本文之研究目的在於實地探討台灣地區資訊、電子上市公司在近六年來，技術策略之分類與演變，並進一步探索其績效意涵。本研究以『技術領導者或跟隨者』、『研發投入程度』、『技術範疇與寬度』、『階層效率或市場統治』四個構面探討技術策略，以『自有品牌程度』、『產品集中度』、『研發投入強度』、『附加價值比率』等四項指標作為衡量此技術策略構面之基礎，利用兩階段集群分析法將三個研究時期之122個樣本加以分群，分別記錄樣本廠商在各研究時期所處之群組與其演變之情形。其後，本研究以複迴歸方法與獨立變數平均數之T檢定分別將各時期、各群組廠商之績效差異加以比較，並找出各時期的優劣次序。本研究的結果顯示，在策略分群之部份，樣本廠商可劃歸為六種各具特色的技術策略群組，其中以『機會代工者』所占比率為最高，『技術先驅者』比率最低。在技術策略演變部份，我們發現這些群組間存在著一定程度之流通性，這代表策略本身並不具備太大之僵固性，且若干技術策略間有較易於轉換的現象。在績效意涵方面，我們的研究顯示，當產業景氣高峰時，以『技術先驅者』與『專精品牌者』策略之廠商表現為最佳﹔當產業景氣衰退時，以『階層效率者』與『專業代工者』策略之廠商表現較為穩健﹔而以『機會代工者』策略經營之廠商往往屬於績效落後者。

With an emphasis on a longitudinal analysis, this master thesis aims to explore technology strategies of Taiwan’s electronic and computer public listed firms and their performance implications. Four technological areas of strategic choices are identified: leadership vs. followership, R&D investment, technology scope, and hierarchy vs market. We then use branding ratio, R&D intensity, product breadth, added-value, respectively, to measure these four theoretical dimensions proposed. Cluster analysis is used to separate sample firms into several strategic groups, and each firm’s group in different periods is identified in order to reveal the evolutionary pattern of our sample firms’ technology strategies. Multiple regression analysis is also used to check the difference of each group in each period, while T test is employed to rank and identify superior performance group. Our first research result shows that our sample firms can be classified into six distinguished technology strategic groups. Among them, firms in the opportunistic OEM group are the most substantial, and firms in the technology leader group are the minority. In terms of evolutionary analysis, we find some firms move between identified groups in different periods. This shows the possibility of low degree of strategic rigidity and some strategic choices might easily be changed. In terms of strategic implications for performance, we show that in economic boom, technology leader group and concentrated OBM group will be optimal technological strategic choices. In economic recession, choice of hierarchical efficiency or professional OEM group will be a desirable, if not ideal, strategy. Finally, we find firms’ strategies stressing on opportunistic OEM will be negatively related to financial performance. Suggestions for future studies are drawn out.

中文部份：
陳幸美，『我國製造業垂直整合結構與利潤率之實証探討』，東吳大學經濟研究所碩士論文，1989。
英文部份：
Acs, Z., and D. Audretsch. Innovation and Small Firms. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 1990.
Adelman M. A.：Concept and Statistical Measurement of Vertical Integration. in G. J. Stigler, Business Concentration and Price Policy, 1955: 281-330.
Ali, A. Pioneering versus incremental innovation：Review and research proposition. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11, 1994: 46-61.
Barney, J.B. How a Firm’s Capabilities Affect Boundary Decisions. Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 1999: 137-146.
Bierly, P. and A. Chakrabarti. Generic Knowledge Strategies in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 1996:123-135.
Burgelman, R.A. and R.S. Rosenbloom. Technology Strategy: An Evolutionary Process Perspective. Research on Technological Innovation, Management, and Policy, 4, 1989: 1-23.
Buzzell, R., and B. Gale. The PIMS Principles. New York: The Free Press. 1987.
Chesbrough, H.W. and D.J. Teece. When is virtual virtuous？Organizing for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 73(3),1996：65-73.
Cohen, W., Levin, R. and Mowery, D. Company size and R&D intensity：A re-examination. Journal of Industrial Economics, 35, 1986:543-565.
Cooper, A.D., Willard, G.E. and C.Y. Woo. Strategies of High-Performing New and Small Firms - A Reexamination of the Niche Concept. Journal of Business Venturing. 1, 1986: 247-260.
Cooper D.C. and C.W. Emory, Business Research Methods, 5th. Ed., Richard D. Irwin, Inc.,1995.
Deeds, D.L, Decarolis, D. and J.E. Coombs. The impact of firm-specific capabilities on the amount of capital raised in an initial public offering: evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 1997: 31-46.
Foster, R.N. Innovation: The Attacker’s Advantage. New York: Summit Book. 1986.
Frohman, A.L. Putting technology into strategic planning, California Management Revew, 27, 1985: 48-59.
Golder, P.N., and G.J. Tellis. Pioneer advantage: Marketing logic or marketing legend？ Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 1993: 158-170.
Grant, R.M. Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments：Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 1996：375-387.
Hamel, G. and C.K. Prahalad. Competing for the Future. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. 1994.
Lefebvre, L., Langley, A., Harvey, J. and E. Lefebvre. Exploring the strategy-technology connection in small manufacturing firms. Production and Operations Management, 1, 1992: 269-284.
Lefebvre, L.A., Mason, R. and E. Lefebvre. The influence prism in SMEs: the power of CEO’s perceptions on technology policy and its organizational impacts. Management Science, 43, 1997: 856-878.
Leonard-Barton, D. Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development, Strategic Management Journal, 13, 1992: 111-125.
Little, A. D. The Strategic Management of Technology. European Management Forum. 1981.
Maidique, M.A. and R.H. Hayes. The Art of High-Technology Management. Sloan Management Review, 25, 1984: 18-31.
Maidique, M.A., and P. Patch. Corporate strategy and technological policy. In: Tushman, M.L., Moore, W.L.(Eds.), Readings in the Management of Innovation. Ballinger, Cambridge, MA: 1988.
Mansfield, E. Composition of R&D expenditures：relationship to size of firm concentration and innovation output. ReView of Economics and Statics, 18(4), 1981：610-615.
McCann, J.E. Patterns of growth, competitive technology, and financial strategies in young ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 6, 1991: 189-208.
McGee, J. and M. Dowling. Using R&D cooperative arrangements to leverage managerial experience: a study of technology-intensive new venture. Journal of Business Venturing, 9 , 1994: 33-48.
Miller, A. A Taxonomy of Technological Settings, with Related Strategies and Performance Levels. Strategy Management Journal, 9, 1988: 239-254.
Milligan, G. W. An Examination of the Effect of Six Types of Error Perturbation of Fifteen Clustering Alogrithms. Psychometrika, 45, 1980: 325-342.
Pegels, C.C. and M.V. Thirumurthy. The Impact of Technology Strategy on Firm Performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 43, 1996: 246-249.
Pisano, G. The R&D boundaries of the firm: An empirical analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 1990: 153-176.
Porter, M.E. Competitive Advantage. New York: The Free Press. 1985.
Punj, G. and Stewart, D. Cluster Analysis in Marketing Research：Review and Suggestions for Application. Journal of Marketing Research, May, 1983:145.
Robinson, W.T. and C. Fornell. Sources of market pioneer advantages in consumer goods industries. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 1985: 609-624.
Scherer, F.M. and D. Ross. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. 3rd, The Museum of Modern Art, N. Y. 1990.
Singleton R.A. and B.C. Straits and M.M. Straits. Approaches to Social Research. 2th. Ed., New York Oford university press. 1993.
Spital, F.C. and D.J. Bickford. Successful competitive and technology strategies in dynamic and stable product technology environments. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. 9, 1992: 29-60.
Tid, J. and J. Bessant and K. Pavitt. Management Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market, and Organizational Change. New York：Wiley. 1997.
Tushman, M. L. and P. Anderson. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly. 31, 1986: 439-465.
Utterback, J. Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press. 1994.
Wholey, D.R. and Lawton. Organizational transitions：From changes by health maintenance organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 11, 1993:257-293.
Wibon, A.D. An empirical investigation of technology strategy in computer software initial public offering firms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 16, 1999: 147-169.
Williamson, D.C. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press. 1975.
Williamson, D.C. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press. 1985.
Venkatraman, N. and V. Ramanujam. Measurement of Business Performance in Strategy Research - A Comparison of Approaches. Academy of Management Review. 11(4), 1986: 801-814.
Veugelers, R. Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing. Research Policy, 26, 1997：303-315.
Volberda, H.W. Toward the flexible form：How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environment. Organization Science, 7(4), 1996：359-374.
Zahra, S.A. Technology strategy and financial performance: examining the moderating role of the firm’s competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(3), 1996: 189-219.