母國企業進入地主國市場，其進入模式包括出口、授權與外商直接
投資，其中「外商直接投資」涉及所有權，並可取得部分或全部的經營權。而涉及到外商直接投資的進入模式，依據持股比例做區分，包括合資與獨資，此為本研究之範疇。對於母國企業而言，通常持股比例越高，掌握的經營權越多，對於新公司各項事務越有決策權，而對於新公司的績效越能掌握。
由於不熟悉當地市場狀況，或是為了尋求資源的整合，母國企業進
入地主國市場時，常與當地企業合作採取合資的方式。合資的模式或許可以在初期獲得合作上的利益，然而在合作的過程中，未必能保證合作夥伴是否會模仿、抄襲、竊取相關技術等。而根據交易成本理論，多國籍企業會傾向於採取獨資的方式，其一是因為母國企業考量到無形資產可能會遭合作夥伴竊用，故較願意轉移各項資源予獨資子公司，其二是因為合資子公司的績效取決於合作夥伴是否有共同的目標，以及夥伴的投機主義行為。
因此，不管母國企業採取合資或獨資模式，皆會受到地主國其他競爭廠商的模仿，進而影響到母國的合資或獨資公司的經營績效。本研究著重在地主國廠商的模仿與學習，因此以「模仿障礙」的概念，來探討外國廠商合資或獨資型態的經營績效，如何受到地主國廠商之競爭影響，包括廣告密度、研發密度與管理費用密度等三項變數。
另一方面，對於「進入模式」的研究範疇，先前雖有大量的文獻探討進入模式，但大多針對進入前的模式考量與選擇，對於選擇模式進入後的實際績效，卻鮮少有研究著墨，因此我們無法明確認定獨資模式的經營績效一定會比合資模式來得好，而此一缺口的產生，乃是因為子公司財務資料非常缺乏。本研究透過推導與計算，以母企業集團之財務資料替代子公司之財務數據，解決子公司財務數據缺乏的窘境，藉此得知持股比例與各項調節變數對於組織經營績效的影響為何。
本研究母體乃為台灣公開上市上櫃企業至大陸市場投資之子公司，並以母企業於大陸市場的投資比例做為篩選樣本的標準，淘汰該比例在15%以下的企業後，在剔除各項財務資訊有所疏漏之企業，餘計136家，乃為本研究之樣本數，其中獨資企業共94家、合資企業共42家。
本研究以母企業之財務資料替代為子公司財務數據，有其合理性，理由是子公司之財務數據與母公司之財務資料呈現一定的比例關係。而本研究使用該「大陸市場的投資比例」，研究架構中調節變項「子公司廣告密度」、「子公司研發密度」、「子公司管理費用密度」，以及依變項「大陸市場投資之資產報酬率」便是根據該推論推算而來，乃是原變項與大陸市場投資比例之乘積。
本研究結果顯示，即台灣母公司之持股比例愈高，大陸子公司的經營績效亦會愈高。而「大陸子公司研發密度」之調節效果為正向影響主效果，顯示研發經費的投入與組織經營績效呈現正相關，能夠對於合作夥伴與競爭對手，建立起「模仿障礙」。至於「大陸子公司廣告密度」與「大陸子公司之管理費用密度」之調節效果則為負向影響。

The entry mode of foreign direct investment(FDI) includes joint venture(JV) and wholly owned subsidiary(WOS) which both can confer effective management control. Previous studies of entry mode focused ex ante prediction, not the ex post performance. The absence of work in this area takes root in the lack of financial data for foreign subsidiaries. Therefore, this study uses “the foreign parent’s financial data multiplied by investment ratio in focal market” as the subsidiary’s data. Moreover, this study proposes “barriers to imitation” to discuss how much shareholding proportion is better and the variables includes (1) advertising intensity (2) R&D intensity (3) management fee intensity.

台灣經濟新報(2010)，「上市(櫃)董監事持股狀況」。
台灣經濟新報(2015)，「財務資料庫-科目說明(IFRS版)」。
Agarwal S, Ramaswami S. (1992). Choice of foreign entry mode: impact of
ownership, location, and internalization factors. Journal of International
Business Studies 23: 1–27."
Anderson E, Gatignon H. (1986). Modes of foreign entry: a transaction cost
analysis and proposition. Journal of International Business Studies 17: 1–
16.
Barney JB. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage.
Journal of Management 17: 99–120.
Barth, M. E., Kasznik, R., & McNichols, M. F. (2001). Analyst coverage and
intangible assets. Journal of Accounting Research, 39: 1–34.
Boeh, K. K., & Beamish, P. W. (2012). Travel time and the liability of distance
in foreign direct investment: Location choice and entry mode. Journal of
International Business Studies, 43(5), 525-535.
Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers, L. E., & Werner, S. (2003). Transaction cost‐
enhanced entry mode choices and firm performance. Strategic
Management Journal, 24(12), 1239-1248.
Buckley P, Casson M. (1976). The Future of the Multinational Enterprise.
Homles & Meier: New York.
Chang, S. J., Chung, J., & Moon, J. J. (2013). When do wholly owned
subsidiaries perform better than joint ventures?. Strategic Management
Journal, 34(3), 317-337.
Chang, S. J., & Rosenzweig, P. M. (2001). The choice of entry mode in
sequential foreign direct investment. Strategic Management Journal, 22(8), 747-776.
Dierickx I, Cool K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of
competitive advantage. Management Science 35(12): 1504–1511.
Dunning J. (1988). Explaining International Production. Unwin Hyman:
London.
Fornell, C., Robinson, W. T., & Wernerfelt, B. (1985). Consumption experience
and sales promotion expenditure. Management Science, 31(9), 1084-1105.
Francioni, B., Musso, F., & Vardiabasis, D. (2013). Key decisions and changes
in internationalization strategies: The case of smaller firms. Journal of
Strategic Marketing, 21(3), 240-259.
Gatignon H, Anderson E. (1988). The multinational corporation’s degree of
control over foreign subsidiaries: an empirical test of a transaction cost
explanation. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 4: 304–336."
Gomes-Casseres B. (1989). Ownership structures of foreign subsidiaries.
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 11: 1–25."
Gomes, L., & Ramaswamy, K. (1999). An empirical examination of the form of
the relationship between multinationality and performance. Journal of
international business studies, 173-187.
Hennart J-F. (1982). The Theory of the Multinational Enterprise. University of
Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI."
Johanson J, Vahlne J. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm; a
model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market
commitment. Journal of International Business Studies 8: 23–32.
King, A. W., & Zeithaml, C. P. (2001). Competencies and firm performance:
Examining the causal ambiguity paradox. Strategic Management Journal,
22(1), 75-99.
Kogut B. (1991). Joint ventures and the option to expand and acquire.
Management Science 37(1): 19–33.
Kogut B, Singh H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry
mode. Journal of International Business Studies 19: 414–432."
Lippman SA, Rumelt RP. (1982). Uncertain imitability: an analysis of interfirm
differences in efficiency under competition. Bell Journal of Economics 13:
418–438."
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial
orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of
management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
Murray, J. Y., Ju, M., & Gao, G. Y. (2012). Foreign market entry timing
revisited: Trade-off between market share performance and firm survival.
Journal of International Marketing, 20(3), 50-64.
Nitsch D, Beamish PW, Makino S. (1996). Entry mode and performance of
Japanese FDI in Western Europe. Management International Review 36:
27–38.
Reed R, DeFillippi RJ. (1990). Causal ambiguity, barriers to imitation, and
sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review 15:
88–102.
Root F. (1994). Entry Strategies for International Markets. Lexington: New
York.
Rugman A. (1981). Inside the Multinationals: The Economies of Internal
Markets. Croom Helm: London."
Shaver JM. (1998). Accounting for endogeneity when assessing strategy
performance: does entry mode choice affect FDI survival? Management
Science 44(4): 571–585."
Tsai, H. T. (2014). Moderators on international diversification of advanced
emerging market firms. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1243-1248.
Zhang, Y., Li, Y., & Li, H. (2014). FDI spillovers over time in an emerging
market: the role of entry tenure and barriers to imitation. Academy of
Management Journal, 57(3), 698-722.