late development cycle, and the other is to early development cycle. Four different types of supplier involvement, named arm’s length, routine, critical, and strategic development, are also included into the NPD system. Moreover, the robustness and equilibrium analysis of the NPD system is examined by using additional workload impacts. Our experiment results show that when the NPD process is parallel, the resources should be allocated into the early development cycle in order to achieve the best performance; if the process is sequential, the resources should be allocated into the late development cycle to improve the system performance. Moreover, when the pulse are higher than one third in the parallel process, the system could not return to the original stable state and go into another worse equilibrium state. When in the sequential process, the system would not affect by the pulse and quickly return to the initial stable state. Under the environment of parallel NPD process and the resources are allocated into the early development cycle, when the utilization are higher or the testing delay are shorter, the system would become more sensitive and easily to fall into another worse state. On the opposite, if the utilization is lower, the system’s performance would be improved. However, too long testing time would not improve the system performance. In the supplier involvement NPD system, when under arm’s length development, the system’s performance would be better for the supplier to apply additional resources into the system. When the supplier relationship is routine development, the resources changed could make the system become better but the allocated ratio do not have obviously distinction. When under critical development, the manufacturer should take care for the resource allocated ratio. If the manufacturer putting excessive resources to connect with the supplier can not make the system become better. In the strategic development, both the manufacturer and the supplier should pay more attention into the ratio of the resources allocation because when the resources are insufficient, the success from the collaboration would not achieve.

中文摘要 I
ABSTRACT III
CONTENTS V
LIST OF FIGURES VII
LIST OF TABLES IX
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE SURVEY 4
2.1. Processes and R&D resource allocation strategies of New Product Development 4
2.1.1 New product development processes 4
2.1.2 The resource allocations in new product development processes 4
2.2. Supplier involvement in NPD 5
2.3 Summary 7
CHAPTER 3. A WITHIN-FIRM NPD SYSTEM DYNAMIC MODEL CONSIDERING R&D RESOURCE ALLOCATION STRATEGIES FOR SEQUENTIAL AND PARALLEL PROCESSES 9
3.1. Introduction 9
3.2. Conceptual framework and system model for new product development 10
3.2.1 Research hypothesis of NPD Dynamics 10
3.2.2 Model structure 10
3.2.3. Resources allocation strategies 15
3.2.3.1 Type I (current-phase-first) resource strategy 16
3.2.3.2 Type II (advanced-phase-first) resource strategy 18
3.3. Experiment Results and Discussions 19
3.3.1 Experiments Settings 19
3.3.2 Experiment Results and discussions 21
3.3.2.1 Resources allocation strategies under parallel NPD process 21
3.3.2.2 Resources allocation strategies under sequential NPD process 26
3.3.2.3 Pulse effects under different resources allocation strategies 30
3.3.2.4 Pulse effects under different new product development processes 37
3.4. In-depth scenarios analysis for workload disturbances and testing delays 40
3.4.1 Equilibrium analysis of NPD performance under workload disturbances 40
3.4.2 The role of within-year testing delays 44
3.5 Conclusion 46
CHAPTER 4. A SYSTEM DYNAMIC MODEL FOR NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERING SUPPLIER-MANUFACTURER RELATIONSHIPS UNDER CURRENT-PHASE-FIRST R&D RESOURCE ALLOCATION STRATEGY AND PARALLEL PROCESS 48
4.1. Introduction 48
4.2. Conceptual framework for NPD of a manufacturer with different supplier relationships 49
4.2.1 Different supplier involvement portfolios in NPD 49
4.2.2 Model structure 50
4.3. Experiment results and discussions 53
4.3.1 Experiments Settings 53
4.3.2 Experiment Results and discussions 55
4.3.2.1 Arm’s-length Development 55
4.3.2.2 Routine Development 58
4.3.2.3 Critical Development 62
4.3.2.4 Strategic Development 65
4.4. In-depth scenarios analysis for workload disturbances 69
4.5. Conclusion 75
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH 77
1. Conclusion 77
2. Future research 78
Appendix I. PowerSim Modules 80
Appendix II. The dynamics of the simplified parallel NPD system by Nelson (2000) 86
References 89

Aaker, D. A. (1995). Developing Business Strategies, 4th ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Bonaccorsi, A. and Lippaini, A. (1994). Strategic Partnerships in New Product Development: an Italian Case Study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(2), 134-145.
Clark, K.B. (1989). Project scope and project performance: the effect of parts strategy and supplier involvement on product development. Management Science, 35 (10), 1247–1263.
Cooper, R. G. (1983). A Process Model for Industrial New Product Development. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-30 (1), 2-11.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1988). Resource allocation in the new product process. Industrial Marketing Management, 17(3), 249-262.
Dickson, G. W. (1966), An Analysis of Vendor Selection System and Decisions, Journal of Purchasing 2/1, pp. 5-17
Handfield, R. B., Ragatz , G. L., Petersen, K. J., Monczka R. M. (1999). Involving Suppliers in New Product Development. California Management Review, 42(1), 59-82.
Marcos A. M. P., Susan D. A. (2002). An exploratory study of the effects of supplier relationships on new product development outcomes. Journal of Operations Management, 20, 33-52.
Nelson P. R. (2000). A dynamic model of resource allocation in multi-project research and development systems. System Dynamics Review, 6(3), 173-212.
Spivey, W. A., Munson, J. M. & Wolcott, J. H. (1997). Improving the new product development process: A fractal paradigm for high-technology products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(3), 203-218.
van Weele, A.J. (1994). Purchasing Management: Analysis, Planning and Practice, 4th ed., Chapman & Hall, London.
Wynstra, F. and Pierick, E. T. (2000). Managing supplier involvement in new product development: a portfolio approach. European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 6(1), 49-57.