English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 92427/122731 (75%)
Visitors : 26266449      Online Users : 189
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/30350


    Title: 探討動態能耐的屬性對同產業內不同廠商間競爭優勢的影響:從模擬獲得的啟發
    Authors: 柯伯旻
    Ke,Pomin
    Contributors: 許牧彥
    柯伯旻
    Ke,Pomin
    Keywords: 動態能耐
    競爭優勢
    模擬
    Dynamic Capability
    Competitive Advantage
    Simulation
    Date: 2004
    Issue Date: 2009-09-11 17:43:16 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 在今日瞬息萬變的產業環境裡,策略學者Porter (1980)所提出的五力分析只能告訴我們在某個時點中企業是否具有競爭優勢。但是,我們卻無法解釋企業的競爭優勢從何而來?又該往哪裡去?Hamel & Prahalad (1990)認為企業應該以未來的表現作為主要競爭的舞臺,建立核心競爭力來進行創新與變革才是企業獲取長久競爭優勢的主要手段。
    Teece (1997)進一步提出動態能耐的概念,探討廠商在動態環境中,進行變革所需的能耐。Zott (2003) 利用電腦進行了寡佔的競爭賽局模擬,証實了動態能耐的三個屬性:組織執行力、變革成本、學習效應,是影響組織具有超額利潤的重要關鍵。
    本研究另外引用其他文獻,如Jovanovic & MacDonald (1994)、Klepper (1996)、Winter (2003),重新建構了理論模式以進行電腦模擬。我們將模擬的架構做出以下修正:增加廠商數目、有淘汰廠商的機制、產品創新與製程創新之間會互相影響、增加學習效應的種類,並修正目標函數與動態過程,讓模擬更符合實際狀況,來了解以下三個問題:
    一、在動態能耐的屬性高低皆相同的情形下,廠商是否會有超額利潤?
    二、不同程度的執行力對競爭優勢有何影響?
    三、不同種類的學習效應對廠商競爭優勢有何影響?廠商的學習效應除了從事變革時的學習外,還有在執行變革的過程中從事學習的情形。我們將會模擬擅長不同學習效應的廠商,那一方能獲得超額利潤。
    根據我們的實驗,本研究的結論如下:
    一、動態能耐是產業內出現不同利潤表現的因素之一,當廠商動態能耐的強弱相同時,創新的策略思是影響競爭優勢的原因。我們發現最成功的廠商會在產業初期提升產品創新,在產業成熟之後大量投入製程創新,與Klepper (1996)的發現相同。
    二、組織執行力會影響超額利潤。但是必須在所有廠商的變革成本處於較低的狀態,或有較好的學習效應時,執行力較高的廠商才會有明顯的競爭優勢。
    三、如果廠商的組織執行力相同,注重在執行變革的學習效應,能幫助廠商獲得競爭優勢。相對地,注重在尋找變革策略上的學習,對競爭優勢的幫助較為有限。
    本研究不僅展現了動態能耐對競爭優勢多方面的影響,並提供一個架構來闡述一家公司從策略到能耐的競爭結構。要怎麼結合這個架構與策略地圖是我們後續可以研究的方向。
    In the dynamic environment of competitive industry, we have problem to know how a company will perform in the future with Five-Force-Model (Porter 1980). Five-Force-Model can tell us the competitive advantage of a company at that time, but we can’t explain how the company got that competitive advantage and whether it could be kept or not in the future. The theory of Core Competence (Hamel & Prahalad 1990) notifies that company should compete for future, and accumulate its core competence for innovation to keep the competitive advantage. Basing on Resource Based View, Teece (1997) further discussed the Dynamic Capability which is needed by enterprise in dynamic competition. Zott (2003) simulate a Cournot Game to study the attributes of dynamic capability. He finds that execution, strategic switching cost and learning ability affect the superior profit of firms of intra-industry.
    This research rebuilds the simulation of Zott (2003) and modifies the simulation by incorporating the insights from Jovanovic & MacDonald (1994), Klepper (1996) and Winter (2003). We increase the number of firms, set up the mechanism which can shake out the less competitive firms. We also remodel the settings of innovation and learning and modify the dynamic process and profit function to investigate the following question.
    First, when the level of dynamic capability is the same, will firms in an intra-industry perform differently?
    Second, could execution ability affect the superior profit?
    Third, is the learning effect of switching strategy more important than the learning effect of implementing strategy?
    Three propositions can be drawn from this simulation.
    First, when all firms have equal dynamic capability, the strategy of innovation will affect the competitive advantage. We find that the most successful firm will increase production innovation at first then put more resources into process innovation, which is compatible with the empirical study of Klepper (1996).
    Second, execution ability will affect the superior profit in some condition. When all firms have low strategic switching cost or good learning ability, the firms which have higher execution ability earn superior profit in simulation.
    Third, when all firms have the same execution ability, the firms which have higher learning ability of implementing strategy will earn the superior profit. In contrast firm’s learning ability of switching strategy does not make great difference.
    This research not only demonstrates the various impacts of dynamic capability, but also provides a framework to depict the competitive structure of a firm. The integration of this framework and strategy map deserves the further research.
    中文摘要 1
    Abstract 3
    目錄 5
    第一章 緒論
    1.1 研究背景與目的 9
    1.2 研究方法與限制 11
    1.3 論文大綱 12
    第二章 文獻探討
    2.1 競爭優勢的解構 15
    2.2 廠商的動態能耐 20
    2.3 Zott(2003)動態賽局的模擬 27
    2.4 文獻的反省 38
    第三章 理論模型
    3.1 賽局模型的建構 42
    3.2 模擬程式的設計 56
    3.3 欲驗證的假設 58
    第四章 實驗結果
    4.1 Zott (2003)的結果驗証 61
    4.2 廠商的創新策略 63
    4.3 動態能耐屬性的高低對競爭優勢的影響 66
    第五章 結論與建議
    5.1 研究結論 86
    5.2 管理實務的意涵 88
    附錄一、Zott (2003)的賽局實驗模擬原始碼 93
    附錄二、Nash均衡解的推導 106
    參考文獻 112
    Reference: 英文部份
    期刊專文
    Andersen, P. H., (1998) “Organizing International Technological Collaboration in Subcontractor Relationships An Investigation of the Knowledge-Stickyness Problem”, DURID Working Paper, NO. 98-11
    Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A., (1990) “Absorptive Capacity: A new perspective on Learning and Innovaiton”, Administrative Science Quarterly, V.35, p.128-151
    Jovanovic, B. & MacDonald, G. M., (1994) “The Life Cycle of a Competitive Industry”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 102, No. 2
    Klepper S., (1996) “Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle”, American Economic Review, Vol. 86, No.3, 562-583
    Winter S. G., (2003) “Understand dynamic capability”, Strategic Management Journal, 24: 991-995
    Teece D. J., Pisano G. & Shuen A., (1997) “Dynamic capability and strategic management”, Strategic Management Journal, 18: 7, 509-533
    Tsoukas, H., (1996) “The firm as a distributed knowledge system: a constructionist approach”, Strategic Management Journal, 17:11-26
    Zack M., (1999) “Developing a Knowledge Strategy”, California Management Review, 41: (2), p.125-145
    Zott C., (2003) “Dynamic capability and the emergence of intraindustry differential firm performance: insight from a simulation study”, Strategic Management Journal, 24: 97-125
    專書文獻
    Georg Von Krogh, Kazuo Ichijo & Ikujiro Nonaka, (2001) “Bringing Care into Knowledge Development of Business Organization”, “Knowledge Emergence: Social, Technical, and Evolutionary Dimensions of Knowledge Creation”, edited by I. Nonaka and T. Nishiguchi. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.30-52.
    Despres, C. & Chauvel D., (2002) “Knowledge, Context, and the Management of Variation”, “The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge”, edited by Choo, C. W. & Bonits, N., Oxford University Press.
    Nonaka, I., N. Konno & R. Toyama, (2001) “Emergence of "Ba": A Conceptual Framework for the Continuous and Self-transcending Process of Knowledge Creation.”, “Knowledge Emergence: Social, Technical, and Evolutionary Dimensions of Knowledge Creation”, edited by I. Nonaka and T. Nishiguchi. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 13-29.
    Prahalad C.K. & Hamel G., “The Core Competence of the Corporation”, “Harvard Business Review”, 68 (May/June 1990):79-91.
    Prusak Laurence & Don Cohen, (1998) “ Knowledge Buyers, Sellers, and Brokers: The Political Economy of Knowledge”, “The Economic Impact of Knowledge (Resources for the Knowledge-Based Economy)”, Section Seven.
    專書
    Christensen C. M. & Raynor M. E., (2003) “The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth” Harvard Business School Press
    D’aveni R., (1994) “Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering”, New York, Free Press
    Davenport T. H. & Prusak L., (2000) “Working Knowledge: How Organization manage What They Know”, Harvard Business School Press
    Kaplan R. & Norton D., (2001) “The Strategy-focus Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment”, Harvard Business School Press
    Leonard-Barton D., (1995) “Wellspring of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation”, Boston: Harvard Business School Press
    Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi H., (1995) “The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation”, New York: Oxford University Press.
    Nonaka, L. & Nishiguchi, Y., (2001), “Knowledge Emergence: Social, Technical, and Evolutionary Dimensions of Knowledge Creation”, Oxford University Press
    Porter M., (1980) “Competitive Strategy: Technique for Analyzing Industries and Competitors”, New York, Free Press
    Probst G. J. B., Raub S. & Romhardt K., (2000) “Managing Knowledge: Building Blocks for Success”, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
    中文部份
    翻譯專書
    ARC遠擎管理顧問公司策略績效事業部譯,Kaplan R. & Norton D.著,〈2001〉〝策略核心組織:以平衡計分卡有效執行企業策略〞,臉譜出版
    王美音譯,Leonard-Barton D.著,〈1998〉〝知識創新之泉:智價企業的經營〞,遠流出版
    李芳齡、李樹田譯,Christensen C. M. & Raynor M. E.著,〈2003〉〝創新者的解答〞,天下雜誌
    胡瑋珊譯,Davenport T. H. & Prusak L.著,〈2002〉〝知識管理:有效運用知識,創造競爭優勢〞,中國生產力中心
    許梅芳譯,D’aveni R.著,〈1998〉〝超競爭優勢:新時代的動態競爭理論與應用〞,遠流出版
    鍾俊仁譯,Watson K. et. 著,〈2003〉〝Visual C#教學手冊〞,□峰出版
    專書著作
    吳思華著,〈2000〉〝策略九說:策略思考的本質〞,臉譜出版
    張守鈞著,〈2000〉〝個體經濟理論與應用:二版〞,全英出版
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    科技管理研究所
    91359005
    93
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0091359005
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[科技管理研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML190View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback