第一，以 131 家房地产业上市公司为样本，分析房地产行业限购限贷等产业
政策对行业结构的影响。结论如下：消极的产业政策导致战略群组数量增多、群
组成员数量发生变化；使战略群组的匹配率降低、移动率变化率加大、稳定率下
降；使企业与本战略群组中心和其他战略群组中心的战略距离都变小，整个行业
呈收缩态势。研究结果表明，产业政策造成行业结构变化。研究结论对企业管理
和政府政策制定具有参考价值
第二，用配对 t 检验的统计分析方法，对政策出台前后数据作对比分析，研究
产业政策对行业绩效、战略群组绩效和企业绩效的影响。消极的产业政策使行业
整体绩效下降，并表现出一定的滞后性；使群组的稳定率降低，不同稳定率的群
组的绩效不同，稳定率高的群组绩效高，稳定率低的群组绩效低；产业政策对稳
定率高的群组的绩效影响小于稳定率低的群组
第三，建立多元线性回归模型，用 2009-2013 年的面板数据验证假设，研究企
业迁移对企业绩效和绩效变化率的影响，研究战略距离变化对企业绩效和绩效变
化率的影响。企业从低向高稳定率群组的迁移使企业绩效变好，绩效变化率变小
消极的产业政策使企业与本群组中心的战略距离变小，变小的战略距离有利于提
升企业绩效，且战略距离越小企业绩效变化越大。消极的产业政策同时也使企业
与其他战略群组中心的战略距离均值变小，战略距离越小，企业绩效越好，绩效
变化率越小。从结论可以看出当消极的产业政策来临的时候企业要充分考虑环境
的变化，调整战略、调动资源，企业迁往稳定率高的群组有利于企业绩效提升
积极模仿本群组的典型战略，同时不和其他群组的战略相左，将有利于提高企业
绩效。当行业面临消极的产业政策时，整个行业出现趋同的现象，企业倾向于模
仿行业内的其他企业的典型战略
关键词：战略群组；产业政策；行业结构；绩效Abstract
II
Abstract
The examination of external environment has been a central research topic in
management. This dissertation adopted the perspectives of strategic group and analyzed
the effects of industrial policies on industrial structure, strategic groups, and firms. We
took the restrictive policy in China’s real estate market in 2010 as a quasi-experiment,
we analyzed the regulatory history of China’s real estate industry. We first used paired
t-test methods to examine the significant influence of the restrictive policy on industry
structure, industry performance, and performance of strategic groups and firms. We then
used multiple linear regression methods and tested the effects of changes of industrial
structure on firm performance with a five-year panel data during 2009 - 2013. We
conclude on the innovative findings.
First，we selected 131 listed companies in China’s real estate industry as samples，
and we tested the influence of industrial policies on industrial structure. The results
showed as follows：the number of strategic group increased and the number of strategic
groups were affected when negative industrial policies took place; the mobile rate (MR)
of strategic group decreased， the mobility rate of firms increased，and the coefficients
of stabilization decreased；The strategic distance between a firm and the center of its
strategic group and the distance between a firm and the centers of other strategic groups
reduced, and the entire industry appeared contracting movement. The result showed that
industrial policies changed industrial structure. The conclusions of this paper have
implications for both firms and government authorities.
Second, using paired t-test, we analyzed the effects on performance of the entire
industry, strategic groups, and firms before and after the initiation of restrictive policy.
The performance of the entire industry decreased when negative industrial policies took
place with lagged influence. The coefficients of stabilization of the strategy groups
decreased when the negative industrial policies took place—the higher the coefficient of
stabilization the better the performance of strategic groups. Besides, the performance
change rates of strategic groups with higher coefficients of stabilization were lower than
that of the strategic groups with lower coefficients of stabilization.
Third, we constructed a multiple linear regression model, and used a five-year
panel data from 2009 to 2013 to test the hypotheses, and discussed the effects of firms’Abstract
III
movement from one strategic group to another on firms’ performance and changing rate
of performance. Firms’ performance were enhanced when companies moved from the
strategic group with lower coefficient of stabilization to the strategic group with lower
coefficient of stabilizations, and the changing rate of company performance decreased.
The strategic distance to the center of one’s own strategic group decreased when the
negative industrial policies took place, and the firms with smaller strategic distance had
better performance and greater changing rate of performance. At the same time, average
distance to the centers of other strategic groups decreased when negative industrial
policies took place, and the firms with smaller distance had better performance and
smaller change rate of performance. Our findings suggested that, when negative
industrial policies took place, firms should adjust strategies and (re)allocate resources
by pondering over environmental changes. Firms’ movement toward strategic groups
with higher coefficients of stabilization favored the improvement of firm performance.
Proactive imitation of typical strategies of one’s own strategic group and
non-contradictory strategies with other strategic groups helped firms improve their
performance. When encountered negative policies, firms learn from the prototypical
strategies of the industry, which resulted in a mimetic trend at industry level.
Key words：strategic group；industrial policy；industrial structure；performance目 录
IV
目 录
第 1 章 引言.......1
1.1 研究背景...1
1.1.1 现实背景........1
1.1.2 理论背景........3
1.2 问题的提出...........6
1.3 研究方法...7
1.4 研究内容与文章结构.......7
第 2 章 理论基础和文献综述.11
2.1 理论基础.11
2.1.1 SCP 范式.........11
2.1.2 资源基础观与核心能力........12
2.2 战略群组理论.....14
2.2.1 战略群组及相关概念..........15
2.2.2 战略群组的存在性..15
2.2.3 战略群组与行业结构..........16
2.2.4 战略群组内企业及战略群组间企业的绩效差异..18
2.2.5 战略群组与移动壁垒..........19
2.2.6 战略群组与企业战略决策和动态分析......19
2.2.7 国内对战略群组的研究情况..........21
2.3 产业政策.21
2.3.1 产业政策定义、特点、种类..........21
2.3.2 产业政策的理论依据......
。。。以上简介无排版格式，详细内容请下载查看
==>>