1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 英特爾洞見：境外研發中心的創意生存之道
Intel Insight: The Creative Survival Experience from Offshore Innovation Centre
作者 顏嘉妤
Chia-Yu Yen
貢獻者 蕭瑞麟
Ruey-Lin Hsiao
顏嘉妤
Chia-Yu Yen
關鍵詞 創新全球化
弱勢配角
創意回應
global innovation
low-power actors
creative response
日期 2010
上傳時間 3-Jun-2013 11:06:34 (UTC+8)
摘要 近年來，跨國企業積極在各區域廣設境外研發中心，期待拓展全球化的創新能力，完善設計鏈的布局。但是，過去研究所關心的議題多停留在技術研發，卻忽略跨國企業也是一個複雜的權力網絡。在此權力結構中，邊陲的成員，或稱之弱勢配角，往往受到網絡中強勢主角（像是研發總部）的制約，甚至面臨生存危機。在此制約下，境外研發中心如何回應總部，以完成創新任務？本文以英特爾的亞洲創新中心為案例，分析弱勢配角如何創意地回應強勢主角，化阻力為助力。本研究發現，弱勢配角可以嘗試改變與關鍵夥伴的互動方式，透過不同的資源交換方式來借力使力，促成自己轉換設計鏈上的角色，借以突破制約而完成創新任務。於理論貢獻上，本文拓展跨國企業管理文獻中對母公司與子公司之間的權力動態分析，延伸策略回應文獻，也探索策略作為(strategizing)對創新管理的應用。於實務貢獻上，本文點出創新全球化的境外管理議題，也提出在制約與權力落差下如何進行劣勢創新。
In recent years, multinational corporations actively incorporate offshore R&D (Research and Development) centers, with the hope to extend its global innovation capability and improve its design chain. However, given that it is necessary to focus on technological R&D, we seem to neglect that multinational corporations are also consisted of complicated power networks. In such a power structure, peripheral members, or low-power actors, will inevitably constrained by high-power actors (e.g. R&D headquarters) who often determine low-power actors’ survival. Under such constraints, how may offshore R&D centers (low-power actors) respond to the headquarters (high-power actors) and still manage to accomplish their missions of innovation? Our field study is based on Intel Innovation Center in Asia and examines how low-power actors may creatively respond to high-power actors so as to turn adversity into opportunity. The findings indicate that, to innovate under constraints, low-power actors could attempt to change their ways of interaction with partners by leveraging mutual resources and shifting their roles in the design chain. In terms of theoretical contribution, this article expands the analysis of power dynamics in international business literature, extends strategic response literature and explores how strategizing may be used in innovation management studies. In terms of practical contribution, this study highlights how to manage offshore innovation centers and suggests how to innovate under constraints and power imbalance.
壹、緒論 1
     貳、文獻回顧 5
     參、研究方法 15
     一、個案選擇 15
     二、資料蒐集方法 17
     三、資料分析方法 20
     肆、案例背景 24
     伍、研究發現 32
     一、創意回應模式一：唇亡齒必寒 32
     二、創意回應模式二：借花來獻佛 36
     三、創意回應模式三：狡兔有三窟 41
     四、創意回應模式四：移花可接木 45
     五、化劣勢為優勢的創新 48
     陸、討論 50
     一、理論意涵 50
     二、實務意涵 56
     三、研究限制與未來方向 59
     柒、結論 61
     參考文獻 62
參考文獻 徐村和、楊東震、李倉頡，2007，「策略演化觀點之跨國企業策略事業部撤離模式」，中山管理評論，15卷4期：頁855-884。
     陳明惠、陳相甫，2008，「研發團隊社會網絡的個案研究：以專案發展階段的觀點」，科技管理學刊，13卷3期：頁1-31。
     陳明惠、張元杰、陳咨明、毛凱立，2007，「網絡型態與研發專案團隊績效：以專案發展階段的觀點」，臺灣管理學刊，7卷1期：頁1-24。
     劉孟俊、陳信宏，2007，「跨國研發網絡與研發國際化：海外子公司的分析觀點」，臺大管理論叢，18卷1期：頁211 -237。
     Anderson, U., & Pahlberg, C. 1997. Subsidiary influence on strategic behavior in MNCs: an empirical study. International Business Review, 6(3): 319.
     Asakawa, K. 2001. Evolving headquarters subsidiary dynamics in international R&D: the case of Japanese multinationals. R&D Management, 31(1): 1-14.
