技术创新战略与研发绩效评价指标研究
|
摘要
本研究以臺灣光電業為研究物件,試圖瞭解技術戰略、績效評價與績效之涵義的關係為何,主要研究目的包括:藉由實證研究瞭解不同技術創新戰略下,著重的研發重點為何?是否存有差異?探討不同技術戰略下,對財務、顧客、企業内部程式及學習與成長四個構面,研發指標之重視程度是否不同?分析技術創新戰略與研發績效指標之績效評價配合之程度,對企業績效之影響為何?
基於本研究之動機與目的,對臺灣與國外相關文獻進行了探討。探討了研發與技術創新之涵義;產品創新與制程創新之區別和關係;技術創新戰略之含義及分類;也探討了研發績效評價之概念及評價指標,研發績效評價模型,戰略與績效評價之關係以及戰略、績效評價與績效之間的關係;還探討了平衡計分卡之觀念及相關文獻等,根據文獻探討内容,本研究重新對技術創新、研發、績效評價加以理解,建立了本研究的研究假設。為檢定研究假設,達到本研究之目的。
本研究過程中,利用EXCEL及SPSS等統計軟體,首先對樣本進行描述性統計分析,然後分析研究問卷的信度和效度。通過因數分析後,各構面均能提取出一個至三個有效因數,其特徵值均大於1,累積可解釋變數均大於50%,顯著性水平均小於0.001,由此說明本問卷設計各變數之有效性較好,即整個問卷效度較好。之後對所搜集數據加以因數分析、回歸分析等方法進行分析,得出相應結論。
本研究之主要結論在技術戰略、對財務構面及學習與成長構面研發績效指標的重視程度與實際績效之關係上,發現技術積極度高的積極型廠商,並非較技術防禦者重視財務構面及學習與成長構面的研發績效指標時,實際績效較佳,顯示臺灣光電業廠商的技術創新戰略與平衡計分卡的觀點相悖,技術開創者應降低對財務構面研發績效指標的重視程度,並提高對學習與成長構面研發績效指標的重視程度,才有助於實際績效的提升。
根據本研究之結論,最後對後續研究提出了相應的建議,並指出本研究的局限與貢獻。
This research is carried through the LED industry of our nation is taken as the research object. In this research, the meaning and relationship of technology strategy, Performance Measurement and the performance are intended to find out. The research aims include that to find out what are the emphases and if there is difference of research & development in different technology strategies through demonstration research; to probe into if the important degree of the research & development indexes is difference to financial, customers, internal business and learning and growth perspectives in different technology strategies; to analyze the cooperating degree between the technology innovation strategies and the research & development performance indexes and how about the influence to the business.
Based on the research motivation and aims, the related internal and international literatures are reviewed. They include the meaning of research & development and the technology innovation; the differentiate and relationship between the product innovation and manufacture progress innovation; the meaning and the classify of technology innovation strategy; the concept of research & development performance evaluation and the measurement indexes; the conception and the related literatures of the balanced scorecard and so on. And then, the research hypotheses are set up based on the literature review. In order to check the research hypotheses and achieve the research aim.
The EXCEL and SPSS are used in the research to analyze the data. At first, the stylebooks are analyzed by the Descriptive Statistic Analysis method, and then the reliability and the validity of the questionnaires are analyzed. The result indicate that the Cronbachaof every surfaces variable in the questionnaires are larger than 0.6, and all of the Item to Total Correlations are not less then 0.35. So it is shown that the questionnaire is high reliability. Through the Factor Analyze, one to three effective factors can be picked up in every surfaces and the eigenvalue of which is larger than 1, the Cum Pct are higher than 50%, the P value are less then 0.001, so the variables of the questionnaires in this research are designed availably, namely the validity of the whole questionnaire is preferably. Then, the Factor analysis and Regression analysis are used to analyze the data and made out the corresponded conclusions.
The conclusion is regarding the relationship between the important degree of the technology innovation strategy, financial surface and the learning and growth surface performance indexes and the real performance, it is shown that the high enthusiasm enterprises which didn't have higher regard for the financial surface and the learning and growth surface performance indexes than the technology defenders have better performance. It indicate that the technology innovation strategy of the Light Emitting Diode industry of our nation does not accordant to the point of the balance scorecard, so the technology inaugurators should decrease the important degree to the performance indexes of the financial surface and increase the important degree to the performance indexes of the learning and growth surface. Which can helpful to improve the real performance.
Finally, some advices of the following-up researches are brought forward according to the conclusion and the restrictions of this research are pointed out.
基於本研究之動機與目的,對臺灣與國外相關文獻進行了探討。探討了研發與技術創新之涵義;產品創新與制程創新之區別和關係;技術創新戰略之含義及分類;也探討了研發績效評價之概念及評價指標,研發績效評價模型,戰略與績效評價之關係以及戰略、績效評價與績效之間的關係;還探討了平衡計分卡之觀念及相關文獻等,根據文獻探討内容,本研究重新對技術創新、研發、績效評價加以理解,建立了本研究的研究假設。為檢定研究假設,達到本研究之目的。
本研究過程中,利用EXCEL及SPSS等統計軟體,首先對樣本進行描述性統計分析,然後分析研究問卷的信度和效度。通過因數分析後,各構面均能提取出一個至三個有效因數,其特徵值均大於1,累積可解釋變數均大於50%,顯著性水平均小於0.001,由此說明本問卷設計各變數之有效性較好,即整個問卷效度較好。之後對所搜集數據加以因數分析、回歸分析等方法進行分析,得出相應結論。
本研究之主要結論在技術戰略、對財務構面及學習與成長構面研發績效指標的重視程度與實際績效之關係上,發現技術積極度高的積極型廠商,並非較技術防禦者重視財務構面及學習與成長構面的研發績效指標時,實際績效較佳,顯示臺灣光電業廠商的技術創新戰略與平衡計分卡的觀點相悖,技術開創者應降低對財務構面研發績效指標的重視程度,並提高對學習與成長構面研發績效指標的重視程度,才有助於實際績效的提升。
根據本研究之結論,最後對後續研究提出了相應的建議,並指出本研究的局限與貢獻。
This research is carried through the LED industry of our nation is taken as the research object. In this research, the meaning and relationship of technology strategy, Performance Measurement and the performance are intended to find out. The research aims include that to find out what are the emphases and if there is difference of research & development in different technology strategies through demonstration research; to probe into if the important degree of the research & development indexes is difference to financial, customers, internal business and learning and growth perspectives in different technology strategies; to analyze the cooperating degree between the technology innovation strategies and the research & development performance indexes and how about the influence to the business.
Based on the research motivation and aims, the related internal and international literatures are reviewed. They include the meaning of research & development and the technology innovation; the differentiate and relationship between the product innovation and manufacture progress innovation; the meaning and the classify of technology innovation strategy; the concept of research & development performance evaluation and the measurement indexes; the conception and the related literatures of the balanced scorecard and so on. And then, the research hypotheses are set up based on the literature review. In order to check the research hypotheses and achieve the research aim.
The EXCEL and SPSS are used in the research to analyze the data. At first, the stylebooks are analyzed by the Descriptive Statistic Analysis method, and then the reliability and the validity of the questionnaires are analyzed. The result indicate that the Cronbachaof every surfaces variable in the questionnaires are larger than 0.6, and all of the Item to Total Correlations are not less then 0.35. So it is shown that the questionnaire is high reliability. Through the Factor Analyze, one to three effective factors can be picked up in every surfaces and the eigenvalue of which is larger than 1, the Cum Pct are higher than 50%, the P value are less then 0.001, so the variables of the questionnaires in this research are designed availably, namely the validity of the whole questionnaire is preferably. Then, the Factor analysis and Regression analysis are used to analyze the data and made out the corresponded conclusions.
The conclusion is regarding the relationship between the important degree of the technology innovation strategy, financial surface and the learning and growth surface performance indexes and the real performance, it is shown that the high enthusiasm enterprises which didn't have higher regard for the financial surface and the learning and growth surface performance indexes than the technology defenders have better performance. It indicate that the technology innovation strategy of the Light Emitting Diode industry of our nation does not accordant to the point of the balance scorecard, so the technology inaugurators should decrease the important degree to the performance indexes of the financial surface and increase the important degree to the performance indexes of the learning and growth surface. Which can helpful to improve the real performance.
Finally, some advices of the following-up researches are brought forward according to the conclusion and the restrictions of this research are pointed out.
引文
1.Ansoff,H.I.and J.M.Stewart.1967.Strategies for a technology-based business.Harvard Business Review(Nov-Dec):71-82
2.Autio,E.and T.Laamanen,1995,"Measurement and Evaluation of Technology Transfer:Review of Technology Transfer Mechanisms and Indicators," International Journal of Technology Management,Vol.10,Nos.7/8,p.64.
3.Baker,N.R.,S.G.Green,and A.S.Bean,1986,The need for strategic Balance in R&D Project Portfolios,Research Management,Mar-Apr,.41.
4.Bantel,K.A.1997.Performance in adolescent,technology-based firms:product strategy,implementation,and synergy.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 8(2):243-262
5.Boer,H.and W.E.During.2001.Innovation,what innovation? A comparison between product,process and organizational innovation.Int.J.Technology Management 22(1/2/3):83-107
6.Bone,S.and T.Saxon.2000.Developing effective technology strategies.Research Technology Management(Jul-Aug):50-58
7.Chakrabarti,A.K.1991.Industry characteristics influencing the technical output:a case of small and medium size firms in the US.R&D Management 21(2):139-153
8.Chandler,G.N.1993.Reward perceptions and the performance of emerging technology dependent and non-technology dependent manufacturing firms.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 4(1):63-76
9.Chenhall,R.H.1996.Strategies of manufacturing flexibility,manufacturing performance measures and organizational performance:and empirical investigation.Integrated Manufacturing Systems 7:25-32
10.Chubin Daryle,1990.Peerless Science Peer Review and U.S.Science Policy.Albany,N.Y.:State University of New York Press.
