進階搜尋


 
系統識別號 U0026-2304202015120700
論文名稱(中文) 藉由標準化探討通訊產業中瓶頸的控制
論文名稱(英文) Controlling the Bottlenecks of the Telecommunication System through 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 108
學期 2
出版年 109
研究生(中文) 黃慈惠
研究生(英文) Cih-Huei Huang
學號 R46071230
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 42頁
口試委員 指導教授-許經明
口試委員-吳豐祥
口試委員-林杏娥
中文關鍵字 控制  複雜產品系統(CoPS)  標準重要專利(SEPs)  瓶頸 
英文關鍵字 control  complex product systems (CoPS)  standard essential patents (SEPs)  technical specifications  bottlenecks 
學科別分類
中文摘要 de jure標準,是一個共享的技術平台,每個企業比須從這個平台上獲得技術資訊以發展產品。在標準化發展組織(SDOs) 制定de jure標準會為複雜產品系統(Complex product systems ) (CoPS),創造外部效果。de jure標準是一系列定義複雜產品系統功能及規範的技術規格書。藉由宣告重要專利(Standard essential patents)(SEPs)來控制技術規格書的應用,複雜產品系統的企業可以在複雜產品系統市場上獲取價值,藉由在重要專利上宣告以控制技術規格書的應用。雖然相互合作企業的關係,對於在標準化過程中創造價值是很重要的,然而價值卻必須從競爭的產品市場中獲取。在本研究中,我們認為企業控制技術規格書的能力,可以幫助企業在複雜產品系統市場上獲取價值。
藉由觀察企業如何在通訊產業標準化過程中,控制2G GSM、3G UMTS、 4G LTE等技術規格書,我們發現領先的複雜產品系統公司可能會失去他們從複雜產品系統市場上,獲取價值的能力,因為只控制了技術規格書之間的相互依存關係但卻鮮少在幾個擁有特定瓶頸(bottlenecks)性質的技術規格書上控制,本研究可以以補足有關開放式創新於標準化下獲取價值的討論缺口。
英文摘要 The de jure standards are a shared technological platform, in which any firm must access the technical information to develop products. Setting up de jure standards in the standard-development organizations (SDOs) creates the network effects value of complex product systems (CoPS). The de jure standards are a set of technical specifications that define the functionalities and requirements of CoPS. Controlling the implementation of technical specifications by declaring standard essential patents (SEPs), CoPS firms can capture the value from CoPS business market. Firms can capture the value from CoPS business market through controlling the implementation of technical specifications by declaring standard essential patents (SEPs).Although the collaborative interfirm relationships are crucial for value creation in the standardization, whereas the value is captured from the competitive product market. In this study, we argue that the ability of firms in controlling the technical specifications, which can help firms capture value from the CoPS product market. By investigating how firms controlled the 2G GSM, 3G UMTS and 4G LTE technical specifications in the standardization of telecommunication industry, we found that leading CoPS firms might lose their ability to capture value from CoPS business market because of they only controlled the interdependence between technical specifications but lacked sufficient control at particular technical specifications relevant to the bottlenecks of CoPS. Our study can complement the debates of value capture under standardization through the context of open innovation.
論文目次 致謝 II
摘要 III
Abstract IV
TABLES VI
FIGURES VII
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Chapter 2 Literature Review 3
2.1 The Purpose of Control in the Innovation 3
2.2 The Control in the CoPS Standardization 7
Chapter 3 Analytical Methodology 12
3.1 Data and Analysis Objects 12
3.2 Measurements for System Control and Bottleneck Control 14
Chapter 4 Analysis Results 19
4.1 Overview of Standardization in the Telecommunication Industry 19
4.2 The Competition in Controlling the Technical Specifications 24
Chapter 5 Discussion 28
Chapter 6 Conclusion 31
References 32
參考文獻 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.
Ambos, B., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (2007). Innovation and control in the multinational firm: A comparison of political and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 28(5), 473-486.
Arıkan, A. T., & Schilling, M. A. (2011). Structure and governance in industrial districts: implications for competitive advantage. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 772-803.
Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116-131.
