Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/133975
|
| Title: | 政府研發補助計畫對於新創企業的影響 —以創業型 SBIR 為例
The Effect of Public R&D Subsidies on New Ventures: The case of Early-Stage SBIR Program |
| Authors: | 賴映竹
Lai, Ying-Chu |
| Contributors: | 鄭至甫
Jeng, Jyh-Fu
賴映竹
Lai, Ying-Chu |
| Keywords: | 創新型新創企業
附加性
正當性
政府研發補助計畫
Innovation-driven entrepreneurship
Additionality
Legitimacy
Government-sponsored R&D programmes |
| Date: | 2020 |
| Issue Date: | 2021-02-01 14:29:43 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 近幾年各國政府開始關注創新創業的議題，也逐漸推出許創新創業的相關政策與補助計畫，期盼新創企業能成為國家經濟成長的動力之一。台灣雖然從多年前便已開始聚焦推動國內創新創業生態系的健全發展，也在全球創業觀察針對創業環境的調查中獲得相當高的評分，但是優良的創業環境未必等同於新創企業擁有良好的經營狀況，也並不一定表示新創企業對於當前的創業政策與環境感到滿意，新創企業仍期待能持續獲得更多的外部資源及支持。本研究以附加性理論以及正當性概念之觀點切入，探討創業型研發補助計畫對於新創企業的影響，除了分析計畫如何影響新創企業研發活動的投入程度、研發成果以及組織行為之外，也將討論補助計畫如何驅動更多資源挹注於獲選新創企業。本研究採用個案研究法，共訪談五間不同產業類別、且皆通過創業概念海選計畫的創新型新創企業。研究結果顯示雖然獲選新創企業依據其申請計畫的目的，以不同的方式運用獎勵獎金，但是補助計畫能讓多數獲選新創企業更積極投入於研發活動。此外，計劃的前置作業與執行過程的審核機制能對組織行為產生正面的長期影響，除了能訓練新創企業執行研發專案，也可使其創建組織例規，提升組織內部的管理能力。在計畫結案時，獲選新創企業能夠達成最初設定的目標，順利開發技術、改善產品的功能、逐漸形塑其商業模式，而主辦單位的媒合協助也能提升新創企業未來的商業表現。本研究接著發現，計畫結束後獲選新創企業除了能藉由計畫提升企業形象之外，也能促進與外部網絡的互動，外部資源挹注機會因此而增加，但此等情況多半是主辦單位間接或直接給予的協助。計畫釋出的資源以及後續驅動的外部資源挹注僅可為新創企業帶來短期效益，獲選企業仍須依靠本身的能力與潛力來保持成長的動能。
Anticipating that the new ventures will become the driving force of economic growth, in recent years, governments have paid much more attention to innovation and entrepreneurship as well as introducing various entrepreneurship polices and subsidy programs. Taiwan has been promoting the development of startup ecosystem for many years, and Taiwan was also given a high opinion of the entrepreneurial environment in the 2019 GEM report. It does not mean, however, that having friendly entrepreneurial environment, is enquivalent to having great performance and satisfaction of the new venture. The purpose of this study is to explore the additionality effects of government subsidies on the changes of R&D activity, organizational behavior, R&D results and resources inflow of new ventures. To explain the effects in more detail, we adopt case study research method and interview 5 recipient firms of the R&D subsidy program. The results show that although each company spend the funds in a very different way, most of them increase R&D activity. In addition, the requirments, administrative burdens and review system can have a positive impact on firm behavior. New ventures can not only accumulate project experiences but also establish organizational routines throughout the process, while at the same time they have the chance to improve management capabilities. Furthermore, firms in different industry sector show diverse output additonalty, which depends on the goal of each recipient firm. The study also find that new ventures can enhace corporate image as well as attract many kinds of resources after completing the project. An even more significant factor that should be taken into account is the affiliation with prominent parties, since most of the resources come from the assistance of SMEA directly or indirectly. These reulsts implicate that governemt R&D support has positive effects on new ventures in the short term, but recipient firms must still exploit their capabilities and potential to attain more resources for survival and growth. |
| Reference: | 英文文獻
Aerts, K., & Czarnitzki, D. (2004). Using innovation survey data to evaluate R&D
policy: The case of Belgium. (Discussion Paper No. 04-55). Retrieved. April, 01, 2020, from ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research website: https://www.zew.de/en/publications/using-innovation-survey-data-to-evaluate-rd-policy-the-case-of-belgium
Aerts, K., & Schmidt, T. (2008). Two for the price of one? Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany. Research Policy, 37(5), 806-822.
Aldrich, H. (1999). Organizations evolving. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Aldrich, H., & Auster, E. R. (1986). Even dwarfs started small: Liabilities of age and size and their strategic implications. Research in Organizational Behavior. 8, 165-198.
Ali, A., Kelley, D. J., & Levie, J. (2020). Market-driven entrepreneurship and institutions. Journal of Business Research, 113, 117-128.
Antonioli, D., Marzucchi, A., & Montresor, S. (2014). Regional innovation policy and innovative behaviour: looking for additional effects. European Planning Studies, 22(1), 64-83.
Arrow, K. J. (1972). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In
Charles K. R (Ed.), Readings in Industrial Economics (pp. 219-236). LON:
Macmillan.
Aulet, W., & Murray, F. (2013). A tale of two entrepreneurs: Understanding differences
in the types of entrepreneurship in the economy. Retrieved September, 03, 2020,
from Kuaff foundation website:
https://www.kauffman.org/entrepreneurship/reports/a-tale-of-two-
entrepreneurs-understanding-differences-in-the-types-of-entrepreneurship-in-
the-economy/
Autio, E. (2007). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2007 Global Report on High-
Growth Entrepreneurship. Retrieved September, 02, 2020, from https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/gem-2007-report-on-high-growth-entrepreneurship
Bach, L., & Matt, M. (2005). From Economic Foundations to S&T Policy Tools: a Comparative Analysis of the Dominant Paradigms. In P. Llerena & M. Matt (Eds.), Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy: Theory and Practice (pp. 17-45). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Becker, M. C. (2004). Organizational routines: a review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate change, 13(4), 643-678.
Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D., & Mead, M. (1987). The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 369-386.
Biggadike, R. (1989). The risky business of diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 10(6), 523-551.
Bollinger, L., Hope, K., & Utterback, J. M. (1983). A review of literature and hypotheses on new technology-based firms. Research Policy, 12(1), 1-14.
Bosma, N., Hill, S., Ionescu-Somers, A., Kelley, D., Levie, J., & Tarnawa, A. (2020). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2019/2020 Global Report. Retrieved May, 27, 2020, from https://www.gemconsortium.org/file/open?fileId=50443
Bronzini, R., & Piselli, P. (2016). The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), 442-457.
Buffart, M., Croidieu, G., Kim, P. H., & Bowman, R. (2020). Even winners need to learn: How government entrepreneurship programs can support innovative ventures. Research Policy, 104052.
Buisseret, T. J., Cameron, H. M., & Georghiou, L. (1995). What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4-6), 587-600.
Busom, I., & Fernández-Ribas, A. (2008). The impact of firm participation in R&D programmes on R&D partnerships. Research Policy, 37(2), 240-257.
Butchart, R. (1987). A new UK definition of high technology industries. Economic Trends, 400, 82-88.
Chrisman, J. J., Bauerschmidt, A., & Hofer, C. W. (1998). The determinants of new venture performance: An extended model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(1), 5-29.
Cin, B. C., Kim, Y. J., & Vonortas, N. S. (2017). The impact of public R&D subsidy on small firm productivity: evidence from Korean SMEs. Small Business Economics, 48(2), 345-360.
Clarysse, B., Bilsen, V., Steurs, G., & Consult, I. (2006). Behavioural additionality of the R&D subsidies programme of IWT-Flanders (Belgium). Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality, pp. 91-114.
Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Mustar, P. (2009). Behavioural additionality of R&D subsidies: A learning perspective. Research Policy, 38(10), 1517-1533.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1990). New product success factors: a comparison of ‘kills’ versus successes and failures. R&D Management, 20(1), 47-63.
Czarnitzki, D., & Delanote, J. (2015). R&D policies for young SMEs: input and output effects. Small Business Economics, 45(3), 465-485.
Czarnitzki, D., & Fier, A. (2003). Publicly funded R&D collaborations and patent outcome in Germany. (Discussion Paper No. 03-24). Retrieved April, 02, 2020, from ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research website: https://www.zew.de/en/publications/publicly-funded-rd-collaborations-and-patent-outcome-in-germany ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research
Czarnitzki, D., & Hottenrott, H. (2011). R&D investment and financing constraints of small and medium-sized firms. Small Business Economics, 36(1), 65-83.
Czarnitzki, D., & Hussinger, K. (2004). The link between R&D subsidies, R&D spending and technological performance. (Discussion Paper 04-056). Retrieved April, 02, 2020, from ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research website: https://www.zew.de/en/publications/the-link-between-rd-subsidies-rd-spending-and-technological-performance
Czarnitzki, D., & Hussinger, K. (2018). Input and output additionality of R&D subsidies. Applied Economics, 50(12), 1324-1341.
Davenport, S., Grimes, C., & Davies, J. (1998). Research collaboration and behavioural additionality: a New Zealand case study. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 10(1), 55-68.
David, P. A., Hall, B. H., & Toole, A. A. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research Policy, 29(4-5), 497-529.
De Smedt, L. (2015). Additionality of R&D support for Young Innovative Companies. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Universiteit of Hogeschool.
Dollinger, M. (2008). Entrepreneurship: Strategies and Resources (4 ed.). Illinois, USA: Marsh.
Ebersberger, B. (2005). The impact of public R&D funding. Finland: Technical Research Centre of Finland. (VTT Publications No. 588). Retrieved. April, 26, 2020, from VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland website: https://cris.vtt.fi/en/publications/the-impact-of-public-rampd-funding
Ebersberger, B., & Lehtoranta, O. (2005). Pattern of innovative activities among Finnish firm. (VTT Publications No. 588). Retrieved. April, 26, 2020, from VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland website: https://cris.vtt.fi/en/publications/pattern-of-innovative-activities-among-finnish-firms
Einiö, E. (2014). R&D subsidies and company performance: Evidence from geographic variation in government funding based on the ERDF population-density rule. Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(4), 710-728.
Falk, R. (2004). Behavioural Additionality Effects of R&D-Subsidies. Empirical Evidence from Austria. Retrieved. April, 27, 2020, from Austrian Institute of Economic Research website: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.535.9539&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Falk, R. (2007). Measuring the effects of public support schemes on firms’ innovation activities: Survey evidence from Austria. Research Policy, 36(5), 665-679.
Feldman, M. P., & Kelley, M. R. (2003). Leveraging research and development: Assessing the impact of the US Advanced Technology Program. Small Business Economics, 20(2), 153-165.
Feldman, M. P., & Kelley, M. R. (2006). The ex ante assessment of knowledge spillovers: Government R&D policy, economic incentives and private firm behavior. Research Policy, 35(10), 1509-1521.
Fielden, S. L., Davidson, M. J., & Makin, P. J. (2000). Barriers encountered during micro and small business start-up in North-West England. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 7(4), 295-304.
Fier, A., Aschhoff, B., & Löhlein, H. (2006). Behavioural additionality of public R&D funding in Germany. Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality, pp. 127-150.
Freeman, J., Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (1983). The liability of newness: Age
dependence in organizational death rates. American Sociological Review, 48(5), 692-710.
Garcia, A., & Mohnen, P. (2010). Impact of government support on R&D and innovation. (Working Paper No. 2010-034). Retrieved April, 25, 2020, from https://collections.unu.edu/eserv/UNU:267/wp2010-034.pdf
Gartner, W. B. (1985). A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon of new venture creation. Academy of Ｍanagement Review, 10(4), 696-706.
Georghiou, L. (1994). Impact of the framework programme on European industry. (Report EUR 15907). Retrieved April, 26, 2020, from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/f4592590-8dc0-4012-afa6-1482119a7024
Georghiou, L. (1998). Issues in the evaluation of innovation and technology policy. Evaluation, 4(1), 37-51.
Georghiou, L. (2002). Impact and additionality of innovation policy. IWT Studies, 40, 57-64.
Georghiou, L., & Keenan, M. (2006). Evaluation of national foresight activities: Assessing rationale, process and impact. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(7), 761-777.
Georghiou, L., Rigby, J., Cameron, H. (2002). Assessing the socio-economic impacts of the Framework Programme. Retrieved. April, 27, 2020, from https://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations/pdf/archive/other_reports_studies_and_documents/assessing_the_socio_economic_impacts_of_the_framework_programme_2002.pdf
Gök, A. (2010). Evolutionary Approach to Innovation Policy Evaluation: Behavioural Additionality and Organisational Routines. Retrieved, April, 05, 2020, from https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/theses/an-evolutionary-approach-to-innovation-policy-evaluation-behavioural-additionality-and-organisational-routines(0c8bd621-ce09-4945-934b-89f3bec63ae9).html
González, X., Jaumandreu, J., & Pazó, C. (2005). Barriers to innovation and subsidy effectiveness. The RAND Journal of Economics, 36(4), 930-950.
Hall, B. H., & Maffioli, A. (2008). Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America. The European Journal of Development Research, 20(2), 172-198.
Halliday, T. C., Powell, M. J., & Granfors, M. W. (1987). Minimalist organizations: Vital events in state bar associations, 1870-1930. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 456-471.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49(2), 149-164.
Hart, M. M., Stevenson, H. H., & Dial, J. (1995). Entrepreneurship: a definition revisited. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 15(3), 54-63.
Hewitt-Dundas, N., & Roper, S. (2010). Output additionality of public support for innovation: evidence for Irish manufacturing plants. European Planning Studies, 18(1), 107-122.
Hottenrott, H., Lopes-Bento, C., & Veugelers, R. (2017). Direct and cross scheme effects in a research and development subsidy program. Research Policy, 46(6), 1118-1132.
Howell, A. (2017). Picking ‘winners` in China: Do subsidies matter for indigenous innovation and firm productivity? China Economic Review, 44, 154-165.
Hsu, F.-M., Horng, D.-J., & Hsueh, C.-C. (2009). The effect of government-sponsored R&D programmes on additionality in recipient firms in Taiwan. Technovation, 29(3), 204-217.
Hsu, F.-M., & Hsueh, C.-C. (2009). Measuring relative efficiency of government-sponsored R&D projects: A three-stage approach. Evaluation and Program Planning, 32(2), 178-186.
Hud, M., & Hussinger, K. (2015). The impact of R&D subsidies during the crisis. Research Policy, 44(10), 1844-1855.
Hussinger, K. (2008). R&D and subsidies at the firm level: An application of parametric and semiparametric two‐step selection models. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(6), 729-747.
Hyvärinen, J., & Rautiainen, A.-M. (2007). Measuring additionality and systemic impacts of public research and development funding—the case of TEKES, Finland. Research Evaluation, 16(3), 205-215.
Kazanjian, R. K., & Drazin, R. (1990). A stage-contingent model of design and growth for technology based new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 5(3), 137-150.
Lenihan, H., Hart, M., & Roper, S. (2007). Industrial policy evaluation: Theoretical foundations and empirical innovations: New wine in new bottles. International Review of Applied Economics, 21(3), 313-319.
Licht, G. (2003). The role of additionality in evaluation of public R&D programmes. Paper presented at the 11th TAFTIE Seminar on Additionality. Retrieved. April, 03, 2020, from https://taftie.eu/sites/default/files/xmlsitemap/GeorgeLicht.pdf
Lichtenstein, B. M. B., & Brush, C. G. (2001). How do “resource bundles” develop and change in new ventures? A dynamic model and longitudinal exploration. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 37-58.
Löhlein, H., & Fier, A. (2005). Behavioural Additionality Effects of Government Financing of Business R&D. (Discussion Paper No. 06-37). Retrieved. April, 02, 2020, from ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research website: https://www.zew.de/en/publications/detecting-behavioural-additionality-an-empirical-study-on-the-impact-of-public-rd-funding-on-firms-cooperative-behaviour-in-germany
Lööf, H., & Heshmati, A. (2005). The impact of public funds on private R&D investment: New evidence from a firm level innovation study. (Discussion Paper No. 11862). Retrieved. April, 02, 2020, from ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research website: https://www.zew.de/en/publications/using-innovation-survey-data-to-evaluate-rd-policy-the-case-of-belgium
Luukkonen, T. (2000). Additionality of EU framework programmes. Research Policy, 29(6), 711-724.
Malik, K., Georghiou, L., & Cameron, H. (2006). Behaviuoral Additionality of the UK
SMART and LINK Schemes. Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour Measuring Behavioural Additionality: Measuring Behavioural Additionality, pp. 205-218.
Mariani, M., & Mealli, F. (2018). The effects of R&D subsidies to small and medium-
sized enterprises. Evidence from a regional program. Italian Economic Journal, 4(2), 249-281.
Marino, M., Lhuillery, S., Parrotta, P., & Sala, D. (2016). Additionality or crowding-out? An overall evaluation of public R&D subsidy on private R&D expenditure. Research Policy, 45(9), 1715-1730.
Méndez-Morales, E. A., & Muñoz, D. (2019). Input, Output, and Behavioral Additionality of Innovation Subsidies. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 14(4), 158-172.
Metcalfe, J. S., & Georghiou, L. (1997). Equilibrium and evolutionary foundations of
technology policy. Special Issue on New Rationale and Approaches in Technology and Innovation Policy, 1998(2), 75-100
Meuleman, M., & De Maeseneire, W. (2012). Do R&D subsidies affect SMEs’ access to external financing? Research Policy, 41(3), 580-591.
Miller, A., & Camp, B. (1985). Exploring determinants of success in corporate ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 87-105.
OECD. (2006). Government R & D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality. Retrieved. June, 06, 2020 from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development website: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/government-r-d-funding-and-company-behaviour_9789264025851-en
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4 ed). New York, NY: Sage.
Pollock, T. G., & Rindova, V. P. (2003). Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 631-642.
Quintas, P., & Guy, K. (1995). Collaborative, pre-competitive R&D and the firm. Research Policy, 24(3), 325-348.
Radicic, D. (2014). The Effectiveness of R&D and Innovation Policy in Promoting Innovation in European SMEs: an Empirical Investigation of Additionality Effects. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Staffordshire University.
Schoonhoven, C. B., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Lyman, K. (1990). Speeding products to
market: Waiting time to first product introduction in new firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 177-207.
Shelton, L. M. (2005). Scale barriers and growth opportunities: A resource-based model of new venture expansion. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 13(4), 333-357.
Shepherd, D. A., Douglas, E. J., & Shanley, M. (2000). New venture survival: Ignorance, external shocks, and risk reduction strategies. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5-6), 393-410.
Shin, K., Choy, M., Lee, C., & Park, G. (2019). Government R&D subsidy and additionality of biotechnology firms: The case of the South Korean Biotechnology industry. Sustainability, 11(6), 1583.
Sieber, S. D. (1973). The integration of fieldwork and survey methods. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1335-1359.
Singh, J. V., Tucker, D. J., & House, R. J. (1986). Organizational legitimacy and the liability of newness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(2), 171-193.
Söderblom, A., Samuelsson, M., Wiklund, J., & Sandberg, R. (2015). Inside the black box of outcome additionality: Effects of early-stage government subsidies on resource accumulation and new venture performance. Research Policy, 44(8), 1501-1512.
Soltanzadeh, J., Elyasi, M., Ghaderifar, E., Soufi, H. R., & Khoshsirat, M. (2019). Evaluation of the effect of R&D subsidies on Iranian firms’ innovative behavior. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 11(1), 17-48.
Steigertahl, L., Mauer, R., & Say, J. (2018). EU Startup Monitor 2018 Report. Retrieved September, 02, 2020, from https://www.eban.org/eu-startup-monitor-2018-report/
Steurs, G., Verbeek, A., Vermeulen, H., & Clarysse, B. (2006). A Look Into the Black Box: What Difference Do IWT R & D Grants Make for Their Clients? Retrieved February, 07, 2020, from https://2rws6i2ak9i045wvup1ldt81-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/IWT-RandD-study.pdf
Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In March, J.P. (Ed), Handbook of Organtzatlons (pp. 142-193). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Storey, D. J., & Tether, B. S. (1998). New technology-based firms in the European Union: an introduction. Research Policy, 26(9), 933-946.
Stuart, T. E., Hoang, H., & Hybels, R. C. (1999). Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 315-349.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
Szücs, F. (2020). Do research subsidies crowd out private R&D of large firms? Evidence from European Framework Programmes. Research Policy, 49(3), 103923.
Tse, T., & Esposito, M. (2014). Want More Innovation-Driven Entrepreneurship? Go Low-Tech! European Business Review. Retrieved September, 03, 2020, from https://www.europeanbusinessreview.com/want-more-innovation-driven-entrepreneurship-go-low-tech/
Wallsten, S. J. (2000). The effects of government-industry R&D programs on private R&D: the case of the Small Business Innovation Research program. The RAND Journal of Economics, 31(1), 82-100.
Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing: Biographic narrative and semi-structured methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Yeoh, P. L., & Roth, K. (1999). An empirical analysis of sustained advantage in the US pharmaceutical industry: Impact of firm resources and capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 637-653.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414-431.
中文文獻
吳建華、謝發昱、黃俊峰、陳銘凱（2004）。個案研究。載於潘慧玲（編），教育研究的取徑：概念與應用（頁199-236）。臺北：高等教育。
林淑馨（2010）。質性研究：理論與實務。臺北：巨流。
國家發展委員會（2019）。亞洲‧矽谷推動方案進度及成果。上網日期：2020年5月27日，檢自https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/c5f0c959-3ddb-4d4f-8aa1-1bb89956b89a
國家發展委員會（2020）。亞洲‧矽谷計畫進度及成果。上網日期：2020年5月27日，檢自https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=7F37B18CFC68015B
張芬芬（2010）。質性資料分析的五步驟：在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊， 35，87-120。
陳李綢（2000）。個案研究(再版)。臺北：心理。
陳萬淇（1992）。個案研究法。臺北：華泰。
經濟部中小企業處（2019）具創新能力之新創事業認定原則。上網日期：2020年5月27日，檢自https://www.moeasmea.gov.tw/files/579/51B06AF1-A0EB-4890-A6E4-60B23365A7B0
經濟部中小企業處（2019）小型企業創新研發計畫介紹。上網日期：2020年2月25日，檢自https://www.sbir.org.tw/download_sbir
經濟部技術處（2019）2018科技專案執行年報。上網日期：2020年6月15日，檢自：https://www.moea.gov.tw/MNS/doit/publication/Publication.aspx?menu_id=13400&pub_id=5982
經濟部中小企業處（2018）2018中小企業白皮書。上網日期：2021年1月20日，檢自：https://www.moeasmea.gov.tw/list-tw-2345
經濟部中小企業處（2020）2020中小企業白皮書。上網日期：2021年1月21日，檢自：https://www.moeasmea.gov.tw/list-tw-2345
資誠聯合會計師事務所（2019）2019台灣新創圈生態大調查。上網日期：2020年5月27日，檢自：https://www.pwc.tw/zh/publications/topic-report/2019-taiwan-startup-ecosystem-survey.html
潘淑滿（2003）。質性研究：理論與應用。臺北：心理。
吳梓川(2017)。新創企業創業團隊關係研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學，臺北。
Babbie, E. (2016). 社會科學研究方法（林秀雲譯）。臺北：新加坡商聖智學習。
Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2000). 質性資料分析：文本，影像與聲音（羅世宏、蔡欣怡、薛丹琦譯）。臺北：高等教育。
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). 質性研究概論（徐宗國譯）。臺北：巨流。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
107364125 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107364125 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202100135 |
| 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 |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 412501.pdf | | 4346Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
