:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:基隆港創新管理與競爭策略之研究
作者:蕭丁訓
作者(外文):Ding-Hsun Hsiao
校院名稱:海洋大學
系所名稱:航運管理學系
指導教授:林光
張志清
陳基國
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2008
主題關鍵詞:港埠經營管理創新管理競爭策略基隆港Port Administration and ManagementInnovation ManagementCompetitive StrategiesKeelung Port
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(8) 博士論文(0) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:8
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:2
因國際港埠間之競爭日趨激烈,臺灣鄰近各主要國際港除積極推動海運與港埠建設計畫及提升本身的經營效率來吸引航商外,亦積極發展港埠物流,提升其競爭力,以爭取更多國際航商所屬船隊靠泊使用,其發展已對臺灣國際港埠產生一定程度影響。因此,臺灣港埠發展如何突破困境與創新改革,積極改善臺灣國際港埠的經營環境,強化營運競爭力,以免被邊緣化,實為當前應努力之方向。
以往探討基隆港競爭能力或競爭策略之相關文獻均僅以財務或經營績效之層面提出解決方案,鮮少以創新的思維提出更長遠及更寬廣的整體競爭策略。本論文研究的主要目的除了探討基隆港所處的經營環境及面臨之挑戰及透過與基隆港主要航商客戶以半結構式訪談法進行策略方向及可行競爭策略資料的探討,以瞭解港埠使用者的需求與期待外,並應用創新管理的理論導入港埠創新之定義,提出基隆港五大構面及18個策略方案之後,進而規劃設計問卷並進行調查,再透過AHP分析方法,排列基隆港推動各項策略方案的排序,並參考基隆港一級主管以上人員之意見調查,綜合其會計、人事、法規、營運及技術等層面多年的行政歷練之經驗研擬各執行方案的初步構想及發展期程建議。
本論文研究發現,就策略構面而言,五個策略構面的重要排序以「基礎設施創新」是基隆港應優先推動的方向。而就18項策略方案而言,基隆港應優先執行的前五項策略方案依序為徵收民地增加儲位、調整各碼頭的使用功能、闢建聯外設施、型塑組織文化及培養種子員工。在發展期程方面,就行政院及交通部層級而言,短期內應加速民營化政策的推動及進行航港體制的改革;中期應突破政治、法令的限制,研訂獎勵港埠建設的投資與擴大優惠自由貿易港區業者;長期而言,應參考高雄港案例徵收民地增加港埠營業用地。就港務局而言,短期內應積極推動調整各碼頭的使用功能等12項業務;中期發展方向為闢建聯外設施、突破政治與法令的限制、進行組織變革及業務切割委外辦理;長期而言,本研究建議港務局在完成組織體制改革後,可積極跨入異業。同時,形塑組織文化進而發展整合性服務,此等措施納入長期較為合適。
港埠經營管理、創新管理、競爭策略、基隆港
Considering the keen competition in port industry, the neighboring ports of Taiwan have put a lot of efforts to improve port infrastructure, enhance operational efficiency and develop value-added logistics services, in order to upgrade their competitive edge to attract more international shipping fleets. Under such a circumstance, in order to prevent Keelung Port from being marginalized, the port authorities need to take initiatives to break through its bottleneck in port operation, make operational environment friendlier, and strengthen port competitiveness as well.
Since few of literature reviews in the past were based on core values or core competence to develop more profound or broader strategies for port operation, this thesis, therefore, aims to (1) examine the operation environment and challenges that Keelung Port has been confronted with; (2) conduct semi-structured interviews and apply theory of Innovation Management to collect possible and feasible competitive strategies; (3) place the orders of those competitive strategies by using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); and (4) find out short-term, middle-term, and long-term competitive strategies with reference to the questionnaires given by senior supervisors in Keelung Port authority.
By virtue of expert interviews and questionnaire survey, the respondents take “innovation of infrastructure” as the most important strategic dimensions among all the 5 ones. Among those 18 competitive strategies, the most important five ones are ordered as “Levying private land to increase storage capacity”, “Making suitable adjustment on functions of wharf using”, “establishing more complete outward-connecting road system”, “Reframing organizational culture”, and “developing seed’s workforce”. In terms of development stage for each competitive strategy, as far as the Executive Yuan and the Ministry of Transportation and Communications are concerned, privatization of port operation and innovation of shipping and navigation system should be carried out in the short term; deregulation and encouragement for port investment as well as incentives expansion for free trade zone enterprises should be considered in the middle term; while in the long term, Keelung Port should learn the experience from Kaohsiung Port to levy private land so as to increase its land for port operation. For the Harbor Bureau, the 12 competitive strategies such as “Making suitable adjustment on functions of wharf using”, “Levying private land to increase storage capacity”…etc. need to be conducted in the short term; in the middle term, the establishment of outward connecting road system, deregulation, and innovation on organization and business outsourcing should be taken into consideration; in the long term, provided the functions of administration and business operation have been appropriately separated into different organizations, Keelung Port can actively involve and invest in different industries, reframe its organizational culture, so as to further develop integrated services.
