應用資源基礎論分析經營策略：以某外商輪胎公司為例

Abstract

資源基礎論的研究以觀念性的文獻居多，輪胎產業2005年的全球產值已超過1,000億美元，而個案公司米其林輪胎與其競爭對手普利司通自1980年以來即蟬聯業界的前二名，因此產業與個案公司均值得作為資源基礎論的實證研究範例。本研究主要根據R.M.Grant(2002)所建構的策略分析模式，以台灣米其林輪胎公司為例進行個案研究，並綜合Collis & Montgomery(1995)的觀點，將此個案公司所擁有的資源與能力加以辨識與分類，其次分析這些資源與能力的策略重要性與相對於競爭對手的優劣勢情況，最後根據分析結果，找出個案公司的主要優勢與主要弱勢，對照檢驗個案公司的實際經營策略，審視其是否充分發揮所長，彌補所短，並提供改善建議。 依據本研究分析，個案公司的主要優勢為商譽資源，帳款風險掌控能力，研發與產品設計能力與價格主導能力。個案公司的主要弱勢為行銷預算資源，市場佔有率資源，經銷通路與服務據點資源，產品區隔資源，供貨能力及行銷與通路拓展能力。 本研究之結論與心得為： 1.企業策略的擬定應因地制宜，循序漸進，在嘗試滿足市場需求時，首先應考量企業本身的“供給能力” ，否則將事倍功半甚至徒勞無功。 2.資源與能力的辨識必須考量“產出能力”，也就是在產業中的獲利可能性，而非只注意到該項資源是否對客戶有直接吸引力。 3.資源與能力的評定必須遵循標竿法則，也就是必須與主要競爭對手相比，才能判別本身的優弱勢情況。 4.資源與能力的優弱勢是動態而非靜態，停滯不前既有優勢將被迎頭趕上，投資於彌補資源缺口，將成為未來競爭力來源。 5.競爭優勢可能與單一資源或能力有關，但多為數個資源或能力結合成果的顯現，因此必須綜合考量。

Most studies on RBV (Resource-Based View) are mainly focus on conceptual research, the world tire industry in 2005 was more than USD 100 billions and the case company-Michelin and its major competitor-Bridgestone have dominated the top two positions since 1980. Both the industry and the case company are worthy for case study of RBV. This research is based on the framework for strategy formulation of R.M.Grant (2002) to analyze a foreign tire company in Taiwan. The methodology is firstly to identify this firm’s resources and capabilities, secondly to appraise these resources and capabilities in terms of strategic importance and relative strength, thirdly to examine the approaches this firm has conducted, finally to find out if this firm well performed its key strengths and propose suggestions for weakness correction. This research concludes that the key strengths of this firm are reputation, credit management, R&D and pricing dominance, key weaknesses are marketing expenditure, market share, distribution network, resources for product segmentation, supply chain and marketing & channel development. This research also provides suggestions as follows: 1.Supply capability should be prior to market demand for a firm’s strategy formulation. 2.The key identification of key resources and capabilities is “productivity” or “profitability” not the “attractiveness for customers”. 3.To objectively appraise a firm’s resources and capabilities, we should follow the principle of “benchmarking”. 4.The relative strength is not static, invest to correct the weakness at present will raise the competitive advantage in the future. 5.Most competitive advantages are not from a single resource or capability, they are often synergies of several resources or capabilities.