淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-1906201700202600
中文論文名稱 影響生技食品產業選擇國際夥伴相關因素分析
英文論文名稱 A study on the Factors of International Partner Selection of Biotechnology Food Industry
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 國際企業學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Master's Program, Department Of International Business
學年度 105
學期 2
出版年 106
研究生中文姓名 陳昱橙
研究生英文姓名 Yu-Cheng Chen
學號 604550029
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2017-06-12
論文頁數 75頁
口試委員 指導教授-孫嘉祈
委員-蔡政言
委員-周啟陽
中文關鍵字 生技食品產業  夥伴選擇  契約風險  投資風險  差異化  國際化 
英文關鍵字 Biotechnology food industry  Partner selection  Contract risk  Investment risk  Differentization  Globalization 
學科別分類
中文摘要 在企業聯盟中有很多關於合作夥伴選擇因素的研究,但很少有研究專注於了解任務的具體需求。夥伴選擇是企業進行國際化最被重視之議題,關係海外的投資成敗之相關因素。本研究選擇採用「生技食品產業」為研究對象。探討國際企業進行「海外直接投資 (Foreign Direct Investment, FDI)」之動機及策略;並就「所有權優勢」、「區位優勢」以及「內部化優勢」分析對進入國際市場之影響。國際夥伴相關因素分別採用「契約風險」、「投資風險」、「市場潛力大小」、「開發差異化產品能力」以及「國際化經驗」等五構面,探討生技食品產業於海外投資時選擇合作伙伴,其主要相關因素為何,並分析構面間彼此關聯性。採用量化問卷方式,分析進入國際市場時選擇夥伴相關因素,使用DEMATEL進行統計分析,並對投資者對於夥伴選擇之管理意涵及策略目的進行研究,期望研究成果可加速國內「生技食品產業」國際化之速度。本研究分析結果指出國際市埸選擇夥伴相關因素分別為:「市場潛力大小」、「產品差異化能力」、「投資風險」、「國際化經驗」、「契約風險」等五構面。
英文摘要 Although there are many studies dealing with partner selection factors in the firm level, few studies are devoted to understand the specific demands of the task. This study investigates the factors affect the partner selection of biotechnology food industry in the international market. How to choice and cooperation mode of the international partner is the most important subject for firm to entry foreign marketing, and the key success factor for the overseas investment. To explore the motivations and strategies of international enterprises to carry out foreign direct investment (FDI), and analyzes the impact of ownership advantages, location advantages and internalization advantages on the access to international markets.
This study adopt quantitative case study and questionnaire survey to analyze the key factors in the choice of the international market entry mode and partner choice. DEMATEL was used for statistical analysis. Analytical results indicate that the main driving forces and priority for biotechnology food industry international marketing entry include marketing potential, product differentiation ability, investment risk, internationalization experience and contract risk. Moreover, this study provides a framework for managing biotechnology food industry international marketing and partner choice, and closes with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications of the research findings.
論文目次 目 錄
摘要 III
ABSTRACT IV
第一章、 緒論 1
1.1. 研究背景 1
1.2. 研究動機 3
1.3. 研究問題 3
1.4. 研究流程 4
第二章、 生技食品產業介紹 6
2.1. 生技食品產業 6
2.2. 生技產業分類 6
2.3. 生物科技在食品產業的應用 8
2.4. 生物科技在食品產業應用的優點: 9
第三章、 文獻探討與研究假說 10
3.1. 海外投資 10
3.2. 海外投資分類 14
3.3. 影響海外投資選擇決策 21
3.4. 市場進入模式選擇方式 24
3.5. 研究架構 31
第四章、 研究方法 41
4.1. 決策實驗室分析法 (DEMATEL) 41
4.2. DEMATEL流程 41
第五章、 實證分析 45
5.1. 研究架構說明 45
5.2. 選擇國際夥伴相關因素構面說明 45
5.3. 選擇國際夥伴相關因素,構面填答說明 47
5.4. 問卷填答範例 49
5.5. 分析問卷 49
第六章、 總結 58
6.1. 結論與建議 58
6.2. 研究限制與未來研究方向 60
參考文獻 61
附件:問卷 69

圖目錄
圖1.4.1研究流程 5
圖3.1.1海外直接投資分類 11
圖3.4.1市場進入模式選擇方式 25
圖3.4.3所有權合資模式架構 29
圖3.4.4製藥產業研究分類 30
圖3.5.1影響國際市場定位因素 31
圖3.5.2研究架構 40
圖4.2.1因果座標圖 43
圖5.1.1研究架構 45
圖5.5.1因果分析圖 57

表目錄
表2.3.1食品生技產品範圍與分類 9
表3.1.1海外投資模式 13
表3.1.2海外投資內容 14
表3.2.1海外進入模式 15
表3.2.2海外進入模式分類 17
表3.4.1國際化折衷理論分析變項 26
表3.5.1選擇國際市場進入模式分析 33
表5.4.2問卷樣本 49
表5.5.1受訪者基本資料 50
表5.5.2算術平均數矩陣 51
表5.5.3單位矩陣 52
表5.5.4單位矩陣-算術平均數矩陣 53
表5.5.5單位矩陣-算術平均數逆矩陣 54
表5.5.6間接影響矩陣 55
表5.5.7主構面的影響度 56

參考文獻 參考文獻

中文部分:
1. 王祥光 (2014),生物科技產業概論生物科技產業概論(第二版)出版社:新文京 。
2. 吳青松 (2003),國際企業管理理論與實務,第三版。
3. 胡名雯, 何重慶, 卓正中 (2010) ,臺灣企業對大陸地區投資行為轉變之研究。臺灣銀行季刊第六十一卷第一期, pp. 295~307。
4. 許仁弘、雷中和、吳偉琪、朱鴻鈞、余祁暐、楊玉婷、劉翠玲、李秉璋與 吳金洌 (2012),Bio Taiwan 2012農業生技市場趨勢及產品行銷論壇報導。農業生技產業季刊,31: 70-77。
5. 陳昭義 (2015),生醫產業趨勢研討會:差異化VS國際市場。環球生技月刊2015年4月號。
6. 郭仲軒 (2006),論企業組織有限責任之擴張--從有限夥伴暨有限責任夥伴之立法談起。國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士。
7. 林董祥 (1999) ,影響供應鏈夥伴關係相關因素之研究-以半導體供應鏈為例。國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
8. 陳勁初(2012),生技靠技術與差異化。http://mia.shop2000.com.tw/news/117844。Accesses on dated: 2017/04/14。
9. 楊明宗 (2003),蓬勃發展中食品及特用化學生物科技公司動態能力與經營策略之研究,碩士論文,國立雲林科技大學。
10. 廖美智(2014),食品生技產業現況與趨. http://agbio.coa.gov.tw/information_detail.aspx?dno=10446&ito=32. Accessed on dated:2016/3/29。
11. 簡秀如 (2011) ,影響中國企業對外投資績效的原因探究:以所有權優勢分析之。國立暨南國際大學,管理學院經營管理碩士學位學程碩士論文。
12. 張乃穎 (2015),以DEMATEL 探討影響我國高級中學學校評鑑結果之相關因素,國立中正大學經濟學系國際經濟學碩士學位論文。
13. 閻鐵民、李友錚(2008),運用重要度-表現度分析與決策實驗室分析法於贏得訂單條件的改善-以臺灣工業電腦製造業為例,私立中華大學科技管理研究所博士論文。
14. 胡秀媛(2008),運用Kano Model與DEMATEL於贏得訂單條件的改善:以臺灣工業電腦製造業個案為例,私立中華大學科技管理研究所博士論文。

英文部分:
1. Agarwal, S. and Ramaswami, S.N. (1992). Choice of foreign market entry mode: Impact of ownership, location and internalization factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 232(1): 1-27.
2. Anderson, E. and Gatignon, H. (1986). Modes of foreign entry: A transaction cost analysis and propositions. Journal oflnternational Business Studies, 17(3): 1-26.
3. Anderson, E. and Weitz. B. (1986). Make or buy decisions: A framework for analyzing vertical integration issues in marketing. Sloan Management Review, 27: 3-19.
4. Baum, J., Calabrese, T. and Silverman, B. (2000). Don't go it alone: Alliance network composition and startup's performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21:267-94.
5. Bell, G.G. (2005). Clusters, networks, and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 287-295.
6. Bernhardt, R. (2003). The encyclopedia of public international law, 8, 246. United Kingdom: The auspices of the max planck institute for comparative public law and international law.
7. Bridgewater, S. (1999). Networks and internationalisation: the case of multinational corporations entering Ukraine. International Business Review, 8: 99-18.
8. Brouthers, K.D., Broutherst, L.E. and Werner, S. (1996). Dunning's eclectic theory and the smaller firm: The impact of ownership and locational advantages on the choice of entry-modes in the computer software industry. International Business Review, 5(4): 377-394.
