| Summary: | 碩士 === 中華大學 === 科技管理學系 === 105 === The Industrial Revolution 4.0 era has led to the concept of intelligent revolution, and creativity is the driving force of the new era. “Co-working space” is a new term and model derived from innovation to enhance and accelerate entrepreneurial development. It means building a low-cost, convenient and all-inclusive new form for the entrepreneur, and includes work space, cyberspace, social space and resource sharing, to create an entrepreneurship service platform. Many companies are currently pursuing product and services emphasizing customization, tailor-made solutions, at low cost, and high efficiency–which requires continuous innovation, creativity, integration and rapid product cycles to meet the needs of the customers. To address these market dynamics, several of the world's advanced countries are actively engaged in the use of the co-working space model to improve each country's future economic power and competitiveness. In this study, we analyze and compare the most important and urgent needs of Taiwan and Hong Kong in the creation of entrepreneurial space and creative groups. The analysis includes study of the key elements, the relative importance of the key elements, and comparison of similarities and differences of key elements between the Taiwan and Hong Kong.
This research was conducted using literature reviews and personal interviews. Data collection was performed across three primary dimensions that play a role in entrepreneurial development in the co-working space model:
1. national policy and financial tax counseling.
2. professional training for innovation and entrepreneurship.
3. international business coaching and consulting.
Additionally, eleven key factors were evaluated among the three dimensions to construct an AHP hierarchical architecture of the priority factors. Maker space industry groups and experts were interviewed in Taiwan and Hong Kong, with 23 interviews conducted in Taiwan and 18 interviews conducted in Hong Kong. The completed interview questionnaires were then compiled and analyzed using the Expert Choice analytical software package to generate an AHP hierarchy. This Expert Choice analysis indicated that the demand in Taiwan and Hong Kong for the dimension of “Professional Training and the Exchange of Innovation and Entrepreneurship” was more important than either the “National Taxation Policy and Financial Counseling” dimension or the “Channel Sales and International Accelerated Counseling” dimension. At the key factor level of assessment, Taiwan's "technology and patents" are the highest priority in terms of "Professional Training and Innovation and Entrepreneurship", followed by "business cooperation", and "training courses”. In Hong Kong, the highest priority factor is the "training courses, industry guidance counseling", followed by "create a customer exchange and business cooperation", "technology and patents" and "industry supply chain information". Finally, using the SPSS statistical analysis software package ANOVA, a comparison of the key factors in Taiwan and Hong Kong was conducted, and an analysis of whether there is a meaningful difference between the priorities in Taiwan and Hong was performed. This analysis focused on the different priority factors: "professional training and the exchange of innovation and entrepreneurship", "international sales and accelerated path counseling" and "maker culture exchanges and cross-sector cooperation”. It was determined these priority factors have no significant statistical differences.
Finally, this study proposes relevant research proposals to provide further recommendations as a reference for Taiwan and Hong Kong to promote the co-working space model.
|
|---|