     Asakawa, K. & Lehrer, M. 2003. Managing local knowledge assets globally: the role of regional innovation relays. Journal of World Business, 38(1): 31-42.
     Asakawa, K. & Som, A. 2008. Internationalization of R&D in China and India: Conventional wisdom versus reality. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(3): 375-394.
     Ashford, S. J. & Cummings, L. L. 1983. Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32(3): 370-398.
     Ashford, S. J., Rothbard, N. P., Piderit, S. K., & Dutton, J. E. 1998. Out on a limb: The role of context and impression management in selling gender-equity issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(1): 23-57.
     Barnett, W., Mischke, G., & Ocasio, W. 2000. The evolution of collective strategies among organizations. Organization Studies, 21(2): 325.
     Bartel, C. A. 2001. Social comparisons in boundary-spanning work: Effects of community outreach on members` organizational identity and identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 379-413.
     Birkinshaw, J., Morrison, A., & Hulland, J. 1995. Structural and competitive determinants of a global integration strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 16(8): 637-655.
     Birkinshaw, J. 2003. The paradox of corporate entrepreneurship. Strategy and Business, 30(30): 46-57.
     Birkinshaw, J., Bouquet, C., & Ambos, T. 2007. Managing executive attention in the global company. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(4): 39.
     Bouquet, C. & Birkinshaw, J. 2008a. Managing power in the multinational corporation: How low-power actors gain influence. Journal of Management, 34(3): 477-508.
     Bouquet, C. & Birkinshaw, J. 2008b. Weight versus voice: How foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3): 577-601.
     Boutellier, R., Gassmann, O., & von Zedtwitz, M. 2008. Managing global innovation: Uncovering the secrets of future competitiveness. New York: Springer.
     Brass, D. J. 1984. Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4): 518.
     Burt, R. 1983. Corporate profits and cooptation: Networks of market constraints and directorate ties in the American economy. New York, NY: Academic Press.
     Chen, S. H. 2004. Taiwanese IT firms` offshore R&D in China and the connection with the global innovation network. Research Policy, 33(2): 337-349.
     Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. S. 1994. Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research: 1-17. London: Sage.
     Dutton, J. E. & Dukerich, J. M. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 517-554.
     Florida, R. 1997. The globalization of R&D: Results of a survey of foreign-affiliated R&D laboratories in the USA. Research Policy, 26(1): 85-103.
     Frost, T. S., Birkinshaw, J. M., & Ensign, P. C. 2002. Centers of excellence in multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11): 997-1018.
     Galunic, D. C. & Eisenhardt, K. M. 1996. The evolution of intracorporate domains: Divisional charter losses in high-technology, multidivisional corporations. Organizaton Science, 7(3): 255-282.
     Gargiulo, M. 1993. Two-step leverage: Managing constraint in organizational politics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1): 1-19.
     Gawer, A. & Cusumano, M. 2002. Platform leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
     Gioia, D. A., Price, K. N., Hamilton, A. L., & Thomas, J. B. 2010. Forging an identity: An insider-outsider study of processes involved in the formation of organizational identity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1): 1-46.
     Golden-Biddle, K. & Locke, K. 1993. Appealing work: an investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4: 595–616.
     Gupta, A. K. & Govindarajan, V. 1991. Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 16(No. 4): 768-792.
     Hargadon, A. B. & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 476-514.
     Jarillo, J. C. & Martinez, J. I. 1990. Different roles for subsidiaries: The case of multinational corporations in Spain. Strategic Management Journal, 11(7): 501-512.
     Kennedy, S. 2007. Transnational political alliances. Business & Society, 46(2): 174.
     Kostova, T. 1999. Transformational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a Contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2): 308-324.
     Kostova, T. & Zaheer, S. 1999. Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. The Academy of Management Review, 24(1): 64-81.
     Kreiner, K. & Schultz, M. 1993. Informal collaboration in R&D: The formation of networks across organizations. Organization Studies, 14(2): 189-209.
     Kristensen, P. & Zeitlin, J. 2005. Local players in global games: The strategic constitution of a multinational corporation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
     Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4): 691-710.
     Ling, Y., Floyd, S., & Baldridge, D. 2005. Toward a model of issue-selling by subsidiary managers in multinational organizations. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(6): 637-654.
