English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88866/118573 (75%)
Visitors : 23552831      Online Users : 184
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/119059


    Title: 由動態能力觀點探討新創企業與創業生態系統互動 - 以Viscovery與Perkd為例
    Interaction between Startups and Entrepreneurial Ecosystem from Dynamic Capability Perspective - A Case Study of Viscovery and Perkd
    Authors: 康瓈云
    Kang, Li-Yun
    Contributors: 鄭至甫
    Jeng, Jyh-Fu
    康瓈云
    Kang, Li-Yun
    Keywords: 新創企業
    創業生態系統
    動態能力
    競爭優勢
    共同演化
    Startups
    Entrepreneurial ecosystem
    Dynamic capability
    Competitive advantage
    Co-evolution
    Date: 2018
    Issue Date: 2018-07-30 15:02:43 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 近年為促進國家經濟成長動能,全球各國政府積極推動創新創業政策,欲建立完善創新生態系,造就新創企業數量蓬勃增長。根據經濟部統計資料,一年新創企業近 10 萬家,年增率達 4%,但同時一年內倒閉比率高達 90%,能撐過前五年者更只有 1%。如何在競爭與變動的商業環境生存,仍有許多努力空間。綜觀國內外對創業生態系統的研究大多著重創業系統主體如政府、學研機構、投資單位與其之間互動發展做為研究主題 (Ben, 2017),鮮少以新創企業為視角來探討創業生態系統。
    有鑒於此,本研究旨在研究新創企業如何透過與創業生態系統的互動,強化自身的競爭優勢。本研究運用 Ben (2017) 創業生態系統架構結合 Teece (1997, 2007) 動態能力理論,以創意引晴股份有限公司 (Viscovery) 與豐盛智慧股份有限公司 (Perkd) 進行案例分析,發現新創企業會從創業生態系統擷取資源,建構動態能力,以強化競爭優勢,也發現新創企業與創業生態系統間存在共同演化的關係。
    本研究之學術意涵在於將動態能力理論應用在新創企業與創業生態系統的互動中,同時強調新創企業與創業生態系統發展是一個共同演化的過程。實務意涵則為提供新創企業審視其動態能力的組成要素與建構流程,並理解如何運用創業生態系統資源來建構動態能力,以及能借助動態能力來強化核心能力,達成競爭優勢。
    本研究價值在先是微觀地探討新創企業與創業生態系統的互動,再延伸至較宏觀的構面,認為新創企業與外部創業主體是基於共同利益聚集,經轉譯與結盟與最後觸發彼此共同成長的過程。換言之,本研究的主要貢獻在於補足了過去創業生態系統理論缺乏個案研究的缺口,並強化了創業生態系統理論在近年的討論焦點—生態系統的流程與演化。此外,本研究也強調新創企業的主動權,證明其擁有能改變創業主體的能力,此影響甚至能擴張至整個創業生態系統。
    In recent years, in order to increase economic growth, governments around the world have been actively working on entrepreneurship and innovation policies in establishing successful entrepreneurial ecosystems. According to 2017 statistics data from Ministry of Economic Affairs, R.O.C., there are nearly 100,000 startups a year with an annual growth rate of 4%, but at the same time, the rate of failures in one year is as high as 90%, and only 1% of those survive the first five years. How to survive in a competitive and changing business environment still leaves much room for effort. Previous research have elaborated on entrepreneurial ecosystems entities such as government, universities, and investment institutions (Ben, 2017); however, relationship between “startup” and the ecosystem entities is still lack of discussion.
    This study aims to explore how startup companies strengthen competitive advantage through the interaction with entrepreneurial ecosystems. Using Ben (2017) entrepreneurial ecosystem structure and Teece (1997, 2007) dynamic capability theory to the analysis of two startups—Viscovery and Perkd, the study finds out that startups acquire resources from entrepreneurial ecosystem to construct their dynamic capabilities, and use dynamic capabilities to enhance their core competence, in the end to achieve competitive advantages. Moreover, a co-evolving relationship between startups and entrepreneurial ecosystems is being elaborated.
    The academic implications of this study lie in the application of dynamic capability theory to the interaction between startups and entrepreneurial ecosystems, while emphasizing that the development of start-ups and entrepreneurial ecosystems is a co-evolving process. The practical implications are to provide startups a clear picture in developing dynamic capabilities and to understand how to use the entrepreneurial ecosystem resources to build up dynamic capabilities and competitive advantages.
    This research explores entrepreneurial ecosystem in an unique way—both microscopically and macroscopically, starting from startups specific needs in acquiring external resources, to the collaboration with ecosystem entities, and further perceive the ecosystem as a collaborative, co-evolutionary, and dynamic network.
    To conclude, the main contribution of this study is to bridge the research gap in case studies research of entrepreneurial ecosystem, and to provide “process” and “evolution” point of view that has gained increasing attention in recent years.
    Reference: 一、英文參考文獻

    1. Ács, Z. J., E. Autio & L. Szerb (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues & policy implications. Research policy, 43(3), 476-494.
    2. Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved June 26, 2018 from https://bit.ly/2hDCINR
    3. Amit, R. & Schoemaker, P. J. (1993), Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic management journal, 14(1), 33-46. doi:10.1002/smj.4250140105
    4. Ardichvili, A., Cardozo, R., & Ray, S. (2003). A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and development. Journal of business venturing, 18(1), 105-123. doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(01)00068-4
    5. Argyres, N. S. (1995). Technology strategy, governance structure and interdivisional coordination. Journal of economic behavior & organization, 28(3), 337-358.
    6. Audretsch, D.B., Falck, O., Feldman, M.P., & Heblich, S. (2011). Local entrepreneurship in context. Regional studies, 46 (3), 379–389.
    7. Autio, E., & Thomas, L. (2014). Innovation Ecosystems: Implications for Innovation Management?. Oxford: The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management, Oxford University Press.
    8. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
    9. Baumol, W. J., R. E. Litan & C. J. Schramm (2007). Sustaining entrepreneurial capitalism. Capitalism and society, 2(2).
    10. Ben, S. (2017). The Relational Organization of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49-72. doi:doi:10.1111/etap.12167
    11. Ben, S., & Richard, H. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 151-168. doi:doi:10.1002/sej.1268
    12. Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (4th ed.), Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
    13. Birger, W. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180.
    14. Black, J. A. & Boal, K. B. (1994), Strategic resources: Traits, configurations and paths to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic management journal, 15(S2), 131-148. doi:10.1002/smj.4250151009
    15. Bradford Cross. (2017, June 14). Vertical AI Startups: Solving Industry-specific Problems by Combining AI and Subject Matter Expertise. Bradford Cross Blog. Retrieved July 16, 2018, from https://bit.ly/2thtgGs
    16. Camp, R. C. (1989). Benchmarking : The search for industry best practices that lead to superior performance. Milwaukee, Wis. : White Plains, N.Y, Quality Press ; Quality Resources.
    17. Carat. (2017). Ad spend report. Retrieved July 14, 2018, from https://bit.ly/2cFMRJo
    18. Casper, S. (2007). How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable?: Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster. Research policy 36(4), 438-455.
    19. Chesbrough H. (2003). Open Innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
    20. Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business strategy and the environment, 15(1), 1-14.
    21. Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 35(1), 128-152. doi:10.2307/2393553
    22. Collis, D. J., & Montgomery, C. (1995). Competing on resources: Strategy in the 1990s. Harvard Business Review, 73(4), 118-128.
    23. Daniel J. Isenberg. (2010). The big idea: How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, Retrieved June 26, 2018 from https://bit.ly/1GjWnHB
    24. Das, T. K. & B.-S. Teng. (1998). Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. The Academy of management review, 23(3), 491-512.
    25. De Clercq, D. & M. Voronov. (2011). Sustainability in entrepreneurship: A tale of two logics. International small business journal, 29(4), 322-344.
    26. Delgado, M., M. E. Porter & S. Stern. (2010). Clusters and entrepreneurship. Journal of economic geography, 10(4), 495-518.
    27. Dierickx, Ingemar & Kare l Cool. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage, Management science, 35(12), 1504-1511.
    28. Fairlie, R. W., Karlan, D., & Zinman, J. (2015). Behind the gate experiment: Evidence on effects of and rationales for subsidized entrepreneurship training. American economic journal: Economic policy, 7(2), 125-161. doi: 10.1257/pol.20120337
    29. Feldman, M. P. (2001). The entrepreneurial event revisited: Firm formation in a regional context. Industrial & corporate change, 10(4), 861-891.
    30. Feldman, M., & Zoller, T. D. (2012). Dealmakers in place: Social capital connections in regional entrepreneurial economies. Regional studies, 46(1), 23-37. DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2011.607808
    31. Foster, G., Shimizu, C., Ciesinski, S., Davila, A., Hassan, S. Z., Jia, N., & Morris, R. (2013). Entrepreneurial ecosystems around the globe and company growth dynamics (September 2013). Retrieved from World Economic Forum: https://bit.ly/1lKRdOD
    32. Goh, J. W. (2003). The resource advantage theory of competition: Implications for higher educational institutions in Singapore. Educational research for policy and practice, 2(2), 93-106.
    33. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
    34. Hannan, M T., & Freeman J. (1997). The population ecology of organizations. American journal of sociology, 82(5), 929-964.
    35. Hunt, S. D. & R. M. Morgan. (1996). The resource-advantage theory of competition: dynamics, path dependencies, and evolutionary dimensions. Journal of marketing, 60(4), 107-114.
    36. Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage: What the new dynamics of business ecosystems mean for strategy, innovation, and sustainability, Boston: Harvard Business Press.
    37. Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Presentation at the Institute of International and European Affairs.
    38. Isenberg, D. (2014). What an entrepreneurship ecosystem actually is. Harvard Business Review. 5, 1-7. Retrieved June 24, 2018 from https://bit.ly/1RWKM9O
    39. Katz, M. & C. Shapiro (1985). Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American economic review, 75(3), 424-440.
    40. Kenney, M., & Patton, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial geographies: Support networks in three high- technology industries. Economic geography, 81(2), 201–228.
    41. Kirchhoff, B. A., S. L. Newbert, I. Hasan & C. Armington (2007). The influence of university R & D expenditures on new business formations and employment growth. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 31(4), 543-559.
    42. Latour, B. (2004). Politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy (trans. C.Porter), London, England: Harvard University Press
    43. Law, J. (1999). After ANT: Complexity, naming, and topology, The sociological review, 47(S1), 1-14.
    44. Liao, J., Welsch, H., & Stoica, M. (2003). Organizational absorptive capacity and responsiveness: an empirical investigation of growth-oriented SMEs. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 28(1), 63–85.
    45. Lily Varon. (2016, February 23). How big will ecommerce in Asia Pacific be in five years? Forrester Research. Retrieved July 14, 2018, from https://bit.ly/2NS6CP1
    46. Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2002). The Elusive concept of localization economies: towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering. Environment and planning A, 34(3), 429-449. doi:10.1068/a3457
    47. Markusen, A. (1991). The Military-industrial divide. Environment and planning D: society and space, 9(4), 391-416.
    48. Marshall, Alfred. (1920). Library of Economics and Liberty. Principles of Economics, (8th ed.) Retrieved June 24, 2018 from database of Online Library of Liberty. https://bit.ly/2MYCcKw
    49. Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship. Final Report to OECD, Paris, 30(1), 77-102.
    50. Meyskens, Moriah A. (2010). How do partnerships lead to a competitive advantage? Applying the resource based view to nascent social ventures (Doctoral dissertation). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 238. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2Km0EHi
    51. Michael Fritsch & Dirk Schilder. (2005). Does venture capital investment really require spatial proximity? an empirical investigation. Environment and planning A, 40(9), 2114-2131
    52. Moore J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71 (3), 75-83.
    53. Moore, J. F. (1996). The death of competition: Leadership and strategy in the age of business ecosystems, New York: Harper business
    54. Motoyama, Y. & Knowlton, K. (2014). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Kansas City, MO: Kauffman Foundation.
    55. Nambisan, S. & R. A. Baron. (2013). Entrepreneurship in innovation ecosystems: entrepreneurs' self-regulatory processes and their implications for new venture success. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 37(5), 1071-1097.
    56. Nelson, R. R. (1994). The co-evolution of technology, industrial structure, and supporting institutions, Industrial and corporate change, 3(1), 47-63
    57. Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
    58. Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2005). The spatial configuration of the entrepreneurial support network for the semiconductor industry. R&D management, 35(1), 1-17.
    59. Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm (3th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    60. Pitelis, C. N. & D. J. Teece. (2010). Cross-border market co-creation, dynamic capabilities and the entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Industrial & corporate change, 19(4), 1247-1270.
    61. Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance, New York: Free Press.
    62. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative science quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
    63. Qian, H., Z. J. Acs & R. R. Stough. (2013). Regional systems of entrepreneurship: the nexus of human capital, knowledge and new firm formation. Journal of economic geography, 13(4), 559-587.
    64. Richard N. Langlois. (1995). Firms, Markets and Economic Change: A dynamic Theory of Business Institutions (1st Ed.), London: Routledge
    65. Sara L. (2017, September 27). Global B2C ecommerce country report 2017. Ecommerce Foundation. Retrieved July 14, 2018, from https://bit.ly/2Lj1lOU
    66. Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    67. Scaringella, L., & Radziwon, A. (2017). Innovation, entrepreneurial, knowledge, and business ecosystems: Old wine in new bottles? Technological forecasting and social change. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.023
    68. Shane, S., & Cable, D. (2002). Network ties, reputation, and the financing of new ventures. Management science, 48(3), 364–381.
    69. Simon HA. (2002). Near decomposability and the speed of evolution. Industrial and corporate change, 11(3): 587–599
    70. Smith, H. L., D. Chapman, P. Wood, T. Barnes and S. Romeo. (2014). Entrepreneurial academics and regional innovation systems: the case of spin-offs from London's universities. Environment and planning C: Government and policy, 32(2), 341-359.
    71. Spilling, O.R. (1996). The entrepreneurial system: on entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event. Journal of business research, 36(1), 91–103.
    72. Stuetzer, M., M. Obschonka, U. Brixy, R. Sternberg and U. Cantner. (2014). Regional characteristics, opportunity perception and entrepreneurial activities. Small business economics, 42(2), 221-244.
    73. Tansley, A. (1935). The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology, 16(3), 284-307. doi:10.2307/1930070
    74. Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research policy, 15(6), 285-305.
    75. Teece, D. J. (1996). Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation, Journal of economic behavior and organization, 31(2), 193-224.
    76. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal , 28(13), 1319-1350. doi:10.1002/smj.640
    77. Teece, D. J., (1980). Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of economic behavior and organization, 1(3), 223–247.
    78. Teece, D. J., G. Pisano and A. Shuen (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
    79. Ter Wal, A. L. J., P. Criscuolo & A. Salter. (2017). Making a marriage of materials: The role of gatekeepers and shepherds in the absorption of external knowledge and innovation performance. Research policy, 46(5), 1039-1054.
    80. Thompson, T., J. Purdy & M. J. Ventresca. (2017). How entrepreneurial ecosystems take form: evidence from social impact initiatives in Seattle. Strategic entrepreneurship journal. 12(1), 96-116.
    81. Tötterman, H. & J. Sten. (2005). Start-ups: Business incubation and social capital. International small business journal, 23(5), 487-511.
    82. Vaillant, Y., & Lafuente, E. (2007). Do different institutional frameworks condition the influence of local fear of failure and entrepreneurial examples over entrepreneurial activity? Entrepreneurship and regional development, 19(4), 313-337.
    83. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (1997). Mass media research: An introduction (9th ed.). Belmont Calif.: Wadsworth Pub.
    84. Wu, J., Si, S., & Wu, X. (2016). Entrepreneurial finance and innovation: Informal debt as an empirical case. Strategic entrepreneurship journal, 10(3), 257-273. doi:10.1002/sej.1214
    85. Zahra, S., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. The academy of management review, 27(2), 185-203. Retrieved on June 24, 2018 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4134351
    86. Zhang, Y., G. Duysters & M. Cloodt. (2013). The role of entrepreneurship education as a predictor of university students’ entrepreneurial intention. International entrepreneurship and management journal, 10(3), 623-641.1


    二、中文參考文獻

    1. 經濟部中小企業處(2015)。104年度全球創業觀察調查計畫(Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) 執行摘要報告。
    2. 經濟部中小企業處(2016)。105全球創業觀察調查計畫(Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) 執行摘要報告。
    3. 雍惟畬、洪世章 (2006)。以動態能力觀點探討明基的興起。管理與系統,13,99-120。
    4. 任立中、周建亨、陳靜怡、周文賢 (2012)。統計學:管理者必備的修鍊。台灣:前程文化。
    5. 米高.奎因.巴頓 (1995)。質的評鑑與研究 (吳芝儀, 李奉儒,譯)。台北: 桂冠。
    6. 國家實驗研究院(2015)。我國科技競爭力分析。國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心。取自:https://goo.gl/8wy3fs。
    7. 國家實驗研究院(2015)。創新生態系統發展策略研究,國家實驗研究院科技政策研究與資訊中心。
    8. 林秀英(2018)。【新興領域:4月焦點1】透析全球人工智慧專利與早期投資大戰。FINDIT 早期資金資訊平台。
    9. 張金山 (1991)。創業行為與成就動機,家族背景之相關性研究。國立台灣大學 商學研究所碩士論文。台灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
    10. 張苙雲 (1999)。網絡台灣-企業的人情關係與經濟理性。臺北:遠流出版有限 公司。
    11. 洪榮志、蔡志豪 (2011)。 從行動者網絡理論看文創商品的展演:以安平劍獅的在地轉譯為例。創業管理研究,6 (4),105-122。
    12. 黃瑞琴(1991)。質的教育研究方法。台北:心理。
    13. 蕭瑞麟 (2007)。不用數字的研究:鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究。台灣:台灣培生教育出版。
    14. 陳家聲、戴士嫻 (2007)。創業家社會網絡行為之質性研究。創業管理研究,2 (4),1-24。
    15. 麥可.波特 (2008年1月)。波特新論競爭五力。哈佛商業評論,1月號。2018年1月,取自https://bit.ly/2yEhk8u。
    16. 藍嘉淑(2000)。圖片在國中生物科教學的角色及其對學生圖片理解之影響。 國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。台灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
    17. James Huang (2018年4月18日)。 2018年全球創業生態系:重金都押寶在兩種類型、四大領域的新創公司。數位時代。2018年4月18日。取自
    https://bit.ly/2voiRh8。
    18. James Huang (2018年4月18日)。秀外慧中?解讀台北創業生態系:3大產業進榜、5家創業新星被點名。數位時代。2018年4月18日。取自 https://bit.ly/2tzSG33。
    19. James Huang (2018年4月18日)。為什麼台灣沒跑進全球創業生態系的決賽圈?。數位時代。2018年4月18日。取自: https://bit.ly/2MmaeaK。
    20. Michael Hu (2017年12月8日)。人工智能企業自動化的關鍵現狀和戰略影響。搜狐。取自 https://bit.ly/2tCudKy。
    21. 周培 (2016年10月26日)。拿到上千萬美金融資後:黃俊傑下一步是將Viscovery送進「重點高中」。一鳴網。2018年3月22日。取自https://bit.ly/2K5MA5B。
    22. 商標好萊塢 (2017年9月8日)。出門錢可以沒帶,會員卡怎麼可以沒帶? Perkd世界各地品牌的會員卡小叮噹。MeetHub。2018年3月27日。取自: https://bit.ly/2tw25sr。
    23. 郭芝榕 (2015年3月24日)。創意引晴雙喜臨門!推拍照搜尋雲端服務,獲A輪融資500萬美元。數位時代。2018年3月20日。取自https://bit.ly/2lw1H9L。
    24. 郭芝榕 (2016年10月17日)。Viscovery獲中華開發領投1千萬美元,發展影音人工智慧。數位時代。2018年3月20日。取自https://bit.ly/2KeVk5m。
    25. INSIDE 硬塞的網路趨勢觀察編輯 (2016年10月17日)。Viscovery 再獲千萬美元投資!用電腦視覺 AI,讓行動影音廣告點擊率增加 86%。INSIDE 硬塞的網路趨勢觀察。2018年3月27日。取自https://bit.ly/2MUbdzZ。
    26. 黃倩茹 (2016年11月20日)。Viscovery:影像辨識技術的廣告應用。廣告雜誌,301。2018年3月22日。取自https://bit.ly/2tyqgWV。
    27. 楊又肇 (2017年5月10日)。Viscovery用影像識別分析技術讓影片廣告媒合更精準、更具彈性。聯合新聞網。2018年3月27日。取自: https://bit.ly/2MjV1qx。
    28. 蕭玉品 (2017年8月30日)。素材分析零誤差 投放廣告最佳利器。遠見雜誌。2018年3月27日。取自: https://bit.ly/2IpsaPm。
    29. 李墨天 (2016年10月17日)。視頻智能識別公司Viscovery 創意引晴獲千萬美元A+輪投資,中華開發工業銀行領投。動點科技。2018年7月14日。取自https://bit.ly/2LeR8WO。
    30. 魏君頤 (2014年10月31日)。台灣新創Viscovery勇奪創富中國亞軍。Digitimes。2018年3月20日。取自https://bit.ly/2MSDTcz。
    31. 郭儀蕙(2015年8月5日)。隨拍隨看即買 快速消費領風潮。外貿協會 經貿透視雙周刊。423,14-16。取自https://bit.ly/2NhMZ1N
    32. 愛奇藝招股說明書(2018)。https://news.cnyes.com/news/id/4082260
    33. 因為這些挑戰者,Google、Facebook、騰訊如今也睡不了安穩覺(2017年5月18日)。36氪。2018年7月15日。取自http://36kr.com/p/5075486.html
    34. 翁書婷(2017年5月18日)。連騰訊都採用的影像辨識技術,創意引晴闖中國:我們存活下來了。數位時代。2018年7月16日。取自https://bit.ly/2NlTLnp
    35. 譚偉晟(2018年5月10日)。它靠99%精準視覺辨識 打敗美日大廠。今周刊。1116。2018年7月16日。取自https://bit.ly/2Jq0ome
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    科技管理與智慧財產研究所
    105364128
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105364128
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/THE.NCCU.TIIPM.005.2018.F08
    Appears in Collections:[科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    412801.pdf93230KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback