English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88645/118187 (75%)
Visitors : 23496701      Online Users : 285
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/140.119/56818


    Title: 創業導向、策略彈性與動態能力之關係
    Entrepreneurial Orientation, Strategic Flexibility, and Dynamic Capability
    Authors: 黃資婉
    Huang, Tzu Wan
    Contributors: 譚丹琪
    Tan, Danchi
    黃資婉
    Huang, Tzu Wan
    Keywords: 創業導向
    策略彈性
    動態能力
    Entrepreneurial Orientation
    Strategic Flexibility
    Dynamic Capability
    Date: 2012
    Issue Date: 2013-02-01 16:49:29 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 動態能力指企業整合、建構、重新配置內外部能耐,以因應快速變遷環境的能力,本研究整理前人論述,將動態能力進一步分為產品、市場、流程等三個面向,並綜合過去文獻將前因分為實體或虛擬資產、機制或過程、行為意圖等三類,然而目前學者驗證的前因有限,尚有許多著墨空間,故在此提出屬於行為意圖類的創業導向,以及屬於機制或過程類的策略彈性,也是動態能力前因之假設,而由於兩者定義上一內一外的互補性,使本研究同時假定創業導向與策略彈性的交互作用亦為動態能力之前因。

      本研究使用政治大學國貿所之「台灣電子業公司資料庫」,共採用204家國內電子公司樣本2009年之資料,以迴歸模型進行分析,模型中以創業導向、策略彈性、以及兩者之交互作用項為自變數,以產品、市場、流程動態能力三者為依變數。實證結果指出,創業導向與策略彈性對三種動態能力的影響皆達顯著水準;然而,創業導向與策略彈性之交互作對產品、市場、流程動態能力有顯著影響的假設並不成立,一來是因為兩變數的內涵差異所致,二來則導因於樣本分布的廣泛性。

      本研究後續針對廠商差異性,將樣本分為許多不同的類別進行分析,發現當分別以OEM、ODM、OBM篩選樣本來執行迴歸模型,其中的創業導向與策略彈性交互作用項將會接近或滿足顯著的標準。在OEM和ODM兩類廠商樣本的迴歸檢測中,以流程動態能力為依變數的模型之交互作用顯著水準最高,而當採用OBM廠商為樣本時,以市場動態能力為依變數的效果最明顯,證明交互作用項的影響在特定類別中是可能達到顯著水準的。
    Dynamic capability is the capability that enterprises integrate, construct, and reconfigure their internal and external competences to respond to the rapidly changing environment. This thesis reviews past researches on dynamic capability, categorizing its underlying concepts into three dimensions, which are product, market, and process respectively, and combining different scholars’ point of views to classify the antecedents of dynamic capability into three types, tangible or intangible assets, mechanism or procedure, as well as behavioral intention. Due to the limited academic output on the dynamic capability antecedents, there’s much to be explored. Two new antecedents are proposed in this research; one is entrepreneurial orientation which belongs to the aforementioned behavioral intention type, and the other is strategic flexibility that is a part of the mechanism or procedure type. Moreover, because of the partly complementary connotations of entrepreneurial orientation and strategic flexibility, it’s further proposed that the interaction effect of the two variables can also serve as one dynamic capability antecedent.

    The “Taiwanese Electronic Company Database” of the Department of International Business, National Chengchi University, which contains the year 2009 data of 204 electronic firms based in Taiwan, is adopted to conduct an experimental research of regression analysis. Entrepreneurial orientation, strategic flexibility, and their interaction term are the three independent variables, while product, market, and process dynamic capabilities are the three dependent variables. The result points out that the impact of both entrepreneurial orientation and strategic flexibility on the three types of dynamic capabilities all reach the significant level. However, the interaction term does not generate significant influence on each of the three dynamic capabilities. The situation may on the one hand arise from the partial discrepancy of definition of the two main independent variables, and on the other hand stem from the variety of the sample.

    In order to generate a more satisfactory result, more regression analyses are conducted with the entire sample trimmed according to different criteria. Three regression models show positive results, that is when the sample only contains OEM, ODM, or OBM firms respectively, the interaction effect can be close or above the significant level. In the two models conducted with the OEM and ODM samples, the interaction effect is most evident on the process dynamic capability dependent variable, whereas the interaction effect of the OBM model is most significant on the market dynamic capability dependent variable. It shows that the interaction effect is able to reach the level of significance within certain sample groupings.
    Reference: Aaker, D. A., & Mascarenhas, B. (1984). The need for strategic flexibility. Journal of Business Strategy, 5(2), 74-82.
    Alchian, A. A. (1950). Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory. The Journal of Political Economy, 58(3), 211-221.
    Arthurs, J. D., & Busenitz, L. W. (2006). Dynamic capabilities and venture performance: The effects of venture capitalists. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(2), 195-215.
    Bahrami, H. (1992). The emerging flexible organization: Perspectives from Silicon Valley. Organization, 34(4), 33-52.
    Barringer, B. R., & Bluedorn, A. C. (1999). The relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 421-444.
    Benner, M. J. (2009). Dynamic or Static Capabilities? Process Management Practices and Response to Technological Change*. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(5), 473-486.
    Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of management review, 28(2), 238-256.
    Blyler, M., & Coff, R. W. (2003). Dynamic capabilities, social capital, and rent appropriation: Ties that split pies. Strategic Management Journal, 24(7), 677-686.
    Bower, J. L., & Administration, H. U. G. S. o. B. (1970). Managing the resource allocation process: A study of corporate planning and investment: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
    Brown, J. R., Lusch, R. F., & Muehling, D. D. (1983). Conflict and power-dependence relations in retailer-supplier channels. Journal of Retailing, 59(4).
    Covin, J. G., & Covin, T. J. (1990). Competitive aggressiveness, environmental context, and small firm performance. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 35-50.
    Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75-87.
    Cyert, R. M., & James, G. (1963). March, A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs.
    Danneels, E. (2008). Organizational antecedents of second‐order competences. Strategic Management Journal, 29(5), 519-543.
    Dean, C., & Thibodeaux, M. (1994). Corporate entrepreneurship: US firms operating in the middle east and the Arab world. Advances in international comparative management, 9, 193-222.
    Dean, C. C. (1993). Corporate entrepreneurship: Strategic and structural correlates and impact on the global presence of United States firms. University of North Texas.
    Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?
    Gaski, J. F. (1986). Interrelations among a channel entity's power sources: Impact of the exercise of reward and coercion on expert, referent, and legitimate power sources. Journal of Marketing Research, 62-77.
    Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J. M. (1997). Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 77-90.
    Green, K. M., Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (2008). Exploring the relationship between strategic reactiveness and entrepreneurial orientation: The role of structure–style fit. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(3), 356-383.
    Grewal, R., & Tansuhaj, P. (2001). Building organizational capabilities for managing economic crisis: The role of market orientation and strategic flexibility. The Journal of Marketing, 67-80.
    Griffith, D. A., & Harvey, M. G. (2001). A resource perspective of global dynamic capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 597-606.
    Griffith, D. A., Noble, S. M., & Chen, Q. (2006). The performance implications of entrepreneurial proclivity: A dynamic capabilties approach. Journal of Retailing, 82(1), 51-62.
    Helfat, C. E. (1997). Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management Journal, 18(5), 339-360.
    Hitt, M. A., Keats, B. W., & DeMarie, S. M. (1998). Navigating in the new competitive landscape: Building strategic flexibility and competitive advantage in the 21st century. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 22-42.
    Jantunen, A., Puumalainen, K., Saarenketo, S., & Kyläheiko, K. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, dynamic capabilities and international performance. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 3(3), 223-243.
    Johnson, J. L., Lee, R. P. W., Saini, A., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Market-focused strategic flexibility: conceptual advances and an integrative model. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(1), 74-89.
    Kimberly, J. R. (1981). Managerial innovation. Handbook of organizational design, 1(84), 104.
    King, A. A., & Tucci, C. L. (2002). Incumbent entry into new market niches: the role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Management Science, 171-186.
    Kor, Y. Y., & Mahoney, J. T. (2005). How dynamics, management, and governance of resource deployments influence firm‐level performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), 489-496.
    Leonard‐Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1), 111-125.
    Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of management review, 135-172.
    Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 429-451.
    March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 71-87.
    March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations.
    Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman Jr, H. J. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of management review, 546-562.
    Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 770-791.
    Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. (2007). Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3), 243-270.
    Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change: Belknap press.
    Rindova, V. P., & Kotha, S. (2001). Continuous" morphing": Competing through dynamic capabilities, form, and function. Academy of Management Journal, 1263-1280.
    Rothaermel, F. T., & Hess, A. M. (2007). Building dynamic capabilities: Innovation driven by individual-, firm-, and network-level effects. Organization science, 18(6), 898-921.
    Rumelt, R. P., & Teece, D. J. (1994). Fundamental issues in strategy: A research agenda: Harvard Business Press.
    Sanchez, R. (1995). Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 135-159.
    Simon, H. A. (1993). Strategy and organizational evolution. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 131-142.
    Teece, Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::aid-smj882>3.0.co;2-z
    Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
    Teece, D. J., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Industrial and corporate change, 3(3), 537-556.
    Wang, C. L. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation, learning orientation, and firm performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(4), 635-657.
    Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 31-51.
    Wiklund, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(1).
    Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge‐based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium‐sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1307-1314.
    Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995.
    Wu, L. Y. (2007). Entrepreneurial resources, dynamic capabilities and start-up performance of Taiwan's high-tech firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 549-555.
    Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review, 185-203.
    Zahra, S. A., & Nielsen, A. P. (2002). Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization. Strategic Management Journal, 23(5), 377-398.
    Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda*. Journal of Management studies, 43(4), 917-955.
    Zhou, K. Z., & Li, C. B. (2010). How strategic orientations influence the building of dynamic capability in emerging economies. Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 224-231.
    Zhou, K. Z., & Wu, F. (2010). Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 547-561.
    Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization science, 339-351.
    Zollo, M., Winter, S. G., & Insead. (1999). From organizational routines to dynamic capabilities: Citeseer.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    國際經營與貿易研究所
    99351027
    101
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099351027
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[國際經營與貿易學系 ] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    102701.pdf639KbAdobe PDF679View/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