現代的國際競爭不斷在重新定義國家的角色，提昇國家競爭力已是刻不容緩。然 而，瑞士洛桑國際管理學院 (IMD) 與日內瓦世界經濟論壇 (WEF) 分別公佈的「全球競爭力 年報」，對各國競爭力的評比亦有差異。究竟 IMD 與 WEF 的指標是否能適切地表達一國的 競爭力﹖不同的國家競爭力衡量指標如何協調﹖為明瞭我國在國際競爭中的真實位勢，實有 必要檢驗不同的競爭力衡量報告的構念效度 (即輻合效度與區別效度 ) 和信度。 本研究運 用確定性因素分析方法，將國家競爭力指標排名的差異來源分為三種：因衡量方法而產生， 因衡量特質而產生，以及隨機誤差。本研究的貢獻在於將國家競爭力指標的實質內涵加以修 正或重新界定，使我國國家優勢提昇的努力方向，能有一個更為明確的定位。

　　　　　International competition is constantly redefining the roles of nations as most nations (or states) must strive to upgrade their national competitiveness. But from the World Competitiveness Reports published respectively by IMD and WEF in Switzerland, we still notice substantial differences in terms of country rankings. Are indicators chosen by IMD and WEF reflective of real national competitiveness ﹖ How can we reconcile the differences between numerous measures ﹖ To understand Taiwan's competitive standing relative to other countries, we need to re-examine both competitiveness reports and demonstrate their appropriateness through construct validation (i.e., calculating convergent and discriminant validities) and reliability testing. This pioneering study uses confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to decompose variations in national competitiveness rankings into three sources: variation due to "methods" (i.e., sources of reports), variation due to "traits" (i.e., indicators of competitiveness), and pure random errors. The major contribution of this study is that a modified or re-defined "national competitiveness" concept makes it easy for our national efforts toward upgrading international competitiveness to find their exact focus.