Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/151518
|
| Title: | 台積電技術社群與網絡機制對創新表現的影響:以發明人網絡為例
The Effects of Technological Community and Network Mechanisms on Innovation Impact in TSMC: A Case Study of Inventor Networks |
| Authors: | 林鈺紘
Lin, Yu-Hung |
| Contributors: | 熊瑞梅
鄭力軒
Hsung, Ray-May
Cheng, Li-Hsuan
林鈺紘
Lin, Yu-Hung |
| Keywords: | 技術社群
結構凝聚
地位集中性
專利發明人網絡
Technological Communities
Structural Cohesion
Centrality
Patent Inventor Networks |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-06-03 11:47:52 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本論文透過混合模型的應用，從龐大的台積電發明人合作網絡中，篩選出屬於巢狀核心位置的發明人。更進一步地，本論文企圖探討位於相同巢狀核心結構位置中的發明人，造成其創新影響力差異的網絡機制。此外，藉由回顧台積電的技術發展軌跡，歸納出銅製程、浸潤式微影、鰭式場效電晶體(FinFET)及先進封裝等四項核心技術，本論文企圖使用技術社群的概念，描繪出台積電在2000年至2019年間的核心技術的演化。同時期的網絡中，理解技術社群創新影響力的消長；進一步探討這些技術社群的效應在不同的結構凝聚力和集中性的差異。
本研究的主要發現如下: (一) 透過混合模型的應用，參與核心技術研發的發明人，擁有較高的比例會被歸類於巢狀核心的網絡位置中。(二) 在2009年之前，結構凝聚力對創新影響力的效應，呈現線性關係；2010年後則呈現先升後降的曲線關係。地位集中性則在兩個時期中，皆呈現倒U 型的效應。 (三) 2010年後，發明人參與的專利類型越多，對其專利被引證數會帶來正面效果。(四) 除了浸潤式微影技術之外，具備核心技術專利的發明人，會比其他發明人獲得較高的創新影響力。(五) 技術社群的影響力消長，以浸潤式微影的衰退最為明顯，FinFET社群無論在規模或專利的累積上，至今仍相對其他技術來的穩定。本研究的貢獻是補充了過往相關研究中，較缺乏的發明人合作網絡和台積電的技術變遷的創新影響力的實證分析。
This study employs a hybrid model to extract inventors belonging to the nested core in TSMC's inventor collaboration network. Furthermore, this study attempts to explore the network mechanisms that lead to variations in innovative impact among inventors occupying similar structural position of nested core. In addition, through reviewing the trajectory of technological development, four core technologies are identified—damascene, immersion lithography, FinFET (Fin Field-Effect Transistor), and advanced packaging. This study attempts to illustrate the evolution of TSMC's core technologies from 2000 to 2019 using the concept of technological communities, and examine the effects of structural cohesion, centrality of networks and technological communities on innovation impact of inventors in different periods.
The main findings of this study are as follows: (1) Inventors involved in core technology research and development are more likely to be classified in the nested core position. (2) The effects of structural cohesion on innovation impact show a linear relationship before 2009, followed by a curvilinear relationship after 2010. Status centrality, exhibits an inverted U-shaped effect in both periods. (3) After 2010, the more diverse types of patents for inventors lead to a positive effect on the citation count of their patents. (4) Besides immersion lithography, inventors holding patents in core technologies tend to have higher innovation impact than other inventors. (5) The influence of technological communities fluctuates, with immersion lithography experiencing the most noticeable decline, while the FinFET community remains relatively stable in terms of size and patent accumulation up to now. The contribution of this study is to complement the lacking empirical analyses on the innovation impacts of inventor’s networks and TSMC's technological changes for previous related researches. |
| Reference: | 江韋築（2023）。網絡社區結構的跨界和異質性學習與創新效果：全球半導體公司間的專利引用網絡分析，台北：政治大學社會學系碩士論文。
林季誼、熊瑞梅，2018，〈台灣半導體產業的公司治理跨坐網絡趨勢（2000-2015）：朝向小世界網絡特性〉。《調查研究-方法與應用》40：211-263。
官逸人、熊瑞梅、林亦之，2012，〈臺灣IC產業的創新機制：以2001年、2005年臺灣IC產業專利的發明人網絡為例〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》24(1)：51-82。
官逸人，2014，《台灣IC產業專利發明人的合作網絡機制》。政治大學博士論文。
洪世章，2021，《打造創新路徑 改變世界的台灣科技產業》台北：聯經。
黃世竹，2022，《台灣半導體產業董監網絡的結構凝聚(2010-2020)》。台北：政治大學社會學系碩士論文。
熊瑞梅、 陳冠榮、官逸人，2017，〈紅色跨界創新網絡的機制：以中國大陸半導體公司專利發明人網絡為例〉。頁 496~539，收錄於李宗榮與林宗弘主編，《未竟的奇蹟：轉型中的台灣經濟與社會》。台北：中央研究院 社會學研究所。
熊瑞梅(2023)。「台灣半導體產業創新網絡的演變:制度與網絡機制」專書寫作計畫 (計畫編號：109-2410-H-004-046-MY2)。台北。國科會。
Almeida, P., & Kogut, B. (1997). The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation. Small Business Economics, 9(1), 21–31.
