簡化後層級架構的驗證

在篩選掉不必要的績效指標後，希望簡化後的層級架構圖仍然能夠完整的代表原系 統。為了驗証此項結果，將減少績效指標個數後的簡化後層級架構套用AHP，看是否能 得到與先前研究相同的結果。則四家半導體晶圓廠其優先序的排序如表 4-24 所示。我 們比較其優先序，可以發現其優先序幾乎完全相同，因此驗證了簡化後的層級架構與先 前的層級架構具有相同的結果。

表4-24 簡化前後四家半導體晶圓製造廠在製造管理方面的優先序

製造廠商 C1 C2 C3 C4

原先的優先序 0.111 0.334 0.274 0.281

原先的排名 4 1 3 2

簡化後的優先序 0.113 0.322 0.285 0.281

簡化後的排名 4 1 2 3

Line yield WAT yield

Chip probing yield

Average cycle time/Layer Theoretical cyle time/Layer

品質良率

產品週期

Average mask layer Average process steps

Wafer/Month

Production layer/Month Move

Target hit rate by volume 產品製程複雜

整 廠 性 績

效 生產力

整 體 績 效

交貨能力

圖4-10 簡化後的半導體製造廠層級架構

Target hit rate by order

Uptime 機台能力

黃 光 區 績 效

Utilization

Wafer per hour WPH×uptime 機台效率

WPH×utilization

簡化後架構與原先的層級架構僅差了 2 個績效指標，顯示原先建構的 AHP 架構十 分的合理與嚴謹，所以，以後在進行製造系統的績效評估時，使用 MTS 進行績效指標 的篩選來簡化AHP 的層級架構是很好的工具。

4. 6 結論

大部份企業會把改變績效評估指標的順位排在最後一個，但這才是首要必須改變的 項目！有了正確的績效評估指標，才能推動組織的變革。所以，改變績效評估方式的目 的，與建立組織策略／資源／流程之間有密切的關聯性，藉由品質、時間、成本等不同 績效指標的設立與結果的追蹤，不僅掌握企業活動的軌跡，並且能真正幫助企業提升客 戶滿意度，促進流程改善，以創造企業更好的績效。

晶圓代工廠的競爭力在於如何針對不同客戶的需求，以低成本來生產高品質的晶 圓，整廠性績效指標與黃光區績效指標是所有產業內外相關人士所關心的。處於半導體 產業高度競爭的經營環境之下，管理者必須藉由有效的控制程序以監督相關作業的進 行，並根據最後的成果與預期的目標相比，作為未來改進的依據以提昇經營績效。

參考文獻

1. 檀潤華，創新設計─TRIZ：發明問題解決理論，機械工業，民 91。

2. 邱翊豪，以 TRIZ 探討行動商務在技術演進的趨勢，逢甲大學工業工程所碩士論 文，民93。

3. 林美秀，運用 TRIZ 原理探討專利開發實例，中原大學機械工程學系碩士論文，

民93。

4. 張盛鴻、李榮貴，TOC 限制理論，中國生產力中心，民 94。

5. 朱晏樟，整合 TRIZ 與功能分析之設計方法研究，成功大學機械工程學系碩士論 文，民92。

6. 王仁慶，TRIZ 創新設計方法之改良研究，成功大學機械工程學系碩士論文，民 91。

7. 林豐隆，生產與作業服務管哩，揚智出版社，民 93。

8. 王小璠，"多準則決策分析”，滄海書局，2005。

9. 吳振寧，「台灣半導體廠設備管理指標模型建立與評比」， 國立清華大學工業工程 與工程管理系碩士論文，1999 年。

10. 郭奕桓，”台灣半導體廠設備管理標竿：黃光區”，國立清華大學工業工程與工程 管理系碩士論文，2001 年。

11. 電子技術編輯群編，”表面黏著技術”，電子技術出版社，1992 年。

12. 黃世豪，電子化企業經營績效評估之研究，大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，

2000。

13. Altshuller, G. & Shulyak L., “40 Principles: TRIZ Keys to Innovation”, Worcester, MA:”Technical Innovation Center, 2002.

14. Domb, E. “The Ideal Final Result: Tutorial”, The TRIZ Journal, www.triz-journal.com, 1997.

15. Mann, D., “Systematic Win-Win Problem Solving In a Business Environment”, The TRIZ Journal, www.triz.com, 2002.

16. Ruchti, B. & Livotov, P. “TRIZ-based Innovation Princiles and A Process for Solving in Business and Management”, The TRIZ Journal, www.triz-journal.com, 2001.

17. Takemura, M., “TRIZ Introduction in Airlines Management Division”, The TRIZ Journal, www.triz-journal.com, 2002.

18. D.H. Besterfield, Carol Besterfield-Michna, Glen H. Besterfield, MaryBesterfield -Sacre, Total Quality Management, Prentice Hall, 1995.

19. J. J. Buckley, “Fuzzy Hierarchical Analysis”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol 17, No. 3, pp233-247, 1985.

20. C. Caplice and Y. Sheffi, “A Review and Evaluation of Logistics Metrics,” The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp11-28, 1994.

21. A. Charnes, V. V. Cooper and E. Rhodes, “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units”, European Journal of Operation Research, Vol. 2, No. 6, pp. 429-444, 1978.

22. S. J. Chen and Hwang, C. L., Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making – Method and Application, a State – of – Art Survey, New York: Springer – Verlag, 1992.

23. C. H. Cheng and D. L. Mon, “Fuzzy System Reliability Analysis by Interval Confidence”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 58, pp29-35, 1993.

24. C. Douligeris and I. J. Pereira, A Telecommunications Quality Study Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 12, No. 2,

pp241-250, 1994.

25. P. Drucker, Management Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices, Harper & Row, New York, 1973.

26. H. Evans, G. Ashworth, M. Chellew, A. Davidson and D. Towers, “Exploiting

Activity-Based Information: Easy as ABC,” Management Accounting, London, pp24, 1996.

27. J. Korpela and M. Tuominen, Benchmarking Logistics Performance with an Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp323-333, 1999.

28. C. J. Huang and D. D. Sheu , A Fuzzy AHP Evaluation of Manufacturing Management Performance for Notebook Computer Plants in Taiwan,, Proceeding of the 5^th Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering, Theory, Application and Practice.

Dec. 13-15, 2000, Paper No. 150, 2000.

29. G. J. Klir and T. A. Folger, Fuzzy Sets, Uncertainty and Information, Prentice Hall, 1988.

30. Y. J. Lai and C. L. Hwang, Fuzzy Mathematical Programming, Springer-Verlag, 1992.

31. R. C. Leachman and D. A. Hodges , “Benchmarking Semiconductor Manu facturing”, IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp158-169, 1996.

32. D. Mon, “Evaluating Weapon System Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Based on Entropy Weight”, Proceedings of 1995 International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 2, pp591-598.

33. S. Ohnishi and H. Imai, “Evaluating for a Stability of Fuzzy Decision Making Using a Sensitivity Analysis”, 1998 Conference of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society-NAFIPS, pp86-90.

34. Peng, S. L. . Assessing Manufacturing Management Performance for Notebook Plants in Taiwan: Model Construction and Application, M. S. thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, 1999. (In Chinese)

35.S. P. Robbins, Management, Prentice-Hall, pp168-173, 1994.

36. T. J. Ross, Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Applications, McGraw-Hill New York, 1995.

37. T. L. Saaty，”The Analytic Hierarchy Process”，McGraw-Hill, 1980.

38. T. L. Satty, “A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchy Structures”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 3, pp243-281, 1979.

39. R. S. Schuler, V. L. Huber, Personnel and Human Resource Management, St. Paul, MN:

West Pub. 1990.

40. D. Sheu and Shieh, A., Benchmarking Manufacturing Management for Taiwan’s Notebook Industry: Printed Circuit Board Assembly, The 3^rd Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering Theories, Applications and Practices, Dec. 28-31, 1998, Hong Kong.

41. D. Sheu, S. Peng, “Assessing Manufacturing Management performance for Notebook Computer Plants in Taiwan”, The 4^th Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering Theories, Applications and Practices. Nov. 17-20, 1999, San Antonio, Texas, U. S. A..

42. A. Shieh, Benchmarking Manufacturing Management for Taiwan’s Notebook Manufacturers: Printed Circuit Board Assembly, M. S. thesis, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, 1998. (In Chinese)

43. T. Wakabayashi, K Itoh, T. Mitamura and A. Ohuchi, “A Framework of an Analytic Hierarchy Process Method Based on Ordinal Scale”, Proceeding of the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 1, pp355-360.

44. M. L. Wang, H. F. Wang and C. L. Lin, “Ranking Fuzzy Number Based on

Lexicographic Screening Procedure”, International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, December 4(4), pp663-678, 2005.

45. R. Yager, A New Methodology for Ordinal Multi-objective Decisions Based on Fuzzy Sets, Decision Sci., Vol. 12, pp589-600, 1981.

46. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy Sets”, Information and Control, Vol. 8, pp338-353, 1965.

47. H. J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy Set and Its Application, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991, 2^nd Edition.