集中化與多角化無形資產價值評價研究—以台灣與美國IC設計業為例

Abstract

知識經濟的時代，企業已從傳統的土地、廠房、生產設備等固定資產的經營型態，轉而強調專利、品牌、顧客關係、服務等無形資產，而台灣的產業結構亦正面臨從傳統製造導向，轉為知識、服務導向的重大轉型期。台灣於過去數十年間創造了台灣經濟奇蹟，有形資產的價值已無法解釋許多公司的成長及價值；反倒是非傳統的無形資產：如技術、專利、服務、品牌、……等才是經濟成長的驅動力。無形資產到底是什麼？又該怎麼衡量？又該怎麼管理？ 本研究為能更清楚了解驅動IC設計業競爭的無形資產價值，在不同的策略模式—「集中化」與「多角化」是否有所差異？採用客觀的公開資料，以台灣和美國前二十大IC設計公司為樣本，進行統計實證分析，期找出其管理意涵。

經實證結果發現： 一、 不同經營策略（「集中化」與「多角化」），其獲利能力有顯著差異，但獲利變異數並無顯著差異； 二、 不同經營策略（「集中化」與「多角化」），其無形資產價值或變異數皆沒有顯著差異； 三、 以Mann-Whitney法檢定，發現2000年時，兩群組間之淨值報酬率與營業利益率出現顯著差異；分別做出兩項指標之歷年趨勢圖，發現：採行「集中化」策略時，易受外在因素影響其營收獲利；若採行「多角化」策略，當景氣不佳時，仍可以減緩其獲利不佳的趨勢，企業較有調整、因應外部環境影響的彈性。 四、 五種無形資產評價法中，CEEM (資本化超額盈餘法)、VAIC（智慧資本附加價值法）與變數間呈現較多相關性顯著的無形資產評價法。若以策略模式比較，發現「集中化」與變數間相關性較大，影響也較大。 五、 不同無形評價法間，各有其評估的優缺點，然而採行不同策略時，無形資產評價並不會出現顯著差異。

In era of the knowledge-based economy, enterprises have already changed their managing resources from fixed assets , such as traditional land , factory buildings, and production equipments to the intangible assets, such as patents , brand , customer's relation , services, and people. The industrial structure of Taiwan has shifted its direction from the traditional manufacturing to knowledge or service leading milestone. During the past decades, Taiwan created the economic miracle. Physical assets have been already unable to explain the growth and value of a lot of companies; Intangible assets have become increasingly important as economy development. What are the intangible assets on earth? How to value or manage it? This research is in order to understand clearly if the valuations of intangible assets are different when IC design firms adopt focus versus diversification strategy. Secondary, we used data from Taiwan and U.S.A. of 20 largest IC design companies (from 1998-2003) to conduct our empirical study. Based on our empirical results, we have concluded: 1. Using “focus” or “diversification” strategy, firms’ profitabilities are significantly different, but has no difference in the profit variation. 2. Using different strategies, firms’ intangible asset values or variation has no significant difference. 3. In 2000, firms’ ROE’s and ROI’s showed significant difference. 4. Among all the five different intangible assets valuation methods, CEEM and VAIC methods lead to more apparent dependence between variables than other methods. 5. Different evaluation assessments have their own advantages and disadvantages. We should understand their characteristics and contingencies to make the best use of them.