根據2014年教育部最新短期補習班資料管理系統的資料顯示，全國的補習班產業在台灣近十年仍然十分蓬勃。然而面對少子化的衝擊以及家長本身知識、學識提升之下，身為補習班的經營者，採取何種策略因應對經營者確是一大考驗。因此，本研究主要目的在了解補習班的策略方針，策略群組，並分析各群組間經營績效之差異。本研究採用訪談法及問卷調查法，研究對象為雲林縣短期文理補習班，共計回收200份有效問卷，採用描述性分析法、集群分析及差異檢定法分析。分析結果發現，班主任的教育程度以大學學歷居多，授課類別以多科專業科目指導較多，老師學歷以大專以上（教育相關科系）居多，授課長度以1.6小時～2小時居多。各策略群組間在補習班營運績效上其有顯著差異，集群2「積極擴張者」在集群中的績效是最優者，集群1「服務品牌者」的績效則次之。集群1重視服務，因此在「人數成長」、「營收成長」、「續班比率」、「班級總數」的經管績效皆優於集群3。集群2重視行銷和服務品質，在五大績效「人數成長」、「營收成長」、「續班比率」、「每班人數」、「班級總數」的經營績效是三個集群中績效最優良的一個。集群3僅在「每班人數」此績效中優於集群1，是三個集群中績效落差較大者。

According to the latest Ministry of Education 2014, short-term supplementary data management information system. Since 2000 the number of cram schools has increased from 4,944 to 18,894 today: i.e., Over the past fifteen years, this number has expanded nearly threefold. Obviously, this industry across the last decade has seen healthy growth. Facing the low birth rate impact as a manager of the supplementary, talent or skill class, how to attract guardian's approval, how to increase children's desire to study, etc. all test the manager's business skills. This research deals with all the listed cram schools in Yunlin County, groups then according to business strategies and analyzes their management achievement. This study used interviews and questionnaires to analyze short-term cram schools of Yunlin County. We used sampling method for census and total recovery of 200 valid questionnaires. Data were evaluated by descriptive analysis, cluster analysis, and differential test to find most teachers in charge as university graduates, up to 56% teaching multidisciplinary professional subjects, and most teachers graduated from colleges and/or education-related departments. We thus know college graduation as sine qua non for cram school teachers, their class length from 1.6 to 2.0 hours, for the most part. Based on analysis, this research divided the cram schools into service brand, enthusiastic expander, and active adjuster groups. There surfaced definite differences among groups with regard to business achievements, Group Two (＂enthusiastic expander＂) placing highest, Group One (＂service brand＂) second, and Group Three (＂active adjuster＂) lowest. Group One focused on service, such that ＂growing number...revenue growth...continued shift ratio... total number of classes＂ in operating performance are superior to Group Three. Group Two paid active attention to marketing and service quality, rendering performance of the top five, ＂the number of growth...revenue growth...continued shift ratio...class size...total number of classes＂ in overall operation better than that of the other two groups. Group Three only outperformed Group One in ＂class size＂ and showed the largest performance gap among three groups.