     Lingo, E. L. & O`Mahony, S. 2010. Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1): 47-81.
     Lorenzoni, G. & Baden-Fuller, C. 1998. Creating a strategic center to manage a web of partners. California Management Review, 37: 146-163.
     Manea, J., & Pearce, R. 2006. MNEs’ strategies in Central and Eastern Europe: Key elements of subsidiary behaviour. Management International Review, 46(2): 235-255.
     Markides, C. 2000. All the right moves: A guide to crafting breakthrough strategy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
     Meyer, K. E. 2006. Global focusing: From domestic conglomerates to global specialists. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5): 1109.
     Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. 1985. Of Strategy, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6: 257-272.
     Morgan, G. & Kristensen, P. 2006. The contested space of multinationals: Varieties of institutionalism, varieties of capitalism. Human Relations, 59(11): 1467.
     Murray, F. 2004. The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, 33(4): 643-659.
     Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1): 145.
     Pfeffer, J. & Fong, C. T. 2005. Building organization theory from first principles: the Self-enhancement motive and understanding power and influence. Organization Science, 16(4): 372-388.
     Rugman, A. & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3): 237-250.
     Rugman, A. M. & Verbeke, A. 2007. Liabilities of regional foreignness and the use of firm-level versus country-level data: a response to Dunning et al. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(1): 200-205.
     Schumpeter, J. A. 1947. The creative response in economic history. The Journal of Economic History, 7(2): 149 - 159.
     Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571-610.
     Von Zedtwitz, M. 2004. Managing foreign R&D laboratories in China. R&D Management, 34(4): 439-452.
     Walsham, G. 1995. The emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Information Systems Research, 6(4): 376–394.
     Zimmerman, M. A. & Zeitz, G. J. 2002. Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3): 414-431.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理研究所
98359010
99
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098359010
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 蕭瑞麟zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Ruey-Lin Hsiaoen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 顏嘉妤zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chia-Yu Yenen_US
dc.creator (作者) 顏嘉妤zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Chia-Yu Yenen_US
dc.date (日期) 2010en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-Jun-2013 11:06:34 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-Jun-2013 11:06:34 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Jun-2013 11:06:34 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0098359010en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/58298-
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) 98359010zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 99zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近年來，跨國企業積極在各區域廣設境外研發中心，期待拓展全球化的創新能力，完善設計鏈的布局。但是，過去研究所關心的議題多停留在技術研發，卻忽略跨國企業也是一個複雜的權力網絡。在此權力結構中，邊陲的成員，或稱之弱勢配角，往往受到網絡中強勢主角（像是研發總部）的制約，甚至面臨生存危機。在此制約下，境外研發中心如何回應總部，以完成創新任務？本文以英特爾的亞洲創新中心為案例，分析弱勢配角如何創意地回應強勢主角，化阻力為助力。本研究發現，弱勢配角可以嘗試改變與關鍵夥伴的互動方式，透過不同的資源交換方式來借力使力，促成自己轉換設計鏈上的角色，借以突破制約而完成創新任務。於理論貢獻上，本文拓展跨國企業管理文獻中對母公司與子公司之間的權力動態分析，延伸策略回應文獻，也探索策略作為(strategizing)對創新管理的應用。於實務貢獻上，本文點出創新全球化的境外管理議題，也提出在制約與權力落差下如何進行劣勢創新。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In recent years, multinational corporations actively incorporate offshore R&D (Research and Development) centers, with the hope to extend its global innovation capability and improve its design chain. However, given that it is necessary to focus on technological R&D, we seem to neglect that multinational corporations are also consisted of complicated power networks. In such a power structure, peripheral members, or low-power actors, will inevitably constrained by high-power actors (e.g. R&D headquarters) who often determine low-power actors’ survival. Under such constraints, how may offshore R&D centers (low-power actors) respond to the headquarters (high-power actors) and still manage to accomplish their missions of innovation? Our field study is based on Intel Innovation Center in Asia and examines how low-power actors may creatively respond to high-power actors so as to turn adversity into opportunity. The findings indicate that, to innovate under constraints, low-power actors could attempt to change their ways of interaction with partners by leveraging mutual resources and shifting their roles in the design chain. In terms of theoretical contribution, this article expands the analysis of power dynamics in international business literature, extends strategic response literature and explores how strategizing may be used in innovation management studies. In terms of practical contribution, this study highlights how to manage offshore innovation centers and suggests how to innovate under constraints and power imbalance.en_US
