新興產業動態競合策略模型之建置―以台灣應用軟體租賃服務產業為例

Abstract

競合網路中合作價值創造之重要性日益顯著，企業於所處競合關係網路中之相對關係決定該競合網路之支配權，而企業所掌握之支配權愈大，在價值網路中所擁有的附加價值與競合優勢也就愈明顯。本研究透過所發展之動態競合策略模型，探討：(1)競合網路面對不連續科技創新所產生之替代威脅時，競合網路中之成員如何在新舊競合關係從新定位，(2)在新興產業發展初期，突破性科技創新者如何以競合策略界定競合範疇與關係。 動態競合策略模型之發展基礎在於：新興產業之不連續技術創新企業應以「創新所需之互補性資產」為支點，並根據不同之技術採用生命週期階段，透過改變競合關係之策略手段攻擊或迴避既有產業成員之競爭動作。動態競合策略分析模式之主要目的在於分析企業在新興產業發展階段期間，新舊競合網路關係之演變過程，並分析組織如何就現有的策略性資產與互補性能力以競合策略取得新興競合網路關係中之優勢地位。透過模型之操作，所獲對於新興產業階段突破性科技廠商所應採行之策略建議如下：(一)早期市場階段，應降低既有產業大廠之加入競爭動機，避免與其直接對抗；並利用互補性資產所形成之移動障礙為支點，限制既有價值網路競爭者移動，並迫使其角色轉換為互補合作關係。(二)鴻溝與保齡球道階段：主要在於建立價值分工體系、構築利基市場價值鏈，並將與上下游之「互補關係」推至於「共生關係」，以利基市場求得以求新興價值鏈之保護作用。(三)龍捲風暴階段：誘使上下游廠商協力推動標準化體系並對既有產業鏈進行替代、設定標準奪取市場佔有率等攻擊動作。 本研究選取新興ASP產業發展為模型應用案例。ASP模式本質意涵在於以購買服務取代購買軟體，只租不賣的新興定價方式對資訊服務產業帶來莫大的衝擊。最後應用本研究所建構之新興產業動態競合策略模型，解構台灣ASP產業於各階段之發展過程。研究發現：(一)獨立軟體開發商在轉型ASP初期，會發生通路衝突之現象，這同時也是ASP平台業者可以在早期市場階段與以合作結盟之原因，(二)現階段ASP業者應朝向利基市場之價值分工體系發展，產品線不宜過廣(三)下階段應對傳統軟體產業通路進行價值替代，以標準化產品快速佔有市場。最後並以個案研究中之宇盟商務科技公司之角度，對過去之企業聯盟活動進行策略分析，並提出未來發展階段之競合策略建議。

Instead of concentrating on competition, the industrial players must learn to manage more complicated games. Firms must learn how to work with a variety of co-opetitors, customers and suppliers, and how to create partnerships and alliances with players. The value creation by cooperation between firms is more and more important. A firm dominates in the value net by taking a superior position and stronger relationship with co-opetitors. This study discusses:(1)How does a player position itself between an developing value net while facing the substitution threat induced by disruptive technologies? (2) In an emerging industry, how does a disruptive innovator gain the leadership in new value net through redefining co-opetition scope and levering co-opetition relationship? As for model construction, this study integrates the industrial competitive theories of co-opetition, technology life cycle, game theory, complementary assets, and disruptive technology to analyze the developing value net in the emerging industries. The dynamic co-opetition model is based on different periods of technology life cycle (early market, chasm & bowling, and tornado)to generate a firms’ strategy, such as to attack or defend the incumbents by levering “the complementary assets” and changing co-opetition scope and relationship. Three co-opetition strategies are proposed in this model : (1) In early market, firms should use the “complementary assets” as a leverage to restrict incumbent’s movement, and to reduce competition pressures. (2) During chasm and bowling periods, a firm should establish its niche markets. (3) In tornado period, a firm should try its best to set industrial standards in order to enlarge its market shares. This study employs Taiwan ASPs as the case for dynamic co-opetition analysis. Instead of selling physical package softwares, to provide invisible service is the key essence of an ASP. The case of AsiaHub is evaluated to exemplify the use of analytical schemes developed herein. The study suggests that the platform ASPs should cooperate with independent software vendors at current stage and focus on niche markets. Furthermore, the platform ASPs should work with the system integrators and consultants to enlarge market shares as soon as possible in the tornado period.