進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-0406201919230800
論文名稱(中文) 國際標準化下複雜產品系統的結構控制
論文名稱(英文) The Architectural Control over the Complex Product Systems under Standardization
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 企業管理學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Business Administration
學年度 107
學期 2
出版年 108
研究生(中文) 陳子穎
研究生(英文) Tzu-Ying Chen
學號 R46061455
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 30頁
口試委員 指導教授-許經明
口試委員-張元杰
口試委員-張瑞芬
中文關鍵字 結構控制  複雜產品系統  標準化  標準必要專利  技術規格書  通訊產業 
英文關鍵字 architectural control  complex product systems  standardization  standard essential patents  technical specifications  telecommunication industry 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本研究旨在揭示企業如何在國際標準化(standard-development organizations, SDOs)中擁有複雜產品系統(Complex Product Systems, CoPS)的結構控制。我們認為宣告標準必要專利(standard essential patents, SEPs)於複雜產品系統的技術規格書,意味著公司宣告擁有複雜產品系統的技術規格書之技術實施方式與權利。還有,企業的結構控制旨在系統地宣告技術規格書之間的實施權利,以確保複雜產品系統的技術相互依存性。本研究發現,在通訊產業的標準化過程中,Motorola,Nokia和Ericsson等複雜產品系統既有企業在20世紀90年代中期開始加強對通訊系統的結構控制; 2000年以後,零組件供應商Qualcomm開始不斷改進。2005年之後,Apple,Samsung和LG等新進入者也開始加強結構控制,但仍低於複雜產品系統的既有企業。我們認為新進入者的崛起得到了Qualcomm對通訊系統結構控制的支持。本研究的學術貢獻是提出對複雜產品系統結構控制的測量,並擴展結構控制的概念,以探討國際標準化中企業之間的競爭關係。
英文摘要 This study is aimed to reveal how firms can possess their architectural control of CoPS (Complex Product Systems) in SDOs (standard-development organizations). We believe that the declaration of SEPs (standard essential patents) on the technical specifications of CoPS means that the firms declare to have their technical implementation rights for the technical specifications of CoPS. We propose that the architectural control of firms is meant to declare the implementation rights between technical specifications systematically in order to secure the technological interdependence of CoPS. This study found that in the standardization of the telecommunication industry, CoPS incumbents such as Motorola, Nokia, and Ericsson began to strengthen the architectural control of telecommunication system after mid-1990s; and after 2000, a component supplier Qualcomm began to improve continuously. After 2005, new entrants such as Apple, Samsung, and LG have also begun to strengthen the architectural control but still lower than CoPS incumbents. We think that the rise of new entrants is supported by Qualcomm’s architectural control over telecommunication system. The academic contribution of this research is to propose a measurement of architectural control of CoPS and extend the concept of architectural control to explore the competitive relationship between firms in SDOs.
論文目次 中文摘要-------------------------I
Abstract------------------------II
誌謝----------------------------II
CONTENTS------------------------IV
TABLES--------------------------V
FIGURES-------------------------VI
Chapter 1 Introduction----------1
Chapter 2 Literature Review-----4
Chapter 3 Analysis Methodology--9
Chapter 4 Analysis Results------14
Chapter 5 Discussion------------22
Chapter 6 Conclusion------------25
References----------------------26
參考文獻 Antonelli, C. (1992). The Economics of Information Networks. Elsevier Science Inc.
Bekkers, R., & West, J. (2006). The effect of strategic patenting on cumulative innovation in UMTS standardization.
Bekkers, R., and West, J. (2009). The limits to IPR standardization policies as evidenced by strategic patenting in UMTS. Telecommunications Policy, 33, 80-97.
Bekkers, R., Bongard, R., & Nuvolari, A. (2011). An empirical study on the determinants of essential patent claims in compatibility standards. Research Policy, 40(7), 1001-1015.
Bekkers, R., Catalini, C., Martinelli, A., Righi, C., & Simcoe, T. (2017). National Bureau of Economic Research. Disclosure Rules and Declared SEPs No. w23627.
Bekkers, R., Duysters, G., and Verspagen, B. (2002). Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM. Research Policy, 31(7), 1141-1161.
Bekkers, R., & Martinelli, A. (2012). Knowledge positions in high-tech markets: Trajectories, standards, strategies and true innovators. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(7), 1192-1216.
Boudreau, K. J. (2010). Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access vs. devolving control. Management Science, 56(10), 1849-1872.
Boudreau, K. J. (2012). Let a thousand flowers bloom? An early look at large numbers of software app developers and patterns of innovation. Organization Science, 23(5), 1409-1427.
Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Knowledge specialization, organizational coupling, and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 597-621.
Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Harvard Business Press
Clark, K. B. (1985). The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Research Policy, 14(5), 235-251.
Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No.7552.
Cornwell, B., & Harrison, J. A. (2004). Union members and voluntary associations: Membership overlap as a case of organizational embeddedness. American Sociological Review, 69(6), 862-881.
David, P. A., & Bunn, J. A. (1988). The economics of gateway technologies and network evolution: Lessons from electricity supply history. Information Economics and Policy, 3(2), 165-202.
