運用DEA模型評比DRAM公司

Abstract

2000年台灣DRAM產業產值佔台灣記憶體產業總產值的70%，以及全球DRAM市場的17.3%。2001年在全球高科技產業不景氣的衝擊下，因供過於求且存貨過多，造成DRAM價格崩跌。DRAM產業具有資本密集、技術密集、產品差異性小、價格波動大、以及景氣週期循環的特性，並對全球供需的變化非常敏感。本文比較本國DRAM製造業者與外國(美、德、韓)主要業者的經營績效，並分析造成不同公司經營績效差異的可能原因。傳統績效評量多僅採用財務指標，未能就公司其他重要指標作總體之衡量。本研究運用資料包絡分析法(CCR、A&P和D&G三種評量模式)，除了考量1998-2001年相關財務資料：研發費用、利息支出與折舊之外，並針對DRAM產業的特性增加月產能作為非財務之投入要素；本研究並嘗試以三種產出要素來評量廠商的經營績效，一是以稅後損益為營運績效之代表、二是以Gross Die (每8吋晶圓片可生產的DRAM顆數)為技術績效之代表、三是同時考量稅後損益與Gross Die作為整合營運績效與技術績效之綜合績效。

In year 2000, the Taiwan DRAM revenue made up 70% of all Taiwan semiconductor revenues, and 17.3% of worldwide DRAM market share. However, in year 2001, global DRAM prices plunged abruptly to below cost level and pushed all manufacturers into heavy losses. The DRAM industry has the characteristics of capital intensive, technology intensive, commodity product, cyclic business and vulnerability to price fluctuation to demand changes. Using the CCR, A&P, and D&G models from the DEA (Data Envelope Analysis) methodology, this research compares the operating performances of Micron (US), Infineon (Germany), Hynix (Korea) and five Taiwan DRAM Manufacturers for the period from 1998 to 2001. The DEA method can compare the relative efficiency of these eight companies based on the outcomes of multiple operating outputs with respect to the inputs of multiple operating resources. Four input parameters considered in this study are R&D expenses, interest expenses, depreciation, and monthly production capacity. The net profit is used as a measure of the business return, and the gross die count (the number of equivalent 64MB DRAM on a single 8” wafer) is used as a measure of the technology sophistication. Each of the two output parameters is analyzed individually to compare the business return efficiency and the technology efficiency separately. Moreover, the two output parameters are considered simultaneously to compare the joint output efficiencies.