Baldwin. (2000). Design rules: The power of modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Baldwin, & Woodard, C. J. (2009). The architecture of platforms: A unified view. In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation (pp. 19-37). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Baldwin, C. (2015). Bottlenecks, modules and dynamic architectural capabilities. Harvard Business School Working Paper, 15-028.
Basole, R. C. (2009). Visualization of interfirm relations in a converging mobile ecosystem. Journal of information Technology, 24(2), 144-159.
Bekkers, R. (2001). Mobile Telecommunications Standards: Gsm, Umts, Tetra, and Ermes: Artech House.
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). Disclosure rules and declared essential patents. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, 23627.
Bekkers, R., & Martinelli, A. (2012a). Knowledge positions in high-tech markets: Trajectories, standards, strategies and true innovators. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(7), 1192-1216.
Bekkers, R., & Martinelli, A. (2012b). Knowledge positions in high-tech markets: Trajectories, standards, strategies and true innovators. Technological Forecasting Social Change
79(7), 1192-1216.
Bekkers, R., Verspagen, B., & Smits, J. (2002). Intellectual property rights and standardization: The case of GSM. Telecommunications Policy, 26(3-4), 171-188.
Bekkers, R., & West, J. (2009). The limits to IPR standardization policies as evidenced by strategic patenting in UMTS. Telecommunications Policy, 33(1-2), 80-97.
Bengtsson, M., & Kock, S. (2014). Coopetition—Quo vadis? Past accomplishments and future challenges. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 180-188.
Besen, S. M., & Farrell, J. (1994). Choosing how to compete: Strategies and tactics in standardization. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 117-131.
Bogers, M. (2011). The open innovation paradox: Knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations. European Journal of Innovation Management, 14(1), 93-117.
Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1999). Models of core/periphery structures. Social Networks, 21(4), 375-395.
Boudreau, K. (2010). Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access vs. devolving control. Management Science, 56(10), 1849-1872.
Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1993). Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 441-470.
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.
Burkhardt, M. E., & Brass, D. J. (1990). Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power. Administrative Science Quarterly, 104-127.
Chesbrough, H. (2005). Toward a new science of services. Harv. Bus. Rev., 20-21.
Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape: Harvard Business School Press.
Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (2006). Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). The logic of open innovation: Managing intellectual property. California Management Review, 45(3), 33-58.
Chiao, B., Lerner, J., & Tirole, J. (2005). The rules of standard setting organizations: an empirical analysis (0898-2937). Retrieved from
Condoluci, M., & Mahmoodi, T. (2018). Softwarization and virtualization in 5G mobile networks: Benefits, trends and challenges. Computer Networks, 146, 65-84.
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.
Csermely, P., London, A., Wu, L.-Y., & Uzzi, B. (2013). Structure and dynamics of core/periphery networks. Journal of Complex Networks, 1(2), 93-123.
Cusumano, M. A., & Gawer, A. (2002). The elements of platform leadership. MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(3), 51.
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 technical systems: the case of telecommunications. Industrial Corporate Change, 5(4), 1143-1180.
Davies, A. (1999). Innovation and competitiveness in Complex Product Systems: The case of mobile phone systems. In. Bastos, M. I. & Mitter, S. (Eds.): Routledge.
Davies, A., & Brady, T. (2000). Organisational capabilities and learning in complex product systems: towards repeatable solutions. Research Policy, 29(7-8), 931-953.
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659-669.
Dosi, G., Hobday, M., Marengo, L., & Prencipe, A. (2005). The econonics of system integration: Towards an evolutionary interpretation. In A. Prencipe, A. Davies, & M. Hobday (Eds.), The business of systems integration (pp. 95-113). New York: Oxford University Press.
Doz, Y. L., Olk, P. M., & Ring, P. S. (2000). Formation processes of R&D consortia: Which path to take? Where does it lead? Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 239-266.
Eaton, B., Elaluf-Calderwood, S., Sørensen, C., & Yoo, Y. (2011). Dynamic structures of control and generativity in digital ecosystem service innovation: the cases of the Apple and Google mobile app stores. London School of Economics and Political Science, 44(0), 1-25.