一、中文文獻
1. 大前義次(1988),AHP ?重?付??評?, ????????? ????, 33(8), 頁390-394。
2. 王烑炫(1986),「太平洋航線貨櫃運輸特性分析」,國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
3. 古永嘉(1996)譯,企業研究方法,第五版,台北,華泰書局。
4. 交通部(2005),交通年鑑。
5. 交通部運輸研究所(1987),臺灣港埠費率制度研討報告。
6. 交通部運輸研究所(2006),三通未開放前如何提升國內各港競爭力。
7. 交通部運輸研究所(2006),因應大陸港口發展如何提升國內港埠競爭力。
8. 朱正?、王宏仁(2006),韓國自由經濟區考察,高雄縣政府考察報告。
9. 余坤東,梁金樹、張志清(2001),基隆港務局轉投資與多角化經營,基隆港務局委託研究計畫報告書。
10. 周旭華 譯(1994 ),發展型管理,台北:天下。
11. 周松青(2005),東北亞三國港口競爭加劇 -- 上海情報服務平臺,城市競爭情報-都市圈研究。
12. 林光、張志清、顏進儒等人(2007),從兩岸港口發展探討基隆港競爭策略,基隆港務局委託海洋大學研究計畫報告書。
13. 林國勝 (2000),AHP 標度評價與新標度法之研究,國防管理學院國防決策科學研究所碩士論文,頁37-51。
14. 倪安順(1997),「臺灣地區港埠均衡發展策略之研究」,航運季刊,第六卷,第三期,頁14。
15. 倪安順(2003),「以資源基礎理論探討航商貨櫃港口選擇行為之研究」, 國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理學系博士論文。
16. 徐人剛(2006),臺北港貨櫃中心經營策略之研究,2006航運與港埠發展研討會,中華民國。
17. 徐啟銘 譯(1998),策略性科技管理,台北:美商麥格羅希爾。
18. 財經縱橫網(2006),香港、上海和深圳三個港口的前瞻性發展預測報告,http://wz.dzwww.com/cj/。
19. 國際先驅導報(2005),洋山港讓韓國人擔憂,http://61.129.65.8:82/gate/big5/world.eastday.com/eastday/node81844/node81851/node88857/userobject1ai1576529.html ,2005年10月25日。
20. 基隆港務局(2006),基隆港96-100年整體規劃與發展報告。
21. 深圳市交通局(2006),2006年度責任目標白皮書,深圳市中小企業發展網。
22. 陳正平 譯(1996),原著Moore Geoffrey A.,龍捲風暴,台北:麥田。
23. 陳梧桐(2002),「經營策略之創新管理─以IC企業為例」,國立交通大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
24. 陳清擇(2006),考察港口及物流設施並拜訪重要航商,基隆港務局出國報告書。
25. 陳義勝、林光、梁金樹等人(1999),我國國際商港港埠未來競爭力分析及核心能力建立整體規劃整合報告,基隆港務局委託國立臺灣海洋大學。
26. 陳榮聰(1993),「航商對台灣三大國際商港港埠條件滿意度調查研究」,國立交通大學交通運輸研究所碩士論文。
27. 陳榮聰(2006),「基隆港未來營運發展計劃」,基隆港務局94 年自行研究報告。
28. 陳遷、王浣辦(1996),AHP 方法判斷尺度的合理定義,系統工程,第十四卷,第五期,頁18-20。
29. 程建宇、鄭淑惠,1999,E 世代港埠行銷的印證分析-新加坡港策略與經營。
30. 黃文吉、曾國雄、張志清等人(2004),交通部基隆港務局特殊公法人組織架構與經營管理之研究,基隆港務局委託研究計畫報告書。
31. 黃文吉、郭塗城、鄧振源等人(2002),基隆港區開辦物流業務行動計畫及運量之開發及分析,基隆港務局委託海洋大學研究計畫報告書。
32. 新華網(2006), http:// news.xinhuanet.com/globe/2006-11/14/content_5328737.htm, 2006-11-14。
33. 楊鈺池(1999),邁向二十一世紀的港埠行銷策略,台北:航貿周刊。
34. 楊鈺池(2000),我國際貨櫃港埠行銷策略之研究,私立義守大學國貿系,行政院國家科學委員會大專青年專題研究計畫成果報告,89-2185-C-214-026-H。
35. 楊鈺池(2006),二十一世紀港埠物流發展新趨勢,高雄海洋科技大學,正利航運員工訓練講義。
36. 楊瑪利、陳之俊、王一芝(2006),前進杜拜:一門全球必修的新顯學,台北:天下。
37. 溫東洲(2004),「生物技術產業新產品發展關鍵因素之探討-以AHP 方法分析」,國立東華大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。
38. 劉蘊芳 譯(1996),創新K管理,台北:經典傳訊。
39. 蔡丁義(2003),「兩岸現狀與WTO架構下高雄港之競爭與發展策略促進港埠營運策略」,中山大學碩士論文。
40. 蔡明田、莊立民、劉春初(2001),組織創新衡量模式的建構,http://www.itis.org.tw/forum/content3/01if05c.htm。
41. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989),層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(下),中國統計學報,27卷7期,頁1-20。
42. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989),層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(上),中國統計學報,27卷6期,頁5-22。
43. 蕭丁訓(2006),臺北港貨櫃碼頭營運後對基隆港營運所產生之影響及因應策略之探討,國際物流學術研討會,海洋大學航運管理學系,基隆。
44. 蕭丁訓等人(2005),「由上海港發展看臺灣港口的競爭策略」,航運季刊,第十四卷,第四期,頁85-107。
45. 蕭丁訓、盧展猷、曹至宏(2006),從港埠客戶結構論碼頭經營者的競爭策略-以基隆港貨櫃儲運場為例,航港政策高階論壇,中華民國。
46. 蕭丁訓、謝明輝、陳基國(2004),由上海港變革論提升我國港埠競爭力之道,第一屆十校聯盟航運研討會,中華民國,頁78-85。
47. 簡瑞峰(1995),「產業創新力的研究」,臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
二、英文文獻
1. Abernathy, W. J., Kim, B. C., and Alan, M. K. (1983), Industrial Renaissance, New York: Addison-Wesley.
2. Anderson, P. and Tushman, M. L. (1986), “Technological Discontinuities and Organization Environment”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 439-465.
3. Betz, F. (1998), Managing Technological Innovation-Competitive Advantage from Change, New York: Wiley-Interscience.
4. Betz. F. (1993), Managing Technology Competing Through New Venture Innovation and Corporate Research, Prentice Hall.
5. Brown, R. (1992), "Managing the "S" Curves of Innovation", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 61-72.
6. Bryman, A.(1989). Research methods and organization studies. London: Unwin Hyman.
7. Christensen C. M. and Raynor M. E. (2003), The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth, New York: Harvard Business School.
8. Christensen C. M., Anthone, S. D., and Roth, E. A. (2004), What's Next: Using the Theories of Innovation to Predict Industry Change, New York: Harvard Business School.
9. Churchill, G.A. Jr. (1995), Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations, 6th ed., New York: The Dryden Press.
10. Daft, R. L. (1978). "A dual-core model of organization innovation." Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 193-210.
11. Damanpour, F. (1991). " Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp.555-590.
12. Drucker, P. (1985), Innovation and Entrepreneurship: practice and principles, London: Heineman.
13. Freeman, C. (1982), The Economics of Industrial Innovation, Cambridge, The MIT press, MA.
14. Henderson R. M. and Clark, K. M. (1990), "Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firm," ASQ, pp.9-30.
15. James, Peter (1985). Campus, International Specialized Book services.
16. Jose L. T. (2006), Privatization: The Port of Singapore Experience.
17. Knight, K.E. (1967), "A Descriptive Model of the Intra-firm Innovation Process," The Journal of Business, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 478-496.
18. Knight, K.E., 1967, “A descriptive model of intra-firm innovation process,” Journal of Management, Vol. 41, pp. 478-496.
19. Luecke. R. (2003), Managing Creativity and Innovation, New York: Harvard Business School Press.
20. Marquish, D. G. (1982), The Anatomy of Successful Innovation, Winthrop Publisher: Cambridge.
21. Murphy, P. R. and Daley, J. M. (1994), "A Comparative Analysis of Port Selection Factors," Transportation Journal, Fall, pp. 15-21.
22. Murphy, P. R., Dalenberg, D. R., and Daley, J. M. (1991), "Analyzing international Water Transportation: The Perspectives of Large U.S industrial Corporations," Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 169-189.
23. Murphy, P. R., Dalenberg, D. R., and Daley, J. M. (1992), "Port Selection Criteria: An Application of a Transportation Research Framework," Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 237-255.
24. OECD (1997), The Oslo Manual: Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data. Paris, OECD.
25. Robert E. D. and Jack N. B. (1988), National Industrial Policies, Winthrop Publisher: Cambridge.
26. Rothwell, R. and Zegveld, W. (1985), Reindustrialization and Technology, UK: Harlow Longman.
27. Saaty, T.L. and Vargas, L.G. (1991), The logic of Priorities, Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
28. Slack, B. (1985), "Containerization, Inter-Port Competition and Port Selection,” Maritime Policy Management, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 293-303.
29. Song, D. W. (2001), "Port Co-petition as a New Strategic Option," Seaview, No. 56, pp. 2-8.
30. Stainback, S., and Stainback, W. (1988). Understanding and conducting qualitative research. Dubugue, IA: Kendall/ Hunt.
31. Streele (1990), Management Policy and Strategy, North Holland: Doubleday.
32. The Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries(MOMAF)(2003), Trend and analysis of large container vessels ,KOREA.
33. Thomas (1997), Structural Changes in Maritime Transport, Port Policy Seminar.
34. Tushman, M. and Nadler, D. (1986), "Organizing for Innovation," California Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 74-92.
35. Ulusoy, G. (2003), "An Assessment of Supply Chain and Innovation Management Practices in the Manufacturing Industries in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 86, No. 3, pp. 251-270.
36. UNCTAD (1992), Port Marketing and The Challenge of the Third Generation Ports, New York: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE