視界主流之爭：TFT-LCD與OLED的競爭策略研究

Abstract

顯示器的技術就是為了滿足人類視覺需求而演化，由CRT進化成TFT-LCD平面顯示器（簡稱面板），可攜式面板直接改變了全人類的生活，舊技術被新技術取代，而且贏家全拿。TFT-LCD不斷地創新、挑戰人類視網膜極限，然而更先進、更輕薄、自發光OLED新技術來勢洶洶，直接挑戰TFT-LCD面板地位，台灣也面臨這場挑戰人類視界品位的主流之爭。 本研究乃一質性研究，藉助「紮根理論法」以及「個案研究法」，透過資料蒐集、分析、整理、歸納TFT-LCD產業與個案公司的競爭策略。使用S-C-P市場-結構-績效模型、Michael Porter的五力分析模型，以及價值網等產業分析工具，歸納整理出TFT-LCD產業已由成熟期逐漸走向衰退期，產業內部既有競爭者（特別是中國）競爭力快速擴大，同時也面臨OLED替代技術的威脅。在這場競爭中，TFT-LCD的發源地日本，由於企業層級策略方向選擇錯誤而失去了競爭優勢。 本研究以韓國、台灣、中國面板業龍頭：三星、群創、京東方為個案研究對象，基於Porter（1980）「競爭策略」、Porter（1985）「競爭優勢」三種基本競爭策略、成本領導與差異化補充分析理論基礎，深入研究個案公司的競爭策略。本研究發現，韓國企業層級策略方向著重於技術領先策略，積極搶攻OLED藍海市場；中國著重於低成本領導策略，積極搶攻TFT-LCD市場占有率，同時與韓國合作投資開發OLED技術與生產線。台灣在沒有品牌及市場的支持下，企業層級策略方向仍停留在低成本領導及代工模式，逐漸失去領先優勢，甚至趨於落後，台灣TFT-LCD產業現狀與日本失去市場前的發展軌跡驚人地相似。 面板產業視界之爭尚未定局，韓國、中國已積極轉進OLED。面對韓國、中國大陸的競爭，台灣TFT-LCD面板企業如何維持現有競爭優勢、避免日本化，核心技術會是關鍵。台灣業者應及早佈局新技術、強化核心競爭力：首先，應使用減法策略避免盲目投資，選擇利基技術或產品，等待時機創造新的市場規模；其次，改變競爭態勢，利用韓國在新技術替代過程中，成為SDC、LGD面板供應商；最後，積極找出企業新的成長曲線，維持產業競爭地位。

The technology of display evolved to meet the human visual needs. From CRT to TFT-LCD flat-panel displays (abbreviated as panels), portable panels directly changed the human life. New technology replaced the old technology, and the winner took it all. TFT-LCD continues to innovate and challenge the limits of human retina. However, newer, thinner, and self-luminous OLED new technologies coming and directly challenge TFT-LCD panels. Taiwan was also facing the mainstream competition of display. This is a quantitative research by 'Grounded Theory' and 'Case Study' methods. By the data collection, analysis, sorting and summarizing the competition strategy of TFT-LCD industry and the case companies. Using the S-C-P model,(Structure-Conduct-Performance), Porter’s 5-forces analysis model, and value net industry analysis tools, it is concluded that TFT-LCD industry life cycle has gradually moved to decline from maturity. The force of competitors is rapidly expanding (especially China), and it is facing the threat of OLED replacement technology. In this competition, Japan, the birthplace of TFT-LCD, lost its competitive advantage due to the wrong choice of corporate strategy. The leading companies selected in this study are Samsung, Innolux, and BOE in South Korea, Taiwan and China. In-depth study of the competition strategy by case companies and base on Porter (1980) 'competition strategy' and Porter (1985) 'competitive advantage' there are three generic strategies: cost leadership, differentiation, or focus. We found that Korean companies focus on technology leadership strategies and actively taps into the OLED blue ocean market; China companies focus on cost leadership strategies, actively grabs TFT-LCD market share, and cooperate with South Korea to develop OLED technology and production lines. Lack of the brand and market support, Taiwan's TFT-LCD corporate strategies still focus on low-cost leadership and foundry mode, gradually losing its leading advantage and lags behind. The development track of Taiwan's TFT-LCD industry is very similar to Japan that lost its market share in the past. The battle in the panel industry is not over yet. South Korea and China have actively turned into OLED. To face the competition from South Korea and China, Taiwan's TFT-LCD companies must maintain their existing competitive advantages to avoid Japaneseization and the core technology will be the key factor. Taiwanese companies should lay out new technologies and strengthen their core competencies as soon as possible. First, they should use a subtractive strategy to avoid blindly investment, choose niche technologies or products to wait for the opportunity to create new market scales. Second, to change the competitive situation, they could cooperate with South Korea during the replacing of new technologies and become suppliers of SDC or LGD. Finally, actively find out the new growth curve and maintain their competitive position in the industry.