臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本文的目的是探討創新性與國際化對台灣半導體產業經營績效的影響，本文整合DEA分析法用於效率測度之相對重要性。可視情境改善各投入產出變數，此舉更能貼切實務，對公司之績效能做更準確分析。最後使用迴歸分析法探討創新性連結國際化對經營績效影響。本研究中樣本共467個，橫跨2009年至2015年，從本文實證結果得知創新性與國際化是有利於經營績效，研究結果發現創新性和經營績效呈現顯著正相關，國際化程度越高，公司的經營績效表現越好。我們的資料中有強力證據去支持在創新性與國際化可以影響公司的經營績效。

The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between innovation, internationalization, and business performance in Taiwan’s semiconductor industry. This study applies a two-stage approach. First, it uses a dynamic data envelopment analysis (DEA) model to measure the operational efficiency of Taiwan’s semiconductor companies. Second, it adopts ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis to explore the influence of innovation and internationalization on business performance. The final sampling included 467 samples covering the period 2009–2015. The empirical results show that innovation and internationalization have a positive influence on business performance. The results reveal that the more the innovation and internationalization, the better is the business performance. There is robust evidence in the findings of the study that leads to the conclusion that innovation and internationalization can influence a firm’s business performance.

Abstract in Chinese i
Abstract in English ii
Acknowledgements iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Innovation and business performance 5
Hypothesis 1a: There is a relationship between patent counts and business performance. 6
Hypothesis 1b: There is a positive relationship between patent claims and business performance. 7
Hypothesis 1c: There is a positive relationship between patent citations and business performance. 7
2.2 Internationalization and business performance 7
Hypothesis 2a: Foreign sales as a percentage of total sales has a positive influence on business performance. 8
Hypothesis 2b: The number of overseas subsidiaries has a positive influence on business performance. 8
2.3 The connection between internationalization and innovation 9
Hypothesis 3a: The interaction of patent counts and internationalization has an influence on business performance. 10
Hypothesis 3b: The interaction of patent claims and internationalization has a positive influence on business performance. 10
Hypothesis 3c: The interaction of patent citations and internationalization has a positive influence on business performance. 10
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN 11
3.1 Research framework 11
3.2 Sample 11
3.3 Innovation measure 12
3.4 Internationalization measure 12
3.5 Business performance measure 13
3.6 Descriptive Statistics 15
CHAPTER 4 EMPIRICAL RESULTS 17
4.1 Directional distance dynamic efficiency analysis 18
4.2 The relationship between innovation and business performance 18
4.3 The relationship between innovation, internationalization, and business performance 21
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION 24
REFERENCES 26

Allison, J. R., &Lemley, M. A. (2000). Who's Patenting What-An Empirical Exploration of Patent Prosecution. Vand. L. Rev., 53, 2099.
Baumol, W. J. (2002). The free-market innovation machine: Analyzing the growth miracle of capitalism. Princeton university press.
Blomkvist, K., Kappen, P., & Zander, I. (2010). Quo vadis? The entry into new technologies in advanced foreign subsidiaries of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1525-1549.
Cantwell, J., &Vertova, G. (2004). Historical evolution of technological diversification. Research Policy, 33(3), 511-529.
Capar, N., &Kotabe, M. (2003). The relationship between international diversification and performance in service firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(4), 345-355.
Chambers, R. G., Chung, Y., &Färe, R. (1996). Benefit and distance functions. Journal of economic theory, 70(2), 407-419.
Dang, J., &Motohashi, K. (2015). Patent statistics: A good indicator for innovation in China? Patent subsidy program impacts on patent quality. China Economic Review, 35, 137-155.
Deng, Z., Lev, B., &Narin, F. (1999). Science and technology as predictors of stock performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 20-32.
Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2013). DEA, directional distance functions and positive, affine data transformation. Omega, 41(1), 28-30.
Feroz, E. H., Kim, S., &Raab, R. L. (2003). Financial statement analysis: A data envelopment analysis approach. Journal of the operational Research Society, 54(1), 48-58.
Fransman, M. (1985). Conceptualising technical change in the Third World in the 1980s: An interpretive survey. The Journal of Development Studies, 21(4), 572-652.
Gomes, L., &Ramaswamy, K. (1999). An empirical examination of the form of the relationship between multinationality and performance. Journal of international business studies, 30(1), 173-187.
Gu, F. (2005). Innovation, future earnings, and market efficiency. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 20(4), 385-418.
Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., &Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of economics, 16-38.
Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., &Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research policy, 32(8), 1343-1363.
Hirschey, M., & Richardson, V. J. (2004). Are scientific indicators of patent quality useful to investors?. Journal of Empirical Finance, 11(1), 91-107.
Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Ireland, R. D. (1994). A mid-range theory of the interactive effects of international and product diversification on innovation and performance. Journal of management, 20(2), 297-326.
Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management journal, 40(4), 767-798.
Kafouros, M. I. (2006). The impact of the Internet on R&D efficiency: theory and evidence. Technovation, 26(7), 827-835.
Kobrin, S. J. (1991). An empirical analysis of the determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S1), 17-31.
Kotabe, M., Srinivasan, S. S., &Aulakh, P. S. (2002). Multinationality and firm performance: The moderating role of R&D and marketing capabilities. Journal of international business studies, 33(1), 79-97.
Kurokawa, S., Iwata, S., & Roberts, E. B. (2007). Global R&D activities of Japanese MNCs in the US: A triangulation approach. Research Policy, 36(1), 3-36.
Lanjouw, J. O., &Schankerman, M. (2001). Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition. RAND journal of economics, 129-151.
Lanjouw, J. O., &Schankerman, M. (2004). Patent quality and research productivity: Measuring innovation with multiple indicators. The Economic Journal, 114(495), 441-465.
Loncan, T., & Meucci, W. (2010). Degree of Internationalization and performance: Evidence from emerging Brazilian multinational firms. GCG: Revista De Globalización, Competitividad & Gobernabilidad, 4(1).
Makui, A., &Momeni, M. (2012). Using CSW weight’s in UTASTAR method. Decision Science Letters, 1(1), 39-46.
Mann, R. J., & Sager, T. W. (2007). Patents, venture capital, and software start-ups. Research Policy, 36(2), 193-208.
Mastrogiorgio, M., &Gilsing, V. (2016). Innovation through exaptation and its determinants: The role of technological complexity, analogy making & patent scope. Research Policy, 45(7), 1419-1435.
Matolcsy, Z. P., & Wyatt, A. (2008). The association between technological conditions and the market value of equity. The Accounting Review, 83(2), 479-518.
Merges, R. P., & Nelson, R. R. (1994). On limiting or encouraging rivalry in technical progress: the effect of patent scope decisions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 25(1), 1-24.
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). The Schumpeterian tradeoff revisited. The American Economic Review, 72(1), 114-132.
Nerkar, A., &Paruchuri, S. (2005). Evolution of R&D capabilities: The role of knowledge networks within a firm. Management Science, 51(5), 771-785.
Pandit, S., Wasley, C. E., & Zach, T. (2011). The effect of research and development (R&D) inputs and outputs on the relation between the uncertainty of future operating performance and R&D expenditures. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 26(1), 121-144.
Phene, A., & Almeida, P. (2008). Innovation in multinational subsidiaries: The role of knowledge assimilation and subsidiary capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), 901-919.
Sandner, P. G., & Block, J. (2011). The market value of R&D, patents, and trademarks. Research Policy, 40(7), 969-985.
Santos, J., Doz, Y., & Williamson, P. (2004). Is your innovation process global?. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 31-37.
Sher, P. J., & Yang, P. Y. (2005). The effects of innovative capabilities and R&D clustering on firm performance: the evidence of Taiwan's semiconductor industry. Technovation, 25(1), 33-43.
Shermeh, H. E., Najafi, S. E., &Alavidoost, M. H. (2016). A novel fuzzy network SBM model for data envelopment analysis: A case study in Iran regional power companies. Energy, 112, 686-697.
Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., &Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic management journal, 31(5), 463-490.
Tong, X., & Frame, J. D. (1994). Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data. Research Policy, 23(2), 133-141.
Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management science, 32(5), 590-607.
Van Fleet, D. D., McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. S. (2000). A theoretical and empirical analysis of journal rankings: The case of formal lists. Journal of Management, 26(5), 839-861.
Von Zedtwitz, M., & Gassmann, O. (2002). Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: four different patterns of managing research and development. Research policy, 31(4), 569-588.
Wade, R. (1990). Governing the market: Economic theory and the role of government in East Asian industrialization. Princeton University Press.
Wang, W. K., Lu, W. M., Kweh, Q. L., & Lai, H. W. (2014). Does corporate social responsibility influence the corporate performance of the US telecommunications industry?. Telecommunications Policy, 38(7), 580-591.
Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., &Hitt, M. A. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management journal, 43(5), 925-950.