「商業生態系統」同時考慮並分析「競爭」與「合作」兩種關係，這種觀點跨越了產業的界線，對於經常需要與產業以外的其他企業合作之半導體產業而言，相當實用。在自由競爭的市場下，半導體製造商、通路商與系統廠並沒有制式的交易模式，製造商可能直接與系統廠合作，也可能透過通路商與系統廠交易；通路商可以適時地引進多家製造商，提供相同或不同的服務給系統廠，另一方面，通路商亦須維持與系統廠既有的客戶關係，進而在上、下游的合作中建立專業與信任的夥伴關係。企業必須彼此競爭，以保護自身的利益，但又必須彼此協力合作，在市場中創造更多的價值。眼前的合作夥伴，很可能在未來成為競爭對手，反之亦然，印驗了「商場上沒有永遠的敵人，也沒有永遠的朋友」，形成動態的競合關係。本研究藉由探究半導體產業鏈之間競爭與合作的關係，及企業應採行何種策略以長期培養夥伴關係，共同創造價值，提昇產業整體競爭力。

本研究發現，半導體產業鏈之間，彼此依存度高且清楚知道自己的定位，忠實地扮演好自己的角色，共同維繫商業生態系統的健康；競合關係隨著商業生態系統之生命週期而改變，「誔生階段」的合作關係遠高於競爭關係，在進入「擴張階段」，合作關係將逐漸衰減，於「領導與權威階段」取而代之的是高度的衝突與競爭，接著在「自我更新或死亡階段」卻反轉趨向共同攜手合作。半導體產業鏈的合作關係不限於互補者，其對象也有可能是競爭者，由於彼此的任務、目標不一致，故在實務上常見「聯合次要敵人共同抵禦主要敵人」的策略運用；企業若能於合作初期建立彼此之間的信任與承諾，將提高彼此的調適度，引領較高的合作意願，利用資源互補的方式，促進產業鏈間的密切合作，各企業專注於核心能力的建構，可使彼此更具競爭力，並透過合作「把餅做大」，分取更多的利益，達成雙贏局面。

"Business Ecosystem" incorporates "cooperation" and "competition" among business players and operates beyond industry boundaries, which is frequently practiced in the semiconductor industry. In the free competitive market, semiconductor manufacturers, distributors, and system integrators do not interact in a standard pattern. Manufacturers could provide service and products to the system integrators directly or through distributors; Distributors can introduce various manufacturers in a timely manner to provide the same or different services to the system integrators. On the other hand, distributors need to maintain the existing customer relationships with system integrators in order to build a professional image and create partnership throughout the supply chain. Business players co-work with others to increase market size and market value, but also compete with others to protect their own interests. Partners now might become competitors in the future, and vice versa. An old saying of "there is no eternal friend or opponent in the business circles" best describes such dynamic co-opetition. This study explores the chain relationship between competition and cooperation in the semiconductor industry, and what strategies should be adopted in order to develop long-term partnership to jointly create value and enhance overall industry competitiveness.

This study has found that the semiconductor players reply on each other and are aware of their positions and roles to sustain the overall business ecosystem. The business co-opetition changes cyclically along with the life cycle of business ecosystem. Co-opetition is more prominent during the pioneer stage and weakens as the business scope develops into expansion stage, followed by the leadership and authoritative stage with high degree of conflict and fierce competition. At the final stage of self-revolutionary and decaying stage, the relationship reversely develops into cooperation. The partnership in the semiconductor supply chain is not limited to players who complement each other. Competitors could also be partners as well. Given the different missions and targets, the strategy of "allying with minor enemies to resist against major enemy" is commonly practiced. If enterprises can build up trust and honor commitment in the early stage of cooperation, through mutual adjustment, partnership commitment, and complimentary resource allocation, and close relationship, they can ultimately enhance their overall competitiveness and create a bigger market for win-win.

一、中文部分
1.Brandenburger, A. M. & Nalebuffy, B. J., (2004)。競合策略 (許恩得譯)。培生圖書出版有限公司。(原著出版於1996)。
2.Moore, J. F., (2001)。競爭加倍速：創新致勝 (蘇怡仲譯)。智庫股份有限公司。(原著出版於1996)。
3.TSIA新聞稿 (2013年3月15日)。2012Q4 / 2012全年台灣IC產業營運成果出爐。台灣半導體產業協會 (TSIA)。網址：http://www.tsia.org.tw
4.方至民 (2002)。競爭優勢。建弘書局。
5.石博中 (2005)。半導體物料通路商之電子化策略對其通路績效之影響因素。銘傳大學管理學院高階經理碩士論文。
6.余文郎 (2006)。紅海、藍海—從鴻海與廣達的競合關係，探討IT 產業的藍海世界。國立臺灣科技大學管理研究所碩士論文。
7.李德龍 (2010)。台灣半導體通路業轉型之供應鏈變動研究。國立臺灣科技大學管理研究所碩士論文。
8.林立鈞 (2011)。從企業生態利基及競合關係探討SI資訊廠商競爭優勢。國立臺灣科技大學資訊管理系碩士論文。
9.郭國泰 (2006)。軟體商業生態系統中利基者經營模式之變遷：以資訊安全軟體公司為例。國立政治大學企業管理學系博士論文。
10.郭國泰、司徒達賢、于卓民 (2008)。商業生態系統之變遷：以軟體產業為例。創新與管理，6 (1)，1-28。
11.黃江能 (2007)。產業環境、組織文化與合作策略關聯性之個案探討：以半導體通路商為例。國立臺灣科技大學管理研究所碩士論文。
12.閻永誠 (2004)。電子暨光電零組件通路商。交通銀行產業調查與技術，148。
13.歐祥義 (2010年6月8日)。蘋果iPhone利潤55％，鴻海毛利5％。自由時報。網址：http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2010/new/jun/8/today-e3.htm
14.簡佩萍 (2013年5月9日)。2012年全球前10大電子設備代工廠總營收成長7%，主賴Apple挹注。Digitimes Research。網址：http://www.digitimes.com.tw 

二、英文部分
1.Bengtsson, M. & Kock, S., (2000). “Coopetition in Business Networks - To Cooperate and Compete Simultaneously,” Industrial Marketing Management, 29 (5), 411-426.
2.Brandenburger, A. M. & Nalebuff, B. J., (1995), “The Right Game: Use Game Theory to Shape Strategy,” Harvard Business Review, 74 (4), 57-71.
3.Brandenburger, A. M. & Nalebuffy, B. J., (1996), Co-opetition : A Revolutionary Mindset That Combines Competition and Cooperation, New York: Currency Doubleday.
4.Breucellaria, M., (1997), “Strategic Alliance Spell Success,” Management Accounting, 77 (7), 6.
5.Bryman, A., (1989), Research Methods and Organization Studies, London: Unwin Hyman.
6.Comerford, J., (1998), “Learning to Team with the Competition,” In: Outlook Magazine, (1), 71-76.
7.Crabtree, B. F. & Miller, W. L., (1999), Doing Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
8.Culpan, R., (1993), Multinational Strategic Alliances, New York: International Business Press, 13-32.
9.Das, T.K. & Teng, B.S., (2000), “Instabilities of Strategic Alliances: An Internal Tensions Perspective,” Organization Science, 11 (1), 77-101.
10.Dowlatshahi , S., (1999), “Bargaining Power in Buyer-Supplier Relationships,” Production and Inventory Management Journal, 40 (1), 27-35.
11.Hamel, G., Doz, Y.L. & Prahalad, C.K., (1989), “Collaborate with Your Competitors and Win,” Harvard Business Review, 65 (1), 133-139.
12.Iansiti, M. & Levien, R., (2004a), “Strategy as Ecology,” Harvard Business Review, 82 (3), 68-78.
13.Iansiti, M. & Levien, R., (2004b), The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
14.Lowenthal, David, (1985), The Past is a Foreign Country, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 187.
15.Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B., (1995), Designing qualitative research, London : Sage Publications.
16.Mason, J., (1996), Qualitative Researching, London: Sage Publications.
17.Mills, L. S., Soule M. E. & Doak, D. F., (1993), “The Keystone Species Concept in Ecology and Conservation,” BioScience, 43 (4), 219-224.
18.Moore, J. F., (1993), “Predators and Prey: a New Ecology of Competition,” Harvard Business Review, 71 (3), 75-86.
19.Moore, J. F., (1996), The Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems, New York: Harper Business, 297.
20.Moore, J. F., Liang, J. & Yang, F. X., (1999), Translated, Decline and Fall of the Competition: Strategy and the Leadership of Business Ecosystem Times, Beijing : Beijing Press, 17-20.
21.Rajagopal, P. D. & Rajagopal Ananya, (2007), “Competition vs. Cooperation: Analyzing Strategy Dilemma in Business Growth under Changing Social Paradigms,” International Journal of Business Environment, 1 (4), 476-487.
22.Stern, L. W., Ansary, A. I. & Coughlan, A. T., (1996), Marketing Channels (Vol. 5), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23.Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J.Ｍ., (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research (Vol. 15), Newbury Park, CA: Sage publications.
24.Tansley, A. G., (1935) , “The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts and Terms,” Ecology, 16 (3), 284-307.
25.Thompson, J. D., (1967), Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.