臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：創新政策與產業策略: 比較型與接續型研究
作者：林志杰
作者(外文)：Lin, Chih-Chieh
校院名稱：國立交通大學
系所名稱：科技管理研究所
指導教授：林亭汝
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2014
主題關鍵詞：國家創新政策；比較型與接續型研究；半導體政策與產業策略；供應鏈發展；多準則決策模式；National innovation policy；comparative & Successibe reseach；MCDM；Semiconductor policy and industrial strategy；Supply-chain development strategy
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(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:36
自1970年代以來, 興盛的高科技產業發展被認為是開發中國家或地區經濟發展的關鍵因素，證諸世界各國發展，由各國政府所主導的有效且高品質國家創新政策確實可以結合企業適當的商業經營以提升整體產業與經濟發展。
首先，本研究細數並分析台灣與新加坡各自在國家創新政策的方向與內涵，從這二個較小經濟規模、皆重點投入科技發展的島國的比較結果，本研究揭櫫各國政府是如何採取有效的措施以協助其國內高科技企業創造國際競爭優勢，特別是在二國的創新績效上的比較，台灣政府部門在創新與研究發展上，採取一主動的角色，以一由上而下的決策方法，集中政策在特定產業上；相對地，新加坡政府是透過具市場機制企業的設立來推廣創新。
其次，本論文在接續國家創新政策，進一步針對產業發展，選擇台灣半導體產業深入探究，IC晶圓代工業如何發展其產業供應鏈策略，更從公司層次探討無晶圓廠的IC設計公司如何選擇晶圓代工供應商。亦因台灣晶圓代工產業與IC設計產業目前市佔率為全球第一與第二，本研究選此作為關鍵個案之以作為連接國家創新政策的接續性產業研究。透過多準則決策分析方法，如決策實驗室分析法(DEMATEL)、網路分析程序法(ANP)、階層分析程序法(AHP)等，被應用在上述兩個產業-晶圓代工業與IC設計產業的分析上。本研究藉此也探究了這兩個台灣非常重要的產業，除了政府政策的導引與協助外，在各個管理層面上如何發展其策略。
從個別供應鏈策略的競爭優劣勢的特性與效應評估分析，本研究發現此策略動態變動的特質，在市場競爭的動態變動下，企業會被驅使調整其策略以維持或提升其競爭優勢。本研究依供應鏈統治能力區分十個主要的供應鏈策略，發現台灣IC晶圓代工業供應鏈績效最佳的策略乃是企業策略聯盟，而影響供應鏈策略發展的最重要準則是-對客戶成本競爭力的貢獻，其次是製程與技術藍圖的策略對準。
接續供應鏈策略的研究，本論文從產業最上游的無晶圓廠IC設計公司，分析其選擇晶圓代工供應商的決策準則，透過多準則決策分析方法中的階層分析程序法，考量在技術、生產、客戶服務支援、與製造設施位置等決策構面，面談IC設計公司的管理者與專家，調查其在決定IC晶圓代工供應商的16個準則，發現供應商的技術能力乃是其在考慮市場競爭的最重要決策選擇的準則。
本研究的研究發現，隨著資訊科技環境所塑造的知識組織間與地域間流動與擴散性增加，可幫助新興經濟體進一步學習並導入國家創新系統在政策與產業發展間的連結機制，及如何掌握台灣與新加坡國家創新政策的成功與彼此的異同，因此在新興經濟體的國家創新系統與產業發展的典範移轉乃是未來不可忽視的重要研究課題。
Prosperity of high-tech industries has been the main fostering factor of developing national or area economy since the 1970s. The global horizons are that quality innovation policies led by national governments can enhance industrial and economic development associated with appropriate business models of enterprises.
First, this research portrayed and analyzed the dimensions and contexts of national innovation policy between Taiwan and Singapore. Based on the research results derived from a comparison of the two small technology-oriented island countries, this research discovered how their governments could assist high-tech companies in developing related strategies for creating competitive advantages nationally and globally. Particularly, in a comparative analysis of innovation performance between these two countries, Taiwanese public institutes take an active role in innovation/R&D and focus their policies on specific industries—a top-down approach; whereas the Singapore government promotes innovation by public enterprises establishments.
Second, this dissertation conducted next-step research on how the integrated circuit (IC) foundry industry of Taiwan had developed its supply-chain strategy, and how IC design houses in Taiwan had selected appropriate IC foundry providers. Taiwan’s IC foundry industry and fabless IC design houses have ranked first and second, respectively, in terms of their worldwide market shares in recent years. This dissertation therefore adopted the whole industry chain as a case research of industry strategy covering key themes connecting to what is after national innovation policy. The multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods such as the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) technique, the analytic network process (ANP), and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) were applied to these two strategy selection researches. The research concerning these two mentioned topics is hoped to demonstrate how Taiwan’s specific and important industry chain has been developing its strategies in varying management aspects, apart from the government’s guidance and assistance.
From evaluating the character and impact of the competitive advantage of individual supply-chain strategies, the study findings showed that strategy adjustments occur dynamically. Thus, companies are driven to make adjustments to strengthen their competitive advantages in a dynamic business environment. In addition, the most critical supply-chain strategy for Taiwan’s IC foundry industry through the survey is “business alliance.” Moreover, the “contribution to customer’s cost competition” and “process/technology roadmap alignment” are the two most important key influence factors of the offered strategies.
Finally, the goal of the last step of research was to analyze the evaluation criteria used by IC designers when selecting IC foundry service providers. With an MCDM model considering the aspects of technology, production, customer service and support, and manufacturing location, we interviewed managers and experts of Taiwan’s IC design firms using the AHP survey with 16 attributes to determine the areas of top concern with respect to IC foundry evaluation criteria. In this study process, technology is found to be the most significant evaluation criterion in view of competitiveness in the customer market.
The increase in organizational and geographical mobility of knowledge may help those emerging economies use national innovation system to link between policy and industry development. However, the geography of knowledge is not a flatter world, thus, it is important to figure out how those emerging economies can learn from the successful experience of Taiwan and Singapore. We suggest that some future research could focus on the paradigm shift in the field of NIS and industries development in emerging economics.
References
1. Anwar, S. (2008). Foreign investment, human capital and manufacturing sector growth in Singapore. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(3), 447-453.
2. Bahinipati, B.K., & Deshmukh, S.G. (2012). Vertical collaboration in the semiconductor industry: A decision framework for supply chain relationships. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 62(2), 504-526.
3. Balzat, M., & Hanusch, H. (2004). Recent trends in the research on national innovation systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14(1), 197-210.
4. Balzat, M., & Pyka, A. (2006). Mapping national innovation systems in the OECD area. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 2(1/2), 158-176.
5. Barney, J.B., (1991), Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
6. Bartels, F. L., & Lederer, S. (2009). Changing patterns in industrial performance – A UNIDO competitive industrial performance perspective: Implications for industrial Development. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
7. Bartels, F. L., Voss, H., Lederer, S., & Bachtrog, C. (2012). Determinants of National Innovation Systems: Policy Implications for Developing Countries. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 14 (1), 2-18.
8. Barton, J. H., Dellenbach, R. B., & Kuruk, P. (1988). Toward a theory of technology licensing. Stanford J. Int. Law, 24, 195-208.
9. Biggadike, R. (1979). The risky business of diversification. Harvard Business Review, May/June, 103-111.
10. Block, F., & Keller, M. R. (2008). Where do innovations come from? Transformations in the U.S. National Innovation System 1970-2006. Washington, DC.: Information Technology & Innovation Foundation.
11. Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513-1522. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002
12. Burke, G. J., Carrillo, J. E., & Vakharia, A. J. (2006). Single versus multiple supplier sourcing strategies. European Journal of Operational Research, 182(1), 95-112.
13. Buvik, A., & Gronhaug, K. (2000). Inter-firm dependence, environmental uncertainty and vertical co-ordination in industrial buyer–seller relationships. Omega, 28(4), 445-460.
14. Castellacci, F., & Natera, J. M. (2013). The Dynamics of National Innovation Systems: A Panel Cointegration Analysis of the Coevolution between Innovative Capability and Absorptive Capacity. Research Policy, 42(3), 579-594.
