請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/76748
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 柯承恩,曾智揚 | |
dc.contributor.author | Terng-Huei Lai | en |
dc.contributor.author | 賴騰輝 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-07-10T21:36:11Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-07-10T21:36:11Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2016-10-14 | |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2016-07-25 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Ashton, K. (2009, June 22). That “Internet of Things” Thing - RFID Journal. Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://www.rfidjournal.com/articles/view?4986
Auchard, E. (2015, December 7). NXP completes deal to buy Freescale and create top auto chipmaker. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/usautos-semiconductors-nxp-semicondtrs-idUSKBN0TQ1IK20151207 Aune, T. B. (2014). Managing Suppliers in Business Networks:: Exploring Innovation, Capability Development, and Network Pictures. Retrieved from http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/266431 Axelsson, & Hakansson. (1984). Managing Suppliers in Business Networks. Bross, M., & Zhao, G. (2004). Supplier selection process in emerging markets-The case study of Volvo bus corporation in China. Burkitt, F. (2014, November 10). A Strategist’s Guide to the Internet of Things.Retrieved May 16, 2016, from http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00294? gko=a9303 Cheraghi, S. H., Dadashzadeh, M., & Subramanian, M. (2004). Critical success factors for supplier selection: an update. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 20(2). Retrieved from http://new.cluteinstitute.com/ojs/index.php/JABR/article/view/2209 Cisco. (2014). The Internet of Things Reference Model. Cisco. Daly, M. (2016, March 22). IoT enabler, engager or enhancer? Retrieved May 16, 2016, from http://www.businessintelligencethoughtleadership.com/post/102d98s/iotenabler-engager-or-enhancer Dickson, G. W. (1966). An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. Journal of Purchasing, 1, 5–17. Evans, D. (2011). The Internet of Things How the Next Evolution of the Internet Is Changing Everything. Cisco IBSG White Paper. Retrieved from http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/about/ac79/docs/innov/IoT_IBSG_0411FINAL.pdf Gartner. (2014, November 3). Gartner Says the Processing, Sensing and Communications Semiconductor Device Portion of the IoT Is Set for Rapid Growth. Retrieved May 17, 2016, from http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2895917 Gartner, G. (2015, November 10). Gartner Says 6.4 Billion Connected [Newsroom].Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3165317 Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things (IoT):A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Generation Computer Systems, 29(7), 1645–1660.http://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010 Higginbotham, S. (2014, April 16). The internet of things is great for chipmakers and a challenge for Intel. Retrieved May 14, 2016, from https://gigaom.com/2014/04/16/the-internet-of-things-is-great-for-chipmakersand-a-challenge-for-intel/ IDC. (2014, September). Japan Internet of Things Ecosystem and Trends. IDC. IEC. (2014). Internet of Things: Wireless Sensor Networks. IEC. Information and communications technology. (2016, May 19). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Information_and_communications_technology&oldid=721067977 Internet of Things. (2016, May 13). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_of_Things&oldid=720138659 Lueth, K. L. (2014, October 31). IoT market segments – Biggest opportunities in industrial manufacturing. Retrieved from http://iot-analytics.com/iot-marketsegments-analysis/ Mani, R. (2015, April 15). The Impact of IoT on Semiconductor Companies. pwc. McKinsey/GSA. (2015, May). The_Internet of Things Opportunities and challenges for semiconductor companies. McKinsey & GSA. Micrium. (2016). Part 1: IoT Devices and Local Networks | Micrium. Retrieved from https://www.micrium.com/iot/devices/ Morgan, J. (2014, May 13). A Simple Explanation Of “The Internet Of Things.”Retrieved May 16, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2014/05/13/simple-explanationinternet-things-that-anyone-can-understand/ Porter, M. E. (1979, April). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://faculty.bcitbusiness.ca/KevinW/4800/porter79.pdf Raman Chikara, Werner Ballhaus, Olaf Acker, Bin Song, Anand Sundaram, & Maria Popova. (2015, May). The Internet of Things: The next growth engine for the semiconductor industry. PricewaterhouseCoopers AG Wirtschaftsprufungsgesellschaft. Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234–281. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. Sachs, G. (2014, September 3). iot-report Goldman Sachs.pdf. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.goldmansachs.com/ourthinking/ outlook/internet-of-things/iot-report.pdf Software as a service. (2016, May 13). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Software_as_a_service&oldid=720076289 Ti. (2016). CC2650 SimpleLink multi-standard 2.4 GHz ultra-low power wireless MCU. Retrieved May 16, 2016, from http://www.ti.com/product/CC2650 Tilley, A. (2015, May 15). Qualcomm: The Internet Of Things Is Already A Billion Dollar Business. Retrieved May 14, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/aarontilley/2015/05/15/qualcomm-the-internet-ofthings-is-a-billion-dollar-business/ Tullous, R., & Munson, J. M. (1991, summer). Trade-off Under Uncertainty:Implications for Industrial Purchasers. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management. Vaidya, O. S., & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 169(1), 1–29. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028 Weber, C. A., Current, J. R., & Benton, W. C. (1991). Vendor selection criteria and methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 50(1), 2–18. Wind, Y., & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science, 26(7), 641–658. Yoshida, J. (2015, December 12). What Freescale-NXP Merger Can Teach Us | EE Times. Retrieved May 19, 2016, from http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp? doc_id=1328411 Zhang, Z., Lei, J., Cao, N., To, K., & Ng, K. (2003). Evolution of supplier selection criteria and methods. European Journal of Operational Research. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/76748 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 在傳統的資訊通信科技產業裡, 特別是個人電腦相關產業, 硬體製造廠商面對
的IC 供應廠商選項有限, 且解決方案多是根據業界統一界定的規格. 新興的物聯 網產業沒有統一的規格, 而是根據不同的應用提出來的相互競爭的並持續演進中 的不同技術. 由於預計2020年以前世界上會有數百億個智慧型終端設備, 每一個半 導體廠商無不卯足了勁, 投入大量的資源希望能拿到最大的市場佔有率. 因此在台 灣希望進入物聯網市場的硬體製造商面臨了如何選擇合適IC供應廠商的新問題. 選擇一個最適合自己需求的供應商有許多需要考慮的因素. 本論文依據台灣 產業的現況提出5個因素作為公司評選IC 供應商的依據, 分別是廠商的穩定度, 產 品提供的性能特色, 價格, 產品研發的支援, 以及供應廠品牌. 同時建議用Saaty 博 士提出的層次分析法作為評比各個考量因素的方法, 並且作為公司決策單位達到 集體共識的工具. 本研究論文藉由一個4人團隊以演示層次分析法中的比較, 衡量與比序過程, 以及如何達到最後團隊共識, 選出最符合決策團隊內每一個成員要求之最佳供應 商. 本文發現價格雖然仍是重要的衡量因素, 但不是最大考量重點. 供應廠商本身 的穩定與解決方案的性能特色, 才是面對這個議題時的最主要決定因素. | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Compared with the traditional ICT industry, especially the PC related marketwhere limited IC solutions are available and mostly based on the same specification, thebooming IoT market has competing and evolving spec for different applications. With tens of billions of devices in the forecast, all IC makers are putting in tremendous amount of resources to try to get as much market share as possible. The hardware makers in Taiwan now face a problem as how to select a proper IC vendor to help enter the new emerging market. Various factors must be considered before the best candidate can be identified.
Five factors are suggested by this paper, from the prospective of a Taiwan based IHV, as the vendor selection criteria, company stability, features of the products, pricing, support of the development, and brand of the vendor. Dr. Saaty's AHP is also suggested as the methodology to evaluate these factors and to reach a group consensus for the company's decision-making team. The AHP process for the criteria comparison, to rate and rank potential candidates, and to eventually reach a group decision of identifying the most suitable vendor that best fit every decision maker's expectation, are demonstrated by a team of 4 invited members. It is the founding of this research that, although still a significant factor, price is not the most important consideration. Instead, the vendor's stability and the features supported by its offerings are the top two concerns. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-07-10T21:36:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-105-P02744010-1.pdf: 2309142 bytes, checksum: e94dc28a7faa9d816a8c3855ef840b7f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Table of Contents
Acknowledgment iii 中文摘要 iv THESIS ABSTRACT v Table of Contents vii Index of Figures ix Index of Tables x 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Objectives 1 1.1.1. Goal of the research 1 1.1.2. The Role of the IHV 2 1.1.3. Scope and Limitation 3 1.2. Methodology 4 1.3. Structure of the thesis 4 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 5 2.1. IoT 5 2.1.1. IoT Overview 5 2.1.2. IoT Infrastructure 8 2.1.3. WSN – Wireless Sensor Network 11 2.1.4. Semiconductor Industry and IoT 14 2.2. VENDOR SELECTION 16 2.2.1. Criteria of choosing a proper vendor 17 2.2.2. The role of vendors 18 2.2.3. The role of IC vendor in IoT 19 2.3. AHP, the ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS 20 2.3.1. Basic Theory 20 2.3.2. How it Works: the AHP procedure 24 3. APPLYING AHP IN THE VENDOR SELECTION 33 3.1. Methodology 33 3.1.1. Participants 33 3.1.2. Determining the criteria 34 3.1.3. Questionnaire 37 3.2. Data calculation and analysis 37 3.2.1. Data calculation 37 3.2.2. Summary and Analysis 42 3.2.3. Reaching a Group Consensus 47 3.3. Potential Candidates Comparison 49 3.3.1. The Candidates 49 3.3.2. The comparisons 50 3.4. Ranking of the Candidates 57 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 59 5. CONCLUSION 61 References 64 Appendix 68 Index of Figures Fig. 1.1 : ICT EcoSystem 3 Fig. 2.1 : The Internet of Things Was 'Born' Between 2008 and 2009 6 Fig. 2.2 : Source: Cisco (2014), Internet of Thngs Reference Model 8 Fig. 2.3 : 5 Layers that Constitute IoT Market 9 Fig. 2.4 : Source: IEC (2014), Wireless sensor networks 12 Fig. 2.5 : A basic Sensor Node 13 Fig. 2.6 : Ti CC26xx Block Diagram 14 Fig. 2.7 : Source: PWC(2015), IoT EcoSystem 15 Fig. 2.8 : Structure of the Hierarchy 24 Fig. 2.9 : Pairwise Comparison Process 26 Index of Tables Table 2.1 : Source: Gartner (November 2015), Internet of Things Units Installed Base by Category (Millions of Units) 7 Table 2.2 : Source: Gartner (November 2015), Internet of Things Endpoint Spending by Category (Billions of Dollars) 7 Table 2.3 : Source: Saaty, Random Index Table 24 Table 2.4 : Preference Matrix of Factor A, B, C, and D 25 Table 2.5 : Source: Saaty, Scale and Definition 26 Table 2.6 : Calculation of Preference Table 28 Table 2.7 : Candidates' Preference Table regarding Factor A, B, C and D 29 Table 2.8 : Candidates' Preference Table Calculation regarding Factor A 29 Table 2.9 : Candidates' Preference Table Calculation regarding Factor B 30 Table 2.10 : Candidates' Preference Table Calculation regarding Factor C 30 Table 2.11 : Candidates' Preference Table Calculation regarding Factor D 31 Table 2.12 : Overall Ranking of the Candidates 31 Table 3.1 : Preference Table Calculation of Sales 38 Table 3.2 : Preference Table Calculation of BU Head. 39 Table 3.3: Preference Table Calculation of Engineering 40 Table 3.4: Preference Table Calculation of CTO 41 Table 3.5 : Summary of Participant's Preference 42 Table 3.6 : Participants' Priority Sequence 42 Table 3.7 : Priority List - Group Consensus 48 Table 3.8: Potential Candidates Fact Sheet 50 Table 3.9 : Potential Candidates' Comparison regarding Stability 51 Table 3.10 : Potential Candidates' Comparison regarding Brand 52 Table 3.11 : Potential Candidates' Comparison regarding Cost 54 Table 3.12 : Potential Candidates' Comparison regarding Features 55 Table 3.13 : Potential Candidates' Comparison regarding Supports 56 Table 3.14 : Potential Candidates in Respect to Factors 57 Table 3.15 : Score Calculation of the Candidates 58 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 利用層次分析法替台灣獨立硬體製造公司
選擇物聯網IC供應商 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Using AHP method to Choose an IoT IC vendor
for a Taiwan based Independent Hardware Vendor | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 104-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳國泰 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 物聯網,層次分析法,集體決策,供應商選擇,無線感測網路, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Internet of Things (IoT),AHP,Group Decision-making,Vendor Selection,WSN, | en |
dc.relation.page | 73 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201601154 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2016-07-25 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 會計與管理決策組 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 會計與管理決策組 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-105-P02744010-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.26 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。