基于技术创新系统的企业竞争力分析【带中文翻译】

1、PAGE 本科毕业论文外文翻译外文题目： Competitiveness of Enterprises Based on Technology Innovation System 出 处： International Small Business Journal 作 者： WANG He-ping，YANG Zhang-wei，Zhu Chun-sheng 原 文：Competitiveness of Enterprises Based on Technology Innovation SystemAbstract: TOPSIS method for the use of technolog

2、ical innovation on the iron and steel enterprises to evaluate the time of the evaluation criteria used under the AHP method, the weight of a single method instead of the usual weight of the Delphi method to solve. This improved TOPSIS method can make progress outside of large steel companies can com

3、pare their own innovation capacity of innovation to improve and enhance Chinas iron and steel enterprises evaluation capacity for innovation system, so that Chinas steel industry technology innovation management has been further improved.Key words: Multi-index Evaluation System; Ideal Solution; Prox

4、imity1. Introduction In recent years, a information from the U.S. steel consultancy WSD (World Steel Dynamics) compile and publish the global competitiveness ranking sheet steel, is increasingly the domestic steel industry and related media attention 1. Analysis and research their competitive point

5、of evaluation and reflection on iron and steel enterprises. We can study how to improve the international competitiveness of Chinas iron and steel enterprises. The preparation of the International Iron and Steel in WSD competitiveness evaluation index system of progressive use of technology capabili

6、ties, the weight of this indicator has become more and more, in this case the iron and steel enterprises technological innovation competitiveness indicators are listed separately for evaluation very necessary. This will improve the traditional TOPSIS method for the large steel companies after compet

7、itive evaluation of technological innovation, making the steel industry both in the evaluation of other companies with the same industry can be seen comparing the competitiveness of their enterprises in technological innovation within the weaknesses, identify deficiencies to improve it.2. Problem de

8、scription and model assumptions2.1. Problem Description This article is to discuss the competitiveness of large steel companies, The present study the competitiveness of iron and steel enterprises technological innovation the main methods include AHP 2, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method 3, BP ne

9、ural network evaluation method 4 and so on, Although the above methods can compare the technological innovation of enterprises competitiveness between our companies, so that enterprises can not improve their less than intuitive to increase the level of technological innovation. This article is from

10、the iron and steel enterprises in technology innovation evaluation system of indicators selected to proceed the important single criterion in the AHP method for the calculation of the weight applied to the TOPSIS method to evaluate the iron and steel enterprises in technology innovation and competit

11、iveness of large steel companies can make progress when compared to external innovation while improving their ability to innovate.2.2. Notations and definitionsX=x1，x2，x n: A set consisting of iron and steel enterprises which is waiting for technological innovation competitiveness.U=u1，u2，u m: A set

12、 of rating indicators.W=w1，w2，w mT: A vector of index weights.a=:Closed interval number, 、R3. How to establish Rating model 3.1. Classification EvaluationWe used one-year data as the evaluation objects for large iron and steel enterprise technology innovation index. But large-scale iron and steel en

13、terprises is characterized by a long cycle of technological innovation, updating innovative technology is slow and a lot of research for many years so we can have a continuous time period selected as the object of data collection, then we can normalization our data. Evaluation with a variety of type

14、s, including efficiency, cost and interval, in these three properties, the bigger the better efficiency properties, cost-type properties as small as possible, interval is a range of property values. In order to eliminate the results of different dimensions of evaluation, gives the following formula

15、for calculating the standardized evaluation matrix, from this formula we can transform into a normalized matrix, represent the subscript set for efficiency indicators and cost index 5.REAL indicators standardized method. (1)Standardized method of interval numbers 6. (2)Or (3)3.2. Innovation Competen

16、ce Model and SolutionStep 1 Based on the current status of iron and steel enterprises technological innovation, innovation and competitiveness evaluation select 4, respectively:Ratio of R&D funding = Evaluation indicators for research and development of cost / index evaluation of sales.The ratio of

17、R&D personnel = Number of R&D personnel / total number of employees.Value ratio of new products = New product sales / corporate sales revenue.The number of patents.Step 2 Use the calculation of the relative weight method on Single criterion of AHP to calculate the weight between each index.Construct

18、 the comparative matrix, in this matrix expressed a degree of influence on one indicator to the other indicator, on the matrix H, was given by experts; accordingly the enterprise can be drawn between each index and the relative importance of relationships.Solve the relative weight vector between eac

19、h indicator and the consistency test.:W=（w1，w2，w m）T.Step 3 Normalize the multi-attribute evaluation matrixand find the weighted matrix 7. (4)Step 4 Determine the maximum evaluation value of the matrixand the minimum evaluation value of the matrix.For REAL indicators: ,.For interval indicator:;.So w

20、e can find the maximum evaluation value of the matrix:The minimum evaluation value of the matrix:Step 5 Calculate the evaluation value of different enterprises to the maximum evaluation value vector distance and average distance to a minimum 8., (5), (6)Step 6 Find the mean vector of the enterprise

21、value evaluation vector with the largest relative closeness and draw conclusions. (7)We can evaluate the innovation and competitiveness between these enterprises which we used, then obtained according to the start of the evaluation index of the relative weight by the Relative evaluation index weight

22、s.4. Numerical examplesOn the global competitiveness ranking of steel sheet, the short-listed 23 global steel prices and strong domestic steel companies, including Baosteel, Anshan Iron and Steel, Maanshan Steel, Wuhan Steel and Sha Steel1,so in this article we select these five steel companies to c

23、arry out technological innovation competitiveness analysis. This article will link the 3-year evaluation of the data because of the long-term technological innovation in large iron and steel enterprises. 2007 - 2009 innovation of the steel industry competitiveness index data, as shown in Table 1.Tab

24、le 1 Steel technological innovation competitiveness index in WSDCompany NameIndexR&D ratioRatio of R&D personnelValue ratio of new productsPatentsBaosteel2007 3.732.1123.2745320085.342.3424.4585920095.982.9125.621030Anshan Steel20073.681.3716.2316520084.791.4517.4338720094.921.5817.99733Maanshan Ste

25、el20072.430.9715.236020082.781.0215.3413420093.211.2116.65216Wuhan Steel20072.631.2416.2420220083.411.3116.7632920093.851.7517.31476Sha Steel20071.971.3213.124520082.361.4013.3413720093.321.6313.53213We should synthesize the continuous data to single data. As R&D ratio, Ratio of R&D personnel and Va

26、lue ratio of new products are single data, we use the general average method to synthesize these data; Because of patent applications may not be completed within one year, we should deal it as a interval data. After finishing the evaluation index data shown in Table 2.Table 2 The evaluation data aft

27、er synthesizedCompany NameIndexR&D ratioRatio of R&D personnelValue ratio of new productsPatentsBaosteel5.022.4524.45453，1030Anshan Steel4.461.4717.22165，733Maanshan Steel2.811.0715.7460，216Wuhan Steel3.301.4316.77202，476Sha Steel2.551.4513.3345，213Construct the comparative matrix, Solve the relativ

28、e weight vector between each indicator and the consistency test. W=（0.25，0.18，0.35，0.22）T And inspect the data. From this vector we can reach which is more importance in large iron and steel enterprise technological innovation. We can find the relative importance of high to low is Value ratio of new

29、 products, R&D ratio, Patents and Value ratio of new products. Therefore, enterprises should strengthen the efforts of new products into production as soon as possible out of obsolete technology innovation to improve competitiveness.According to Table 2, we should construct technological innovation

30、competitiveness evaluation matrix, using formula (1) and formula (2) a normalized evaluation matrix can be reached,From the standardized evaluation matrix B, we find the weighted evaluation matrix R,According to the above formula about maximum evaluation value matrix X+ and the minimum evaluation va

31、lue matrix X- , evaluation of the value of the maximum and minimum evaluation value vector of vectors defined as, According to the formula (1) and formula (2) we can reach index vector to the maximum evaluation value vector distance and the distance to the minimum evaluation value vector,，According

