研发价值链定位与全球电子产业的企业绩效[外文翻译].doc

本科毕业论文（设计）外 文 翻 译原文：R&D, Value Chain Location and Firm Performance in the Global Electronics IndustryIn today’s global electronics industry, innovation is carried out by various value chain participants, including brand-name manufacturers (sometimes called lead firms), contract manufacturers and component suppliers, but there is little understanding of who benefits most from innovation in such networks. This research examines empirically the relationship of R&D spending and location in the value chain (lead vs. non-lead firms) to firm performance in the global electronics industry by using the Electronic Business 300 data set for 2000–2005. Our results show that firms spending more on R&D have higher gross profits, but do not have higher return on equity (ROE) and return on assets (ROA). There is a strong positive relationship between lead firms and performance as measured by gross profit, ROE and ROA, but the relationship between lead firms and gross profit becomes insignificant when the interaction term of R&D and lead firm is included in the analysis. Finally, lead firm status has a positive interaction effect on the relationship between R&D and gross profit. These findings suggest that the relationship of R&D to performance is mixed, but that lead firms can capture higher value (gross profit) from R&D than contract manufacturers and component suppliers.In today’s global economy, outsourcing has become a strategic necessity, especially in fiercely competitive and rapidly changing sectors such as electronics. Value chains in the electronics industry have steadily disintegrated across corporate and national boundaries for the past several decades. According to Baldwin and Clark (2006), the electronics industry has evolved to a modular structure in which firms keep a smaller set of activities in-house (a smaller footprint) by outsourcing the functions that do not constrain overall business performance. In the past, large electronics firms designed and developed their own products, often using their internal supply chains (Linden et al., 2007). Today, lead firms (brand-name manufacturers) focus on core competencies, especially product innovation, marketing and other activities related to brand development, while using specialized suppliers for non-core functions such as manufacturing (Sturgeon, 2002; Gereffi et al., 2005; Yeung, 2006). By outsourcing, lead firms can get more products faster, reap value from innovations before imitators enter the market, and all of these without making huge capital investments or idling in-house capital assets to meet rapid technological change and volatile market demand (Sturgeon, 2002).Innovation is often a source of value creation and competitiveness (Schumpeter, 1934). In today’s electronics industry, innovation is carried out by various value chain participants, including lead firms, contract manufacturers (CMs) and component suppliers. These diverse companies often cross national borders and form global production networks (or value chains). These firms are independent organizations, working closely to leverage local knowledge into commercial success. Value created from innovation in the global electronics industry is distributed not only to the lead firm, but also to partners in the firm’s supply chain (Dedrick et al., 2008). While most core technological innovations are done by component suppliers upstream in the industry, lead firms innovate by identifying new product markets and designing products that incorporate new technologies to serve those markets.However, there is little understanding of who benefits most from innovation in the global electronics industry. The key questions we raise for this research are as follows: What is the relationship of R&D to firm performance? Do firms at different levels in the value chain, particularly lead vs. non-lead firms, perform differently? Do lead firms capture higher value from R&D than non-lead firms? In order to tackle these questions, we conduct an exploratory study by examining empirically the relationship of R&D spending and location in the value chain to firm performance in the global electronics industry. We employ the Electronic Business 300 data set and the Hoovers database for the six years from 2000 to 2005.In the next section, we describe the global production network of the electronics industry. Section 3 discusses the relationship of R&D and value chain location to firm performance, and proposes hypotheses. Section 4 describes our general empirical model, as well as our data sources and research methodology. We outline our results in Section 5. Discussion and conclusions are provided in Section 6.Today’s electronics industry consists of a global production network (supply chain) of independent component suppliers, CMs or original design manufacturers (ODMs), branded firms, distributors and retailers. The supply chain model (Figure 1) shows various activities, such as R&D, manufacturing, 。