現在位置首頁 > 博碩士論文 > 詳目
  • 同意授權
論文中文名稱:應用分析層級程序法探討使用共享單車考量因素-以Mobike和ofo為例 [以論文名稱查詢館藏系統]
論文英文名稱:Establishment of Evaluation Criteria for Bike-sharing by Applying AHP-The Case Study of Mobike and ofo [以論文名稱查詢館藏系統]
院校名稱:臺北科技大學
學院名稱:管理學院
系所名稱:管理學院EMBA大上海班
畢業學年度:105
畢業學期:第二學期
出版年度:106
中文姓名:鄭詩穎
英文姓名:Shih-Ying Cheng
研究生學號:104C26505
學位類別:碩士
語文別:中文
論文頁數:76
指導教授中文名:王貞淑
口試委員中文名:丁一賢;陳煒朋
中文關鍵詞:分析層級程序法共享單車Mobikeofo
英文關鍵詞:Analytic Hierarchy ProcessBike-SharingMobikeofo
論文中文摘要:在眾多共享經濟的應用和延伸範疇中,共享單車租賃服務是其中一項較廣泛且最為消費者接受和使用的服務,在既有的公共交通出行模式外,伴隨著“互聯網+共享單車”模式的興起,解決了公共交通出行“第一哩路”和“最後一哩路”的問題,成為了人們短途的代步工具,為人們的出行帶來極大的方便,減少因私人代步交通工具所帶來的環境污染,真正實踐了“綠色出行”節能減碳的環保理念。
在全球現有許多共享經濟成功商業形態和典範,但目前對於同一種共享經濟服務但隸屬於不同平台的相關研究不夠全面,故本研究以不同平台使用者或未使用者對同一種共享經濟服務之考量因素進行探討,茲選定中國大陸兩大共享單車租賃服務平台Mobike及ofo作為探討對象,Mobike和ofo都是屬於共享經濟的延伸,和共享理念相符,但兩家在商業模式、經營理念和產品設計上有很大的差異。


由文獻彙整出六大評估構面,挑選出十六項準則,訂定合適的評估要素與建置評估層級架構,對受訪者進行問卷調查,再應用分析層級程序法(AHP)對整體問卷進行分析。對研究中取得各評估要素間之相對權重及絕對權重數值,對問卷結果提出建議,可作為其他共享經濟服務平台策略擬定之參考,本研究藉由多面向及多維度的分析,對不同群體的消費者進行探討,可供目前和後續新成立共享經濟服務平台商業模式參考,使更多的人有意願參與共享經濟活動。
論文英文摘要:Among all the sharing economy applications in a variety of forms, the bike-sharing service is one of the most accessible and widely adopted kind in consumer markets. The dramatic rise of the bike-sharing industry in China certainly shows us its potential beyond all the existing modes of public transportation, to effectively solve the “first mile” or “last mile” problem of public transit, as a daily short-range transportation tool. What it offers to people is not only just a great convenience, but also a possible solution to alleviate the environmental pollution caused by those traditional private personal transportation tools, thus contributing to the health of the low-carbon economy.
There already have been quite a lot of successful sharing economy business model innovations that have taken place in a wide variety of industries. And each of these specific industries became a battlefield where the most well-funded, growth-driven sharing economy startups fight a war with their own unique combinations of business strategies and product designs. It appears the flames of war are spreading onto the land of the bike-sharing industry. This thesis will focus on revealing the decision-making process of the consumers or the potential consumers of different bike-sharing services hosted on different platforms. We choose the two biggest bike-sharing startups in China, Mobike and Ofo as our two main case studies. Though the services that Mobike and Ofo offer both conform to the general definition of sharing economy with no doubt, but those two startups hold very different ideas and decisions of how the business model is established, the way they run their platforms and their product designs.
In this thesis we have established six evaluation dimensions according to the literature quoted, and refined them further into sixteen more precise criteria, which form the basis for constructing a formal hierarchical structured evaluation system and designing the final survey questionnaire. At last we apply an analytic hierarchy process approach to analyzing the sample data collected from our respondents, revealing the precise related weights and absolute weights of each evaluation criteria and presenting our ultimate constructive advice to those who run sharing economy service platforms, as their decision-making basis, and those who intend to participate in the sharing economy activities.
There already have been quite a lot of successful sharing economy business model innovations that have taken place in a wide variety of industries. And each of these specific industries became a battlefield where the most well-funded, growth-driven sharing economy start-ups fight a war with their own unique combinations of running strategies and product design. It appears the flames of war are spreading onto the land of the Bike-sharing industry. This thesis will focus on revealing the decision-making process of the consumers or the potential consumers of different Bike-sharing services hosted different platforms. We choose the two biggest Bike-sharing start-ups in China, Mobike and ofo as our two main case studies. Though the services that Mobike and ofo offer both conform to the general definition of sharing economy with no doubt, but those two start-ups hold very different ideas and decisions of how the business model is established, the way they run their platforms and their product design.
In this thesis we have established six evaluation dimensions according to the literature quoted, and refined them further into sixteen more precise criteria, which form the basis for constructing a formal hierarchical structured evaluation system and designing the final survey questionnaire. At last we apply an analytic hierarchy process approach to analyze the sample data collected from our respondents, revealing the precise related weights and absolute weights of each evaluation criteria and presenting our ultimate constructive advices to those who run sharing economy service platforms, as their decision-making basis, and those who intend to participate in the sharing economy activities.
論文目次:摘要 i
ABSTRACT iii
誌謝 v
目錄 vi
表目錄 viii
圖目錄 ix
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機與背景 1
1.2 研究目的 3
1.3 研究架構與流程 3
第二章 文獻探討 5
2.1 共享經濟發展 5
2.1.1 共享經濟發展歷程 5
2.1.2 共享經濟定義 6
2.1.3 隨經濟的社會趨勢影響 8
2.1.4 「互聯網+」的新思維 9
2.1.5 共享經濟發展模式 10
2.2 共享單車發展 12
2.2.1 共享單車興起 12
2.2.2 共享單車Mobike和ofo商業模式 14
2.2.3 共享單車Mobike和ofo資本市場 18
2.2.4 共享單車Mobike和ofo產品發展 21
第三章 研究架構與方法 23
3.1 研究架構 23
3.2 多準則決策評估 25
3.2.1 遴選各層級評估要素 25
3.2.2 層級分析法操作流程 28
第四章 問卷設計與分析 35
4.1 問卷設計 35
4.2 問卷對象 35
4.3 問卷分析 38
4.4 權重計算 48
4.5 分群分析 50
第五章 結論與未來展望 56
5.1結論 56
5.2研究限制 60
5.3未來展望 61
參考文獻 63
附錄 66
研究问卷 66
第一部分、个人基本资料 68
第二部分、问卷主体 70
論文參考文獻:1. 王喜文,「萬眾創新何以可能——互聯網時代的信息物理共享經濟」,人民論壇·學術前沿,第12期,2015,第25-31+91頁。
2. 王新玲,「互聯網分享經濟下的“摩拜單車”」,軟件和集成電路,第10期,2016,第12-14頁。
3. 仲夢、樊一陽,「共享經濟驅動下的出行行業商業模式研究——基於Mobike、Uber案例分析」,科技和產業,第4期,2017,第48-51+143頁。
4. 江積海、李琴,「平台型商業模式創新中連接屬性影響價值共創的內在機理——Airbnb的案例研究」,管理評論,第07期,2016,第252-260頁。
5. 李敏蓮,「共享單車市場調研與分析」,財經界(學術版),第05期,2017,第121-123頁。
6. 李懷勇、張貴鵬,「基於共享經濟的商業模式創新」,商業經濟研究,第1期,2017,第120-122頁。
7. 周敏,「摩拜對決ofo:共享單車“火”了」,滬港經濟,第11期,2016,第18-24頁。
8. 周禮豔,「基於O2O的共享經濟商業模式分析及構建」,商業經濟研究,第22期,2016,第69-71頁。
9. 林湘霖,數位學習系統活動流程評估準則之建置:應用模糊分析層級程序法
與關聯法則,碩士論文,國立台北科技大學,台灣,2012。
10. 信海光,「ofo+滴滴共享單車大爆發」,企業觀察家,第11期,2016,第74-75頁。
11. 芮益芳,「摩拜單車:你好,中國。哪里是摩拜的下一城」,商學院,第10期,2016,第53-54頁。
12. 馬然,「摩拜單車——讓自行車回歸城市」,交通與運輸,第06期,2016,第26-27頁。
13. 馬廣奇、陳靜,「基於互聯網的共享經濟:理念、實踐與出路」,電子政務,第03期,2017,第16-24頁。
14. 許海洋、戰顯釗,「共享經濟模式探究」,合作經濟與科技,第03期,2017,第32-33頁。
15. 曹雪檸,「共享單車與公共自行車,各自為政還是合作共贏?」,江苏城市规划,第02期,2017,第45-46頁。
16. 張新紅、于鳳霞、高太山、郝凱、李紅升、胡擁軍、蔡丹旦,「中國分享經濟發展現狀、問題及趨勢」,電子政務,第03期,2017,第2-15頁。
17. 黄海峰,「電信、ofo、華為聯手發掘NB-IoT共享單車“金礦”」,通信世界,第06期,2017,第46頁。
18. 邱韻如,共享經濟參與動機之探討:整合社會交換與社會支持觀點,碩士論文,國立中央大學,台灣,2016。
19. 葛文靜,「共享單車價值網模型的構建及盈利模式探討——以摩拜和OFO共享單車為例」,中國商務,第15期,2017,第174-176頁。
20. 歐陽日輝,「從“+互聯網”到“互聯網+”——技術革命如何孕育新型經濟社會形態」,人民論壇·學術前沿,第10期,2015,第25-38頁。
21. 盧希鵬,「隨經濟:共享經濟之後的全新戰略思維」,人民論壇·學術前沿,第22期,2015,第35-44頁。
22. 盧希鵬,「當隨經濟遇到共享經濟:個人品牌時代來臨」,清華管理評論,第04期,2016,第68-73頁。
23. 陳勁甫,折衷權重多準則評估法,碩士論文,國立交通大學,台灣,1989。
24. 潘海嘯、湯諹、麥賢敏、牟玉江,「公共自行車交通發展模式比較」,城市交通,第06期,2010,第40-43頁。
25. 謝慧敏,「摩拜鏖戰ofo:洪荒之爭」,經理人,第02期,2017,第30-32頁。
26. 顏婧宇,「Uber(優步)啟蒙和引領全球共享經濟發展的思考」,商場現代化,第19期,2015,第13-17頁。
27. 蘇晨昀,共享服務關鍵成功因素之初探,碩士論文,國立中山大學,台灣,2015。
28. 顧彥,「共享單車哪家強?——摩拜、ofo使用手記」,中國戰略新興產業,第23期,2016,第36-39頁。
29. Baller S., Dutta S. & Lanvin B.,“The Global Information Technology Report 2016: Innovating in the Digital Economy,” World Economic Forum, 81, 2016.
30. Belk, R.,“You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online,” Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595-1600, 2014.
31. Botsman, R. & Rogers, R.,“Beyond Zipcar: Collaborative consumption,” Harvard Business Review, 88(10), 2010.
32. Böckmann, M.,“The Shared Economy: It is time to start caring about sharing; value creating factors in the shared economy.,” University of Twente, Faculty of Management and Governance, 2013.


33. Cheng, M., “Sharing economy: A review and agenda for future research,” International Journal of Hospitality Management, 57, 60-70, 2016.
34. Felson, M. & Spaeth, J. L.,“Community structure and collaborative consumption: A routine activity approach,” American Behavioral Scientist, 21(4), 614-624, 1978.
35. Hunt, R. C.,“Forager food sharing economy: Transfers and exchanges,” Senri Ethnological Studies, 53(1), 7-26, 2000.
36. Keeney, R. & Raiffa, H., “Decision with Multiple Objectives: Preference and Value Tradeoffs,” Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1976.
37. Keeney, R. & Raiffa, H.,“Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs,” Cambridge University Press, 9(7), 1993.
38. Matzler, K., Veider, V., & Kathan, W.,“Adapting to the sharing economy,” Mit Sloan Management Review, 56(2), 71-77, 2015.
39. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C.,“The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact with a web site: A trust building model,” Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3), 297-323, 2002.
40. Saaty, T. L.,“A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structure,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234-281, 1977.
41. Saaty, T. L.,“How to make a decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process,” European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26, 1990.
42. Walsh B.,“Todays Smart Choice: Dont Own. Share,” TIME, 177(12), 2011.
論文全文使用權限:同意授權於2017-08-23起公開