現今「策略聯盟」常被廣泛的運用於各個不同領域之中，相較之下，海上運送業的定期航運業的策略聯盟並不如以往來的多，以往航商之間的聯繫是相當的頻繁,以亞歐航線為主的定期海運公司更因為同盟而在海運運費作聯結而定期漲價，然而此運費聯結最後確因歐盟的反對而聯盟名存實亡,海運公司之間僅能做艙位的互換或者是操作性的合作以降低成本卻不能聯合調整運價,其中策略聯盟的功效曾經因為聯盟之間的不團結，又因大型船公司之高市佔率牽引市場運價下降而造成巨額賠損，但是在今年2012年三月卻頓露曙光，各海運公司以新的聯營方式打破傳統，進而各個由巨賠轉虧為盈，本研究即將針對不同的策略來分析探討其適切性與海運公司新的聯營方式以及將來如何維持其策略聯盟之延續與獲利。
本研究透過高階經理人員以不記名方式蒐集各定期航運業者對於聯盟的動機、可行性難度以及聯盟類型的選擇，透過分析得以應證以下結論：
一、聯盟的動機有三項：增加獲利及降低風險、拓展及快速回應市場、結合聯盟夥伴力量取得強勢地位。
二、策略聯盟在目前臺灣定期航運業者的認知上，是預期利益不大以及可行性難度高的一項策略,不過新型態的巨型策略聯盟,則有強調均勢，不再是一家獨大，唯我獨尊的局面，當然，初期的結果證實是正面的。
三、顯著影響定期船公司選擇聯營類型的因素有：對於聯盟之拓展及快速回應市場、結合聯盟夥伴取得強力地位此二項能力之信心強弱，以及定期船公司的規模大小。

The “strategy alliance” is put to use in several fields extensively now a day. In comparision, the container shipping strategy alliance is not so popular than in the past.
For example, the communications between members of alliances for Asia-Europe container service liners are frequent previously, it is now the name remains, but the reality is gone after EURO interfere for against –Anti-Trust law to cease ocean freight negotiations between shipping companies. However, they can only make slot exchanges or operational cooperations to save costs but not allowed to ally all members for ocean freight adjustments.
In present allicances,they ever faced big loss not only the reason not to hold a rally but also the large-scale shipping companies intension to defend their beleaguered for maximum market share.
Fortunately, almost all of them started to make money owing to the new expanding strategy alliance to break traditional since from March 2012.
This research will focus on how the newest expanding “strategy alliance” with different strategies and appropriate methods for recovery and how to sustain this “strategy alliance” to maintain obtaining benefits.
This research would rely on the high ranking managements of the top shipping companies in Taiwan to collect their opinions regarding the motivation, feasibility of the strategy alliance, and meantime, the choice of the type of the alliance secretly.
The research results after analysis as below:
1. The motivation of the alliance as: a. Increase the benefit but decrease the risks; b. Expand and respond market rapidly; c.To get stronger position to join the alliances.
2. The cognition for current tactics alliance from the top managements are profitless low feasibility, but the newest expanding strategy alliance is to emphasize equilibrium of forces of each alliance, it’s different fm the past to follow one largest shipping company’s willing for all kinds adjustments. Apparently, it’s successful so far.
3. Statistically significant impact the container shipping to select the running style elements as: The confidence for the alliance’s expanding and rapid response to the market and to obtain the strong power of this alliance and the scale of the partners.

一、中文部份：
1. 吳青松（1990），國際策略聯盟與經營績效評估：美國電腦製造業為例，1990產業科技研究發展管理研討會論文集，台北市。
2. 許士軍（1991），管理學，台北：東華書局。
3. 李大衛（1992），「策略聯盟廠商屬性與成功評價關聯探討--以我國第一代筆記型電腦策略聯盟為例」，國立交通大學未出版碩士論文。
4. 司徒達賢（1992），中小企業互助合作與企業以電子業與機械業為例，台北：經濟部中小企業處。
5. 袁建中、陳義揚（1992），「協同式策略聯盟特性研究」，1992年中華民國科技管理論文研討會，新竹，頁307-318。
6. 呂鴻德（1996），企業策略聯盟－提昇競爭力的經營利器，台北：商周文化。
7. 中華經濟研究院(1999)的研究指出，策略聯盟是廠商間透過合作關係。
8. 翁志維（1996），「策略聯盟的過程、演進與學習之研究」，中央大學未出版碩士論文。
9. 吳青松(1996)認為策略聯盟為一種公司間的契約，屬於關係契約的一種，介於市場交易與完全合併間的組織合作協定。
10. 邱柏松(1996)認為企業策略聯盟是指兩個或兩個以上的企業，為了某種策略目的，而在生產、銷售、研究等技術，以及產品、人員、財務上相互提供或交換資源，以利共同目的之達成的企業行為。
11. 傅衡宇（1997），「策略聯盟夥伴選擇評估準則之研究－以台灣地區船舶運送業
12. 為例」，國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理學系未出版碩士論文。
13. 李文瑞、曹為忠、林志豪（2000），「策略聯盟類型與績效影響因素之研究」，
14. 中山管理評論，第8卷，第2期，頁273-302。
15. 林光、張志清（2003），航運經營與管理，台北市：航貿文化事業有限公司。
16. 林隆儀（2000），「策略聯盟-創造出新競爭優勢-清涼飲料產業突破傳統的策略」，經濟情勢評論，第五卷，第四期，頁115-127。
17. 盧振華（2003），「長期照護機構策略聯盟與服務品質關係之研究---以萬安、萬泰養護中心為例」，中山大學未出版碩士論文。
18. 李超、何有富（2005）, 「发展我国不定期船企业联盟」，中国水运，2005年第五期，頁12-13。
19. 張世龍、王穆衡、陳一平(2007)，定期航運策略聯盟。

