1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 廠商進行突破性產品創新之影響因素—台灣製造業的實證分析
The Determinants of Disruptive Innovation - An Empirical Study of Taiwan Manufacturing Industry
作者 何弘凱
Ho, Hong Kai
貢獻者 許牧彥
Hsu, Mu Yen
何弘凱
Ho, Hong Kai
關鍵詞 產品創新
突破性創新
產業特性
廠商特性
創新策略
Product Innovation
Disruptive Innovation
Industry Characteristics
Firm Characteristics
Innovation Strategy
日期 2011
上傳時間 1-Nov-2012 13:48:23 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究目的為探討突破性創新之影響因素，採用兩階段法進行實證分析，第一階段探討產業特性、廠商特性與產品創新之關係；第二階段則探討廠商進行突破性創新之影響因素，包括產業特性、廠商特性與廠商創新策略，希望透過兩階段的比較，釐清外在環境與內在條件如何分別影響廠商進行產品創新與突破性創新之決策。本研究利用國科會企劃處2007年「台灣地區第二次產業創新活動調查研究」資料庫，選擇台灣地區製造業廠商為研究對象，第一階段採用Logit迴歸模型進行實證分析，第二階段則以Logit模型以及Heckman模型進行實證，希望透過Heckman二階段模型修正「樣本自我選擇偏誤」(self-selection bias)發生之可能性，實證結果發現：
     一、產品加值鏈區段、廠商規模、市場廣度對廠商進行產品創新有正向影響，B2C型態廠商對廠商進行產品創新有負向影響。廠齡與高科技產業廠商對於廠商進行產品創新則無顯著影響。
     二、產品加值鏈區段、廠商規模對廠商進行突破性創新有正向影響
     三、具有以下創新策略的廠商較可能進行突破性創新：1.自有品牌廠商 2.有新產品的行銷活動 3.追求拓展產品線 4.與供應商協同創新 5.追求先行者優勢
     四、與顧客協同創新、追求既有市場佔有率的廠商對於突破性創新有負向影響
The main purpose of this research is to explore the factors or determinants of product innovation and disruptive innovation for the manufacturer firms in Taiwan. In this empirical studies, we use Logit model and Heckman selection model to demonstrate the factors affect a firm adopting product innovation and disruptive innovation separately. By analyzing the data from 2007 Taiwan Technological Innovation Survey, it shows：
     1.The position of value added chain, firm size, market scope have positive correlation with product innovation. B2C firms has negative correlation with product innovation. Firm age and Hi-tech industry firms don’t have significant correlation with product innovation.
     2. The position of value added chain, firm size have positive correlation with disruptive innovation.
     3.Firms have innovation strategy as followed tend to adopt disruptive innovation：(i)Brand manufacturer (ii)Engage in marketing activity of the innovative product (iii)Pursue the extension of product line (iv)Collaborative innovation with suppliers (v)Pursue first mover advantage
     4. Firms have innovation strategy as followed tend not to adopt disruptive innovation：(i)Collaborative with customers (ii)Pursue the market share of existing product
第一章 緒論 1
     第一節 研究背景與動機 1
     第二節 研究目的 2
     第三節 研究流程 3
     第二章 文獻探討 4
     第一節 產品創新 4
     壹、 產品創新定義 4
     貳、 產品創新類型 5
     第二節 技術創新與廠商型態的關係 9
     壹、 廠商規模與產品創新 9
     貳、 廠齡與技術創新 10
     參、 市場廣度與產品創新 11
     肆、 市場結構與技術創新 11
     伍、 市場機會、技術機會與技術創新 12
     第三節 突破性創新 13
     壹、 突破性創新發展背景 13
     貳、 突破性創新特性與定義 14
     參、 突破性創新與其他創新分類之比較 15
     肆、 突破性創新類型 18
     第四節 突破性創新與廠商型態的關係 20
     壹、 廠商規模突破性創新 20
     貳、 市場結構與突破性創新 20
     參、 組織特性與突破性創新 20
     肆、 協同合作與突破性創新 21
     第三章 研究方法 22
     第一節 研究架構 22
     第二節 假設命題 24
     壹、 廠商進行產品創新之影響因素 24
     貳、 廠商進行突破性創新之影響因素 26
     第三節 資料來源與樣本結構 31
     壹、 台灣地區第二次產業創新活動調查 31
     貳、 本研究樣本來源 32
     參、 樣本結構分析 34
     第四節 資料分析方法 37
     第五節 研究變數定義 39
     壹、 第一階段實證模型 39
     貳、 第二階段實證模型 41
     第六節 研究限制 46
     壹、 問卷問題之單調性 46
     貳、 受訪者回答問題之精準度 46
     參、 變數與模型選擇之限制 46
     肆、 資料之同時性 46
     第四章 實證結果與分析 47
     第一節 第一階段模型變數之敘述統計 47
     第二節 產品創新影響因素之迴歸分析 49
     壹、 迴歸分析結果 49
     貳、 實證結果討論 49
     第三節 廠商獲利方式分析 52
     壹、 KMO與Bartlett球型檢定 52
     貳、 因素分析結果 53
     第四節 第二階段模型變數之敘述統計 55
     第五節 突破性創新影響因素之迴歸分析 58
     壹、 迴歸分析結果 58
     貳、 實證結果討論 61
     第五章 結論與建議 63
     第一節 研究結論 63
     第二節 研究建議 66
     壹、 實務上之建議 66
     貳、 後續研究之建議 66
     參考文獻 67
     附錄 73
     附錄一、問卷內容 73
參考文獻 小島敏彥（2002），新產品開發管理：企業革新的生存之道（蔣永明 譯），台北：中衛發展中心。
     王濟川、郭志剛（2003），Logistic迴歸模型－方法及應用，五南圖書出版
     司徒達賢、李仁芳及吳思華（1985），企業概論，教育部空中大學教學委員會。
     Abernathy, W. J., & Utterback, J. M. (1978). Patterns of Industrial Innovation. Technology Review, 80(7), 40-47.
     Ahuja, G., & Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 521-543.
     Arrow, K.J. (1962). “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions”,in Nelson, R.R. (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors. Princeton University Press. Princeton
     Audretsch, D. B. (1995). Innovation, growth and survival. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(4), 441-457.
     Baldwin, J. R., & Sabourin, D. (2002). Advanced technology use and firm performance in Canadian manufacturing in the 1990s. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(4), 761-789.
     Betz, F. (1993). Strategic technology management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
     Bhattacharya, M., & Bloch, H. (2004). Determinants of innovation. Small Business Economics, 22(2), 155-162.
     Bonaccorsi, A., & Piccaluga, A. (1994). A Theoretical Framework for the Evaluation of University-Industry Relationships. R & D Management, 24(3), 229-247.
     Booz, Allen and Hamilton (1982), New Product Management for the 1980`s. NY: Booz, Allen and Hamilton Inc.
     Bower, J. L. (1970). Managing the resource allocation process: a study of corporate planning and investment. Boston,: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
     Bower, J. L., & Christensen, C. M. (1995). DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES - CATCHING THE WAVE. [Article]. Harvard Business Review, 73(1), 43-53.
     Brouwer, E., & Kleinknecht, A. (1999). Innovative output, and a firm`s propensity to patent. An exploration of CIS micro data. Research Policy, 28(6), 615-624.
     Burgelman, R. A. (1991). Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research. Organization Science, 2(3), 239-262. doi: Doi 10.1287/Orsc.2.3.239
     Chandy, R. K., & Tellis, G. J. (2000). The incumbent`s curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 64(3), 1-17.
     Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator`s dilemma : when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
     Christensen, C. M., & Bower, J. L. (1996). Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. [Article]. Strategic Management Journal, 17(3), 197-218. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199603)17:3<197::aid-smj804>3.0.co;2-u
     Christensen, C. M., & Overdorf, M. (2000). Meeting the challenge of disruptive change. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 66-+.
     Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator`s solution : creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
     Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). Why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory. Harvard Business Review, 81(9), 66-+.
     Christensen, C. M., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (1995). EXPLAINING THE ATTACKERS ADVANTAGE - TECHNOLOGICAL PARADIGMS, ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS, AND THE VALUE NETWORK. [Article]. Research Policy, 24(2), 233-257. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(93)00764-k
     Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. (1996a). Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(2), 232-243.
     Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. (1996b). A reprise of size and R&D. Economic Journal, 106(437), 925-951.
     Cohen, W. M., Levin, R. C., & Mowery, D. C. (1987). Firm Size and Research-and-Development Intensity - a Reexamination. Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(4), 543-565.
     Copulsky, W. (1976). Cannibalism in Marketplace. Journal of Marketing, 40(4), 103-105.
     Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1095-1121. doi: Doi 10.1002/Smj.275
     Danneels, E. (2004). Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(4), 246-258.
     Denning, S. (2005). Why the best and brightest approaches don’t solve the innovation dilemma. Strategy & Leadership, 33(1), 4–11.
     Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J. E. (1986). The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations - an Empirical-Analysis. Management Science, 32(11), 1422-1433.
     Dobson, Wendy,( 1997), “Crossing Borders: Multinationals in East Asia.” Pp. 223-247, in Multinationals and East Asian Integration, edited by Wendy Dobson and Chia Siow Yue. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
     Drejer, A. (2002). Integrating product and technology development. International Journal of Technology Management, 24(2-3), 124-142.
     Eisenmann, T. R. (2002). The effects of CEO equity ownership and firm diversification on risk taking. Strategic Management Journal, 23(6), 513-534. doi: Doi 10.1002/Smj.236
     Ettlie, J. E., Bridges, W. P., & Okeefe, R. D. (1984). Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation. Management Science, 30(6), 682-695.
     Foster, R. N. (1986). Innovation : the attacker`s advantage. New York: Summit Books.
     Fritsch, M., & Meschede, M. (2001). Product innovation, process innovation, and size. Review of Industrial Organization, 19(3), 335-350.
     Gomes, L., & Ramaswamy, K. (1999). An empirical examination of the form of the relationship between multinationality and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1), 173-187.
     Govindarajan, V., & Kopalle, P. K. (2006a). Disruptiveness of innovations: Measurement and an assessment of reliability and validity. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 189-199. doi: Doi 10.1002/Smj.511
     Govindarajan, V., & Kopalle, P. K. (2006b). The usefulness of measuring disruptiveness of innovations ex post in making ex ante predictions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 12-18.
     Govindarajan, V., Kopalle, P. K., & Danneels, E. (2011). The Effects of Mainstream and Emerging Customer Orientations on Radical and Disruptive Innovations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28, 121-132. doi: DOI 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00865.x
     Grabowski, H. G. (1968). Determinants of Industrial Research and Development - Study of Chemical, Drug, and Petroleum Industries. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 292-306.
     Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1994). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business Review, 72(4), 122-128.
     Hansen, G. S., & Hill, C. W. L. (1991). Are Institutional Investors Myopic - a Time-Series Study of 4 Technology-Driven Industries. Strategic Management Journal, 12(1), 1-16.
     Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural Innovation - the Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9-30.
     Hewitt-Dundas, N. & S. Roper. (2000) “Strategic Re-engineering – Small Firms’ Tactics in a Mature Industry” Working Paper No. 45, Northern Ireland Economic Research Centre, Belfast.
     Hill, C. W. L., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2003). The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 257-274.
     Hippel, E. v. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
     Hisrich, R. D., & Peters, M. P. (1978). Marketing a new product : its planning, development, and control. Menlo Park, Calif.: Benjamin/Cummings Pub. Co.
     Hoffman, K., Parejo, M., Bessant, J., & Perren, L. (1998). Small firms, R & D, technology and innovation in the UK: a literature review. Technovation, 18(1), 39-55.
     Kerin, R. A., Harvey, M. G., & Rothe, J. T. (1978). Cannibalism and New Product Development. Business Horizons, 21(5), 25-31.
     Koberg, C., Detienne, D. and Heppard, K. (2003) An empirical test of environmental, organizational, and process factors affecting incremental and radical innovation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14, 21–45.
     Leonardbarton, D. (1992). Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities - a Paradox in Managing New Product Development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111-125.
     Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1987). Appropriating the Returns from Industrial-Research and Development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity(3), 783-831.
     Levitt, T. (1966). Innovative Imitation. Harvard Business Review, 44(5), 63-70.
     Marquis, D. G. 1972. The anatomy of successful innovation. Managing Advancing Technology, 1:35-48.
     Marquish, D.G. 1982. The anatomy of successful innovation. Winthrop Publisher, Cambridge.
     Marsh, D. and Oxley, L. (2005) Modelling innovation activity in the New Zealand biotechnology sector. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 69: 103-112.
     Moriarty, R. T., & Kosnik, T. J. (1989). High-Tech Marketing - Concepts, Continuity, and Change. Sloan Management Review, 30(4), 7-17.
     Myers, D. R., Sumpter, C. W., Walsh, S. T., & Kirchhoff, B. A. (2002). A practitioner`s view: Evolutionary stages of disruptive technologies. Ieee Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(4), 322-329. doi: Doi 10.1109/Tem.2002.807295
     Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
     Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited. American Economic Review, 72(1), 114-132.
     Oerlemans, L. A. G., Meeus, M. T. H., & Boekema, F. W. M. (1998). Do networks matter for innovation? The usefulness of the economic network approach in analysing innovation. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 89(3), 298-309.
     Peeters, C., & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. v. (2006). Economic and management perspectives on intellectual property rights. Basingstoke England New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
     Rosenberg, J. B. (1976). Research and Market Share - Reappraisal of Schumpeter Hypothesis. Journal of Industrial Economics, 25(2), 101-112.
     Scherer, F. M. (1965). Firm Size, Market-Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented Inventions. American Economic Review, 55(5), 1097-1125.
     Scherer, F. M. (1970). Industrial market structure and economic performance. Chicago,: Rand McNally.
     Scherer, F. M. (1980). Industrial market structure and economic performance (2d ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally College Pub. Co.
     Scherer, F. M. (1982). Inter-Industry Technology Flows and Productivity Growth. Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(4), 627-634.
     Schmidt, G. M., & Druehl, C. T. (2008). When is a disruptive innovation disruptive? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(4), 347-369.
     Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles; a theoretical, historical, and statistical analysis of the capitalist process (1st ed.). New York, London,: McGraw-Hill Book Company, inc.
     Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York, London,: Harper & Brothers.
     Schumpeter, J. A., & Opie, R. (1934). The theory of economic development; an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, Mass.,: Harvard University Press.
     Shanklin, W. L., & Ryans, J. K. (1984). Organizing for High-Tech Marketing. Harvard Business Review, 62(6), 164-171.
     Siddharthan, N. S. (1988). In-House R-and-D, Imported Technology, and Firm Size - Lessons from Indian Experience. Developing Economies, 26(3), 212-221.
     Soete, L. L. G. (1979). Firm Size and Inventive Activity - Evidence Reconsidered. European Economic Review, 12(4), 319-340.
     Srinivasan, R., Lilien, G. L., & Rangaswamy, A. (2002). Technological opportunism and radical technology adoption: An application to e-business. Journal of Marketing, 66(3), 47-60.
     Tripsas, M., & Gavetti, G. (2000). Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1147-1161.
     Tsai, K. H., & Wang, J. C. (2005). Does R&D performance decline with firm size? - A re-examination in terms of elasticity. Research Policy, 34(6), 966-976. doi: DOI 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.017
     Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439-465.
     Tushman, M. L., & Rosenkopf, L. (1992). Organizational Determinants of Technological-Change - toward a Sociology of Technological Evolution. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 311-347.
     Utterback, J. M., & Abernathy, W. J. (1975). Dynamic Model of Process and Product Innovation. Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 3(6), 639-656.
     Wallin, C. C., & Gilman, J. J. (1986). Determining the Optimum Level for Research-and-Development Spending. Research Management, 29(5), 19-24.
     Worley, J. S. (1961). Industrial-Research and the New Competition. Journal of Political Economy, 69(2), 183-186.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理研究所
99359019
100
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099359019
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 許牧彥zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Hsu, Mu Yenen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 何弘凱zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Ho, Hong Kaien_US
dc.creator (作者) 何弘凱zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Ho, Hong Kaien_US
dc.date (日期) 2011en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Nov-2012 13:48:23 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Nov-2012 13:48:23 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Nov-2012 13:48:23 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0099359019en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/55107-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 科技管理研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 99359019zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 100zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究目的為探討突破性創新之影響因素，採用兩階段法進行實證分析，第一階段探討產業特性、廠商特性與產品創新之關係；第二階段則探討廠商進行突破性創新之影響因素，包括產業特性、廠商特性與廠商創新策略，希望透過兩階段的比較，釐清外在環境與內在條件如何分別影響廠商進行產品創新與突破性創新之決策。本研究利用國科會企劃處2007年「台灣地區第二次產業創新活動調查研究」資料庫，選擇台灣地區製造業廠商為研究對象，第一階段採用Logit迴歸模型進行實證分析，第二階段則以Logit模型以及Heckman模型進行實證，希望透過Heckman二階段模型修正「樣本自我選擇偏誤」(self-selection bias)發生之可能性，實證結果發現：
     一、產品加值鏈區段、廠商規模、市場廣度對廠商進行產品創新有正向影響，B2C型態廠商對廠商進行產品創新有負向影響。廠齡與高科技產業廠商對於廠商進行產品創新則無顯著影響。
     二、產品加值鏈區段、廠商規模對廠商進行突破性創新有正向影響
     三、具有以下創新策略的廠商較可能進行突破性創新：1.自有品牌廠商 2.有新產品的行銷活動 3.追求拓展產品線 4.與供應商協同創新 5.追求先行者優勢
     四、與顧客協同創新、追求既有市場佔有率的廠商對於突破性創新有負向影響		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The main purpose of this research is to explore the factors or determinants of product innovation and disruptive innovation for the manufacturer firms in Taiwan. In this empirical studies, we use Logit model and Heckman selection model to demonstrate the factors affect a firm adopting product innovation and disruptive innovation separately. By analyzing the data from 2007 Taiwan Technological Innovation Survey, it shows：
     1.The position of value added chain, firm size, market scope have positive correlation with product innovation. B2C firms has negative correlation with product innovation. Firm age and Hi-tech industry firms don’t have significant correlation with product innovation.
     2. The position of value added chain, firm size have positive correlation with disruptive innovation.
     3.Firms have innovation strategy as followed tend to adopt disruptive innovation：(i)Brand manufacturer (ii)Engage in marketing activity of the innovative product (iii)Pursue the extension of product line (iv)Collaborative innovation with suppliers (v)Pursue first mover advantage
     4. Firms have innovation strategy as followed tend not to adopt disruptive innovation：(i)Collaborative with customers (ii)Pursue the market share of existing product		en_US
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 第一章 緒論 1
     第一節 研究背景與動機 1
     第二節 研究目的 2
     第三節 研究流程 3
     第二章 文獻探討 4
     第一節 產品創新 4
     壹、 產品創新定義 4
     貳、 產品創新類型 5
     第二節 技術創新與廠商型態的關係 9
     壹、 廠商規模與產品創新 9
     貳、 廠齡與技術創新 10
     參、 市場廣度與產品創新 11
     肆、 市場結構與技術創新 11
     伍、 市場機會、技術機會與技術創新 12
     第三節 突破性創新 13
     壹、 突破性創新發展背景 13
     貳、 突破性創新特性與定義 14
     參、 突破性創新與其他創新分類之比較 15
     肆、 突破性創新類型 18
     第四節 突破性創新與廠商型態的關係 20
     壹、 廠商規模突破性創新 20
     貳、 市場結構與突破性創新 20
     參、 組織特性與突破性創新 20
     肆、 協同合作與突破性創新 21
     第三章 研究方法 22
     第一節 研究架構 22
     第二節 假設命題 24
     壹、 廠商進行產品創新之影響因素 24
     貳、 廠商進行突破性創新之影響因素 26
     第三節 資料來源與樣本結構 31
     壹、 台灣地區第二次產業創新活動調查 31
     貳、 本研究樣本來源 32
     參、 樣本結構分析 34
     第四節 資料分析方法 37
     第五節 研究變數定義 39
     壹、 第一階段實證模型 39
     貳、 第二階段實證模型 41
     第六節 研究限制 46
     壹、 問卷問題之單調性 46
     貳、 受訪者回答問題之精準度 46
     參、 變數與模型選擇之限制 46
     肆、 資料之同時性 46
     第四章 實證結果與分析 47
     第一節 第一階段模型變數之敘述統計 47
     第二節 產品創新影響因素之迴歸分析 49
     壹、 迴歸分析結果 49
     貳、 實證結果討論 49
     第三節 廠商獲利方式分析 52
     壹、 KMO與Bartlett球型檢定 52
     貳、 因素分析結果 53
     第四節 第二階段模型變數之敘述統計 55
     第五節 突破性創新影響因素之迴歸分析 58
     壹、 迴歸分析結果 58
     貳、 實證結果討論 61
     第五章 結論與建議 63
     第一節 研究結論 63
     第二節 研究建議 66
     壹、 實務上之建議 66
     貳、 後續研究之建議 66
     參考文獻 67
     附錄 73
     附錄一、問卷內容 73		-
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
     第一節 研究背景與動機 1
     第二節 研究目的 2
     第三節 研究流程 3
     第二章 文獻探討 4
     第一節 產品創新 4
     壹、 產品創新定義 4
     貳、 產品創新類型 5
     第二節 技術創新與廠商型態的關係 9
     壹、 廠商規模與產品創新 9
     貳、 廠齡與技術創新 10
     參、 市場廣度與產品創新 11
     肆、 市場結構與技術創新 11
     伍、 市場機會、技術機會與技術創新 12
     第三節 突破性創新 13
     壹、 突破性創新發展背景 13
     貳、 突破性創新特性與定義 14
     參、 突破性創新與其他創新分類之比較 15
     肆、 突破性創新類型 18
     第四節 突破性創新與廠商型態的關係 20
     壹、 廠商規模突破性創新 20
     貳、 市場結構與突破性創新 20
     參、 組織特性與突破性創新 20
     肆、 協同合作與突破性創新 21
     第三章 研究方法 22
     第一節 研究架構 22
     第二節 假設命題 24
     壹、 廠商進行產品創新之影響因素 24
     貳、 廠商進行突破性創新之影響因素 26
     第三節 資料來源與樣本結構 31
     壹、 台灣地區第二次產業創新活動調查 31
     貳、 本研究樣本來源 32
     參、 樣本結構分析 34
     第四節 資料分析方法 37
     第五節 研究變數定義 39
     壹、 第一階段實證模型 39
     貳、 第二階段實證模型 41
     第六節 研究限制 46
     壹、 問卷問題之單調性 46
     貳、 受訪者回答問題之精準度 46
     參、 變數與模型選擇之限制 46
     肆、 資料之同時性 46
     第四章 實證結果與分析 47
     第一節 第一階段模型變數之敘述統計 47
     第二節 產品創新影響因素之迴歸分析 49
     壹、 迴歸分析結果 49
     貳、 實證結果討論 49
     第三節 廠商獲利方式分析 52
     壹、 KMO與Bartlett球型檢定 52
     貳、 因素分析結果 53
     第四節 第二階段模型變數之敘述統計 55
     第五節 突破性創新影響因素之迴歸分析 58
     壹、 迴歸分析結果 58
     貳、 實證結果討論 61
     第五章 結論與建議 63
     第一節 研究結論 63
     第二節 研究建議 66
     壹、 實務上之建議 66
     貳、 後續研究之建議 66
     參考文獻 67
     附錄 73
     附錄一、問卷內容 73		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099359019en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 產品創新zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 突破性創新zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 產業特性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 廠商特性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 創新策略zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Product Innovationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Disruptive Innovationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Industry Characteristicsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Firm Characteristicsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Innovation Strategyen_US
dc.title (題名) 廠商進行突破性產品創新之影響因素—台灣製造業的實證分析zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Determinants of Disruptive Innovation - An Empirical Study of Taiwan Manufacturing Industryen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 小島敏彥（2002），新產品開發管理：企業革新的生存之道（蔣永明 譯），台北：中衛發展中心。
     王濟川、郭志剛（2003），Logistic迴歸模型－方法及應用，五南圖書出版
     司徒達賢、李仁芳及吳思華（1985），企業概論，教育部空中大學教學委員會。
     Abernathy, W. J., & Utterback, J. M. (1978). Patterns of Industrial Innovation. Technology Review, 80(7), 40-47.
     Ahuja, G., & Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 521-543.
     Arrow, K.J. (1962). “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions”,in Nelson, R.R. (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors. Princeton University Press. Princeton
     Audretsch, D. B. (1995). Innovation, growth and survival. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(4), 441-457.
     Baldwin, J. R., & Sabourin, D. (2002). Advanced technology use and firm performance in Canadian manufacturing in the 1990s. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(4), 761-789.
     Betz, F. (1993). Strategic technology management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
     Bhattacharya, M., & Bloch, H. (2004). Determinants of innovation. Small Business Economics, 22(2), 155-162.
     Bonaccorsi, A., & Piccaluga, A. (1994). A Theoretical Framework for the Evaluation of University-Industry Relationships. R & D Management, 24(3), 229-247.
     Booz, Allen and Hamilton (1982), New Product Management for the 1980`s. NY: Booz, Allen and Hamilton Inc.
     Bower, J. L. (1970). Managing the resource allocation process: a study of corporate planning and investment. Boston,: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
     Bower, J. L., & Christensen, C. M. (1995). DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES - CATCHING THE WAVE. [Article]. Harvard Business Review, 73(1), 43-53.
     Brouwer, E., & Kleinknecht, A. (1999). Innovative output, and a firm`s propensity to patent. An exploration of CIS micro data. Research Policy, 28(6), 615-624.
     Burgelman, R. A. (1991). Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research. Organization Science, 2(3), 239-262. doi: Doi 10.1287/Orsc.2.3.239
     Chandy, R. K., & Tellis, G. J. (2000). The incumbent`s curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 64(3), 1-17.
     Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator`s dilemma : when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
     Christensen, C. M., & Bower, J. L. (1996). Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. [Article]. Strategic Management Journal, 17(3), 197-218. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199603)17:3<197::aid-smj804>3.0.co;2-u
     Christensen, C. M., & Overdorf, M. (2000). Meeting the challenge of disruptive change. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 66-+.
     Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator`s solution : creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
     Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). Why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory. Harvard Business Review, 81(9), 66-+.
     Christensen, C. M., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (1995). EXPLAINING THE ATTACKERS ADVANTAGE - TECHNOLOGICAL PARADIGMS, ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS, AND THE VALUE NETWORK. [Article]. Research Policy, 24(2), 233-257. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(93)00764-k
     Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. (1996a). Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(2), 232-243.
     Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. (1996b). A reprise of size and R&D. Economic Journal, 106(437), 925-951.
     Cohen, W. M., Levin, R. C., & Mowery, D. C. (1987). Firm Size and Research-and-Development Intensity - a Reexamination. Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(4), 543-565.
     Copulsky, W. (1976). Cannibalism in Marketplace. Journal of Marketing, 40(4), 103-105.
     Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1095-1121. doi: Doi 10.1002/Smj.275
     Danneels, E. (2004). Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(4), 246-258.
     Denning, S. (2005). Why the best and brightest approaches don’t solve the innovation dilemma. Strategy & Leadership, 33(1), 4–11.
     Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J. E. (1986). The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations - an Empirical-Analysis. Management Science, 32(11), 1422-1433.
     Dobson, Wendy,( 1997), “Crossing Borders: Multinationals in East Asia.” Pp. 223-247, in Multinationals and East Asian Integration, edited by Wendy Dobson and Chia Siow Yue. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
     Drejer, A. (2002). Integrating product and technology development. International Journal of Technology Management, 24(2-3), 124-142.
     Eisenmann, T. R. (2002). The effects of CEO equity ownership and firm diversification on risk taking. Strategic Management Journal, 23(6), 513-534. doi: Doi 10.1002/Smj.236
     Ettlie, J. E., Bridges, W. P., & Okeefe, R. D. (1984). Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation. Management Science, 30(6), 682-695.
     Foster, R. N. (1986). Innovation : the attacker`s advantage. New York: Summit Books.
     Fritsch, M., & Meschede, M. (2001). Product innovation, process innovation, and size. Review of Industrial Organization, 19(3), 335-350.
     Gomes, L., & Ramaswamy, K. (1999). An empirical examination of the form of the relationship between multinationality and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1), 173-187.
     Govindarajan, V., & Kopalle, P. K. (2006a). Disruptiveness of innovations: Measurement and an assessment of reliability and validity. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 189-199. doi: Doi 10.1002/Smj.511
     Govindarajan, V., & Kopalle, P. K. (2006b). The usefulness of measuring disruptiveness of innovations ex post in making ex ante predictions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 12-18.
     Govindarajan, V., Kopalle, P. K., & Danneels, E. (2011). The Effects of Mainstream and Emerging Customer Orientations on Radical and Disruptive Innovations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28, 121-132. doi: DOI 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00865.x
     Grabowski, H. G. (1968). Determinants of Industrial Research and Development - Study of Chemical, Drug, and Petroleum Industries. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 292-306.
     Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1994). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business Review, 72(4), 122-128.
     Hansen, G. S., & Hill, C. W. L. (1991). Are Institutional Investors Myopic - a Time-Series Study of 4 Technology-Driven Industries. Strategic Management Journal, 12(1), 1-16.
     Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural Innovation - the Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9-30.
     Hewitt-Dundas, N. & S. Roper. (2000) “Strategic Re-engineering – Small Firms’ Tactics in a Mature Industry” Working Paper No. 45, Northern Ireland Economic Research Centre, Belfast.
     Hill, C. W. L., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2003). The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 257-274.
     Hippel, E. v. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
     Hisrich, R. D., & Peters, M. P. (1978). Marketing a new product : its planning, development, and control. Menlo Park, Calif.: Benjamin/Cummings Pub. Co.
     Hoffman, K., Parejo, M., Bessant, J., & Perren, L. (1998). Small firms, R & D, technology and innovation in the UK: a literature review. Technovation, 18(1), 39-55.
     Kerin, R. A., Harvey, M. G., & Rothe, J. T. (1978). Cannibalism and New Product Development. Business Horizons, 21(5), 25-31.
     Koberg, C., Detienne, D. and Heppard, K. (2003) An empirical test of environmental, organizational, and process factors affecting incremental and radical innovation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14, 21–45.
     Leonardbarton, D. (1992). Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities - a Paradox in Managing New Product Development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111-125.
     Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1987). Appropriating the Returns from Industrial-Research and Development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity(3), 783-831.
     Levitt, T. (1966). Innovative Imitation. Harvard Business Review, 44(5), 63-70.
     Marquis, D. G. 1972. The anatomy of successful innovation. Managing Advancing Technology, 1:35-48.
     Marquish, D.G. 1982. The anatomy of successful innovation. Winthrop Publisher, Cambridge.
     Marsh, D. and Oxley, L. (2005) Modelling innovation activity in the New Zealand biotechnology sector. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 69: 103-112.
     Moriarty, R. T., & Kosnik, T. J. (1989). High-Tech Marketing - Concepts, Continuity, and Change. Sloan Management Review, 30(4), 7-17.
     Myers, D. R., Sumpter, C. W., Walsh, S. T., & Kirchhoff, B. A. (2002). A practitioner`s view: Evolutionary stages of disruptive technologies. Ieee Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(4), 322-329. doi: Doi 10.1109/Tem.2002.807295
     Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
     Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited. American Economic Review, 72(1), 114-132.
     Oerlemans, L. A. G., Meeus, M. T. H., & Boekema, F. W. M. (1998). Do networks matter for innovation? The usefulness of the economic network approach in analysing innovation. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 89(3), 298-309.
     Peeters, C., & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. v. (2006). Economic and management perspectives on intellectual property rights. Basingstoke England New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
     Rosenberg, J. B. (1976). Research and Market Share - Reappraisal of Schumpeter Hypothesis. Journal of Industrial Economics, 25(2), 101-112.
     Scherer, F. M. (1965). Firm Size, Market-Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented Inventions. American Economic Review, 55(5), 1097-1125.
     Scherer, F. M. (1970). Industrial market structure and economic performance. Chicago,: Rand McNally.
     Scherer, F. M. (1980). Industrial market structure and economic performance (2d ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally College Pub. Co.
     Scherer, F. M. (1982). Inter-Industry Technology Flows and Productivity Growth. Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(4), 627-634.
     Schmidt, G. M., & Druehl, C. T. (2008). When is a disruptive innovation disruptive? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(4), 347-369.
     Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles; a theoretical, historical, and statistical analysis of the capitalist process (1st ed.). New York, London,: McGraw-Hill Book Company, inc.
     Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York, London,: Harper & Brothers.
     Schumpeter, J. A., & Opie, R. (1934). The theory of economic development; an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, Mass.,: Harvard University Press.
     Shanklin, W. L., & Ryans, J. K. (1984). Organizing for High-Tech Marketing. Harvard Business Review, 62(6), 164-171.
     Siddharthan, N. S. (1988). In-House R-and-D, Imported Technology, and Firm Size - Lessons from Indian Experience. Developing Economies, 26(3), 212-221.
     Soete, L. L. G. (1979). Firm Size and Inventive Activity - Evidence Reconsidered. European Economic Review, 12(4), 319-340.
     Srinivasan, R., Lilien, G. L., & Rangaswamy, A. (2002). Technological opportunism and radical technology adoption: An application to e-business. Journal of Marketing, 66(3), 47-60.
     Tripsas, M., & Gavetti, G. (2000). Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1147-1161.
     Tsai, K. H., & Wang, J. C. (2005). Does R&D performance decline with firm size? - A re-examination in terms of elasticity. Research Policy, 34(6), 966-976. doi: DOI 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.017
     Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439-465.
     Tushman, M. L., & Rosenkopf, L. (1992). Organizational Determinants of Technological-Change - toward a Sociology of Technological Evolution. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 311-347.
     Utterback, J. M., & Abernathy, W. J. (1975). Dynamic Model of Process and Product Innovation. Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 3(6), 639-656.
     Wallin, C. C., & Gilman, J. J. (1986). Determining the Optimum Level for Research-and-Development Spending. Research Management, 29(5), 19-24.
     Worley, J. S. (1961). Industrial-Research and the New Competition. Journal of Political Economy, 69(2), 183-186.		zh_TW