Abstract
In the TFT-LCD panel industry in Taiwan, Innolux is very special. Its developing state is very peculiar and therefore causes the attention of this research. Innolux, which belongs to Hon Hai Group, is a newcomer of the TFT-LCD panel industry, and takes the peculiar orientation of system factory. In 2005, Innolux became a hybrid manufacturer which could produce both TFT-LCD panels and LCD monitors. In the meanwhile, it became the sixth biggest LCD monitor supplier in the world this year, and its annual revenue also reached at 50 billions NT dollars. Because of the outstanding operational results in 2005, its peculiar orientation and development strategies were highly praised by mass media. Under this situation, it looked as if the developing state of Innolux was the outcome of pre-design and pre-planning. Moreover, this situation also proved the arguments and the importance of strategic planning. However, after observing the actual developing process of Innolux, there comes out different opinions, which cause the actual effect of strategic planning to be worth examined. After all, is the special developing state of Innolux the outcome of the process of strategic planning? Or, is that just one outcome of the organizational evolution affected by other influences? To resolve the questions above, this research proceeds as a case study of Innolux with the resource dependence perspective. This study focuses on the developing process of Innolux and related industry news to make certain whether or not strategic planning played an important and effective role in this case. Eventually, this study concludes that the developing state of Innolux is not the result from the process of strategic planning. On the contrary, that is the outcome of the organizational evolution affected by three major influences and the integrated effect of the interactions among these three major influences. The sources of these three major influences are respectively the TFT-LCD panel industry, Hon Hai Group, and the inner state of Innolux itself. Furthermore, this study finds out four problems for strategic planning in the case. The first is that the necessity of the long-term strategy is questionable. The second is concerned about non-effectiveness of strategic planning. The third is that to pursue the optimal solution in the future for one organization may be a myth. The fourth is about the conflicts between control and flexibility. The conclusions of this study also prove the negative arguments about strategic planning proposed by Mintzberg in 1994, including the three serious fallacies.