11.Clarke,K.,D.Ford and M.Saren.1989.Company technology strategy.R&D Management 19(3):215-229
12.Cody,R.P.and J.K.Smith.1997.Applied statistics and the SAS programming language.Fourth Edition.Prentice-Hall.
13.Cohen,W.M.and S.Klepper.1994.Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries:the case of process and product R&D.The Review of Economics and Statistics:232-243
14.Collier,D.1985.Linking business and technology strategy.Planning Review(Sep):28-
15.Cooper,R.G.2000.Product innovation and technology strategy.Research Technology Management(Jan-Feb):38-45
16.Cooper,R.G.,S.J.Edgett and E.J.Kleinschmidt.1998.Best practices for managing R&D portfolios.Research Technology Management(Jul-Aug):20-33
17.Cunningham,G.M.1992.Management control and accounting systems under a competitive strategy.Accounting,Auditing & Accountability Journal 5(2):85.
18.Damanpour,F.and S.Gopalakrishnan.2001.The dynamics of the adoption of product and process innovations in organizations.Journal of Management Studies 38(1):45-65
19.Dressler,R.,R.S.Wood and V.Alvarez.1999.Evaluating R&D performance using the cost savings metric.Research Technology Management(Mar-Apr):13-14
20.Drongelen,I.C.K.and J.Bilderbeek.1999.R&D performance measurement:more than choosing a set of metrics.R&D Management 29(1):35-46
21.Dziura,M.2001.Innovation:sources and strategies.Int.J.Technology Management 21(5/6):612-627
22.Eliezer Geisler,2000.The Metrics of Science and Technology.Greenwood Publishing Group Inc.
23.Fiegener,M.K.1994.Matching business-level strategic controls to strategy:impact on control system effectiveness.Journal of Applied Business Research 10(1):25-34
24.Fisher,J.and V.Govindarajan.1993.Incentive compensation design,strategic business unit mission,and competitive strategy.Journal of Management Accounting Research 5(Fall):129-
25.Fryxell,G.E.1990.Business-level process R&D:patterns and returns under different generic strategic orientations.Int.J.Technology Management 5(1):41-63
26.Gopalakrishnan,S.2000.Unraveling the link between dimensions of innovation and organizational performance.Journal of High Technology Management Research 11:137-153
27.Gopalakrishnan,S.G.,P.Bierly and E.H.Kessler.1999.A reexamination of product and process innovations using a knowledge-based view.The Journal of High Technology Management 10(1):147-166
28.Govindarajan,V.1988.A contingency approach to strategy implementation at the business-unit level:integrating administrative mechanisms with strategy.Academy of Management Journal 31(4):828-853
29.Govindarajan,V.and A.K.Gupta.1985.Linking control systems to business unit strategy:impact on performance.Accounting,Organization and Society 10(1):51-66
30.Govindarajan,V.and J.Fisher.1990.Strategy,control systems,and resource sharing:effects on business-unit performance.Academy of Management Journal 33(2):259-285
31.Hauser.J,Katz Metrics.1998.You are what you measure,European Management Journal 1998,16(5):517-528.
32.Hertenstein,J.H.and J.B.Platt.2000.Performance measures and amnagement control in new product development(Sep):303-323
33.Inderrieden,E.J.,G.R.Laczniak and A.Pecotich.1990.Determinants of R&D expenditures and expectations.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 1:207-221
34.Ittner,C.D.,D.F.Lacker and M.V.Rajan.1995.Total quality management and the choice of information and reward systems.Journal of Accounting Research 33:1-34
35.Ittner,C.D.,D.F.Lacker and M.V.Rajan.1997.Quality strategy,strategic control systems,and organizational performance.Accounting,Organizations and Society 22(3/4):293-314
36.Ittner,C.D.,D.F.Lacker and M.V.Rajan.1997.The choice of performance measures in annual bouns contracts.The Accounting Review 72(2):231-255
37.Kedia,B.L.,R.T.Keller and S.D.Julian.1992.Dimensions of national culture and the productivity of R&D units.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 3(1):1-18
38.Kim,Y.and B.Lee.1995.R&D project team climate and team performance in Korea:a multidimensional approach.R&D Management 25(2):179-196
39.Kim,Y.,K.Song and J.Lee.1993.Determinants of technological innovation in the small firms of Korea.R&D Management 23(3):215-226
40.Kraft,K..1990.Are product- and process-innovations independent of each other? Applied Economics 22:1029-1038
41.Kumar,K.,R.Subramanian and K.Strandholm.2001.Competitive strategy,environmental scanning and performance:a context specific analysis of their relationship.International Journal of Commerce & Management 11:1-33
42.Langerak,F.,E.Nijssen,R.Frambach and A.Gupta.1999.Exploratory results on the importance of R&D knowledge domains in businesses with different strategies.R&D Management 29(3):209-217
43.Lee Branstetter,Yoshiaki Nakamura,2003.Is Japan Innovative Capacity in Decline? NBER Working Paper,9438.
44.Lee,J.,H.W.Lucius and S.A.McNeil.1999.Entrepreneurial reward and economic performance:an empirical study of the best small companies.Int.J.Technology Management 17(7/8):728-743
45.Liao,Z.1998.Corporate R&D strategy portfolio in Japanese an Australian technology-based firms:an empirical study.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 45(Nov):323-331
46.Link,A.N.1995.Evaluating program performance:the case of Federally-funded collaborative research.Int.J.Technology Management 10(7/8):847-852
47.Luukkon1n-Gronow T.Scientific research evaluation:A review of methods and barious contexts of their application.R&D Management.1987,17(3):207-221.
48.Lynn,G.S.and R.R.Reilly.2000.Measuring team performance.Research Technology Management(Mar-Apri):48-56
49.Martinez-Ros,E.2000.Explaining the decisions to carry out product and process innovation:the Spanish case.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 10(2):223-243
50.Morbey,G.K.and R.M.Reithner.1990.How R&D affects sales growth,productivity and profitability.Research Technology Management(May-Jun):11-14
51.National Institute of Science and Technology Policy,2002.Quantitative Method of Research Evaluation Used by the U.S.Federal Government.NISTEP study material No 86.
52.Omta,S.W.F.,L.M.Bouter and J.M.L.van Engelen.1994.Managing industrial pharmaceutical R&D.A comparative study of management control and innovative effectiveness in European and Anglo-American companies.R&D Management 24(4):303-315
53.Reenen,J.V.1997.Employment and technological innovation:evidence form U.K.manufacturing firms.Journal of Labor Economics 15(2):255-83
54.Roth,K.and S.O Donnell.1996.Foreign subsidiary compensation strategy:an agency theory perspective.Academy of Management Journal 39(Jun):678
55.Schilling,M.A.and C.W.Hill.1998.Managing the new product development process:strategic imperatives.Academy of Management Executive 12(3):67-81
56.Schroeder,D.M.1989.A dynamic perspective on the impact of process innovation upon competitive strategies.Strategic Management Journal 11:25-41
57.Schumann,P.A.,Jr.D.L.Ransley and D.C.L.Prestwood.1995.Measuring R&D performance.Research Technology Management(May-Jun):45-54
58.Sim,A.B.and H.Y.Teoh.1997.Relationships between business strategy,environment and controls:a three country study.Journal of Applied Business Research 13:57-73
59.Simons,R.1987.Accounting control systems and business strategy:an empirical analysis.Accounting,Organization and Society 12(4):357-374
60.Simons,R.1990.The role of management control systems in creating competitive advantage:new perspectives.Accounting,Organization and Society 15:127-143
61.Smeds,R.2001.Implementation of business process innovations:an agenda for research and action.Int.1.Technology Management 22(1/2/3):1-12
62.Souitaris,V.,2002,"Firm-specific competencies determining technological innovation:a survey in Greece," R&D Management 32,p.63,64.
63.Spharim,I.and E.D.Ungar.1995.Morphological analysis in agricultural R&D:a technologist's approach to the definition and economic evaluation of technologies.R&D management 25(4):351-363
64.Stain,A.and B.Nixon.1997.Productivity and performance measurement in R&D.Int.J.Technology Management 13(5/6):486-496
65.Stathakopoulos,V.1998.Enhancing the performance of marketing managers:aligning strategy,structure and evaluation systems.European Journal of Marketing 32:536-552
66.Tipping,J.W.,E.Zeffren and A.R.Fusfeld.1995.Assessing the value of your technology.Research Technology Management(Sep-Oct):22-39
67.Wang,C.,J.Wu and R.Horng.1999.Creative thinking ability,cognitive type and R&D performance.R&D Management 29(3):247-254
68.Weisenfeld-Schenk,U.1994.Technology strategies and the Miles & Snow typology:a study of the biotechnology industries.R&D Management 24(1):57-64
69.Werner,B.M.and W.E.Souder.1997.Measuring R&D performance - U.S.and German Practices.Research Technology Management(May-Jun):28-32
70.Whiteley,R.,T.Parish,R.Dressier and G.Nicholson.1998.Evaluating R&D performance using the new sales ratio.Research Technology Management(Sep-Oct):20-22
71.Yamin,S.,A.Gunasekaran and F.T.Mavondo.1999.Innovation index and its implications on organizational performance:a study of Australian manufacturing companies.Int.J.Technology Management 17(5):495-503
72.Yin,X.and E.Zuscovitch.1998.Is firm size conducive to R&D choice? A strategic analysis of product and process innovations.Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 35:243-262
73.Zahra,S.and J.G.Covin.1993.Business strategy,technology policy and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal 14:451-478
74.Zahra,S.and J.G.Covin.1994.The financial implications of fit between competitive strategy and innovation types and sources.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 5(2):183-211
75.Zahra,S.,R.S.Sisodia and S.R.Das.1994.Technological choices within competitive strategy types.Int.J.Technology Management 9(2):172-195
76.Zif,J.and D.J.McCarthy.1997.The R&D cycle:the influence of product and process R&D on short-term ROI.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 44(May):114-123
1.波特著李明軒、丘如美合譯(1998)。國家競爭優勢(上、下册)。天下文化出版.