David, P. A., & Greenstein, S. (1990). The economics of compatibility standards- An introduction to recent research. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 1(1-2), 3-41.
Davies, A. (1996). Innovation in large technology systems: The case of telecommunications. Industrial and Corporate Change, 5(4), 1143-1180.
Davies, A. (1999). Innovation and competitiveness in CoPS: The case of mobile phone systems. In Bastos, M. I. & Mitter, S. (Eds.), Europe and Developing Countries in the Globalized Information Economy: Employment and Distance Education. UNU/INTECH Studies in New Technology and Development, Routledge.
Davies, A. and Brady, T. (2000). Organizational capabilities and learning in CoPS: Towards repeatable solutions. Research Policy, 29(7-8), 931-953.
European Commission (2014), Patents and Standards: A Modern Framework for IPR-based Standardization, European Union.
Everett, M. G., & Borgatti, S. P. (1994). Regular equivalence: General theory. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 19(1), 29-52.
Farrell, J., & Shapiro, C. (1988). Dynamic competition with switching costs. The RAND Journal of Economics, 123-137.
Farrell, J., & Simcoe, T. (2012). Choosing the rules for consensus standardization. The RAND Journal of Economics, 43(2), 235-252.
Funk, J. L. (2002). Global Competition Between and Within Standards. Palgrave Macmillan.
Funk, J. L., & Methe, D. T. (2001). Market-and committee-based mechanisms in the creation and diffusion of global industry standards: the case of mobile communication. Research Policy, 30(4), 589-610.
Gawer, A. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7), 1239-1249.
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2002). Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation (Vol. 5, pp. 29-30). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Goodman, D. J. and Myers, R. (2005). 3G cellular standards and patents. Proceedings of IEEE WirelessCom.
He, Z. L., Lim, K., & Wong, P. K. (2006). Entry and competitive dynamics in the mobile telecommunications market. Research Policy, 35(8), 1147-1165.
Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9-30.
Hobday, M. (2001). The electronics industries of the Asia-Pacific: Exploiting international production networks for economic development. Asia-Pacific Economic Literature, 15(1), 13-29.
Hobday, M., Davies, A., & Prencipe, A. (2005). Systems integration: a core capability of the modern corporation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(6), 1109-1143.
Imai, K., & Shiu, J. M. (2011). Value chain creation and reorganization: the growth path of China’s mobile phone handset industry. In the Dynamics of Local Learning in Global
Kang, B., & Motohashi, K. (2014). The role of essential patents as knowledge input for future R&D. World Patent Information, 38, 33-41.
Lea, G., & Hall, P. (2004). Standards and intellectual property rights: an economic and legal perspective. Information Economics and Policy, 16(1), 67-89.
Leiponen, A. (2008). Competing through cooperation: The organization of standard setting in wireless telecommunications. Management Science, 54(11), 1904-1919
Martin, D. L. & Meyer, D. C. (2006). Patent counting, a misleading index of patent value: A critique of Goodman & Myers and its uses, SSRN Working Paper, 16-25.
Mehta, A., Rysman, M., & Simcoe, T. (2010). Identifying the age profile of patent citations: New estimates of knowledge diffusion. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 25(7), 1179-1204.
Morris, C. R., & Ferguson, C. H. (1993). How architecture wins technology wars. Harvard Business Review, 71(2), 86-96.
Pohlmann, T., Neuhäusler, P., & Blind, K. (2016). Standard SEPs to boost financial returns. R&D Management, 46(S2), 612-630.
Rysman, M., & Simcoe, T. (2008). Patents and the performance of voluntary standard-setting organizations. Management Science, 54(11), 1920-1934.
Schmidt, S. K., Werle, R., & Susanne, K. (1998). Coordinating Technology: Studies in the International Standardization of Telecommunications. MIT press.
Shiu, J. M., & Yasumoto, M. (2015). Investigating Firms’ Knowledge Management in the Standardization: The Analysis of Technical Specification: Declared Essential Patent Networks on Telecommunication Industry (Vol. 465). MMRC Discussion Paper Series.
Shiu, J. M., Yasumoto, M., Yoshioka-Kobayashi, T., Chen, T. Y., Wang, S.K., Huang, C. W. (2018). The Architectural Control Over the Opened Product-Systems Under the Standardization, Academy of Management (AOM), Annual Meeting, Chicago.
Steinbock, D. (2002). Wireless Horizon. AMACOM.
Ulrich, K. & Eppinger, S. (1995). Product Design and Development. New York, McGraw-Hill.
West, J. (2003). How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies. Research Policy, 32(7), 1259–1285.
West, J. (2006). The economic realities of open standards: Black, white and many shades of gray In Greenstein, S., and Stango, V. (Eds.), Standards and Public Policy. (pp. 87-122) Cambridge University Press.
West, J., & Gallagher, S. (2006). Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open‐source software. R&D Management, 36(3), 319-331.
Woodard, C. J. (2008). Architectural control points. In 3rd International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2008), Atlanta, GA.
Yayavaram, S., & Ahuja, G. (2008). Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-based malleability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 333-362.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2024-06-01起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw