The Study of Co-opetition Alliance Development – The Case Study of A-Team in Taiwan Bicycle Industry.

碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 企業管理學系碩士在職專班 === 97 === Taiwan’s bicycle industry has a complete Center-Satellite System. It has a major role in the global bicycle industry. Taiwan once surpassed Japan in becoming the world’s largest exporter of bicycles. However, in recent years, due to stiff competition from...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yi-Feng Huang, 黃逸風
Other Authors: none
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/60257386610452517293
Description
Summary:碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 企業管理學系碩士在職專班 === 97 === Taiwan’s bicycle industry has a complete Center-Satellite System. It has a major role in the global bicycle industry. Taiwan once surpassed Japan in becoming the world’s largest exporter of bicycles. However, in recent years, due to stiff competition from country like China, where cheap labor is readily available, Taiwan’s bicycle export has drastically decreased. In 2003, in order for Taiwan’s bicycle industry to sustain itself, Giant and Merida reached out to the bicycle parts manufacturers in Taiwan and formed the A-Team. A-Team’s structure includes the value chain of center-satellite system and the cooperative/competitive relationship between competitors. My research examines the symbiotic relationship between A-Team’s members based on “Resource-based view”, “co-opetition” and “cluster” theories. Based on my research and analysis, I have formed the following propositions: 1) When members of an industry have a common goal, it helps in the formation of “co-opetition alliance.” 2) When “clustering effect” becomes increasingly obvious, it helps the formation and growth of co-opetition alliance. 3) When a “central factory’s” control over parts manufacturers diminishes, the chance that “central factory” will cooperate with its competitors increases. 4) When industry concentration is low, “central factory” is more likely to form “co-opetition alliance” with its competitors. 5) When industry has more significant parts modularity degrees, “central factory” is more likely to cooperate with its competitors. 6) The probability that competitors will cooperate with each other increases when cooperation activities are less relevant to the customers. The probability that competitors will cooperate with each other decreases when cooperation activities are more relevant to the customers. 7) In co-opetition alliance, competitors within an alliance will more likely cooperate with those with lowly –specialized skills or technologies. Conversely, competitors within an alliance are less likely to cooperate with those with highly-specialized skills or technologies.