15. Chang, P. L., Shih, C., & Hsu, C. W. (1994). The formation process of Taiwan’s IC industry - method of technology transfer. Technovation, 14(3), 161–71.
16. Chang, P. L., Shih, C., & Hsu, C. W. (1999). Taiwan’s approach to technological change: the case of integrated circuit design. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 5(2), 173–177.
17. Chang, P. L., & Hsu, C .W. (1998). The development strategies for Taiwan’s semiconductor industry. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(4), 349–56.
18. Chang, P. L., & Tsai, C. T. (2002). Finding the niche position - competition strategy of Taiwan’s IC design industry. Technovation, 22(2), 101–111.
19. Chen, C. T., Lin, C. T., & Huang, S. F. (2005). A fuzzy approach to supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. International Journal of Production Economics, 102(2), 289-301.
20. Chen, G. R., Lu, T. E., Chen, M. L., & Hsieh, T. R. (2004). An environmental and strategic analysis for current IC foundry in Taiwan. Review of Taiwan Economics, 9(4), 69-82.
21. Chen, C, Y., Lin, Y. L., & Chu, P. Y. (2013). Facilitators of national innovation policy in a SME-dominated country: A case study of Taiwan. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 15(4), 405-415.
22. Chen, C. P., Hu, J. L., & Yang, C. H. (2011). An international comparison of R&D efficiency of multiple innovative outputs: The role of the national innovation system. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 13, 341-360.
23. Chien, C. F., & Kuo, R. T. (2013). Beyond make-or-buy: cross-company short-term capacity backup in semiconductor industry ecosystem. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 25(3), 310-342.
24. Chiu, Y. J., Chen, H. C., Shyu, J., & Tzeng, G. H. (2006). Marketing strategy based on customer behavior for the LCD-TV. International Journal of Decision Making, 7(2/3), 143-165.
25. Chow, W. S., Madu, C. N., Kuei, C. H., Lu, M. H., Lin, C., & Tzeng, G. H. (2008). Supply chain management in the US and Taiwan: An empirical study. Omega, 36(5), 665-679.
26. Chu, P. Y., Lin, Y. L., Huang, C. H., & Liu, T. Y. (2009). Externality evaluation: An empirical study of ITRI. International Journal of Technology Management, 48(3), 280-294.
27. Lin, C. R., Lee, H. Y., & Hsiao, L. F. (2009). Study of Taiwan IC Industry Company Administration and Technical Efficiency Relevance. Journal of Economics and Management, 5(1), 29-54.
28. Corner, J., Buchanan, J. & Henig, M. (2001). Dynamic decision problem structuring. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 10(3), 129-142.
29. Culliton, J. W. (1942). Make or Buy. Cambridge. MA: Harvard Univ Press.
30. Ebner, A. (2004). Innovation policies and locational competitiveness: Lessons from Singapore. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 12(2), 47-66.
31. Edquist, C. (2010). Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development (AJSTID), 2(3), 14-45.
32. Edquist, C. (2011). Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: Identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(6), 1-29. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtr060.
33. Edquist, C, & Lundvall, B.A. (1993). Comparing the Danish and Swedish Systems of Innovation’ in National Innovation Systems: a Comparative Analysis, ed, R.R, Nelson, New York: Oxford University Press, 265-298.
34. Edquist, C., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2012). Public procurement for innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy, 41(10), 1757-1769. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.022
35. Finegold, M., Fleming, W. H., & Grompe, M. (2004). Myelomonocytic cells are sufficient for therapeutic cell fusion in liver, Nature Medicine, 10(7):744-8
36. Freeman, C., Clark, J., & Soete, L. (1982). Unemployment and Technical Innovation: A Study of Long Waves and Economic Development. Portsmouth: Greenwood Press.
37. Frenken, K. (2000). A complexity approach to innovation networks: The case of the aircraft industry 1909–1997. Research Policy, 29(2), 257-272.
38. Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World Problems, an Invitation to Further Thought within the Framework of DEMATEL. Switzerland: Battelle Geneva Research Center.