2.崔上麟(1998).產品創新性、研發團隊自主性與產品創新績效之關係研究-以南韓電腦 產業资源依賴觀點爲例,輔仁大學管理學研究所未出版碩士論文。
3.陳智賢(1995).研發成果績效指標之研究:以經濟部科技專案為例,國立交通大學管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文。
4.陳森田(1991)。技術504戰略、專案組只型態與整合差距對新產品發展續效之影響,國立中興大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
5.丁明勇(1997)。高科技廠商特性、研究發展管理活動與成效之研究-以科學園區廠商實證。國立交通大學管理科學研究所未出版博士論文。
6.杜榮瑞、蔣明晃、林佩琪(2000)。研究發展戰略與績效評價:平衡計分卡之寅證研究,管理學報,17(4):563-589。
7.管傑鵬(1996)。臺灣地區IC業研究發展續效之評價,銘傳管理學院管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文。
8.洪春進(1997)。新產品開發續效與市場導向作爲暨組織運作之相關性研究,靜宜大學管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文.
9.薑禮華(1993)。民營製造業研究發展績效指標建立之研究,國立臺灣大學商學研究所未出版碩士論文。
10.廖志德(1990)。臺灣企業與政府及學術界合作進行研究發展之研究-以资訊電子業爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
11.李益昌(1995)。臺灣電子業研發戰略改變之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
12.李強,韓伯棠,翟立新(2006)。,公共科研機構績效評價體系研究,科學學研究,24(2):243-248。
13.李瑞慶(1999)。技術創新類型、技術能力對技術創新績效之影響。私立中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文.18-21.2。
14.林佩琪(1998)。高科技產業研究發展績效評價之研究-平衡計分卡觀點。國立臺灣大學 會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
15.林明傑、李峻銘(2001)。企業技術引進戰略、認知與寅際整合差距對新產品研發績效影響之研究。管理學報,16(4):683-700。
16.林富松(1990)。研究發展戰略與生產力之關係-臺灣资訊電子業之寅證研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
17.劉水深、赖士葆(1995)。研究發展戰略行程過程之研究-臺灣汽車、電子、機械業之寅證,行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
18.劉立元、徐木蘭(1995)。以共同研發爲動機成立只組織績效評價指標建立之探討-以资訊電子業爲例,管理科學學報,12(1):113-126。
19.汪鼎華(1991)。技術戰略、研究發展組織特性、研究發展績效與戰略性薪资研究,私立中原大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
20.王思佳(2000)。研發能力與研發績效間關係之研究-以高科技產業爲例,大同大學事業 經營研究所未出版碩士論文。
21.翁明祥(1989)。技術創新政策與事業經營戰略的配合對技術創新績效之影響,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
22.許呈因(1994)。臺灣電子業技術戰略行銷戰略對產品創新續效影響之實證研究,國立臺灣工業技術學院管理技術研究所工業工程管理學程未出版碩士論文。
23.尹啓銘(1989)。產品創新自由度、企業戰略與技術政策之關係-臺灣资訊電子業寅證研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。尤慎偉(1992)。市場競爭力導向之研究發展績效評價,國立交通大學工業工程研究所未出版碩士論文。
24.朱作舜(1996)。研究發展專案重要考量因素與評選戰略之探討,國立中央大學工業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
25.周文賢(2001)。多變數統計分析-SAS/SAT之應用,智勝文化出版。
26.周世靜(1992)。企業研究發展專案績效評價模式之研究-以化學材料、化學產品製造業 爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
27.周世靜(1992)。企業研究發展專案績效評價模式之研究-以化學材料、化學產品製造業 爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
28.張如蓮(1996)。高科技事業中創新類型與組織創造之研究”。國立政治大學,科技管理研 究所碩士論文。
29.張重昭(1985)。產業環境、技術特性、經營戰略略、管理制度與績效關係之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
30.黄寬模(1990)。高科技產業技術戰略研究-以资訊電子業爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
31.翟立新,韓伯棠,李曉軒(2005)。基於知識生產函數的公共科研機構績效評價模型研究。中國軟科學,(8):76-80.
2.Autio,E.and T.Laamanen,1995,"Measurement and Evaluation of Technology Transfer:Review of Technology Transfer Mechanisms and Indicators," International Journal of Technology Management,Vol.10,Nos.7/8,p.64.
3.Baker,N.R.,S.G.Green,and A.S.Bean,1986,The need for strategic Balance in R&D Project Portfolios,Research Management,Mar-Apr,.41.
4.Bantel,K.A.1997.Performance in adolescent,technology-based firms:product strategy,implementation,and synergy.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 8(2):243-262
5.Boer,H.and W.E.During.2001.Innovation,what innovation? A comparison between product,process and organizational innovation.Int.J.Technology Management 22(1/2/3):83-107
6.Bone,S.and T.Saxon.2000.Developing effective technology strategies.Research Technology Management(Jul-Aug):50-58
7.Chakrabarti,A.K.1991.Industry characteristics influencing the technical output:a case of small and medium size firms in the US.R&D Management 21(2):139-153
8.Chandler,G.N.1993.Reward perceptions and the performance of emerging technology dependent and non-technology dependent manufacturing firms.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 4(1):63-76
9.Chenhall,R.H.1996.Strategies of manufacturing flexibility,manufacturing performance measures and organizational performance:and empirical investigation.Integrated Manufacturing Systems 7:25-32
10.Chubin Daryle,1990.Peerless Science Peer Review and U.S.Science Policy.Albany,N.Y.:State University of New York Press.
11.Clarke,K.,D.Ford and M.Saren.1989.Company technology strategy.R&D Management 19(3):215-229
12.Cody,R.P.and J.K.Smith.1997.Applied statistics and the SAS programming language.Fourth Edition.Prentice-Hall.
13.Cohen,W.M.and S.Klepper.1994.Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries:the case of process and product R&D.The Review of Economics and Statistics:232-243
14.Collier,D.1985.Linking business and technology strategy.Planning Review(Sep):28-
15.Cooper,R.G.2000.Product innovation and technology strategy.Research Technology Management(Jan-Feb):38-45
16.Cooper,R.G.,S.J.Edgett and E.J.Kleinschmidt.1998.Best practices for managing R&D portfolios.Research Technology Management(Jul-Aug):20-33
17.Cunningham,G.M.1992.Management control and accounting systems under a competitive strategy.Accounting,Auditing & Accountability Journal 5(2):85.
18.Damanpour,F.and S.Gopalakrishnan.2001.The dynamics of the adoption of product and process innovations in organizations.Journal of Management Studies 38(1):45-65
19.Dressler,R.,R.S.Wood and V.Alvarez.1999.Evaluating R&D performance using the cost savings metric.Research Technology Management(Mar-Apr):13-14
20.Drongelen,I.C.K.and J.Bilderbeek.1999.R&D performance measurement:more than choosing a set of metrics.R&D Management 29(1):35-46
21.Dziura,M.2001.Innovation:sources and strategies.Int.J.Technology Management 21(5/6):612-627
22.Eliezer Geisler,2000.The Metrics of Science and Technology.Greenwood Publishing Group Inc.
23.Fiegener,M.K.1994.Matching business-level strategic controls to strategy:impact on control system effectiveness.Journal of Applied Business Research 10(1):25-34
24.Fisher,J.and V.Govindarajan.1993.Incentive compensation design,strategic business unit mission,and competitive strategy.Journal of Management Accounting Research 5(Fall):129-
25.Fryxell,G.E.1990.Business-level process R&D:patterns and returns under different generic strategic orientations.Int.J.Technology Management 5(1):41-63
26.Gopalakrishnan,S.2000.Unraveling the link between dimensions of innovation and organizational performance.Journal of High Technology Management Research 11:137-153
27.Gopalakrishnan,S.G.,P.Bierly and E.H.Kessler.1999.A reexamination of product and process innovations using a knowledge-based view.The Journal of High Technology Management 10(1):147-166
28.Govindarajan,V.1988.A contingency approach to strategy implementation at the business-unit level:integrating administrative mechanisms with strategy.Academy of Management Journal 31(4):828-853
29.Govindarajan,V.and A.K.Gupta.1985.Linking control systems to business unit strategy:impact on performance.Accounting,Organization and Society 10(1):51-66
30.Govindarajan,V.and J.Fisher.1990.Strategy,control systems,and resource sharing:effects on business-unit performance.Academy of Management Journal 33(2):259-285
31.Hauser.J,Katz Metrics.1998.You are what you measure,European Management Journal 1998,16(5):517-528.
32.Hertenstein,J.H.and J.B.Platt.2000.Performance measures and amnagement control in new product development(Sep):303-323
33.Inderrieden,E.J.,G.R.Laczniak and A.Pecotich.1990.Determinants of R&D expenditures and expectations.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 1:207-221
34.Ittner,C.D.,D.F.Lacker and M.V.Rajan.1995.Total quality management and the choice of information and reward systems.Journal of Accounting Research 33:1-34
35.Ittner,C.D.,D.F.Lacker and M.V.Rajan.1997.Quality strategy,strategic control systems,and organizational performance.Accounting,Organizations and Society 22(3/4):293-314
36.Ittner,C.D.,D.F.Lacker and M.V.Rajan.1997.The choice of performance measures in annual bouns contracts.The Accounting Review 72(2):231-255
37.Kedia,B.L.,R.T.Keller and S.D.Julian.1992.Dimensions of national culture and the productivity of R&D units.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 3(1):1-18
38.Kim,Y.and B.Lee.1995.R&D project team climate and team performance in Korea:a multidimensional approach.R&D Management 25(2):179-196
39.Kim,Y.,K.Song and J.Lee.1993.Determinants of technological innovation in the small firms of Korea.R&D Management 23(3):215-226
40.Kraft,K..1990.Are product- and process-innovations independent of each other? Applied Economics 22:1029-1038
41.Kumar,K.,R.Subramanian and K.Strandholm.2001.Competitive strategy,environmental scanning and performance:a context specific analysis of their relationship.International Journal of Commerce & Management 11:1-33
42.Langerak,F.,E.Nijssen,R.Frambach and A.Gupta.1999.Exploratory results on the importance of R&D knowledge domains in businesses with different strategies.R&D Management 29(3):209-217
43.Lee Branstetter,Yoshiaki Nakamura,2003.Is Japan Innovative Capacity in Decline? NBER Working Paper,9438.
44.Lee,J.,H.W.Lucius and S.A.McNeil.1999.Entrepreneurial reward and economic performance:an empirical study of the best small companies.Int.J.Technology Management 17(7/8):728-743
45.Liao,Z.1998.Corporate R&D strategy portfolio in Japanese an Australian technology-based firms:an empirical study.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 45(Nov):323-331
46.Link,A.N.1995.Evaluating program performance:the case of Federally-funded collaborative research.Int.J.Technology Management 10(7/8):847-852
47.Luukkon1n-Gronow T.Scientific research evaluation:A review of methods and barious contexts of their application.R&D Management.1987,17(3):207-221.
48.Lynn,G.S.and R.R.Reilly.2000.Measuring team performance.Research Technology Management(Mar-Apri):48-56
49.Martinez-Ros,E.2000.Explaining the decisions to carry out product and process innovation:the Spanish case.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 10(2):223-243
50.Morbey,G.K.and R.M.Reithner.1990.How R&D affects sales growth,productivity and profitability.Research Technology Management(May-Jun):11-14
51.National Institute of Science and Technology Policy,2002.Quantitative Method of Research Evaluation Used by the U.S.Federal Government.NISTEP study material No 86.
52.Omta,S.W.F.,L.M.Bouter and J.M.L.van Engelen.1994.Managing industrial pharmaceutical R&D.A comparative study of management control and innovative effectiveness in European and Anglo-American companies.R&D Management 24(4):303-315
53.Reenen,J.V.1997.Employment and technological innovation:evidence form U.K.manufacturing firms.Journal of Labor Economics 15(2):255-83
54.Roth,K.and S.O Donnell.1996.Foreign subsidiary compensation strategy:an agency theory perspective.Academy of Management Journal 39(Jun):678
55.Schilling,M.A.and C.W.Hill.1998.Managing the new product development process:strategic imperatives.Academy of Management Executive 12(3):67-81
56.Schroeder,D.M.1989.A dynamic perspective on the impact of process innovation upon competitive strategies.Strategic Management Journal 11:25-41
57.Schumann,P.A.,Jr.D.L.Ransley and D.C.L.Prestwood.1995.Measuring R&D performance.Research Technology Management(May-Jun):45-54
58.Sim,A.B.and H.Y.Teoh.1997.Relationships between business strategy,environment and controls:a three country study.Journal of Applied Business Research 13:57-73
59.Simons,R.1987.Accounting control systems and business strategy:an empirical analysis.Accounting,Organization and Society 12(4):357-374
60.Simons,R.1990.The role of management control systems in creating competitive advantage:new perspectives.Accounting,Organization and Society 15:127-143
61.Smeds,R.2001.Implementation of business process innovations:an agenda for research and action.Int.1.Technology Management 22(1/2/3):1-12
62.Souitaris,V.,2002,"Firm-specific competencies determining technological innovation:a survey in Greece," R&D Management 32,p.63,64.
63.Spharim,I.and E.D.Ungar.1995.Morphological analysis in agricultural R&D:a technologist's approach to the definition and economic evaluation of technologies.R&D management 25(4):351-363
64.Stain,A.and B.Nixon.1997.Productivity and performance measurement in R&D.Int.J.Technology Management 13(5/6):486-496
65.Stathakopoulos,V.1998.Enhancing the performance of marketing managers:aligning strategy,structure and evaluation systems.European Journal of Marketing 32:536-552
66.Tipping,J.W.,E.Zeffren and A.R.Fusfeld.1995.Assessing the value of your technology.Research Technology Management(Sep-Oct):22-39
67.Wang,C.,J.Wu and R.Horng.1999.Creative thinking ability,cognitive type and R&D performance.R&D Management 29(3):247-254
68.Weisenfeld-Schenk,U.1994.Technology strategies and the Miles & Snow typology:a study of the biotechnology industries.R&D Management 24(1):57-64
69.Werner,B.M.and W.E.Souder.1997.Measuring R&D performance - U.S.and German Practices.Research Technology Management(May-Jun):28-32
70.Whiteley,R.,T.Parish,R.Dressier and G.Nicholson.1998.Evaluating R&D performance using the new sales ratio.Research Technology Management(Sep-Oct):20-22
71.Yamin,S.,A.Gunasekaran and F.T.Mavondo.1999.Innovation index and its implications on organizational performance:a study of Australian manufacturing companies.Int.J.Technology Management 17(5):495-503
72.Yin,X.and E.Zuscovitch.1998.Is firm size conducive to R&D choice? A strategic analysis of product and process innovations.Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 35:243-262
73.Zahra,S.and J.G.Covin.1993.Business strategy,technology policy and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal 14:451-478
74.Zahra,S.and J.G.Covin.1994.The financial implications of fit between competitive strategy and innovation types and sources.The Journal of High Technology Management Research 5(2):183-211
75.Zahra,S.,R.S.Sisodia and S.R.Das.1994.Technological choices within competitive strategy types.Int.J.Technology Management 9(2):172-195
76.Zif,J.and D.J.McCarthy.1997.The R&D cycle:the influence of product and process R&D on short-term ROI.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 44(May):114-123
1.波特著李明軒、丘如美合譯(1998)。國家競爭優勢(上、下册)。天下文化出版.