An, L. T. N., Matsuura, Y., Tareq, M. A., Issa, N. M., & Che-Yahya, N. (2023). Impact of Patent Signal on Firm’s Performance at IPO: An Empirical Analysis of Japanese Firms. Economies, 11(4), 101.
Benton, R. A, 2016, “Corporate governance and nested authority: Cohesive network structure, actor-driven mechanisms, and the balance of power in American corporations.” American Journal of Sociology 122:661–713.
Benton, R. A, 2019, "Brokerage and closure in corporate control: Shifting sources of power for a fractured corporate board network." Organization Studies 40(11):1631-1656.
Burt, R.S., 1992, Structural holes : the social structure of competition. Cambridge : Harvard University Press.
Burt, R.S, 2004 “StructuraI Holes and Good ldeas," American JOl/rna/ 01 Sociology 110(2): 349-399
Fleming, Lee, Santiago Mingo, and David Chen, 2007, “Collaborative Brokerage, Generative Creativity, and Creative Success.” Administrative Science Quarterly 52(3):443–75.
Foster, J. G., Rzhetsky, A., and Evans, J. A., 2015, "Tradition and Innovation in Scientists’ Research Strategies." American Sociological Review 80(5): 875–908.
Granovetter, Mark,1985, “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of
Embeddedness.”American Journal of Sociology 91:481–510.
Granovetter, Mark ,1992,“Economic Institutions as Social Constructions: A Framework for Analysis.” Acta Sociologica 35:3–1
He, J. and Fallah, M.H. (2014), Inventor networks and technology clusters in the US. Int J Urban Reg Res, 38: 2174-2200. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12007
Leahey, Erin and James Moody, 2014, “Sociological Innovation Through Subfield Integration.” Social Currents 1(3): 228-256.
Mani, Dahlia, and James Moody, 2014, “Moving beyond Stylized Economic Network Models: The Hybrid World of the Indian Firm Ownership Network.” American Journal of Sociology 119 (6): 1629–69.
Milgram, Stanley. 1967. “The Small World.” Psychology Today 2:60–67.
Moody, J., & White, D. R., 2003, “Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups.” American Sociological Review 68(1):103–127.
Moody,James,2004,“The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network:Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999”,American Sociological Review 69(2):213-238
Moore, G.E. (1965) Cramming More Components onto Integrated Circuits. Electronics Magazine, 38, 114-117.
Paruchuri, S. (2010). Intraorganizational Networks, Interorganizational Networks, and the Impact of Central Inventors: A Longitudinal Study of Pharmaceutical Firms. Organization Science, 21(1), 63–80. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27765952
Podolny, J. M., 2005, Status signals : a sociological study of market competition. Princeton University Press
Uzzi, Brain and Jarrett Spiro, 2005, “Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem.”American Journal of Sociology 111(2): 447–504
Wang, X. X., & Jiao, H. Y. (2022). The impact of network positions in scientific collaboration on pharmaceutical firms' technological innovation performance: Moderating roles of scientific collaboration strength and patent stock. Frontiers in public health, 10, 980845.
Watts, Duncan J. 1999. Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Watts, Duncan J., and Steven H. Strogatz. 1998. “Collective Dynamics of ‘Small-World’Networks.” Nature 393:440–42. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
社會學系
110254018 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110254018 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [Department of Sociology] Theses
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 401801.pdf | | 3760Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
