臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討民國90-94年台灣半導體產業生產力、生產力變動趨勢及環境變數對生產力之影響。本研究選取上市上櫃IC設計45家廠商、IC製造11家廠商、IC封測18家廠商、分離式元件業5家廠商、光電半導體產業5家廠商為研究對象。本研究採用投入導向差額變數模式評估半導體產業生產力整體生產力與個別生產力（獲利力與市場力），使用交叉效率模式找出最佳生產力之企業，應用麥氏指數來分析跨期生產力變動趨勢，最後以迴歸分析來檢視環境變數對生產力之影響。

研究發現：(1) IC設計業平均整體生產力極差，最佳企業為研通公司；無任何一家企業五年均處於最適生產規模；平均獲利力尚可，最佳企業為研通公司；平均市場力欠佳，最佳企業為太欣公司；6家企業總因素生產力呈現成長的趨勢；(2) IC製造業平均整體生產力極差，最佳企業為元隆公司；無任何一家企業五年均處於最適生產規模；平均獲利力尚可，最佳企業為茂矽公司；平均市場力尚可，最佳企業為元隆公司；9家企業總因素生產力呈現成長的趨勢；(3) IC封測業平均整體生產力極差，最佳企業為誠遠公司；僅誠遠公司五年均處最適生產規模；平均獲利力尚可，最佳企業為飛信公司；平均市場力尚可，最佳企業為誠遠公司；6家企業總因素生產力呈現成長的趨勢；(4) 分離式元件業平均整體生產力尚可，最佳企業為華昕電公司；無任何一家企業五年均處於最適生產規模；平均獲利力尚可，最佳企業為華昕電公司；平均市場力尚可，最佳企業為麗正國際公司；3家企業總因素生產力呈現成長的趨勢；(5) 光電半導體業平均整體生產力極差，最佳企業為華興公司；無任何一家企業五年均處於最適生產規模；平均獲利力尚可，最佳企業為華興公司；平均市場力尚可，最佳企業為華興公司；3家企業總因素生產力呈現成長的趨勢；(6)市場成長率與企業年齡對其生產力是有顯著的影響而員工生產力對其生產力是有顯著的負影響。

The purpose of this study is to assess the productivity, productivity change of Taiwanese Semiconductor Industry over 2001-2005 and examine the effects of environmental factors on productivity. This study selected 45 firms for measuring the productivity of IC Design Industry, 11 firms for measuring the productivity of IC Manufacturer industry, 18 firms for measuring the productivity of IC Assembly and IC Testing industry, 5 firms for measuring the productivity of Discrete devices industry, and 5 firms for measuring the productivity of Optoelectronic Semiconductor industry. These 84 firms are listed at stock exchange and over-the-counter Semiconductor-related firms. This study used input-oriented slacks-based measure data envelopment analysis to assess productivity, profitability and marketability of Semiconductor Industry, employed cross efficiency measure to identify the best practice, utilized Malmquist index to estimate productivity change over a five-year period, and finally applied regression analysis to examine the effects of environmental factors on productivity.

Results of this study show that: (1) IC design firms performed poorly in producing their productivity, V-TAC Technology Co., Ltd. was rated as the best practice; these firms were not experienced most productivity scale size over the years of 2001-2005; these firms performed at a median high profitability, V-TAC Technology Co., Ltd. was identified as the best practice; IC design firms performed poorly at marketability, Syntek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. was identified as the best practice; there were 6 firms having positive changes in total factor productivity over a five-years period; (2) IC manufacturing firms performed poorly in producing their productivity, Advanced Microelectronic Products Inc. was rated as the best practice; these firms were not experienced mot productivity scale size over the years of 2001-2005; these firms performed at a median high profitability, Mosel Vitelic Inc. was identified as the best practice; these firms performed at a median high marketability, Advanced Microelectronic Products Inc was identified as the best practice; there were 9 firms having positive changes in total factor productivity over a five-years period; (3) IC Assembly and Testing firms performed poorly in producing their productivity, Test-serv Inc. was rated as the best practice; Test-serv Inc. was experienced most productivity scale size over the years of 2001-2005; these firms performed at a median high profitability, International Semiconductor Technology Ltd. was identified as the best practice; these firms performed poorly at marketability, Test-serv Inc. was identified as the best practice; there were 6 firms having positive changes in total factor productivity over a five-years period; (4) Discrete devices firms performed poorly in producing their productivity, Hi-Sincerity Microelectronics Corp. was rated as the best practice; these firms were not experienced most productivity scale size over the years of 2001-2005; these firms performed at a median high profitability, Hi-Sincerity Microelectronics Corp. was identified as the best practice; these firms performed at a median high marketability, Rectron Ltd. was identified as the best practice; there were 3 firms having positive changes in total factor productivity over a five-years period; (5) Optoelectronic Semiconductor firms performed poorly in producing their productivity, Ledtech Electronics Corp. was rated as the best practice; these firms were not experienced mot productivity scale size over the years of 2001-2005; these firms performed at a median high profitability and a median marketability, Ledtech Electronics Corp. was identified as the best practice; there were 3 firms having positive changes in total factor productivity over a five-years period; and (6) market growth rate and age of a firm have positive impacts on the productivity and employees’ productivity of a firm has a negative impact on the productivity of Semiconductor Industry .

目　 　錄
目　 　錄 I
表 目 錄 III
圖 目 錄 V
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機與目的 3
第三節 研究問題 5
第四節 研究方法與架構 5
第五節 研究範圍與限制 8
第六節 研究內容 9
第貳章 文獻探討 10
第一節 非DEA應用文獻 10
第二節 DEA應用文獻 16
第三節 DEA理論文獻 25
第四節 文獻小結 35
第參章 研究方法 37
第一節 研究流程 37
第二節 研究設計 39
第肆章 實證分析 50
第一節 生產力分析 50
第二節 生產力變動趨勢分析 80
第三節 環境變數影響分析 95
第四節 管理意涵 95
第伍章 結論與建議 98
第一節 結論 98
第二節 建議 99
參考文獻 101
附 錄 106


表 目 錄
表2-1 非DEA 應用文獻表 13
表2-2 DEA 應用文獻表 20
表2-3 交叉效率矩陣表 31
表3-1 投入與產出項歸納表 39
表3-2 樣本選取表 41
表3-3 研究對象 42
表3-4 變數定義表 44
表3-5 敘述統計表 45
表3-6 相關係數表 45
表3-7 環境變數定義表 48
表4-1 投入/產出項權數表 50
表4-2 投入項與產出項權重界限 51
表4-3 IC設計業年平均整體生產力表 51
表4-4 IC設計業年平均個別生產力表 53
表4-5 IC製造業年平均整體生產力表 59
表4-6 IC製造業年平均個別生產力表 60
表4-7 IC封測業年平均整體生產力表 64
表4-8 IC封測業年平均個別生產力表 66
表4-9 分離式元件業年平均整體生產力表 70
表4-10 分離式元件業年平均個別生產力表 71
表4-11 光電半導體業年平均整體生產力表 75
表4-12 光電半導體業年平均個別生產力表 76
表4-13 IC設計業平均生產力變動趨勢表 80
表4-14 IC製造業平均生產力變動趨勢表 84
表4-15 IC封測業平均生產力變動趨勢表 87
表4-16 分離式元件業平均生產力變動趨勢表 90
表4-17 光電半導體業平均生產力變動趨勢表 92
表4-18 迴歸分析表 95


圖 目 錄
圖1-1 全球半導體市場規模圖 1
圖1-2 2005年我國半導體產業全球產值圖 2
圖1-3 研究架構圖 7
圖3-1 研究流程圖 38
圖3-2 整體生產力評估模式圖 40
圖3-3 個別生產力評估模式圖 40
圖4-1 IC設計業整體生產力與獲利力關係圖 56
圖4-2 IC設計業整體生產力與市場力關係圖 57
圖4-3 IC設計業獲利力與市場力關係圖 58
圖4-4 IC製造業整體生產力與獲利力關係圖 61
圖4-5 IC製造業整體生產力與市場力關係圖 62
圖4-6 IC製造業獲利力與市場力關係圖 64
圖4-7 IC封測業整體生產力與獲利力關係圖 67
圖4-8 IC封測業整體生產力與市場力關係圖 68
圖4-9 IC封測業獲利力與市場力關係圖 69
圖4-10 分離式元件業整體生產力與獲利力關係圖 72
圖4-11 分離式元件業整體生產力與市場力關係圖 73
圖4-12 分離式元件業獲利力與市場力關係圖 74
圖4-13 光電半導體業整體生產力與獲利力關係圖 77
圖4-14 光電半導體業整體生產力與市場力關係圖 78
圖4-15 光電半導體業獲利力與市場力關係圖 79

一、中文部份
1.工研院(民94)，2005半導體工業年鑑，台北市。
2.工研院(民95)，2006半導體工業年鑑，台北市。
3.王天津、廖淑觀(民93)，台灣筆記型電腦上市公司經營績效評估之研究，樹德科技大學學報，6(2)，33-46。
4.王文英、張清福(民93)，智慧資本影響績效模式之探討-我國半導體業之實證研究，會計評論，第39期，頁89-117。
5.王克陸、蕭靜芳(民92)，台灣掃描器廠商生產力變動評估模式-無母數麥氏指數之運用，產業論壇，5(4)，45-62。
6.何文榮、洪渭雯(民94)，臺灣光碟片產業經營效率之研究，華人前瞻研究，1(2)，1-23。
7.吳思華(民89)，網際網路智慧資本衡量與發展措施研究，經濟部工業局軟體五年發展計畫。
8.吳肇展(民93)，主機板產業技術效率之研究-資料包絡分析法之應用，崇右學報，10，1-18。
9.林灼榮、曾瑞慶(民91)，中華電信規模經濟、範籌經濟與技術變遷之研究，產業論壇，4(2)，117-140。
10.邱永和、胡均立、曹嘉麟(民92)，台灣生物科技廠商之成本效率分析，農業與經濟，31，55-78
11.胡志堅、黎漢林(民93)，以資料包絡法與投資報酬法評量產業績效─以台灣IC設計業為例，工業工程學刊，21(4)，369-383。
12.孫遜(民93)，資料包落分析法-理論與應用，揚智文化公司，台北。
13.徐啟升、林灼榮與江振隆(（民94)），台灣光電產業生產效率與財務影響因子分析，台灣銀行季刊，56(4)，139-157。
14.馬維揚、林卓民(民94)，影響世界各國主要半導體製造商績效的因素分析，臺灣銀行季刊，56(3)，20-37
15.張世其、胡秋江、虞孝成、曾國雄(民92)，台灣電子零組件通路商經營績效之評估：資料包絡分析法之應用，管理研究學報，3(1)，97-121。
16.陳慧瀅(民89)，科學園區主要產業的相對效率之衡量，產業論壇，1(2)，135-146。
17.詹文男、范錚強、張朝清(民91)，企業智慧資本衡量研究-以資訊硬體產業為例，產業論壇，4(2)，109-137。
18.詹達穎、林政賢(民93)，臺灣半導體產業經營效率之研究-資料包絡分析法之應用，立德學報，2(1)，9-29。
19.蔡秋田、王媛慧(民93)，廠商生產效率與股票報酬之關聯－-資料包絡分析法的應用，工業工程學刊，21(2)，136-145。
20.賴士葆、陳松柏、盧冠嘉(（民93)，台灣生物科技公司經營效率之研究，管理與資訊學報，9，63-88
21.韓慧林(民93)，台灣地區半導體業績效評估，管理研究學報， 4(1)，71-89。

二、英文部份
1.Agrell, P. and B. M. West, 2001. “A Caveat on the Measurement of Productive Efficiency.” International Journal of Production Economics, 69, 1-14.
2.Ali, A. I., Lerme, C. S., and L.M. Seiford, 1995. “Components of Efficiency Evaluation in Data Envelopment Analysis.” European Journal of Operational Research, 80(3), 462-473.
3.Andersen, P. and N. C. Petersen, 1993. “A Procedure for Ranking Efficient Units in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science, 39(10), 1261-1264.
4.Banker R.D. and R.M. Thrall, 1992. “Estimating Most Productive Scale Size Using Data Envelopment Analysis.” European Journal of Operational Research, 62, 74-84.
5.Banker, R. D., A. Charnes and W. W. Cooper, 1984, “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science, 30(9), 1078-1092.
6.Banxia Software Ltd. (2003) Frontier Analyst Professional 3.0 , Britain.
7.Bontis, N., W. Keow, and S. Richardson. 2000, “Intellectual Capital and Business Performance in Malaysian Industries,” Journal of Intellectual Capital,1(1), pp. 85-100.
8.Bowlin, W.F., 1987, “Evaluating the Efficiency of U.S. Air ForceReal-property Maintance Activities”, Journal of Operational Resarch Society, 38(2), 127-135.
9.Bukh, P. N., Larsen, H. T. & Mouritsen, J. 2001, “Constructing Intellectual Capital Statements,” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17, pp. 87-108.
10.Burki, A.A. and D. Terrell, 1998, “Measuring Production Efficiency of Small Firms in Pakistan.” World Development, 26 (1), 155-169.
11.Caves, D.W., L. R. Chrstensen, and W. E. Diewert, 1982, “The Economic Theory for Index Number of the Measurement of Input, Output, and Productivity.” Econometrica, 50 (6), 1393-1414.
12.Chandra, P., W.W. Cooper, and A. Rahman, 1998, “Using DEA To Evaluate 29 Canadian Textile Companies-Considering Returns To Scale.” International Journal of Production Economics, 54, 129-141.
13.Charnes, A., C. T. Clark, W. W. Cooper, and B. Golany, 1985, “A Developmental Study of Data Envelopment Analysis in Measuring the Efficiency of Maintenance Units in the U.S. Air Forces.” Annals of Operations Research, 2, 95-112.
14.Charnes, A., W. W. Cooper, and. E. Rhodes, 1978, “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units.”European Journal of Operations Research, 2(6), 429 -444.
15.Cooper, W. W., G. Deng, B. Gu, S. Li, and R.M Thrall, 2001, “Using DEA to Improve the Management of Congestion in Chinese Industries (1981-1997). ” Socio – Economic Planning Sciences, 35, 227-242.
16.Cooper, W. W., L. M Seiford, and K. Tone, 2000, Data Envelopment Analysis – A comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA – Solver Software. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
17.Doyle, J. and R.Green, 1994, “Efficiency and Cross – Efficiency in DEA: Derivations, Meanings and Uses.” Journal of Operational Research Society, 45(5), 567-578.
18.Druck, P. F., 1993, Post-Capitalist Society, Butterworth Heinemann,Oxford.
19.Färe, R., S. Grosskopf, B. Lindgren, and P. Roos, 1994, “Productivity Development in Swedish Hospitals: A Malmquist Output Index Approach.” In Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y. and Seiford, L. M. (eds.), Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 253-272.
20.Fernandez, E., Montes, J. M. and Vazquez, C. J. 2000, “Typology and Strategic Analysis of Intangible Resources-A Resource-based Approach,” Technovation, 20, 81-89.
21.Griliches, Z. and H. Regev, 1995 , “Firm Productivity in Israeli Industry.” Journal of Econometrics, 65, 175-203.
22.Kozmetsky, G. and P. Yue, 1998, “Comparative performance of global semiconductor companies” Omega, 26(2), 153-175.
23.Kumbhakar, S. C., A. Hesmati, and L. Hjalmarsson, 1997, “Temporal Patterns of Technical Efficiency：Results from Competing Models.” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 15, 597-616.
24.Linton, J.D. and W.D. Cook, 1998, “Technology Implementation: A Comparative Study of Canadian and U.S Factories.” INFOR, 36(3), 142-150.
25.Malmquist, S., (1953), “Index Numbers and Indifference Surfaces.” Trabajos de Estatistica, 4: 209-242.
26.Parkan, C. and M. L. Wu, 1999, “Measuring the Performance of Operations of Hong Kong’s Manufacturing Industries.” European Journal of Operational Research, 118, 235-258.
27.Roll, Y., B. Golany, and D. Seroussy, 1989, “Measuring the Efficiency of aintenance Units in the Israeli Air Force.” European Journal of Operational Research, 43(2), 136-142.
28.Satty, T. L., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw Hill, New York.
29.Seiford L. M., J. Zhu, 1999, “Profitability and Marketability of the Top 55 U.S. Commercial Banks”, Management Science, 45(9), 1270-1288.
30.Seiford, L.M. and J. Zhu, 1998, “Identifying Excesses and Deficits in Chinese Industrial Productivity (1953-1990): A Weighted Data Envelopment Analysis Approach.” Omega, 26, 279-296.
31.Sexton, T.R., R. H. Slikman, and A. Hogan, 1986, “Data Envelopment Analysis: Critique and Extensions.” In R.H. Slikman (eds.), Measuring Efficiency: An Assessment of Data Envelopment Analysis. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Inc., 73-105.
32.Shephard, R.W., 1970, Theory of Cost and Production Function. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
33.Thompson, R. G., F. D. Singleton, R.M. Thrall, and B.A. Smith, 1986, “Comparative Site Evaluations for Locating High Energy Lab in Texas” Interfaces, 16, 1380-1395.
34.Thompson, R. G., P. S. Dharmapala, L. J. Rothenberg, and R. M. Thrall, 1996, “DEA/AR Efficiency and Profitability of 14 Major Oil Companies in U.S. Exploration and Production.” Computers and Operations Research, 23(4), 357-373.
35.Thore, S., F. T.W. Philips, Ruefli, and P. Yue., 1996, “DEA and the Management of the Product Cycle: The U.S. Computer Industry.” Computers and Operations Research, 23(4), 341-356.
36.Tone, K., 2001, “A Slack-based Measure of Efficiency in data envelopment analysis.” European Journal of Operational Research, 130, 498-509.
37.Tone, K., 2003, DEA Solver Professional Manual, New Jersey: Saitech Inc
38.Wu, Y., 1995, “The Productive Efficiency of Chinese Iron and Steel Firms.” Resources Policy, 21(3), 215-222.
39.Wu, Y., 2000, “Is China’s Economic Growth Sustainable? A Productivity Analysis.” China Economic Review, 11, 278-296.
40.Zhu, J., 1996, “DEA/AR Analysis of the 1988 - 1989 Performance of the Nanjing Textiles Corporation.” Annals of Operations Research, 66, 311-335.