臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

台灣的高科技產業是以OEM/ODM為主，代工廠商因為水平合併與垂直整合競爭行動日益激烈，紛紛尋求更有效的策略分析方法以提升競爭力。然而，過去Porter的靜態分析與Chen一系列產品市場競爭的研究成果，並無法完全詮釋代工產業所屬的要素市場競爭，尤其是台灣重點發展的TFT-LCD產業水平合併與垂直整合競爭形貌。因此，本研究以Chen (1996)所提出動態競爭理論架構為基礎，輔以要素市場競爭理論觀點，探討2006年友達光電與廣輝電子水平合併及面板廠商零組件垂直整合行動後，競爭者回應時間差異的相關議題。同時本研究整理歸納台灣面板廠商歷年水平與垂直整合事件，並收集其出貨量與產能之相關次級資料輔以驗證。
最後，研究結果發現，在水平合併事件中，當代工廠商與競爭者之市場共同性越大時，則競爭者對其水平合併行動採取回應的時間越早。另外在垂直整合事件中，當代工廠商與競爭者之產能資源相似性越大時，競爭者對其垂直整合行動採取回應的時間越早，或回應頻率越高。本研究同時也發現，任何兩間代工廠商具相同程度之市場共同性與資源相似性機率很小，其所造成的競爭不對稱性會存在於一對代工廠商當中，且不對稱的程度將隨時間動態改變。

OEM/ODM industry is becoming main high technology in Taiwan. Due to merger and vertical integration competition become fiercer and fiercer, OEM/ODM firms were seeking effective method of strategic analysis to enhance competitiveness. In the past, Porter’s static analysis and Chen’s product market analysis can not completely explain factor market competition, especially in TFT-LCD industry in Taiwan.
In order to explain about the competitor''s different response time after AUO merging Quanta and panel firms vertical integration, my study follow Chen''s dynamic competitive theoretical framework in 1996, and supported by the rivalry of factor market. At the same time, this study collect shipment and capacity data to verify panel firm merger and vertical integration issue.
Finally, my study find that the bigger OEM/ODM firms and competitor’s market commonality is, the earlier competitor’s response time is, and the bigger OEM/ODM firms and competitor’s resource similarity is, the earlier competitor’s response time is. Meanwhile the higher in the frequency of taking action. At the same time, this study also find that the probability of any two OEM/ODM firms having the same degree of market commonality and resource similarity is very small. Asymmetry in the competition will exist in a pair of OEM firms, and the degree of asymmetry changes with time.

Certification i
誌 謝 ii
摘 要 iii
Abstract iv
目 錄 v
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題與研究目的 3
第三節 研究設計 5
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 動態競爭理論架構 8
第二節 市場共同性與廠商間競爭對抗 11
第三節 資源相似性與廠商間競爭對抗 13
第四節 競爭不對稱性與廠商競爭對抗 15
第三章 研究方法 17
第一節 資料庫選取及資料收集 17
第二節 市場共同性及資源相似性的衡量方法 19
第三節 深入訪談 22
第四章 前導個案與命題 23
第一節 TFT-LCD產業現況與面板五虎簡介 23
第二節 TFT-LCD三大應用產品現況 30
第三節 水平合併個案描述與命題 36
第四節 垂直整合個案描述與命題 39
第五章 實證研究與討論 48
第一節 市場共同性圖像 48
第二節 資源相似性圖像 51
第三節 水平合併個案命題驗證 56
第四節 垂直整合個案命題驗證 57
第六章 結論與建議 60
第一節 理論意涵 60
第二節 實務意涵 62
第三節 研究限制與未來研究方向 65
參考文獻 67

一.中文文獻
1.陳明哲著，蘇國賢審訂，林豪傑，喬友慶、侯勝宗翻譯與整理，2008，動態競爭策略探微。台北：智勝。
2.楊森等人(主編)，2007，台灣面板產業新版圖。台北：財訊。
3.建華證券綜研處，2006，友達廣輝合併後之產能概況分析。
二.英文文獻
1.Abrahamson, E., & Fombrun, C. J., 1994. Macrocultures: Determinants and consequences. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 728-755.
2.Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H., 1993. Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33-46.
3.Barney, J., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
4.Baum, J. A. C., & Korn, H. J., 1996.Competitive dynamic of interfirm rivalry: Linking structural conditions of competition to patterns of market entry and exit. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 255-291.
5.Carpenter, G. S., Cooper, L. G., Hanssens, D. M., & Midgley, D. F., 1988. Modeling asymmetric competition. Marketing Science, 7(4), 393-412.
6.Caves, R. E., 1984. Economic analysis and the quest for competitive advantage. Paper and Proceedings of the 96th Annual Meeting of the American Economic Review, 74(2), 127-132.
7.Chen, M. J., & MacMillan, I. C., 1992. Nonresponse and Delayed Response to Competitive Moves: The Roles of Competitor Dependence and Action Irreversibility. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 539-570.
8.Chen, M. J., 1996. Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 100-134.
9.Desarbo, W. S., Grewal, R., & Wind, J., 2006. Who competes with whom? A demand-based perspective for identifying and representing asymmetric competition. Strategic Management Journal. 27(2), 101-129.
10.Dutton, J. E., & Jackson, S. E., 1987. Categorizing Strategic issue: Links to organizational action. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 76-90.
11.Gimeno, J., 1994. Multipoint competition, market rivalry and firm performance: A test of the mutual forbearance hypothesis in the U.S. airline industry, 1984-1988.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.
12.Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J., 1989. Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.Hsu, M. Y., & Chen, M. J., 2007. Toward A Formal Model of Competitor Analysis and Interfirm Rivalry : Revisiting Chen (1996) , No. 13266, Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Aug. 3-8, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania U.S..
14.Jacobson, R., 1992. The Austrian school of strategy. Academy of Management Review, 17(4), 782-807.
15.Karnani, A., & Wernerfelt, B., 1985. Research note and communication: Multiple point competition. Strategic Management Journal, 6(1), 87-96.
16.Lehmann, D. R., & Winer, R. W., 1990. Analysis for marketing planning. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
17.MacMillan, I., Mccaffery, M. L., & Vanwijk, G., 1985. Competitor’s responses to easily imitated new products: Exploring commercial banking product introductions. Strategic Management Journal, 6(1), 75-86.
18.Mahoney, J. T., & Pandian, J. R., 1992. The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5), 363-380.
19.Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., & Buchholtz, A. K., 2009. Factor-market rivalry. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 423-441.
20.Mas-Ruis, F. J., Nicolau-Gonzalbez, J. L., & Ruiz-Moreno, F., 2005. Asymmetric rivalry between strategic groups: response, speed of response and ex ante vs. ex post competitive interaction in the Spanish bank deposit market. Strategic Management Journal, 26(8), 713-745.
21.Montgomery, C. A., 1985. Product-market diversification and market power. Academy of Management Journal, 28(4), 789-798.
22.Peteraf, M. A., 1993. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179-191.
23.Porter, M. E., 1980. Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitor. New York: Free Press.
24.Smith, F. I., & Wilson, R. L., 1995. The predictive validity of the karnani and wernerfelt model of multipoint competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2), 143-160.
25.Smith, K. G., Grimm, C. M., & Gannon, M. J., 1992. Dynamics of competitive strategy. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
26.Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A., 1991. Dynamic capabilities and strategic Management. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley.
27.Teece.D. J., Rumelt, R., Dosi,G., & Winter, S., 1994. Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 23(1), 1-30.
28.Tversky, A., 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4), 327-352.