39. Gambino, A. J. (1980). The Make or Buy Decision. New York: National Assn. Accountants.
40. Godin, B. (2009). National innovation system: the system approach in historical perspective. Science, Technology and Human Values, 34(4), 476-501.
41. Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C., & Tirtiroglu, E. (2001). Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(1/2), 71-87.
42. Habaradas, R. B. (2008). Strengthening the national innovation system (NIS) of the Philippines: Lessons from Malaysia and Thailand. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 16(1), 1-22.
43. Adobor, H., & McMullen, R. (2007). Supplier diversity and supply chain management: A strategic approach. Business Horizons, 50(3), 219-229.
44. Hippel, von E. (1988). The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
45. Hoecht, A., & Trott, P. (2006). Innovation risks of strategic outsourcing. Technovation, 26(5-6), 672-681.
46. Hsu, C. Y., Chen, K. T., & Tzeng, G. H. (2007). FMCDM with fuzzy DEMATEL approach for customers’ choice behavior model. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 9(4), 236-246.
47. Hu, M. C. (2011). Evolution of knowledge creation and diffusion: the revisit of Taiwan’s Hsinchu Science Park. Scientometrics, 88, 949–77.
48. Hubler, M. J. (1966). The make or buy decision. Management Services, Nov./Dec., 45-51.
49. Huang, C. Y., & Tzeng, G. H. (2007). Reconfiguring the innovation policy portfolios for Taiwan's SIP mall industry. Technovation, 27(12), 744-765.
50. Hung, S.W. (2006). Competitive strategies for Taiwan’s thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) industry. Technol Soc, 28(3), 349–61.
51. Hung, S. W., Tsai, J. M., Cheng, M. J., & Chen, P. C. (2012). Analysis of the development strategy of late-entrants in Taiwan and Korea’s TFT-LCD industry. Technol Soc, 34(1), 9–22.
52. Hung, S. W., & Yang, C.(2003). The IC fabless industry in Taiwan: current status and future challenges. Technol Soc, 25(3), 385–402.
53. Hung, S. C., & Whittington, R. (2011). Agency in national innovation systems: Institutional entrepreneurship and the professionalization of Taiwanese IT. Research Policy, 40, 526-538.
54. Industrial Technology Research Institute[ITRI]. (2005).
55. Joshi, A. W., & Stump, R. L. (1999). The contingent effect of specific asset investments on joint action in manufacture–supplier relationships: An empirical test of the moderating role of reciprocal asset investments, uncertainty, and trust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(3), 291-305.new window
56. Juan, C. P. (2009). Study on Development Strategy of Taiwan Semiconductor Packaging Industry (Unpublished Thesis). MBA Program of Providence University, Taiwan:Taichung.
57. Kasanen. E., Wallenius, H., Wallenius, J. & Zionts, S. (2000). A study of high-level managerial decision processes with implications for MCDM research. European Journal of Operational Research, 120, 496-510.
58. Kramer, J.P., Marinelli, E., Iammarino, S., & Diez, J.R. (2011). Intangible assets as drivers of innovation: empirical evidence on multinational enterprises in German and UK regional systems of innovation. Technovation, 31(9), 447-458.
59. Krause, D. R., & Ellram, L. M. (1997). Success factors in supplier development, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 27(1), 39 - 52
60. Kurokawa, S. (1997). Make-or-Buy Decisions in R&D: Small Technology, Based Firms in the United States and Japan. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 44(2), 124-134.
61. Ika, L. A., Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2012). Critical success factors for World Bank projects: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Project Management, 30(1), 105–116.
62. Lee, C.S. & Pecht, M. (1997). Recent Developments in Taiwan’s Electronics Industry. Circuit World, 23(3), 16– 19
63. Lee, E. K., Ha, S., & Kim, S. K. (2001). Supplier selection and management system considering relationships in supply chain management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48(3), 307-318.
64. Li, W., Humphreys, P. K., Yeung, A., Cheng, C. L., & Edwin, T. C. (2007). The impact of specific supplier development efforts on buyer competitive advantage: An empirical model. International Journal of Production Economics, 106(1), 230-247.
65. Liao, S. H., & Hu, T. C. (2007). Knowledge transfer and competitive advantage on environmental uncertainty: An empirical study of the Taiwan semiconductor industry. Technovation, 27(6), 402-411.
66. Lin C. Y. (1973). Industrialization in Taiwan. 1946-1972: Trade and import-substitution policies for developing countries. New York: Praeger.
67. Lin, C., Chow, W., Madu, C. N., Kuei, C. H., & Yu, P. P. (2005). A structural equation model of supply chain quality management and organizational performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 96(3), 355-365.
68. Lin, C.Y. (1973). Industrialization in Taiwan, 1946-1972: Trade and Import Substitution Policies for Developing Countries. New York: Praeger.
69. Lin, G. T. R., & Shen, Y. C. (2010). A collaborative model for technology evaluation and decision-making. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 69(2), 94-100.
70. Liou, J. H., Tzeng, G. H., & Chang, H. C. (2007). Airline safety measurement using a novel hybrid model. Journal of Air Transport Management, 13(4), 243-249.
71. Liu, C. Y. (1993). Government’s role in developing a high-tech industry: the case of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry. Technovation,13(5), 299–309.
72. Liu, T. H., & Huang, H. Y. (2013). The Development Process of the LED industry in Taiwan: A Perspective of National Innovation System. International Journal of Science and Engineering, 3(1), 37-54.
73. Lo, M. C., Chang, C. Y., Tzeng, G. H., & Tseng, F. M. (2005). Development strategies of pure wafer foundries using AHP. ISAHP Conference, Hawaii.
74. Lumpkin, J. R., & Ireland, D. R. (1988). Screening practices of new business incubators: The evaluation of critical success factors. American Journal of Small Business, 12(4), 59–81.
75. Lundvall, B. A., Bjorn, J., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 31(2), 213–231.
76. Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Anthem Press.
77. Mathews, J. A. (1997). A silicon valley of the east: creating Taiwan’s semiconductor industry. California Management Review, 39(4), 26–54.
78. Merges, R. P., & Nelson, R. R. (1990). On the complex economics of patent scope. Columbia Law Review, 90(4), 839-916.
79. Mian, S. A. (1996). Assessing value-added contributions of university technology business incubators to tenant firms. Research Policy, 25(3), 325-335.
80. Mowery, D. C. (1984). Firm structure, government policy, and the organization of industrial research: Great Britain and the United States, 1900-1950. Business History Review, 58(4), 504-531.
81. Nelson, R. R. (1992). National innovation systems: a retrospective on a study. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1(2), 347-374.
82. Nelson, R. R., & Rosenberg, N. (1993). Technical innovation and national systems, in National innovation systems: A comparative analysis, ed. R.R. Nelson. New York: Oxford University Press, 3-21.
83. Nelson, R. R., & Rosenberg, N. (1994). American universities and technical advance in industry. Research Policy, 23(3), 323-348.
84. Nolan, P., & Wang, X. (1999). Beyond privatization: institutional innovation and growth in China’s large state-owned enterprises. World Development, 27(1), 169-200.
85. OECD (2007). OECD factbook 2007: Economic, environmental and social statistics. Paris: OECD.
86. OECD (2008). OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: China. Paris: OECD.
87. Parayil, G. (2005). From "Silicon Island" to "Biopolis of Asia": Innovation Policy and Shining Competitive Strategy in Singapore. California Management Review, 47(2), 50-73.
88. Pekkarinen, S., & Harmaakorpi, V. (2006). Building regional networks: The definition of an age business core process in a regional innovation system. Regional Studies, 40(4), 401–413.
89. Perry, W., & Moffat, J. (1977). Developing models of decision making. Journal of Operational Research Society, 48(5), 457-470.
90. Porter M. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.
91. Roberts, E. B. & Mizouchi, R. (1991). Baio Sangyo niokeru Kigyouteikei Senryaku (Strategy for corporate alliance in the biotechnology industry). Business Review, 38(4), 89–99.
92. Roper, S. (2000). Innovation policy in Israel, Ireland, and the UK – An evolutionary perspective. Northern Ireland: Economic Research Centre.
93. Rothwell, R., & Zegveld, W. (1981). Industrial innovation and public policy: preparing for the 1980s and the 1990s. London: Frances Pinter.