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 壹、緒論 1
     貳、文獻回顧 5
     參、研究方法 15
     一、個案選擇 15
     二、資料蒐集方法 17
     三、資料分析方法 20
     肆、案例背景 24
     伍、研究發現 32
     一、創意回應模式一：唇亡齒必寒 32
     二、創意回應模式二：借花來獻佛 36
     三、創意回應模式三：狡兔有三窟 41
     四、創意回應模式四：移花可接木 45
     五、化劣勢為優勢的創新 48
     陸、討論 50
     一、理論意涵 50
     二、實務意涵 56
     三、研究限制與未來方向 59
     柒、結論 61
     參考文獻 62		-
dc.description.tableofcontents 壹、緒論 1
     貳、文獻回顧 5
     參、研究方法 15
     一、個案選擇 15
     二、資料蒐集方法 17
     三、資料分析方法 20
     肆、案例背景 24
     伍、研究發現 32
     一、創意回應模式一：唇亡齒必寒 32
     二、創意回應模式二：借花來獻佛 36
     三、創意回應模式三：狡兔有三窟 41
     四、創意回應模式四：移花可接木 45
     五、化劣勢為優勢的創新 48
     陸、討論 50
     一、理論意涵 50
     二、實務意涵 56
     三、研究限制與未來方向 59
     柒、結論 61
     參考文獻 62		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098359010en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 創新全球化zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 弱勢配角zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 創意回應zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) global innovationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) low-power actorsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) creative responseen_US
dc.title (題名) 英特爾洞見：境外研發中心的創意生存之道zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Intel Insight: The Creative Survival Experience from Offshore Innovation Centreen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 徐村和、楊東震、李倉頡，2007，「策略演化觀點之跨國企業策略事業部撤離模式」，中山管理評論，15卷4期：頁855-884。
     陳明惠、陳相甫，2008，「研發團隊社會網絡的個案研究：以專案發展階段的觀點」，科技管理學刊，13卷3期：頁1-31。
     陳明惠、張元杰、陳咨明、毛凱立，2007，「網絡型態與研發專案團隊績效：以專案發展階段的觀點」，臺灣管理學刊，7卷1期：頁1-24。
     劉孟俊、陳信宏，2007，「跨國研發網絡與研發國際化：海外子公司的分析觀點」，臺大管理論叢，18卷1期：頁211 -237。
     Anderson, U., & Pahlberg, C. 1997. Subsidiary influence on strategic behavior in MNCs: an empirical study. International Business Review, 6(3): 319.
     Asakawa, K. 2001. Evolving headquarters subsidiary dynamics in international R&D: the case of Japanese multinationals. R&D Management, 31(1): 1-14.
     Asakawa, K. & Lehrer, M. 2003. Managing local knowledge assets globally: the role of regional innovation relays. Journal of World Business, 38(1): 31-42.
     Asakawa, K. & Som, A. 2008. Internationalization of R&D in China and India: Conventional wisdom versus reality. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(3): 375-394.
     Ashford, S. J. & Cummings, L. L. 1983. Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32(3): 370-398.
     Ashford, S. J., Rothbard, N. P., Piderit, S. K., & Dutton, J. E. 1998. Out on a limb: The role of context and impression management in selling gender-equity issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(1): 23-57.
     Barnett, W., Mischke, G., & Ocasio, W. 2000. The evolution of collective strategies among organizations. Organization Studies, 21(2): 325.
     Bartel, C. A. 2001. Social comparisons in boundary-spanning work: Effects of community outreach on members` organizational identity and identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 379-413.
     Birkinshaw, J., Morrison, A., & Hulland, J. 1995. Structural and competitive determinants of a global integration strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 16(8): 637-655.
     Birkinshaw, J. 2003. The paradox of corporate entrepreneurship. Strategy and Business, 30(30): 46-57.
     Birkinshaw, J., Bouquet, C., & Ambos, T. 2007. Managing executive attention in the global company. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(4): 39.
     Bouquet, C. & Birkinshaw, J. 2008a. Managing power in the multinational corporation: How low-power actors gain influence. Journal of Management, 34(3): 477-508.
     Bouquet, C. & Birkinshaw, J. 2008b. Weight versus voice: How foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3): 577-601.
     Boutellier, R., Gassmann, O., & von Zedtwitz, M. 2008. Managing global innovation: Uncovering the secrets of future competitiveness. New York: Springer.