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., & Saloner, G. (1986). Installed base and compatibility: Innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. The American economic review, 940-955.
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: The case of mobile phones: Springer.
Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 196-214.
Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (2002). Complexity, bricolage, and technology. In Interaction of Complexity and Management (pp. 91-95): Quorum Books.
Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (1993). Changing competitive dynamics in network industries: An exploration of Sun Microsystems' open systems strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 14(5), 351-369.
Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (1995). Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 93-109.
Gawer, A. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7), 1239-1249.
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 417-433.
Gawer, A., & Henderson, R. (2007). Platform owner entry and innovation in complementary markets: Evidence from Intel. Journal of Economics Management Strategy, 16(1), 1-34.
Gawer, A., & Phillips, N. (2013). Institutional work as logics shift: The case of Intel’s transformation to platform leader. Organization Studies, 34(8), 1035-1071.
Goldsmith, A. (2005). Wireless communications: Cambridge university press.
Goodman, D. J., & Myers, R. A. (2005). 3G cellular standards and patents. Paper presented at the 2005 International conference on Wireless Networks, Communications and Mobile Computing.
Hacki, R., & Lighton, J. (2001). The future of the networked company. The McKinsey Quarterly(3), 26.
Hardin, R. (1982). Collective action: RFF Press.
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.
Henkel, J. (2006). Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux. Research Policy, 35(7), 953-969.
Henkel, J., & Baldwin, C. Y. (2009). Modularity for value appropriation: Drawing the boundaries of intellectual property: Harvard Business School Boston, MA.
Henkel, J., Schöberl, S., & Alexy, O. (2014). The emergence of openness: How and why firms adopt selective revealing in open innovation. Research Policy, 43(5), 879-890.
Henningsson, S., Hedman, J., & Andersson, B. (2013). Shaping Information Infrastructure Evolution: Governmental Claims of Architectural Control Points. Paper presented at the The 13th European Conference on eGovernment.
Hobday, M. (1995). Innovation in East Asia. Books.
Hobday, M. (1998). Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. Research Policy, 26(6), 689-710.
Hobday, M. (2001). The electronics industries of the Asia–pacific: exploiting international production networks for economic development. Asian‐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.
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.
Hurmelinna‐Laukkanen, P., & Puumalainen, K. (2007). Nature and dynamics of appropriability: strategies for appropriating returns on innovation. R&D Management, 37(2), 95-112.
Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage: What the new dynamics of business ecosystems mean for strategy, innovation, and sustainability: Harvard Business Press.
Imai, K., & Shiu, J. M. (2011). Value chain creation and reorganization: The growth path of China’s mobile phone handset industry. In M. Kawakami & T. J. Sturgeon (Eds.), The dynamics of local learning in global value chains (pp. 43-67): Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Jain, S. (2001). A process framework of collective standards emergence Unpublished doctoral dissertation. NY: New York University.
Jarillo, J. C. (1988). On strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 9(1), 31-41.
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American Economic Review, 75(3), 424-440.
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1986). Technology adoption in the presence of network externalities. Journal of political economy, 94(4), 822-841.
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. (1994). Systems competition and network effects. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 93-115.
Keil, T., Autio, E., & Robertson, P. (1997). Embeddedness, power, control and innovation in the telecommunications sector. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 9(3), 299-316.
Knoke, D. (1994). Networks of elite structure and decision making. Sage Focus Editions, 171, 274-274.
Langlois, R., & Robertson, P. L. (1995). Innovation, networks, and vertical integration. Research Policy, 24(4), 543-562.
Langlois, R. N., & Robertson, P. L. (1992). Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries. Research Policy, 21(4), 297-313.
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131-150.
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. J. (2014). The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration. Research Policy, 43(5), 867-878.
Layne-Farrar, A., & Lerner, J. (2011). To join or not to join: Examining patent pool participation and rent sharing rules. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 29(2), 294-303.
Layne‐Farrar, A., Llobet, G., & Padilla, J. (2014). Payments and participation: The incentives to join cooperative standard setting efforts. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 23(1), 24-49.
Leiponen, A. E. (2008). Competing through cooperation: The organization of standard setting in wireless telecommunications. Management Science, 54(11), 1904-1919.
Lemley, M. A. (2002). Intellectual property rights and standard-setting organizations. Calif. L. Rev., 90, 1889.
Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Nelson, R. R., Winter, S. G., Gilbert, R., & Griliches, Z. (1987). Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings papers on economic activity, 1987(3), 783-831.
Lorenzoni, G., & Baden-Fuller, C. (1995). Creating a strategic center to manage a web of partners. California Management Review, 37(3), 146-163.
Martin, D. L., & Meyer, C. D. (2006). Patent counting, a misleading index of patent value: A critique of Goodman & Myers and its uses. Available at SSRN 949439.
Miller, R., Hobday, M., Leroux-Demers, T., & Olleros, X. (1995). Innovation in complex systems industries: the case of flight simulation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 4(2), 363-400.
Mock, D. (2005). The Qualcomm equation: How a fledgling telecom company forged a new path to big profits and market dominance: AMACOM/American Management Association.
Modol, J. R., & Chekanov, A. (2014). Architectural Constraints on the Bootstrapping of a Personal Health Record. Scandinavian J. Inf. Systems, 26(2), 4.
Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75-86.
Morris, C. R., & Ferguson, C. H. (1993). How architecture wins technology wars. Harvard Business Review, 71(2), 86-96.
Mortara, L., & Minshall, T. (2011). How do large multinational companies implement open innovation? Technovation, 31(10-11), 586-597.
Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2011). Orchestration processes in network-centric innovation: Evidence from the field. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(3), 40-57.
Olk, P., & West, J. (2019). The relationship of industry structure to open innovation: cooperative value creation in pharmaceutical consortia. R&D Management.
Pavitt, K. (2005). Innovation processes. In The Oxford handbook of innovation.
Pon, B., Seppälä, T., & Kenney, M. (2014). Android and the demise of operating system-based power: Firm strategy and platform control in the post-PC world. Telecommunications Policy, 38(11), 979-991.
Porac, J., Rosa, J. A., Spanjol, J., & Saxon, M. S. (2001). America’s family vehicle: Path creation in the US minivan market. R. Garud, P. Karnoe, eds. Path Dependence and Creation. In: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Raza-Ullah, T., Bengtsson, M., & Kock, S. (2014). The coopetition paradox and tension in coopetition at multiple levels. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 189-198.
Rugman, A. M., & D’Cruz, J. R. (2000). The theory of the flagship firm. Cooperative strategy: economic, business and organizational issues, 57-73.
Rysman, M., & Simcoe, T. (2007). Network Operators' Requirements and the Structure of Telecommunications Standards. International Journal of IT Standards Standardization Research, 5(1), 103-117.
Sanchez, R. (1995). Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 135-159.
Sawhney, M., & Nambisan, S. (2007). The global brain: Your roadmap for innovating faster and smarter in a networked world: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Schilling, M. A. (1998). Technological lockout: An integrative model of the economic and strategic factors driving technology success and failure. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 267-284.
Schilling, M. A. (2000). Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Academy of Management Review, 25(2), 312-334.
Schmidt, S. K., & Werle, R. (1998). Coordinating technology. Studies in the international standardization of telecommunications, 3.
Selander, L., Henfridsson, O., & Svahn, F. (2010). Transforming Ecosystem Relationships in Digital Innovation. Paper presented at the ICIS.
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1998). Versioning: the smart way to. Harvard Business Review, 107(6), 107.
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). The art of standards wars. California Management Review, 41(2), 8-32.
Shintaku, J., Ogawa, K., & Yoshimoto, T. (2006). Architecture-based approaches to international standardization and evolution of business models. IEC Century Challenge, 2006, 19-35.
Shiu, J.-M., & Yasumoto, M. (2015). Investigating firms’ knowledge management in the standardization: The analysis of technology specification-declared essential patent networks on telecommunication industry. Retrieved from http://merc.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/mmrc/dp/pdf/MMRC465_2015.pdf
Simard, C., & West, J. (2006). Knowledge networks and the geographic locus of innovation. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, 220-240.
Simcoe, T. (2006). Open standards and intellectual property rights. In H. W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm (pp. 161-183). New York: Oxford University Press.
Simcoe, T. S., Graham, S. J., & Feldman, M. P. (2009). Competing on standards? Entrepreneurship, intellectual property, and platform technologies. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(3), 775-816.
Sozen, H. C. (2012). Social networks and power in organizations. Personnel Review.
Stango, V. (2004). The economics of standards wars. Review of Network Economics, 3(1).
Steinmueller, E. (2005). Technical compatibility standards and the co-ordination of the industrial and international division of labour. Advancing Knowledge and the Knowledge Economy, Washington, DC.
Stuermer, M., Spaeth, S., & Von Krogh, G. (2009). Extending private‐collective innovation: a case study. R&D Management, 39(2), 170-191.
Tatsumoto, H., Ogawa, K., & Shintaku, J. (2010). The essence of platform business through open innovation: Intuitional condition, strategic mechanism and the impact of the international division of labor. Japan Society for Research Policy and Innovation Management, 25(1), 78-91.
Technology, O. o. S. a. (1990). Technology Foresight Progress through Partnership: Defence and Aerospace. London School of Economics and Political Science.
Tee, R., & Woodard, C. J. (2013). Architectural control and value migration in layered ecosystems: The case of open-source cloud management platforms.
Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285-305.
Teece, D. J. (2006). Reflections on “profiting from innovation”. Research Policy, 35(8), 1131-1146.
Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40-49.
Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Research commentary—Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 748-759.
Tiwana, A. (2013). Platform ecosystems: Aligning architecture, governance, and strategy: Newnes.
Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., & Bush, A. (2010). Research commentary—Platform evolution: Coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 675-687.
Tushman, M. L., & Murmann, J. P. (1998). Dominant Designs, Technology Cycles, and Organization Outcomes. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings.
Ulrich, K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research Policy, 24(3), 419-440.
Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (1995). Product Design and Development. McCraw-Hill. Inc., New York, New York.
Van Alstyne, M. W., Parker, G. G., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Pipelines, platforms, and the new rules of strategy. Harvard Business Review, 94(4), 54-62.
van de Kaa, G., & de Bruijn, H. (2015). Platforms and incentives for consensus building on complex ICT systems: The development of WiFi. Telecommunications Policy, 39(7), 580-589.
Vanhaverbeke, W. (2006). The interorganizational context of open innovation. In H. W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm (pp. 205-219). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wadhwa, A., Bodas Freitas, I. M., & Sarkar, M. (2017). The paradox of openness and value protection strategies: Effect of extramural R&D on innovative performance. Organization Science, 28(5), 873-893.
Wang, T., Libaers, D., & Park, H. D. (2017). The paradox of openness: How product and patenting experience affect R&D sourcing in China? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 34(3), 250-268.
Wareham, J., Fox, P. B., & Cano Giner, J. L. (2014). Technology ecosystem governance. Organization Science, 25(4), 1195-1215.
Wasserman, S., & Galaskiewicz, J. (1994). Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences: Sage.
West, J. (2003). How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies. Research Policy, 32(7), 1259-1285.
West, J. (2006). Does appropriability enable or retard open innovation. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, 109-133.
West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), 814-831.
West, J., & Dedrick, J. (2000). Innovation and control in standards architectures: The rise and fall of Japan's PC-98. Information Systems Research, 11(2), 197-216.
West, J., & Dedrick, J. (2001). Open source standardization: The rise of Linux in the network era. Knowledge, Technology Policy, 14(2), 88-112.
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.
West, J., & Wood, D. (2014). Evolving an Open Ecosystem: The Rise and Fall of the Symbian Platform', Collaboration and Competition in Business Ecosystems (Advances in Strategic Management, Volume 30). In: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Woodard, C. J. (2008). Architectural control points. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology.
Yayavaram, S., & Ahuja, G. (2008). Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 333-362.
Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). Research commentary—the new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724-735.
Zhao, K., Xia, M., & Shaw, M. J. (2005). Vertical e‐business standards and standards developing organizations: A conceptual framework. Electronic Markets, 15(4), 289-300.

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2020-07-06起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2020-07-06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