根據本研究的結果顯示，個案公司因為其投資策略為早期投資之故，確有偏好於創建期、擴充期的投資。而隨著台灣科技產業外移大陸，但創業投資事業卻不可以登陸，在投資地區可看出國外的投資多於國內，另一方面亦可顯示創業投資事業全球化的趨勢。
本研究之個案公司以投資種子期新創科技事業為主，由於創業投資事業是一種高報酬、高風險的產業，尤其對高科技產業的事業階段，如種子期、創建期、擴充期、成熟期的投資，台灣的創業投資事業在投資決策時有無特別偏好？如投資國內或國外的高科技公司，投資績效結果孰佳? 都是值得探討的主題，但是過去台灣大多數之創投公司基於經營團隊能力所限及追求迅速獲利之誘因皆偏好投資於較成熟之科技事業，因此，對於投資於早期之科技事業的研究甚少。以實際的投資案數據來研究投資決策因素，有無偏重那一項決策因素？上述即為本研究所欲探索之目的。
本研究個案公司的董事會決定投資與否的決策因素有四項評估準則：1.創業家與經營團隊。2. 產業及市場。3.產品及技術。4.財務計畫與報酬。由於過去對創業投資決策的重視程度和優先順序並無相關研究之分析，因此，本研究發現若被投資公司擁有多項優於同業之技術平台或專利，或產品具有獨特性，較易獲得同意投資。但若被投資公司在產業前景不明或產品市場需求狹小時，易遭拒絕。
本研究在投資案成敗的關鍵因素分析中發現，大多數是以產業市場、產品及技術二因素有優勢而成功，失敗案例的因素卻以創業家及經營團隊出現問題，或產業環境發生變化市場競爭過劇或萎縮，此二因素為導致失敗之最大原因。產業市場、產品及技術此二因素具有優勢條件較能獲得成功，但仍須配合經營團隊與產業環境無負面因子，方能立於不敗之地。

In this study, the venture capital company studied, Company A, showed an investment strategy preference for investing in early stage start-ups as well as expansion cases. An analysis of Company A’s investment cases showed a higher proportion of foreign investments than domestic ones, an indication of the trend towards globalization in the venture capital industry.
One of the major purposes of this study is to identify the factors that influence investment decisions of venture capital firms, including investment stage preferences, and return rate comparisons between international and local investment projects. Early VCs in Taiwan preferred investing in mature technologies, due either to capacity limitations or the pursuit of quick returns. There are therefore limited studies on VCs focusing on early stage investments. It is hoped that through the study of the investment data of Company A, a VC with a special focus on high tech start-up investments, some major factors that affect investment decisions could be uncovered.
The study findings showed that the Board of Company A assessed investment cases using four criteria: the entrepreneur and the management team; the industry and the market; the product and technology; and the financial plan and return rates. No prior studies discussing the factors or priorities that affect decision-making of VC investments were found. This study shows evidence with real data indicating that when the companies under evaluation had more leading technologies and patents, or products with a unique market niche, their investment proposals were more likely to be approved. On the contrary, if the companies seeking investments had no promising technologies or the market demand for their products was narrow, the proposals were more likely to be turned down.
The analysis of key factors that contribute to successful investment cases shows that industry and market promise, as well as the leading technology played vital roles. On the other hand, investment failures may be due to problems of the entrepreneurs or management team, or to fierce competition and changes in the industry or market. It is thus concluded that start-ups with a better chance to succeed are those with leading technologies or products in emerging or promising industries or markets. However, factors such as the management team and the overall industrial environment also determine the final results to a large degree.

一、中文部份
1. 中華民國創業投資商業同業公會2004年台灣創業投資年鑑。
2. 李春月(1992)，創業投資公司投資評估模式建立之研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
3. 徐敏雄（1988），創業投資過程之研究，文化大學企業管理研究所碩士論。
4. 劉曼紅（2001），創業投資：創新與金融，台北：五南出版社。
5. 林象山（1995），創業投資事業與新股票上市，國科會專題計畫。
6. 陳振祥（1985），我國創業投資機構當前投資決策之研究，國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
7. 陸彥妙（1994）台灣地區創業投資公司對投資案評估準則之探討，交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
8. 盛立軍（2001），創業投資－操作、機制與策略，台北：五南出版社。
9. 薛菁菁（2001），我國創業投資公司特性與經營績效關係之研究，國立政治大學企業研究所碩士論文。
10. 黃鈺玲（1989），我國創業投資公司對投資評估準則之研究，中原大學企業研究所碩士論文。
11. 劉常勇，創業投資評估決策程序，會計研究月刊，第134 期，民國八十六年。
12. 蔡幸娟(1998)，台灣地區創業投資事業專業經理人投資評估準則之研究，國立台灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。
13. 經濟部(1999)，台灣生技產業現況與展望－生物技術投資產業。
14. 陳振遠（1986），創業投資方案評估之策略性分析，國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
15. 蔡美麗、朱桂能與林君亮（1980），我國創業投資事業之發展，產業金融，第69 期。
16. 謝劍平（2001），現代投資銀行，台北：智勝出版社。
二、英文部份
1. Fried, Vance H., and Robert D. Hisrich（1994）,“Toward A Model of Venture Capital Investment Decision Making,” Financial Management, 23, 3,pp.28-37.
2. Hall, John and Charles W. Hofer（1993）, “Venture Capitalist Decision Criteria in New Venture Evaluation,” Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 1, pp.28.
3. Dominguez, John R.（1974）, Venture Capital, Mass .:Lexington Book.
4. Riggs, J.,(1979),"Industrial Organization and Management in Series of Grolier Business Library”,6th ed, Mcgraw-hill inc.,127.
5. Macmillan, I.C.; R. Siegel and P.N., Narasimha (1985), “Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposals.” Journal of Business Venturing 1:119-128.
6. Macmillan I. C., Zemann L. & Narasimha P. N. S.（1987）“Criteria Distinguishing Successful from Unsuccessful Ventures in the Venture Screening Process,” Journal of Business Venturing (2), pp123-137.
7. Miller, D. and P. H., Friesen （1984）, “A Longitudinal Study of the Corporate Life Cycle,” Management Science 30(10): pp. 1161-1183, 1984.
8. Muzyka, D., S., Birley and B, Leleux (1996), “Trade-off in the investment decisions of European venture capitalists.” Journal of Business Venturing 11:273-287.
9. Pratt, S. E., （1997）“The Organized Venture Capital Community,” In Pratt’s Guide to Venture Capital Sources, pp.75-80.
10. Rubel, S. M., （1972） “Guide to Venture Capital Sources,” Capital Publishing Corporation, pp. 9.
11. Ruhnka, John C. and John E. Young（1987）, “A Venture Capital Model of the Development Process for New Ventures,” Journal of Business Venturing, 2, pp.167-184.
12. Timmons, Terry A., and David E. Gumpert（1982）, “Discard Many Old Rules about Getting Venture Capital,” Harvard Business Review, pp. 152-156.
13. Tyebjee, Tyzoon T. and Albert V. Bruno（1984）,“A Model of Venture Capitalist Investment Activity,” Management Science, 30, 9, pp.1051-1066.