2.崔上麟(1998).產品創新性、研發團隊自主性與產品創新績效之關係研究-以南韓電腦 產業资源依賴觀點爲例,輔仁大學管理學研究所未出版碩士論文。
3.陳智賢(1995).研發成果績效指標之研究:以經濟部科技專案為例,國立交通大學管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文。
4.陳森田(1991)。技術504戰略、專案組只型態與整合差距對新產品發展續效之影響,國立中興大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
5.丁明勇(1997)。高科技廠商特性、研究發展管理活動與成效之研究-以科學園區廠商實證。國立交通大學管理科學研究所未出版博士論文。
6.杜榮瑞、蔣明晃、林佩琪(2000)。研究發展戰略與績效評價:平衡計分卡之寅證研究,管理學報,17(4):563-589。
7.管傑鵬(1996)。臺灣地區IC業研究發展續效之評價,銘傳管理學院管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文。
8.洪春進(1997)。新產品開發續效與市場導向作爲暨組織運作之相關性研究,靜宜大學管理科學研究所未出版碩士論文.
9.薑禮華(1993)。民營製造業研究發展績效指標建立之研究,國立臺灣大學商學研究所未出版碩士論文。
10.廖志德(1990)。臺灣企業與政府及學術界合作進行研究發展之研究-以资訊電子業爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
11.李益昌(1995)。臺灣電子業研發戰略改變之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
12.李強,韓伯棠,翟立新(2006)。,公共科研機構績效評價體系研究,科學學研究,24(2):243-248。
13.李瑞慶(1999)。技術創新類型、技術能力對技術創新績效之影響。私立中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文.18-21.2。
14.林佩琪(1998)。高科技產業研究發展績效評價之研究-平衡計分卡觀點。國立臺灣大學 會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
15.林明傑、李峻銘(2001)。企業技術引進戰略、認知與寅際整合差距對新產品研發績效影響之研究。管理學報,16(4):683-700。
16.林富松(1990)。研究發展戰略與生產力之關係-臺灣资訊電子業之寅證研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
17.劉水深、赖士葆(1995)。研究發展戰略行程過程之研究-臺灣汽車、電子、機械業之寅證,行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
18.劉立元、徐木蘭(1995)。以共同研發爲動機成立只組織績效評價指標建立之探討-以资訊電子業爲例,管理科學學報,12(1):113-126。
19.汪鼎華(1991)。技術戰略、研究發展組織特性、研究發展績效與戰略性薪资研究,私立中原大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
20.王思佳(2000)。研發能力與研發績效間關係之研究-以高科技產業爲例,大同大學事業 經營研究所未出版碩士論文。
21.翁明祥(1989)。技術創新政策與事業經營戰略的配合對技術創新績效之影響,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
22.許呈因(1994)。臺灣電子業技術戰略行銷戰略對產品創新續效影響之實證研究,國立臺灣工業技術學院管理技術研究所工業工程管理學程未出版碩士論文。
23.尹啓銘(1989)。產品創新自由度、企業戰略與技術政策之關係-臺灣资訊電子業寅證研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。尤慎偉(1992)。市場競爭力導向之研究發展績效評價,國立交通大學工業工程研究所未出版碩士論文。
24.朱作舜(1996)。研究發展專案重要考量因素與評選戰略之探討,國立中央大學工業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
25.周文賢(2001)。多變數統計分析-SAS/SAT之應用,智勝文化出版。
26.周世靜(1992)。企業研究發展專案績效評價模式之研究-以化學材料、化學產品製造業 爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
27.周世靜(1992)。企業研究發展專案績效評價模式之研究-以化學材料、化學產品製造業 爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
28.張如蓮(1996)。高科技事業中創新類型與組織創造之研究”。國立政治大學,科技管理研 究所碩士論文。
29.張重昭(1985)。產業環境、技術特性、經營戰略略、管理制度與績效關係之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
30.黄寬模(1990)。高科技產業技術戰略研究-以资訊電子業爲例,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
31.翟立新,韓伯棠,李曉軒(2005)。基於知識生產函數的公共科研機構績效評價模型研究。中國軟科學,(8):76-80.