Partnership Case Studies & Outcomes
Partnership cases and investment outcomes from the alliances.
How to use these cases
Cases show only public information authorized by the parties involved. They do not predict future results.
Outcomes at a glance
What the page shows and what material exists
This page is for investors, overseas buyers and companies considering cooperation. It helps them judge what verifiable record TINAI’s investment and alliance work has produced so far. TINAI is the Taiwan Industrial Network of Alliances for Investment. The page first states the nature of each kind of material and leaves the reader to decide how far to rely on it. It does not lead with outcome figures and ask for trust.
Four kinds of material can be checked: organisational scale, alliance solution records, official investment statistics, and case results. The first three each have a source and differ in character. The fourth, named companies’ cooperation cases and their results, has no record with the parties’ consent at present. The platform therefore publishes none, and it does not fill the gap with examples or inference.
One consequence follows. You will not find a company name set beside a deal value or an investment return here. If you meet such a claim elsewhere, ask for the evidence, the date and the consent status before relying on it. That is the reading habit this page is meant to encourage.
How strong each kind of evidence is
Organisational scale shows that resources exist. It does not show results. The Venture Capital Committee of the National Innovation and Entrepreneurship Association, R.O.C. was founded in December 2025. It draws on 200 role-model companies, which are medium and large enterprises, in seven industry groups. These figures answer how much can be mobilised. They do not answer how many investments have closed, and the two should never be quoted as if they were interchangeable.
Alliance solution records show how a cooperation is structured, not what it achieved. Two are published. Each names the participating companies, the integration architecture and the use cases. The value statements come from the participants and the alliance and carry no quantified results. The records show which companies have formed an offer that can be adopted. They cannot show that the offer has cut a customer’s cost or lead time by any amount.
Official investment statistics have the clearest definition of the four. The number of approved applications and the investment amount under Taiwan’s three Invest in Taiwan programmes are published by the official portal, with a stated cut-off date. They may be quoted with that date. They describe investment in Taiwan as a whole, not the results of the association or the alliances. The Taiwan outcomes page covers them.
Reading the two alliance solutions
The first solution comes from the Automotive Components Alliance: an intelligent-driving sensing and optical lighting solution. Its participants are two companies, one a vehicle lamp manufacturer and the other an aftermarket parts maker. The description lists five industry pain points: rising barriers to cross-domain integration, limited capability in complex optics, regulatory and certification pressure, demand for modular delivery, and gaps in large-part manufacturing and service.
The architecture has five layers, from the vehicle application layer to manufacturing and validation. It distinguishes the compliance and specification expectations of the United States, under SAE standards, and Europe, under ECE standards. This material tells a buyer what problem the offer addresses and how work is divided, which is useful for a first screen. The statements on cost and efficiency are claims about value, and no actual adoption results are given.
The second solution, AI Vision Application from the Digital Industries Alliance, currently lists only two participating companies. The source has no description, pain points or architecture. The record shows that the two companies registered the offer together. It does not support the conclusion that an adoption has been completed. For further detail, use the data or referral route of the cooperation request form to ask the alliance.
What a case must contain
A case needs at least six elements before it is published: the type of each party, what each party did, the result, the date, the definition behind any figure, and the consent status of the parties. Where the source states no result, the page says so rather than substituting adjectives. Any impact figure must carry its method, such as the period, the unit and the basis of comparison.
Consent is a separate condition. Cooperation that involves a named company is made public only with the agreement of those concerned. A role model’s experience is not stretched into a claim about the whole alliance. Appearing in a directory is not an assessment of a company’s capability or of investment suitability. Material without consent is not published even if it is true, so the cases shown will be fewer than the cooperation that actually takes place.
Impact figures from different cases cannot be set side by side, because their definitions differ. One case may count a completed production-line validation as its result and another a strategic investment secured. The two measure different things over different timescales. Each published case states its own definition, and readers should not add the figures together or rank the cases.
How to request or contribute a case
A reader who needs evidence of a specific case, for example a record of an alliance member adopting a given process, can use the data or referral route in the cooperation request form. State the industry, process and purpose. Staff review the request by hand. Where it involves non-public information or a named company, an introduction is made only after that company agrees.
A company willing to make a cooperation case public can send an outline through the same form. The form takes the outline only, with no attachments, financial data or confidentiality agreements. The platform confirms the facts, dates and scope of consent with the parties, and publishes after review with the source and date stated.
Until formal cases accumulate, the most reliable course for investors and buyers is still to ask the company directly for documents and to carry out their own due diligence. The purpose of this page is to make that process more efficient by showing whom to ask for what evidence. It is not a substitute for the evidence.
Frequently asked questions
Why does this page list no named cooperation cases?
A named case needs the parties’ types, what they did, the result, the date, the definition of any figure and the parties’ consent. Records without consent are not published, and examples or inference are not used instead.
Do the 200 role-model companies mean 200 investments were completed?
No. The figure counts the medium and large role-model companies that take part in the committee. It describes organisational scale. The committee was founded in December 2025 and the source lists no completed cases.
Can the cost or efficiency benefits on solution pages be quoted?
Only as the participants’ and the alliance’s own description of value. They carry no quantified results and have not been checked by a third party, so they should not be quoted as verified performance.
How can a company have its cooperation case published?
Send an outline through the cooperation request form. The platform confirms facts, dates, definitions and the scope of consent with the parties and publishes after review, with source and date. The form accepts no attachments or financial data.
