Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 管理學院
  3. 國際企業學系
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/15905
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor李吉仁(Ji-Ren Lee)
dc.contributor.authorJing-Ru Xinen
dc.contributor.author辛靜如zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-07T17:54:59Z-
dc.date.copyright2012-08-20
dc.date.issued2012
dc.date.submitted2012-08-16
dc.identifier.citation一、中文部份
中央社,2004,「景氣不佳合併成為音樂界撙節成本新選擇」‬
二、英文部份
Argyris, C. and D. Schon. 1978.0rganizationul Learning. Addison-Wesley, MA: Reading.
Arrow, KJ. 1974. The Limits of Organization. New York, NY: Norton.
Barr, PS., Stimpert, JL., Huff, AS. 1992. Cognitive change, strategic action, and organizational renewal. Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue 13: 15–36.
Brown, SL., & Eisenhardt, KM. 1998. Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Darden. 2009. EMI GROUP PLC. Darden Business Publishing University Virginia, UV1201.
Eisenhardt, M., & Kathleen.1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14: 532-550.
Goel,S., Miesing,P., Chandra,U. 2010.The Impact of Illegal Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing. Harvard Business School Case: #9-706-479.
Hedberg, B. 1981. How organizations learn and unlearn. In Nystron, P. and W. Starbuck (eds), Handbook of Organizational Design. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hedberg, B., Nystrom, P., Starbuck., W. 1976. Camping on seesaws: prescriptions for a self-designing organization, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21: 41-65
Helfat, CE. 1997. Know-how asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: the case of R&D. Strategic Management Journal, 18(5): 339–360.
Henderson, RM., & Clark, KB. 1990. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 9–30.
Holland, J. H. 1992. Adaptation in Natural and Artrficial Systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. 1982. Managerial response to changing environments: perspectives on problem sensing from social cognition. Administrative Science Quarterly 27: 548–570.
Kuhn, TS. 1970.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd edn), Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Leonard-Barton, D.1992. Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, l13: 111-125.
Levitt, B., & March JG. 1988. Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319–340.
March J., & Simon, H. 1958. Organizations. New York, NY: John Wiley. & Sons
Mitchell, W. 1989. Whether and when? Probability and timing of incumbents’ entry into emerging industrial subfields. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34: 208–234.
Nelson, R., & Winter, S. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of the Firm. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Prahalad, CK., & Bettis, RA. 1986. The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(6): 485–501.
Prahalad, CK., Bettis, RA. 1995. The dominant logic: Retrospective and extension. Strategic Management Journal, 16: 5-14.
Rayport, Jeffrey. 1999. RCA Records: The Digital Revolution. Harvard Business School Case, 9-800-014.
Rivkin, JW., & Meier, G. 2005. BMG Entertainment. Harvard Business School Case, 9-701-003.
Schramm, W.1971. Notes on Case Studies of Instructional Media Projects, CA: Stanford University Press, 43.
Teece, D. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15: 285–305.
Teece, DJ. 1988. Technological change and the nature of the firm.InDosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G, Soete L (eds.). Technical Change and Economic Theory, 256–281.Pinter Publisher: London.
Teece, DJ., Pisano, G., Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18(7): 509-553.
Tripsas, M. 1997. Unraveling the process of creative destruction: complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue 18: 119–142.
Tripsas, M., & Gavetti, G. 2000.Capabilities, Cognition and Inertia: Evidence from Digital Imaging. Strategic Management Journal, 21(11): 1147-1161.
Tushman, ML., & Anderson, P. 1986. Technological dis-continuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 439–465.
Waldrop, M. M. 1992. Complexity, New York, Simon & Schuster.
Wells, JR., & Raabe, EA. 2007. Update: The Music Industry in 2006.Harvard Business School Case, 9-707-531.
Yin, Y. K. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, CA: Sage Publishing.

二、其他
Financial News.2005.Major labels sell off MusicNet.
.Los Angeles Time. 2005. N.Y. Firm Buys Out MusicNet.
‬Los‬Angeles Time.2003.RealNetworks to Acquire Listen.com.‬‬
Wikipedia.Warner‬Music Group.‬
Billboard全美音樂排行榜:
http://www.billboard.com/bbma/
華納唱片公司年度報告: http://investors.wmg.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=182480&p=irol-reportsannual
IFPI 數位音樂年報 :
http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_statistics/index.html
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/15905-
dc.description.abstract全球科技的進步、不斷推陳出新的產品和日益競爭的經營環境,在在都考驗著企業快速與適切回應的能力而這一直是經營者所須關切的議題。本研究從經營者主導邏輯理論與組織慣性的觀念為基礎,探索既有成功企業對於科技創新的回應行為,期能對於企業變革與轉型有所啟發。
本研究採取個案研究的方法,探討企業經營策略背後的主導邏輯,和主導邏輯的影響結果。個案選擇則以唱片產業四大領導廠商之一的華納唱片公司,做為單一個案研究的標的。透過華納歷史資料的觀察,了解華納在實體唱片時代的營運模式、營運事業範疇、組織結構,並配合華納內部經理人的訪談,總結出華納在唱片營運經營上的主導邏輯:完善的版權保護,才能讓音樂授權的模式獲利,以及挖掘具有濳力成為巨星的藝人,為音樂產業中的致勝關鍵。這兩大主導邏輯決定了華納組織結構、組織資源分配,以及新事業的選擇與發展。
研究結果也發現,高階經理人對核心事業經營的經驗累積,成為企業的核心能力基礎,但當環境改變時,主導邏輯很可能無法改變,而影響了企業回應環境適切性。此外,高階經理人在過去越是成功,就越難放棄既有的主導邏輯,而去接受新的主導邏輯,過去的主導邏輯便成為阻礙企業調適與未來成功的障礙,構成核心僵固性,如此組織的慣性將繼續依循著以往的主導邏輯,重複著過去的營運模式。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractFacing the rapid progress of technology, constant introduction of new products and often discontinuous environmental change, a firm has to ensure its flexibility and adjustment that fits with external change. In the present research, we undertake theoretical lens of dominant logic and organizational inertia to examine how an established firm responds to external technological changes.
Based on a longitudinal case research focusing on one of the major record company, Warner Music Group(WMG, hereafter),we are able to revisit the company’s history, business scope, and organizational structure during the past years.
Plus in-depth interview with senior managers, we then inductively conclude some of its dominant logic of management, including their firm believe on the artist as the key success factor in the music industry, and relying upon general music licensing. These two dominant logics determine how the WMG's organization is structured resources are allocated; as well as new businesses are selected.
This study suggests that the dominant logic of senior managers is formed by accumulated the past experience in core business. It’s not only a core competence, but also the bases of senior managers make the decision. Due to the face that dominant logic is formed under the previous context, it becomes extremely difficult to change and managers are less likely to respond appropriately to situations where the dominant logic is different. In addition, the more successful the company was in the past, the more difficult it is to forego the old dominant logic and to establish the new one. In other word, the old dominant logic become the basis of core rigidity, which the hinder the company to adapt Implications of and suggestions from the research results are also discussed.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-07T17:54:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ntu-101-R99724045-1.pdf: 3415223 bytes, checksum: 0d81badec65d418a1fe5642be8ec31c1 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2012
en
dc.description.tableofcontents中文摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
目錄 iii
圖目錄 v
表目錄 vi
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究問題與目的 2
第三節 研究方法 2
第四節 研究架構 4
第二章 文獻探討 6
第一節 主導邏輯 6
第二節 核心能力與核心僵固 12
第三節 組織慣性 14
第三章 音樂產業分析 17
第一節 傳統音樂產業 17
第二節 數位音樂產業 21
第四章 音樂公司個案分析 28
第一節 個案公司背景 28
第二節 華納主導邏輯 34
第三節 華納組織慣性 35
第四節 回應科技創新的策略 36
第五節 總結 42
第五章 結論與建議 48
第一節 研究結論 48
第二節 研究建議 49
參考文獻 52
dc.language.isozh-TW
dc.subject數位音樂zh_TW
dc.subject組織慣性zh_TW
dc.subject核心僵固zh_TW
dc.subject主導邏輯zh_TW
dc.subjectCore Rigidityen
dc.subjectOrganizational Inertiaen
dc.subjectDominant Logicen
dc.subjectDigital Musicen
dc.title主導邏輯與組織慣性對企業回應科技創新之影響:
以國際音樂公司為例
zh_TW
dc.titleAn Exploratory Study on the Impact of Dominant Logic and Organizational Inertia on a Firm’s Reaction to Technological Innovation: The Case of a Multinational Music Companyen
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear100-2
dc.description.degree碩士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee謝明慧(Ming-Huei Hsieh),吳相勳(Sonic Wu)
dc.subject.keyword數位音樂,主導邏輯,核心僵固,組織慣性,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordDigital Music,Dominant Logic,Core Rigidity,Organizational Inertia,en
dc.relation.page54
dc.rights.note未授權
dc.date.accepted2012-08-16
dc.contributor.author-college管理學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept國際企業學研究所zh_TW
顯示於系所單位:國際企業學系

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-101-1.pdf
  未授權公開取用
3.34 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


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。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved