Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 新創企業與創業生態系之發展
New Startups and Entrepreneurial Ecosystems作者 曾品融
Tseng, Pin-Jung貢獻者 邱奕嘉
Chiu, Yi-Chia
曾品融
Tseng, Pin-Jung關鍵詞 新創企業
創業生態系
價值創造
價值獲取
Startups
Entrepreneurial Ecosystem
Value Creation
Value Capture日期 2024 上傳時間 5-Aug-2024 13:04:25 (UTC+8) 摘要 台灣創業生態系從10年前的沙漠逐漸轉變為現今的雨林，根據全球創業生態系報告「Global Startup Ecosystem Index 2023」(StartupBlink, 2023)指出，台灣的世界排名由2020年的30名上升至2023年的24名。受惠於政府政策轉變、企業開放式創新、中介機構專業化、海外資金回流、國際資源挹注等因素，台灣創業生態系萌芽並慢慢步入快速成長期。 本研究以位於台灣創業生態系的新創企業作為研究對象，包含艾涅爾電力、孚鴻創意資訊、毫米波科技共計三間新創公司，結合過去創業生態系的相關研究文獻，從宏觀視角探討創業生態系之組成結構、運行機制，以及從微觀視角深入了解新創企業位於生態系中的價值創造與獲取。 本研究發現，創業生態系是以新創企業之創業活動為核心，由多方利害關係人共同組成的網絡關係，其目的在於創造價值並獲取價值，所有生態系參與者共同合作目的是為了獲取更多價值，也因此有誘因合作創造價值。其中的參與者包含新創企業、政府與學研單位、創育機構、投資人、企業、顧客等，所有參與者即便期許獲取的價值不盡相同，但共同行動都是支持創業活動，由新創企業負責執行，其他參與者作為輔助角色，所有生態系參與者共同協作以產生綜效，創造更高的價值就是生態系發展的關鍵點。 根據價值創造與獲取理論，結合對於個案公司的訪談，新創企業在初期難以將創造出來的價值捕獲，需要更多時間持續創造價值，並且建立穩定的商業模式，進而獲取價值。新創企業的價值創造與價值獲取若要提升，最好透過創業生態系與多方參與者進行協作，並且不斷創新，打造有長期價值的核心產品，以生態系參與者間共同協作，作爲新創企業成長的驅動力。
The entrepreneurial ecosystem in Taiwan has evolved significantly over the past decade, improving its global ranking from 30th in 2020 to 24th in 2023 (StartupBlink, 2023). This growth is driven by changes in government policies, enterprise innovation, professionalization of intermediaries, return of overseas capital, and international resource infusion. This study focuses on startups within Taiwan's entrepreneurial ecosystem, exploring its structure and operational mechanisms from a macro perspective, and examining value creation and capture by startups from a micro perspective. By integrating past literature and synthesizing insights from different perspectives, the study provides growth strategy recommendations for startups, contributing to the development of Taiwan's entrepreneurial ecosystem. The study finds that Taiwan's entrepreneurial ecosystem is centered on startup activities, forming a network of stakeholders—startups, government, academia, incubators, accelerators, investors, corporations, and customers—focused on creating and capturing value. Participants collaborate to generate more value, with startups leading and others supporting. This synergy is crucial for higher value creation and ecosystem growth. Interviews and value creation theory reveal that startups initially struggle to capture value. Continuous innovation and stable business models are needed. Collaboration with ecosystem participants and developing long-term core products are essential, driving startup growth.參考文獻 李慶芳 (2013)。質化研究之經驗敘說：質化研究的六個修煉。新北市：高立圖書。 林嵩 (2011)。創業生態系統: 概念發展與運行機制。中央財經大學學報， 4，58-62。 資誠聯合會計師事務所 (2022)。臺灣中小企業轉型現況及需求調查。2024年3月10日。取自 https://www.pwc.tw/zh/publications/topic-report/assets/sme-digitalisation-survey-2022.pdf 蕭瑞麟 (2020)。不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辯脈絡。台北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard business review, 84(4), 98. Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of management, 43(1), 39-58. Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic management journal, 31(3), 306-333. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.821 Audretsch, D. B., Cunningham, J. A., Kuratko, D. F., Lehmann, E. E., & Menter, M. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: economic, technological, and societal impacts. The Journal of technology transfer, 44, 313-325. Baldwin, C. Y. (2008). Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms. Industrial and corporate change, 17(1), 155-195. Bernard, H. R. (2013). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage. Bowman, C., & Ambrosini, V. (2000). Value creation versus value capture: towards a coherent definition of value in strategy. British journal of management, 11(1), 1-15. Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory‐building study of regional co‐opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148-162. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research policy, 43(7), 1164-1176. Cobben, D., Ooms, W., Roijakkers, N., & Radziwon, A. (2022). Ecosystem types: A systematic review on boundaries and goals. Journal of Business Research, 142, 138-164. Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 1-14. Cumming, D., Werth, J. C., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Governance in entrepreneurial ecosystems: venture capitalists vs. technology parks. Small Business Economics, 52, 455-484. Cunningham, J. A., Menter, M., & O'Kane, C. (2018). Value creation in the quadruple helix: A micro level conceptual model of principal investigators as value creators. R&D Management, 48(1), 136-147. Dedehayir, O., Mäkinen, S. J., & Ortt, J. R. (2018). Roles during innovation ecosystem genesis: A literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 18-29. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. sage. Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of management review, 31(3), 659-669. Holgersson, M., Granstrand, O., & Bogers, M. (2018). The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 303-319. Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard business review, 82(3), 68-78, 126. Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard business review, 88(6), 40-50. Jacobides, M. (2020). The Delicate Balance of Making an Ecosystem Strategy Work. Harv. Bus. Rev, 12, 7372. Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic management journal, 39(8), 2255-2276. Jacobides, M. G., & Winter, S. G. (2005). The co‐evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: Explaining the institutional structure of production. Strategic management journal, 26(5), 395-413. Järvi, K., Almpanopoulou, A., & Ritala, P. (2018). Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms. Research policy, 47(8), 1523-1537. Kapoor, R., & Agarwal, S. (2017). Sustaining superior performance in business ecosystems: Evidence from application software developers in the iOS and Android smartphone ecosystems. Organization science, 28(3), 531-551. Kapoor, R., & Lee, J. M. (2013). Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: How organizational forms shape new technology investments. Strategic management journal, 34(3), 274-296. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2010 Langlois, R. N. (2003). The vanishing hand: the changing dynamics of industrial capitalism. Industrial and corporate change, 12(2), 351-385. Lee, T. W. (1999). Using qualitative methods in organizational research. Sage. Leendertse, J., Schrijvers, M., & Stam, E. (2022). Measure twice, cut once: Entrepreneurial ecosystem metrics. Research policy, 51(9), 104336. Lepak, D. P., Smith, K. G., & Taylor, M. S. (2007). Value creation and value capture: A multilevel perspective. Academy of management review, 32(1), 180-194. Leten, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Roijakkers, N., Clerix, A., & Van Helleputte, J. (2013). IP models to orchestrate innovation ecosystems: IMEC, a public research institute in nano-electronics. California Management Review, 55(4), 51-64. Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review, 71(3), 75-86. Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2017). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 7(1), 20160011. Pombo-Juárez, L., Könnölä, T., Miles, I., Saritas, O., Schartinger, D., Amanatidou, E., & Giesecke, S. (2017). Wiring up multiple layers of innovation ecosystems: Contemplations from Personal Health Systems Foresight. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 115, 278-288. Ritala, P., Agouridas, V., Assimakopoulos, D., & Gies, O. (2013). Value creation and capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: a comparative case study. International journal of technology management, 63(3-4), 244-267. Shaw, D. R., & Allen, T. (2018). Studying innovation ecosystems using ecology theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 88-102. Shipilov, A., & Gawer, A. (2020). Integrating research on interorganizational networks and ecosystems. Academy of management annals, 14(1), 92-121. Sussan, F., & Acs, Z. J. (2017). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 49, 55-73. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40-49. Van der Borgh, M., Cloodt, M., & Romme, A. G. L. (2012). Value creation by knowledge‐based ecosystems: evidence from a field study. R&D Management, 42(2), 150-169. Verdin, P., & Tackx, K. (2015). Are you creating or capturing value? A dynamic framework for sustainable strategy. M-RCBG Working Paper Series, 36, 1-19. Xu, G., Wu, Y., Minshall, T., & Zhou, Y. (2018). Exploring innovation ecosystems across science, technology, and business: A case of 3D printing in China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 208-221. Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the future of the case study. Method in evaluation research. Evaluation practice, 15(3), 283-290. Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative research methods, 5(14), 359-386. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
110364123資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110364123 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 邱奕嘉 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chiu, Yi-Chia en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 曾品融 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Tseng, Pin-Jung en_US dc.creator (作者) 曾品融 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Tseng, Pin-Jung en_US dc.date (日期) 2024 en_US dc.date.accessioned 5-Aug-2024 13:04:25 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 5-Aug-2024 13:04:25 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 5-Aug-2024 13:04:25 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0110364123 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152643 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 科技管理與智慧財產研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 110364123 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 台灣創業生態系從10年前的沙漠逐漸轉變為現今的雨林，根據全球創業生態系報告「Global Startup Ecosystem Index 2023」(StartupBlink, 2023)指出，台灣的世界排名由2020年的30名上升至2023年的24名。受惠於政府政策轉變、企業開放式創新、中介機構專業化、海外資金回流、國際資源挹注等因素，台灣創業生態系萌芽並慢慢步入快速成長期。 本研究以位於台灣創業生態系的新創企業作為研究對象，包含艾涅爾電力、孚鴻創意資訊、毫米波科技共計三間新創公司，結合過去創業生態系的相關研究文獻，從宏觀視角探討創業生態系之組成結構、運行機制，以及從微觀視角深入了解新創企業位於生態系中的價值創造與獲取。 本研究發現，創業生態系是以新創企業之創業活動為核心，由多方利害關係人共同組成的網絡關係，其目的在於創造價值並獲取價值，所有生態系參與者共同合作目的是為了獲取更多價值，也因此有誘因合作創造價值。其中的參與者包含新創企業、政府與學研單位、創育機構、投資人、企業、顧客等，所有參與者即便期許獲取的價值不盡相同，但共同行動都是支持創業活動，由新創企業負責執行，其他參與者作為輔助角色，所有生態系參與者共同協作以產生綜效，創造更高的價值就是生態系發展的關鍵點。 根據價值創造與獲取理論，結合對於個案公司的訪談，新創企業在初期難以將創造出來的價值捕獲，需要更多時間持續創造價值，並且建立穩定的商業模式，進而獲取價值。新創企業的價值創造與價值獲取若要提升，最好透過創業生態系與多方參與者進行協作，並且不斷創新，打造有長期價值的核心產品，以生態系參與者間共同協作，作爲新創企業成長的驅動力。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) The entrepreneurial ecosystem in Taiwan has evolved significantly over the past decade, improving its global ranking from 30th in 2020 to 24th in 2023 (StartupBlink, 2023). This growth is driven by changes in government policies, enterprise innovation, professionalization of intermediaries, return of overseas capital, and international resource infusion. This study focuses on startups within Taiwan's entrepreneurial ecosystem, exploring its structure and operational mechanisms from a macro perspective, and examining value creation and capture by startups from a micro perspective. By integrating past literature and synthesizing insights from different perspectives, the study provides growth strategy recommendations for startups, contributing to the development of Taiwan's entrepreneurial ecosystem. The study finds that Taiwan's entrepreneurial ecosystem is centered on startup activities, forming a network of stakeholders—startups, government, academia, incubators, accelerators, investors, corporations, and customers—focused on creating and capturing value. Participants collaborate to generate more value, with startups leading and others supporting. This synergy is crucial for higher value creation and ecosystem growth. Interviews and value creation theory reveal that startups initially struggle to capture value. Continuous innovation and stable business models are needed. Collaboration with ecosystem participants and developing long-term core products are essential, driving startup growth. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 表次 VII 圖次 VIII 第壹章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究問題與目的 4 第三節 研究流程 6 第貳章 文獻回顧 7 第一節 商業生態系 7 一、 商業生態系概念 7 二、 商業生態系類型 11 第二節 創業生態系 18 一、 創業生態系概念與結構 18 二、 創業生態系運行機制 20 第三節 價值創造與價值獲取 22 一、 價值創造與獲取之概念 22 二、 價值創造與獲取之動態平衡策略 25 第參章 研究方法 29 第一節 研究方法 29 一、 質性研究法 29 二、 個案研究設計 30 三、 研究個案挑選之原因 31 四、 資料搜集方式 33 第二節 研究架構 34 第肆章 個案背景介紹 35 第一節 台灣創業生態系發展沿革 35 第二節 個案公司背景介紹 39 一、 艾涅爾電力股份有限公司 39 二、 孚鴻創意資訊股份有限公司 43 三、 毫米波科技股份有限公司 47 第伍章 個案分析 51 第一節 創業生態系組成與運行方式 51 一、 創業生態系組成參與者 51 二、 創業生態系運行方式 53 第二節 新創企業價值創造與價值獲取 57 一、 新創企業之價值創造與價值獲取 57 二、 創業生態系價值地圖 69 第三節 新創企業成長策略 70 一、 新創企業價值創造與價值獲取之平衡 70 二、 新創企業於創業生態系之成長策略 72 第陸章 結論與建議 75 第一節 研究發現 75 第二節 研究結論 78 第三節 研究限制與研究建議 79 參考文獻 80 附錄一、訪綱 85 附錄二、艾涅爾電力訪談重點 86 附錄三、孚鴻創意資訊訪談重點 88 附錄四、艾涅爾電力訪談重點 90 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2731765 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110364123 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 新創企業 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 創業生態系 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 價值創造 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 價值獲取 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Startups en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Entrepreneurial Ecosystem en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Value Creation en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Value Capture en_US dc.title (題名) 新創企業與創業生態系之發展 zh_TW dc.title (題名) New Startups and Entrepreneurial Ecosystems en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李慶芳 (2013)。質化研究之經驗敘說：質化研究的六個修煉。新北市：高立圖書。 林嵩 (2011)。創業生態系統: 概念發展與運行機制。中央財經大學學報， 4，58-62。 資誠聯合會計師事務所 (2022)。臺灣中小企業轉型現況及需求調查。2024年3月10日。取自 https://www.pwc.tw/zh/publications/topic-report/assets/sme-digitalisation-survey-2022.pdf 蕭瑞麟 (2020)。不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辯脈絡。台北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard business review, 84(4), 98. Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of management, 43(1), 39-58. Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic management journal, 31(3), 306-333. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.821 Audretsch, D. B., Cunningham, J. A., Kuratko, D. F., Lehmann, E. E., & Menter, M. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: economic, technological, and societal impacts. The Journal of technology transfer, 44, 313-325. Baldwin, C. Y. (2008). Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms. Industrial and corporate change, 17(1), 155-195. Bernard, H. R. (2013). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage. Bowman, C., & Ambrosini, V. (2000). Value creation versus value capture: towards a coherent definition of value in strategy. British journal of management, 11(1), 1-15. Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory‐building study of regional co‐opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148-162. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research policy, 43(7), 1164-1176. Cobben, D., Ooms, W., Roijakkers, N., & Radziwon, A. (2022). Ecosystem types: A systematic review on boundaries and goals. Journal of Business Research, 142, 138-164. Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 1-14. Cumming, D., Werth, J. C., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Governance in entrepreneurial ecosystems: venture capitalists vs. technology parks. Small Business Economics, 52, 455-484. Cunningham, J. A., Menter, M., & O'Kane, C. (2018). Value creation in the quadruple helix: A micro level conceptual model of principal investigators as value creators. R&D Management, 48(1), 136-147. Dedehayir, O., Mäkinen, S. J., & Ortt, J. R. (2018). Roles during innovation ecosystem genesis: A literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 18-29. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. sage. Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of management review, 31(3), 659-669. Holgersson, M., Granstrand, O., & Bogers, M. (2018). The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 303-319. Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard business review, 82(3), 68-78, 126. Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard business review, 88(6), 40-50. Jacobides, M. (2020). The Delicate Balance of Making an Ecosystem Strategy Work. Harv. Bus. Rev, 12, 7372. Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic management journal, 39(8), 2255-2276. Jacobides, M. G., & Winter, S. G. (2005). The co‐evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: Explaining the institutional structure of production. Strategic management journal, 26(5), 395-413. Järvi, K., Almpanopoulou, A., & Ritala, P. (2018). Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms. Research policy, 47(8), 1523-1537. Kapoor, R., & Agarwal, S. (2017). Sustaining superior performance in business ecosystems: Evidence from application software developers in the iOS and Android smartphone ecosystems. Organization science, 28(3), 531-551. Kapoor, R., & Lee, J. M. (2013). Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: How organizational forms shape new technology investments. Strategic management journal, 34(3), 274-296. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2010 Langlois, R. N. (2003). The vanishing hand: the changing dynamics of industrial capitalism. Industrial and corporate change, 12(2), 351-385. Lee, T. W. (1999). Using qualitative methods in organizational research. Sage. Leendertse, J., Schrijvers, M., & Stam, E. (2022). Measure twice, cut once: Entrepreneurial ecosystem metrics. Research policy, 51(9), 104336. Lepak, D. P., Smith, K. G., & Taylor, M. S. (2007). Value creation and value capture: A multilevel perspective. Academy of management review, 32(1), 180-194. Leten, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Roijakkers, N., Clerix, A., & Van Helleputte, J. (2013). IP models to orchestrate innovation ecosystems: IMEC, a public research institute in nano-electronics. California Management Review, 55(4), 51-64. Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review, 71(3), 75-86. Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2017). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 7(1), 20160011. Pombo-Juárez, L., Könnölä, T., Miles, I., Saritas, O., Schartinger, D., Amanatidou, E., & Giesecke, S. (2017). Wiring up multiple layers of innovation ecosystems: Contemplations from Personal Health Systems Foresight. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 115, 278-288. Ritala, P., Agouridas, V., Assimakopoulos, D., & Gies, O. (2013). Value creation and capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: a comparative case study. International journal of technology management, 63(3-4), 244-267. Shaw, D. R., & Allen, T. (2018). Studying innovation ecosystems using ecology theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 88-102. Shipilov, A., & Gawer, A. (2020). Integrating research on interorganizational networks and ecosystems. Academy of management annals, 14(1), 92-121. Sussan, F., & Acs, Z. J. (2017). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 49, 55-73. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40-49. Van der Borgh, M., Cloodt, M., & Romme, A. G. L. (2012). Value creation by knowledge‐based ecosystems: evidence from a field study. R&D Management, 42(2), 150-169. Verdin, P., & Tackx, K. (2015). Are you creating or capturing value? A dynamic framework for sustainable strategy. M-RCBG Working Paper Series, 36, 1-19. Xu, G., Wu, Y., Minshall, T., & Zhou, Y. (2018). Exploring innovation ecosystems across science, technology, and business: A case of 3D printing in China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 208-221. Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the future of the case study. Method in evaluation research. Evaluation practice, 15(3), 283-290. Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative research methods, 5(14), 359-386. zh_TW
