Comparisons of domestic and foreign firms on the driving forces of intangible asset values—Take Taiwan and US IC design houses for example

• Main Authors: Chuan-Yi Yang, 楊川毅
• Other Authors: Po-Young Chu
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2005
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/74547336588240757099

碩士 === 國立交通大學 === 管理科學系所 === 93 === The core competences of IC design houses are their capability to design and develop integrated chips. This capability is also what they compete and what the so-called “intellectual capital” is about. This study adopted “Market Capitalization method, MCM” and “Return on Assets method, ROA” for the use of intangibles valuations, used factor analysis and stepwise regression to find the driving forces of intangible values, and compared whether differences exist between Taiwan and US design houses. No matter what valuation categories, the driving forces of the intangible asset values are different between Taiwan and US design houses. The explanatory power of the stepwise regression functions is lower under MCM than that under ROA. Besides this, driving forces explaining Taiwan and US design houses are more consistent and more diverse, respectively, according to the research under ROA method. In terms of Taiwan firms, the most influential driving force under the two valuation categories is different, which indicator should be taken may depend on the overall strategy and under management discretion（MCM︰Differentiation, ROA︰Profitability）. Furthermore, “R&D resources” is the second best driving force for both Taiwan and US firms, which indicates their competitive edge still falls on R&D capability without border difference.