     Brass, D. J. 1984. Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4): 518.
     Burt, R. 1983. Corporate profits and cooptation: Networks of market constraints and directorate ties in the American economy. New York, NY: Academic Press.
     Chen, S. H. 2004. Taiwanese IT firms` offshore R&D in China and the connection with the global innovation network. Research Policy, 33(2): 337-349.
     Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. S. 1994. Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research: 1-17. London: Sage.
     Dutton, J. E. & Dukerich, J. M. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 517-554.
     Florida, R. 1997. The globalization of R&D: Results of a survey of foreign-affiliated R&D laboratories in the USA. Research Policy, 26(1): 85-103.
     Frost, T. S., Birkinshaw, J. M., & Ensign, P. C. 2002. Centers of excellence in multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11): 997-1018.
     Galunic, D. C. & Eisenhardt, K. M. 1996. The evolution of intracorporate domains: Divisional charter losses in high-technology, multidivisional corporations. Organizaton Science, 7(3): 255-282.
     Gargiulo, M. 1993. Two-step leverage: Managing constraint in organizational politics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1): 1-19.
     Gawer, A. & Cusumano, M. 2002. Platform leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
     Gioia, D. A., Price, K. N., Hamilton, A. L., & Thomas, J. B. 2010. Forging an identity: An insider-outsider study of processes involved in the formation of organizational identity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1): 1-46.
     Golden-Biddle, K. & Locke, K. 1993. Appealing work: an investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4: 595–616.
     Gupta, A. K. & Govindarajan, V. 1991. Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 16(No. 4): 768-792.
     Hargadon, A. B. & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 476-514.
     Jarillo, J. C. & Martinez, J. I. 1990. Different roles for subsidiaries: The case of multinational corporations in Spain. Strategic Management Journal, 11(7): 501-512.
     Kennedy, S. 2007. Transnational political alliances. Business & Society, 46(2): 174.
     Kostova, T. 1999. Transformational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a Contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2): 308-324.
     Kostova, T. & Zaheer, S. 1999. Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. The Academy of Management Review, 24(1): 64-81.
     Kreiner, K. & Schultz, M. 1993. Informal collaboration in R&D: The formation of networks across organizations. Organization Studies, 14(2): 189-209.
     Kristensen, P. & Zeitlin, J. 2005. Local players in global games: The strategic constitution of a multinational corporation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
     Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4): 691-710.
     Ling, Y., Floyd, S., & Baldridge, D. 2005. Toward a model of issue-selling by subsidiary managers in multinational organizations. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(6): 637-654.
     Lingo, E. L. & O`Mahony, S. 2010. Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1): 47-81.
     Lorenzoni, G. & Baden-Fuller, C. 1998. Creating a strategic center to manage a web of partners. California Management Review, 37: 146-163.
     Manea, J., & Pearce, R. 2006. MNEs’ strategies in Central and Eastern Europe: Key elements of subsidiary behaviour. Management International Review, 46(2): 235-255.
     Markides, C. 2000. All the right moves: A guide to crafting breakthrough strategy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
     Meyer, K. E. 2006. Global focusing: From domestic conglomerates to global specialists. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5): 1109.
     Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. 1985. Of Strategy, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6: 257-272.
     Morgan, G. & Kristensen, P. 2006. The contested space of multinationals: Varieties of institutionalism, varieties of capitalism. Human Relations, 59(11): 1467.
     Murray, F. 2004. The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, 33(4): 643-659.
     Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1): 145.
     Pfeffer, J. & Fong, C. T. 2005. Building organization theory from first principles: the Self-enhancement motive and understanding power and influence. Organization Science, 16(4): 372-388.
     Rugman, A. & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3): 237-250.
     Rugman, A. M. & Verbeke, A. 2007. Liabilities of regional foreignness and the use of firm-level versus country-level data: a response to Dunning et al. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(1): 200-205.
     Schumpeter, J. A. 1947. The creative response in economic history. The Journal of Economic History, 7(2): 149 - 159.
     Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 571-610.
     Von Zedtwitz, M. 2004. Managing foreign R&D laboratories in China. R&D Management, 34(4): 439-452.
     Walsham, G. 1995. The emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Information Systems Research, 6(4): 376–394.
     Zimmerman, M. A. & Zeitz, G. J. 2002. Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3): 414-431.		zh_TW