二、英文部份：
1. Aaker, D.A. (1992), Developing Business Strategies, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
2. Astley, W. G., & Fomburn, C. J. (1983), Technological innovation and industrial
3. Badaracco, J. L. (1991), The knowledge link: How firms compete through strategic alliances. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
4. Devlin ,G.& Bleackley, M.(1988), “Strategic Alliance Guidelines for Success”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. l18-23.
5. Elmuti & Kathawala (2001), “An overview of strategic alliances”, Management Decision, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 205-217.
6. H Range Planning, Vol.18, NO. 3, pp. 76-81.
7. Haralambides (1996), “The Economics of Bulk Shipping Pools”, Maritime Policy & Management, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 221-237.
8. Harrigan, K. (1988a), “Joint ventures and competitive strategy”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9, NO. 7, pp. 141-158.
9. Harrigan, K. (1988b), “Strategic alliances and partner asymmetries”, Management International Review, Vol. 28, NO. 2, pp. 53-72.
10. James, B.G. (1985), “Alliance: The new strategic focus”, Long
11. Killing,J.P.(1983). Strategies for joint venture success. New York: Praeger.
12. Krubasik, E. and H Lautenschlager (1993), Foreming Successful Strategic Alliance in High-Tech Business, New York: Wiley.
13. Krubasik, E. and H Lautenschlager (1993), Foreming Successful Strategic Alliance in High-Tech Business, New York: Wiley.
14. Lewis, J.D (1990). Partnerships for profit: structuring and managing strategic alliances, New York: Free Press.
15. Markham B.,Lomas J. (1995), ”Review of the Multi-hospital arrangements literatures:benefits, disadvantages and lesson for implementation”, Healthcare Management Forum, Vol.8, NO. 3, pp. 25~30.
16. Midoro Renato & Pitto Alessandro (2000), “A critical evaluation of strategic alliance in liner shipping”, Maritime Policy & Management, Vol. 27, NO.1, pp. 31-40.
17. Murray (1994), Shipping Pools and EC Competition Law; A Guide for the Shipping Industry. London, 2-4 March
18. Murray, E. and Mahon, J (1993), “Strategic Alliances: Gateway to the new Europe”, Long Range Planning, Vol.26, NO. 4, pp. 102-111.
19. owarth, C.S. (1994), “The role of strategic alliances in the development of technology”, Technovation, Vol. 14, NO. 4, pp. 243-257.
20. Packard, W.V. (1989), Shipping Pools, London: Lloyd's of London Press.
21. Parkhe, A. (1991), “International portfolio analysis: A new model”, Management International Review, Vol. 31, NO. 4, pp. 365-380.
22. Porter, M. E & M. B. Fuller (1986), Coalitions and Global Strategy, Competition in Global Industries, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
23. Poter, M. E., & Fuller, R. (1986), Coalitions and Global Strategy, In Porter, M (eds.), Competition in Global Industries, Boston: Harvard Business Press.
24. Rigby D. K. & W. T. Buchanan (1994), “Putting More Strategy into Strategic Alliances”, Directors & Boards, 1994 Winter, pp. 14-19.
25. Root, F. (1988) , “Some Taxonomics of International Cooperative Arrangement”, Cooperative Strategies in International Business, pp.66-80.
26. Sierra, C. M. (1995). Managing global alliance-key steps for successful collaboration. New York: Wesley Publishing Company.
27. Song Dong-Wook & Photis M. Panayides (2002), “A conceptual application of cooperative game theory to liner shipping strategic alliances“, Maritime Policy & Management, Vol. 29, NO. 3, pp. 285-301.
28. structure: The case of telecommunications. Advances in Strategic Management, Vol.1, NO.4, pp. 205-229.
29. Takac, P. F. & C.P. Singh (1992),“Strategic in Banking”, Management Decision, Vol.30, NO. 1, pp. 32-43.
30. Yoshino M. and Rangan R., “Forging Alliances: A Guide to Top Management”, The Columbia Journal of World Business, Vol. 31, No.3, pp.6-13.
31. Zuckerman,H.S. ＆ T.A. D’Aunno (1990), “Hospital Alliances, Cooperative Strategy in a Competitive Environment”, Health Care Management Review, Vol.15, No.2, pp.21-30.