9. Brouthers, K.D., Brouthers, L.E. and Werner, S. (1999). Is Dunning's eclectic framework descriptive of normative? Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4), 831-844.
10. Brown, H.S. and Vergragt, P.J. (2008). Bounded socio-technical experiments as agents of systemic change: The case of a zero-energy residential building. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 75:107-130.
11. Buckley, P.J. (1988). The limits of explanation: Testing the internalization theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 19: 181-194.
12. Buttel, F.H. (1989). How epoch making are high technologies? The case of biotechnology. Sociol Forum, 4:247-260.
13. Caves, R. E. (1982). Multinational enterprise and economic analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. Chen, H.C. and Chung, M.F. (2014). How to go global with differentiated products. Expert Systems with Applications, 41: 3484-3490.
15. Cho, K.R. (1985). Multinational banks: Their identities and determinants. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press.
16. Choi, S.R., Tschoegl, A.E. and Yu, C.M. (1986). Banks and the world's major financial centers, 1970-1980. Welwirtschaftliches Archive, 1: 48-64.
17. Clark, K.B., and T. Fujimoto, (1991). Product development performance: Strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
18. Contractor, F.J. (1990). Contractual and cooperative forms of international business: Towards a unified theory of modal vhoice. Management International Review, 30: 31-54.
19. Coughlan, A. T. (1985). Competition and cooperation in marketing channel choice: Theory and application. Marketing Science, 4(2): 110-29.
20. Dasi-Rodriguez, S. and Pardo-del-Val, M. (2015). Seeking partners in international alliances: The influence of cultural factors. Journal of Business Research, 68:1522-1526.
21. Davidson, W.H. (1982). Globals trategicm anagement, New York: J ohnW iley.
22. Dekker, H.C. and Van den Abbeele, A. (2010). Organizational learning and inter-firm control: The effects of partner search and prior exchange experiences. Organization Science, 21(6):1233-1250.
23. Doherty, A.M. (2009). Market and partner selection processes in international retail franchising. Journal of Business Research, 62: 528-534
24. Dunning, J.H. (2000). The Eclectic Paradigm as an Envelope for Economic and Business Theories of MNE activity. International Business Review, 9, 163–190.
25. Dunning, J.H. Pak, Y.S., and Beldona, S. (2007). Foreign ownership strategies of UK and US international franchisors: An exploratory application of Dunning’s envelope paradigm. International Business Review, 16, 531–548.
26. Fontela, E. and Gabus, A. (1976). The DEMATEL Observe. DEMATEL 1976 report.
27. Guertler, M.R. and Lindemann, U. (2016). Identifying open innovation partners: amethodology for strategic partner selection. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(5): 1640011.
28. Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19:293-317.
29. Harrison, J., Hitt, M., Hoskisson, R. and Ireland, D. (2001). Resource complementarity in business combination: Extending the logic to organizational alliances. Journal of Management, 27:679-90.
30. Hartmann, P., Apaolaza-Ibanez, V. (2012). Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward green energy brands: The roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern, Journal of Business Research, 65:1254-1263.
31. Hill, C.W.L., Hwang, P. and Kim, W.C. (1990). An eclectic theory of the choice of international entry mode. Strategic Management Journal, 29(1): 117-128.
32. Hollenstein, H. (2005). Determinants of international activities: Are SMEs different? Small Business Economics, 24(5): 431-450.
33. Huizingh, E.K. (2011). Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 31 (1): 2-9.
34. Jeannet, J.P. and Hennessey, H.D. (2004). Global Marketing Strategies, Houghton Mifflin (Academic); sixth edition edition.
35. Kamuriwo, D.D. and Baden-Fuller, C. (2016). Knowledge integration using product R&D outsourcing in biotechnology. Research Policy, 45: 1031-1045
36. Kang, K. H. and Kang, J. (2010). Does partner type matter in R&D collaboration for product innovation? Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(8): 945-959.
37. Kim, Y.J. (2009). Choosing between international technology licensing partners: An empirical analysis of U.S. biotechnology firms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 26(1/2): 57-72.
38. Kim, W.C. and Hwang, P. (1992). Global strategy and multinationals' entry mode choice. Journal of lnternational Business Studies, 23(1): 29-54.
39. Kimura, Y. (1989). Firm specific strategic advantages and foreign direct investment behavior of firms: The case of Japanese semi-conduct of firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 20: 296-314.
40. Kotabe, M., Jiang, C.X., and Murray, J.Y. (2011). Managerial ties, knowledge acquisition, realized absorptive capacity and new product market performance of emerging multinational companies: A case of China. Journal of World Business, 46(2): 166-176.
41. Kuemmerle, W. (1999). Foreign direct investment in industrial research in the pharmaceutical and electronics industries: Results from a survey of multinational firms. Research Policy, 28: 179–193.
42. Kuo, H-C, and Li, Yang (2003). A dynamic decision model of SMEs’ FDI. Small Business Economics, 20: 219-231.
43. Lai, E.L.C. (2008). Globalization of production and the technology transfer paradox. Research Department Working Paper 0810.
44. Lewandowska, M.S., Szymura-Tyc, M., and Gołębiowski, T. (2016). Innovation complementarity, cooperation partners, and new product export: Evidence from Poland. Journal of Business Research, 69: 3673-3681.
45. Li, S., Park, S.H., and Li, S. (2006). The great leap forward: The transition fromrelation-based governance to rule-based governance. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 33(1): 63-78.
46. Lopez-Duarte, C. and Vidal-Suarez, M.M. (2010). External uncertainty and entry mode choice: Cultural distance, political risk and language diversity. International Business Review, 19(6): 575-588.
47. Makino, S., Lau, C.M. and Yeh, R.S. (2002). Asset-exploitation versus asset-seeking: Implications for location choice of foreign direct investment from newly industrialized economies, Journal of International Business Studies, 33:3, 403-421.
48. Nielsen, B.B. (2010). Strategic fit, contractual, and procedural governance in alliances. Journal of Business Research, 63(7):682–689.
49. Park, G., Kim, M.J.H. and Kang, J. (2015). Competitive embeddedness: The impact of competitive relations among a firm’s current alliance partners on its new alliance formations. International Business Review, 24: 196-208.
50. Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., and Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 116-145.
51. Ritter, T., and Walter, A. (2003). Relationship-specific antecedents of customer involvement in new product development. International Journal of Technology Management, 26(5/6): 482-501.
52. Root, F.R. (1987). Entry strategies for international markets. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
53. Rugman, A. and Lan, M. (1979). Internationadl diversificationa and the multinational enterprise. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.
54. Schall, D. (2014). A multi-criteria ranking framework for partner selection in scientific collaboration environments. Decision Support Systems, 59: 1-14.
55. Stephan, M. and E. Pfaffmann. (2001). Detecting the pitfalls of data on foreign direct investment: Scope and limits of FDI data, Management International Review, 41:2, 189-218。
56. Stopford, J.M. and Wells, L.T. (1972). Managingt the multinational enterprise: Organizationo of the firm and ownership of the subsidiaries. New York: Basic Books.
57. Su, C., Yang, Z., Zhuang, G., Zhou, N., and Dou, W. (2009). Interpersonal influence as an alternative channel communication behavior in emerging markets: The case of China. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(4): 668-689.
58. Talay, M.B. and Cavusgil, S.T. (2009). Choice of ownership mode in joint ventures: An event history analysis from the automotive industry. Industrial Marketing Management, 38:71-82.
59. Terpstra, V. and Yu. C.M. (1988). Determinants of foreign investment of U.S. advertising agencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3): 3-46.
60. Tsai, K.H. and Hsieh, M.H. (2009). How different types of partners influence innovative product sales: Does technological capacity matter? Journal of Business Research, 62: 1321-1328.
61. Vassolo, R.S., Anand, J. and Folta, T.B. (2004). Non-additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: A real options-based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 25(11): 1045-1061.
62. Williamson, O. and liver, E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: The Free Press.
63. Wrona, T. and Tra˛pczyn’ski, P. (2012). Re-explaining international entry modes – Interaction and moderating effects on entry modes of pharmaceutical companies into transition economies, European Management Journal, 30, 295-315.
64. Xie, E., Liang, J., and Zhou, K.Z. (2016). How to enhance supplier performance in China: An integrative view of partner selection and partner control. Industrial Marketing Management, 56: 156-166.
65. Xie, E., Peng, M. W., and Zhao, W. (2013). Uncertainties, resources, and supplier selection in an emerging economy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(4): 1219-1242.
66. Yaprak, A. (2011). Dynamic learning and strategic alliances: a commentary essay. Journal of Business Research, 64:1128-1130.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2017-06-26公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2017-06-26起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2486 或 來信