32、to the formula (7) we can obtain the relative closeness between Index vector and the maximum evaluation value vector,，Finally, we can draw the top five large-scale iron and steel enterprises technological innovation competitiveness from the strong to weak are Baosteel, Anshan Steel, Wuhan Steel, Maa

33、nshan Steel and Sha Steel.5. ConclusionWSD (World Steel Dynamics) increase the rate of technological innovation competitiveness in Global steel industry competitiveness sort table. In this article we proposed a separate technological innovation on the competitiveness of the steel to evaluate the met

34、hod. This approach allows the evaluation of iron and steel enterprises can not only be good for enterprises to find the gap between them in technology innovation system also allows businesses to access their own internal innovation index for their own innovation system. Through the above evaluation

35、of steel companies can position themselves well for the future of technology innovation program.References1 Capital Iron and Steel Institute, From the WSD of the world steel industry competitiveness evaluation to see how the domestic steel industry to improve international competitiveness, Metallurg

36、ical Management 11 (2005) 20-24.2 Song-Zehai, Liu-Dacheng, Luo-Wuwei, Interval AHP method in the steel industry investment decisions, Industrial Engineering 8 (6) (2005) 67-70.3 Pan J C H, Yang J S. A study of an integrated inventory with controllable lead timeJ.International Journal of Production R

37、esearch 40 (2002) 1263-1273.4 Xiao-Chun, Xu-Weiping, Zhang-Yi, Iron and steel enterprise comprehensive technical and economic indicators of the neural network evaluation model, Southern Metals 4 (2008) 1-4.5 Xia-Yongqi, Wu-Qi-zong, A hybrid multiple attribute decision making problems TOPSIS method,

38、Systems Engineering 19 (6) (2004) 630-634.6 Ying-Ming Wang, Taha M.S. Elhag, Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets with an application to bridge risk assessment, Expert Systems with Applications 31 (2006) 309-319.7 Ting-Yu Chen, Chueh-Yung Tsao, The interval-valued fuzzy TOPSIS method and ex

39、perimental analysis, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 159 (2008) 1410-14288 Hsu-Shih Shih, Huan-Jyh Shyur, E. Stanley Lee, An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 45 (2007) 801-813 9 H.S. Byun, K.H. Lee, A decision support system for the selection of a rapid proto

40、typing process using the modied TOPSIS method, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 26 (1112) (2005) 13381347. 10 H.S. Shih, C.H. Wang, E.S. Lee, A multiattribute GDSS for aiding problem-solving, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 39 (1112) (2004) 13971412.译 文 ：基于技术创新系统的企业竞争力分

41、析摘要: T0PSIS方法原本应用在钢铁企业科技创新方面，现把它用来评估原本在AHP法下的评估标准，并使单一的AHP法代替了通常的德尔菲法来解决问题。实验结果表明，TOPSIS法能在大型钢铁公司以外取得进步。这表明TOPSIS法与钢铁工业自身的创新容量相比，能有效改善和提高我国中小钢铁企业创新能力评价系统的容量，所以中国钢铁工业技术创新管理有待进一步提高。关键词：多指标评价体系；理想的解决办法；接近性1. 引言近年来，来自美国钢铁咨询公司WSD(世界钢铁动态)编辑出版了“全球钢铁竞争力排名”，其发布的消息得到了越来越多的国内钢铁工业及相关媒体的关注1。分析和研究钢铁企业和他们的竞争力项目也越来

42、越多。我们可以学习如何提升中国钢铁企业的国际竞争力。WSD中有个关于“技术应用能力进步”的竞争力评估指数系统，在这个评估指数系统中有关国际钢铁的储备指标的重要性在不断提高中，在这种情况下为了评估，单独罗列钢铁企业技术创新竞争力评价指标是很有必要的。在技术创新竞争力评估后，将改进大型钢铁公司的传统TOPSIS方法。对钢铁工业进行评估并将它们与同行业其他企业进行比较，我们从中可以看到企业技术创新竞争力方面的弱点，及时发现缺陷并加以提高。2 问题描述和模型的假设2.1 问题描述 本文主要讨论大型钢铁企业的竞争力。目前研究钢铁企业技术创新竞争力的主要方法主要有:AHP2，模糊综合评价法3，BP神经网络

43、的评价方法4等，尽管上述方法可以比较一下我们企业的竞争力科技创新水平，但却不能使企业提高到技术创新水平。本文从特定的钢铁企业技术创新评价体系指数出发，以继续加深评价中的层次分析法(AHP）在TOPSIS法的应用，相比外部创新，提高自身创新能力的方法,使钢铁企业技术创新竞争力中得到提高。22 符号和定义（1）X=x1，x2，x n:一组钢铁企业技术创新竞争力指标（2）U=u1，u2，u m:一套评价指标（3）W=w1，w2，w mT: 一个向量指标权重（4）a=：闭区间，、R3.如何建立评价模型3.1.分类评价我们用一年的数据为评估对象，作为大钢铁企业技术创新指标。但是大型钢铁企业特点是技术创新

44、周期长，技术创新更新缓慢。根据多年的研究，我们可以选择连续周期的数据为研究对象对数据进行汇总，这样我们就可以使我们的数据正常化。评价有多种类型，包括效率、成本和区间，在这三个特性中，效率性能越好成本越小，区间是在属性的范围内。为了消除不同尺寸得出不同的结果，我们得出以下的矩阵，根据这个公式我们可以由得出，代表下标设定成本指标和效益指标5。真正的指标标准化的方法： (1)标准化的方法区间数6： (2)Or (3)3.2.创新能力模型和解决方案步骤1在钢铁企业技术创新的现状基础上，创新和竞争力评价有4种，分别为：(1)研发资金的比值=进行研究的评价指标和开发的成本/指数评价的销售。(2)研发人员的

45、比例=研发人员的数量/总员工数量。(3)新产品的价值比例=新产品销售量/公司销售收入。(4)专利的数量。步骤2使用相对权重的计算方法，运用层次分析法(AHP)的单准则计算各指标之间的重量。（1）构建比较矩阵在这个矩阵中表示对另一个重要指标的影响程度，在矩阵H中，是由专家给出的，因此企业可以区分各指标中相对重要性的关系。（2）解决相对权重向量之间每个指标和一致性的测试：W=（w1，w2，w m）T。步骤3规范多属性评价矩阵找加权矩阵 7： (4)步骤4确定矩阵的最大评价指标和矩阵的最小评价指标。（1）真实指标：，。（2）区间指标：;。因此，我们能找到矩阵评价指标的最大值：矩阵评估指标的最小值：步

46、骤5计算不同企业的评估价值的最大值，到最小值的平均距离矢量8：， (5)， (6)步骤6找到最接近企业价值评估向量的平均向量，并从中得出结论： (7)我们可以评估在使用过这些指标体系后的企业的创新力和竞争力，然后根据相对权重指标对原来的指标进行定论。4.数据案例在“全球钢板竞争力排名”中，有23家全球钢铁公司和实力强劲的国内公司，包括宝钢、鞍山钢铁、马鞍山钢铁、武汉钢铁和沙钢1，因此在这篇文章中我们选择这五个钢铁企业进行技术创新竞争力分析。本文将结合3年的评价数据作为大型钢铁企业技术创新的长期数据。2007-2009年钢铁行业创新竞争力指标数据，如表1。表1： WSD上的钢铁技术创新竞争力指数

47、公司名称指标研发比率研发人员比率新产品价值比率专利数量宝钢2007 3.732.1123.2745320085.342.3424.4585920095.982.9125.621030鞍山钢铁20073.681.3716.2316520084.791.4517.4338720094.921.5817.99733马鞍山钢铁20072.430.9715.236020082.781.0215.3413420093.211.2116.65216武汉钢铁20072.631.2416.2420220083.411.3116.7632920093.851.7517.31476沙钢20071.971.3213.124520082.361.4013.3413720093.321.6313.53213我们应该把单个数据转化成连续的数据。正如研发比率、研发人员的比率、新产品的