| Summary: | 碩士 === 東吳大學 === 企業管理學系 === 93 === In order to survive in the competitive society, organizational changes are significant for companies to sustain their compatibility in the market. This paper is an analysis and comparison between the change of Acer in 2000 and that of Asus in 2002, based on Donald Sull’s Theory of Transforming Commitments. The stages discussed in this paper include (1) the original defining commitments and successful formulas of the two companies, (2) the external innovative power that allowed entrepreneurs to reinforce commitment, leading the organization into active inertia, and (3) the entrepreneurs’ start of transforming commitments and generating new successful formula.
This research shows that although both Acer and Asus were trapped in active inertia and took transforming commitments, there are several differences in their reasons and methods of change: (1) Acer lead to active inertia because of the successful change initiated by 施振榮 in 1992, while active inertia in Asus was resulted from the new guidelines set by 施崇棠 when he joined this company, (2) according to the diagram which shows the analysis of risk elements in active inertia, Acer has higher tendency of active inertia than ASUS, (3) while in active inertia, it takes Asus shorter time to respond to the surrounding changes and to make transforming commitment.
In the last section, the researcher provides some suggestions on methods of avoiding active inertia for the two companies: (1)”Strategic frames,” integrate their products with 3C products. (2)”Resources,” Develop as a consumptive brand and train capable managers in the organization. (3)”Processes,” for Acer, copy “New Channel Business Model with Direct SCM” to other areas, while for Asus, rearrange the vertical management in Mainland China. (4)”Relationships,” for Acer, keep good relationship with its dealers, while for Asus, develop its brand and work contractor separately, and (5)”Values,” recruit the employees who accept the culture of the company.
|
|---|
