台灣地區建築設計產業分析與競爭策略研究

Abstract

建築設計產業屬於營建產業鏈中游之副產業，也是形塑實體空間、造型與環境重要的構思者之一，與建築相關的科系，在台灣也曾經是許多年輕的學子，熱中選擇就讀的科系之ㄧ。放眼全球，觀察各國現代化的都市風貌與紋理，建築及其環境的規劃設計與品質，常常是重要的進步指標，建築設計扮演了重要的角色，然而建築設計必須要依靠整體營建系統的執行與運作，才能具體實現。 自從民國60年制訂建築法以來，基於專業分工的需要，我國採用了分割與階段式的營建法令系統，因而發展成為今日的產業分工與營運模式。早期因對建築需求不高，營建產業生態內的廠商尚能順利運作，但隨著市場需求與競爭日趨提高，在產業鏈內上下游廠商的擠壓下，建築設計廠商不但規模成長不易、且發展日趨兩極化，影響服務品質，浪費人力資源；部分強勢客戶，因為希望可以獲得整體、完整的解決方案，轉而改變採購模式，嚴重影響建築設計廠商的未來發展。因此，如何為建築設計產業的發展建立可行的策略方案，成為本研究的主要目的。 本研究以實際產業數據為基礎，試圖從產業外部環境、結構特色、廠商數量與分佈、組織型態與結構、業務與經營規模...等構面，進行詳細的產業與競爭策略分析。研究結果顯示，產業外部環境是逐漸改變的，產業組織結構是屬於普通集中分散型的產業，建築設計本身是具有可差異化的條件，廠商競爭優勢的建立，原因不外乎價值鏈與價值網的高度成熟運用。 本研究將建築設計產業內之廠商，分為四種策略群組，其中三種是屬於具有競爭優勢的廠商，彼此定位、客戶選擇、擁有的資源與能力都有所不同，雖然稍可減弱產業內廠商彼此的競爭程度，然而來自於「需求端的各種改變力量」與「營建產業鏈內各廠商爭權分利的競爭壓力」，才是建築設計廠商，在經營上無法迴避的問題。 據此，本研究建議政府修法改變系統與制度，以建立適合現代社會的商業模式，滿足一般性客戶的整體需求。至於操之在我的部份，廠商應審度環境情勢，了解未來需求的變化，在現行體制下，積極打入產業鏈內主要廠商之價值網體系內，參與並合作，除了成為客戶之供應商外，更要成為其互補者，雙重角色會增加廠商生存與主導的空間，這才是建築設計廠商發展及永續經營之策略性思考。

Being a part of the overall construction industry, architectural design industry provides professional services that shape the actual space, molding, and environment through conceptualization works. Architecture designer has been a leading choice of profession in Taiwan. Viewing on the world famous landscape and observing the veins of urbanized city, it is quite obvious that architectures, along with the design and quality of its environment, are often the key indicators of advancement. While architectural design plays a significant role, however, it has to rely on the systematic effort of construction works for building implementation. Due to the consideration for division of labor, Taiwan adopted divisional and gradational construction legislation systems ever since the architecture legislation was passed in 1971, which subsequently determined the industry structure and dominant business models. With increasing complexity of construction businesses and intensified competition along the industry value chain, architecture design companies are squeezed by both upstream and downstream players so that their space for expansion are seriously constrained. Powerful investors require turn-key or total solution types of services which would significantly affect the strategic interactions between architecture designing firms and construction firms and hence the structure of the whole industry. Such a structural change motivates the present research. Based on the industry statistics and field information, this research attempts to investigate the architecture design industry and its competitive strategy through the frameworks of industry structure and strategy analysis. Analytical results show that the external environment of architecture industry has been gradually changing, and that the industry is characterized as a medium concentrated structure. There are substantial rooms for differentiation through collaboration with value net partners upon which a architecture design firm's competitive advantages could be based. Based on product mix and price levels, we further suggest four strategic groups of architecture design firms where they possess different positioning, client bases and capabilities. Although such differentiation among groups of firms may reduce the intensity of inter-firm competition, competitive pressures from the demand side and co-opetitiors pertaining to the same value net are key factors that balance out the space of differentiation advantages. In conclusion, we suggest that the government can amend the regulation in order to help establish a healthy business model, which would satisfy the need of the majority of customers in the modern society. On the other hand, architecture design firms should cope with the changing environment and future demand, and proactively penetrate and reshape the value network through co-opetition. In addition to being a pure-play design supplier, an architecture design firm may consider to be an influential supplementor to their existing clients by which the likelihood of long term sustainability would enhance.