94. Saaty, R. W. (2003) The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for decision making and the analytical network process (ANP) for decision making with dependence and feedback. PA:Creative Decisions Foundation.
95. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
96. Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback: Analytic network process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.
97. Saaty, T. L. (1999). Fundamentals of the analytic network process. International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Kobe.
98. Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications
99. Jharkharia, J., & Shankar, R. (2007). Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process (ANP) approach. Omega, 35(3), 274-289.
100. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
101. Sharif, N. (2006). Emergence and development of the National Innovation Systems concept. Research Policy, 35, 745-766
102. Shen, Y. C., Lin, G. T. R., & Tzeng, G. H. (2011). Combined DEMATEL Techniques with Novel MCDM for the Organic Light Emitting Diode Technology Selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 1468-1481.
103. 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.
104. Shyu, J. Z. (2006). National Innovation Systems in the borderless world. Hsinchu: National Chiao Tung University Press.
105. Shyu, J. Z., & Chiu. Y. C. (2002). Innovation policy for developing Taiwan’s competitive advantages. R&D Management, 32(4), 369-374.
106. Shyu, J. Z, Yu, H. C., Lee, Z. Y., & Kuo, L. F. (2003). Using fuzzy MCDM method to study the evaluation criteria and location preferences on foundry service providers by IC designers. Journal of Management, 20(2), 219-249.
107. Sun, Y., & Negishi, M. (2010). Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan’s national innovation system: a comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators. Scientometrics, 82, 677-685.
108. Sun, Y. T., & Liu, F. C. (2010). A regional perspective on the structural transformation of China's national innovation system since 1999. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 77, 1311-1321.
109. Tien, M. C., & Yang, C. C. (2005). Taiwan’s ICP mechanism – a review and a stage approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(1), 29–48.
110. Triantaphyllou. E. (2000). Multi-criteria decision-making methods: A comparative study. MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
111. Tsai, K. H., & Wang, J. C. (2005). An examination of Taiwan's innovation policy measures and their effects. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(2), 239-257.
112. Tzeng, G. H. (1977). A study on the PATTERN method for the decision process in the public system. Japan Journal of Behaviormetrics, 4(2), 29-44.
113. Tzeng, G. H., Chiang, C. H., & Li, C. W. (2007). Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(4), 1028-1044.
114. Tzeng, G. H., Shian. T. A., & Lin, C. Y. (1992). Application of multi-criteria decision making to the evaluation of new energy-system development in Taiwan. Energy, 17(10), 983-992.
115. Tzeng, G. H., & Tsaur, S. H. (1993). Application of multi-criteria decision making to old vehicle elimination in Taiwan. Energy and Environment, 40(3), 65-283.
116. Tzeng, W. L., Li, J. C. C., & Chang, T. Y. (2006). A study on the effectiveness of the most advantageous tendering method in the public works of Taiwan. International Journal of Project Management, 24(5), 431-437.
117. Tung, A. C.(2001). Taiwan’s semiconductor industry: what the state did and did not. Review of Development Economics, 5(2), 266–288.
118. Wang, M. S., & Wu, K. P. (2011). A Study on the Application of Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in IC Industry Policy Selection. Journal of Management Science & Statistical Decision, 8(1), 71-104.
119. Wang, C. T., & Chiu, C. S. (2014). Competitive strategies for Taiwan’s semiconductor industry in a new world economy, Technology in Society, 36, 60-73.
120. Wang, W.L., & Chen, Y. J. (2013). An Empirical Study of an IC Design House in Outsourcing Its Test Vendors. Journal of Information Technology and Applications, 7(2), 34-44.
121. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: The Free Press.
122. Wu, J. Z., & Hsu, C. Y. (2009). Critical Success Factors for Improving Decision Quality on Collaborative Design in the IC Supply Chain. Journal of Quality, 16(2), 95-107.
123. Wu, S. Y., Hung, S. C., & Lin, B. W. (2006). Agile strategy adaptation in semiconductor wafer foundries: an example from Taiwan. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(4), 436–51.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：345（臺灣：340，外國：5） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1541412 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67351115
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上