Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125919
|
| Title: | 本土生技製藥公司轉型研究 -動態能力的觀點
A study of the Transformation of Domestic Biotechnology Pharmaceutical Companies - the perspective of Dynamic Capabilities |
| Authors: | 陶大維
Tao, Ta-Wei |
| Contributors: | 吳豐祥
Wu, Feng-Shang
陶大維
Tao, Ta-Wei |
| Keywords: | 本土藥廠
動態能力理論
轉型
策略與管理
學名藥
新藥開發
Local pharmaceutical companies
Dynamic capabilities theory
Transformation
Strategy and management
Generic drugs
New drug development |
| Date: | 2019 |
| Issue Date: | 2019-09-05 17:29:37 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 生技製藥產業是近年來我國各界都想積極發展的領域，然而，我國的內需市場規模較小且健保制度傾向於壓低藥價，在此情況下，很多過往以學名藥領域為主的廠商在發展上受到了限制。另一方面，全球高齡化人口的增加，對於新藥的需求也隨之增加，因此，本土生技製藥公司需要思考如何進行轉型以重建競爭優勢。本研究的主要目的即是探討本土藥廠面對環境變化及市場機會的轉型過程，特別是本土生技製藥公司如何從以開發學名藥為主的廠商轉型為新藥開發的廠商。本研究認為學名藥廠商與新藥開發的廠商之間存在很多「能力」上的差距，因此，採用動態能力的觀點來探討我國生技製藥公司的轉型過程，並藉由資源、能力及策略與管理等三構面的研究架構來進行研究。本研究透過理論抽樣，選取我國兩家知名的本土藥廠作為研究對象，進行深入的質性研究。本研究所得到的主要結論包括：(1)本土藥廠會考量企業成長路徑，並透過長期與外部組織的合作關係與事業網路體系，來掌握市場機會；(2)本土藥廠會傾向於以設立子公司的方式，來承接新藥開發業務，並導入新的管理制度與商業模式，以提升轉型績效；(3)本土藥廠在管理轉型的過程時，會評估轉型前的資源與能力，且採取集中策略，以轉進新的營運範疇，並做最適當的資源配置；(4)本土學名藥廠轉型前的核心資源，會以製劑設備為主，而轉型後，則會以無形資產為主；(5)本土學名藥廠在轉型前，會以透過對國際藥廠提供OEM / ODM的服務之方式，來建立其與外部組織合作上的能力；轉型成新藥開發公司後，其核心能力的發展上，則會同時強調組織的協調整合、學習與知識管理。根據此研究結果，本研究進一步提出實務上的建議、學理上的意涵與後續研究的建議。
Biotechnological and pharmaceutical industries have become more and more important. However, in terms of industrial environment, our domestic market demand is small and the health insurance system lowers the price of drugs. Therefore, the development of local pharmaceutical companies in the field of generic drugs is limited. Concerning the market opportunities, the global aging population has increased, and the demand for new drugs has also increased. In recent years, biotechnology firms have continued to innovate, and more and more international manufacturers have invested in new drug development. Local biotech pharmaceutical companies need to actively adjust their business models and operations and resource allocation so that they can reshape the competitive advantage and lay out new markets with potential to grasp the trend of the global biotechnology pharmaceutical market. Therefore, this study aims to explore the transformation process of local pharmaceutical companies in the face of environmental changes and market opportunities. The study argues that there exists capability gap between the generic-based and new-drug-development-based firm. Therefore, we adopt the perspective of “dynamic capabilities” and establish a research framework with three major constructs: resources, capacities and strategies and management. This study selected two well-known local pharmaceutical companies in Taiwan to totally understand and analyze the transformation process and transformation strategy of them through qualitative research. The main conclusions of this study include: (1) Local pharmaceutical companies would consider the growth path of enterprises, and seize market opportunities through long-term cooperation with external organizations and business network systems; (2) Local pharmaceutical companies tend to set up a new company to develop new drug and bring new management systems and business models; (3) Local pharmaceutical companieswould assess the resources and capabilities before the transformation and adopt a specific strategy to enter the new scope, and allocate the resource appropriately ; (4) Before the transformation, the core resources of generic drug pharmaceutical would be equipments, and after the transformation, the core resources would be the intangible assets; (5) Before the transformation, the core resources of generic drug pharmaceutical would be based on the ability to establish cooperation with external organizations through the provision of OEM/ODM services to the international pharmaceutical companies; after the transformation, the development of core competencies are emphasize organizational coordination, organizational learning and knowledge management. Based on above conclusion, the research concludes with three practical recommendations and follow-up research recommendations for future reference to manufacturers and researchers in related fields. |
| Reference: | 一、 英文部分
1. Aaker, D. A. (1984). Development Business Strategies. England: John Wiley and Sons.
2. Adams, J. D. (1984). Transforming Work. Miles Review Press.
3. Adrian, S. (1996). Value Migration：How to Think Several Moves Ahead of The Competition. Havard Bussiness Press.
4. Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues, MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.
5. Amit, R., & Livnat, J. (1988). Diversification strategies, business cycles and economic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 9(2), 99-110.
6. Ansoff, H. (1957). Strategies for diversification. Harvard Business Review, 35(5), 113-124.
7. Ansoff, H. I. (1965). The firm of the future. Harvard Business Review, 43(5), 162-178.
8. Aoki, M. (1990). The participatory generation of information rents and the theory of the firm. The Firm as a Nexus of Treaties, 26–52.
9. Barbara, B. and Philippe, H. (1994). Toward a definition of corporate transformation. Spring, 35(3).
10. Barney, J. B. (1994). Crafoord Lectures. U.K. and Lund University Press.
11. Bowman, C. & Ambrosini, V. (2003). How the resource-based & the dynamic capability views of the firm inform corporate-level strategy. British Journal of Management, 14(1), 289-303.
12. Camp, R. (1989). Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices that lead to superior performance. Quality Press.
13. Collis, D. J. (1996). Organizational capabilities as a source of profit. Organizational Learning and Competitive Advantage, Sage: London, 139-163.
14. Doz, Y. and Amy, S. (1988). From intent to outcome: A process framework for partnerships.
15. Eisenhardt, M. K. and Martin, A. J. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They?. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10), 1105-1121.
16. Helfat, C. E. and Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles, Strategic Management Journal, 24 (10), 997-1010.
17. Helfat, E. C. (1997). Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management Journal, 18(5), 339-360.
18. Henderson, R. M., and Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of exiting product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9-30.
19. John ,A.P. & Robbins, D.K. (2008). Strategic transformation as the essential last step in the process of business turnaround. Business Horizons, 51(2), 121-130.
20. Kilmann, Rlph H. & Covin, T. I. (1988). Corporate transformation: revitalizing organization for a competitive world.
21. Langlois, R. (1995). Cognition and capabilities Opportunities seized and missed in the history of the computer industry. Technological Innovation.
22. Lavy A. & Merry U. (1988). Organizational Transformation: Revitalizing Organization for a Competitive World. Jessey-Bass Inc.
23. Levinthal, D. A. & J. G. March (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue, 14, 95–112.
24. Levitt, B. and March, J. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.
25. Mody, A. (1993). Learning through alliances. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 20(2), 151–170.
26. Molin, M. J. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities, How Can We Make Them Work?. Copenhagen Business School Press.
27. Nelson, R. and S. Winter (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press.
28. Pavlos, A. Pavlou (2004). IT-Enabled dynamic capabilities in the new product development: building a competitive advantage in the turbulent environments. University of Southern California Press.
29. Penrose, E. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. John Wiley Press.
30. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York Free Press.
31. Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York Free Press.
32. Prahalad, C. K. & G. Hamel (1990). The core competence of the corporation, Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.
33. Richardson, G. B. (1972). The organization of industry. The Economic Journal, 82(3), 883-896.
34. Rindova, V. P., and Kotha, S. (2001). Continuous morphing : competing through dynamic capabilities form & function. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1263-1280.
35. Rumelt, R. (2011). Good Strategy/Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters. New York: Crown Business.
36. Rumelt, R. P. (1984). Towards a strategic theory of the firm. Competitive Strategic Management, 556–570.
37. Shaheen, G. T. (1994). Approach to Transformation. Chief Executive, 3(1), 2-5.
38. Teece, D. J. & G. Pisano (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3), 537–556.
39. Teece, D. J. (1980). Economics of scope and the scope of the enterprise, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 223–247.
40. Teece, D. J. (1981). The market for know-how and the efficient international transfer of technology. Annals of the Academy of Political and Social Science, 458, 81–96.
41. Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation, Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305.
42. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1319-1350.
43. Teece, D. J. (2018a). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40-49.
44. Teece, D. J. (2018b). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), 359-368.
45. Verona, G. and Ravasi, D. (2003). Unbundling dynamic capabilities: an exploratory study of continuous product innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change.
46. Wang, C. L. and Ahmed, P. K. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 31-51.
47. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.
48. Winter, S.G. (2003). Why is there a resource based view? Toward a theory of competitive heterogeneity. Strategic Management Journal, 24(19), 911-995.
49. Zahra, S., Sapienza, H. & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilites: a review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 917-955.
50. Zollo, M. and Winter, S. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(1), 339-351.
51. Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of industry differential firm performance: insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (2), 97-125.
二、 中文部分
1. 竹本次郎著 (1989)。從勞動密集到技術密集的轉型，日本文摘雜誌社。
2. 吳思華 (1996)。策略九說。台北：麥田出版社。
3. 李朝明、黃利萍 (2010)。動態能力、協同知識創新和企業持續競爭力的關係研究。科技進步與對策。
4. 邱奕嘉、李岱砡、吳珮甄 (2010)。由動態能力觀點分析企業協同凝聚：以復盛集團成長策略為例。科技管理學刊。1~23頁。
5. 侯嘉政、鐘岳群 (2009)。動態能力、顧客知識管理能力與經營績效關係之研究。電子商務學報。
6. 徐聯恩 (1996)。企業變革系列研究。台北：華泰出版社。
7. 許長禮 (2010)。以動態能力觀點探討本土藥廠轉型及創新之個案研究。國立政治大學未出版論文。
8. 陳明璋 (1990)。企業轉型經營策略文獻與實證探討，台北：華泰。
9. 陳明璋 (1990)。企業贏的策略：掌握成功的四項關鍵。台北：遠流出版社。
10. 陳明璋 (1996)。企業轉型的策略與成功關鍵。貿易週刊，1690期，18~21頁。
11. 筒井信行、瀧澤正雄著，江金龍譯 (1988)。成功的企業轉型—中小企業如何脫胎換骨。台北：尖端出版社。
12. 謝安田 (1992)。企業管理。五南圖書出版公司。
三、 網路部分及其他
1. C製藥集團官網，最後上網日期108年6月12日。
2. IQVIA公司網站，最後上網日期108年4月17日。
3. S醫藥集團2017年報。
4. S醫藥集團官網，最後上網日期108年6月16日。
5. TrendForce公司網站，最後上網日期108年4月21日。
6. Y公司官網，最後上網日期108年6月15日。
7. 上市上櫃公司2018年報。
8. 公開資訊觀測站，最後上網日期108年6月14日。
9. 生醫產業創新推動方案現況與執行績效報告，最後上網日
期108年5月30日。
10. 產業價值鏈資訊平台，最後上網日期108年4月20日。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
106364104 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106364104 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU201900856 |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 410401.pdf | 1690Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 60 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
