臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

企業競爭不再只是強調有形的資產，智慧資產越來越受到重視，因此，知識是現代企業持續競爭優勢的重要資源之一。組織內成員在知識分享上的互動與交流，對於促進知識的創造有著相當重要的影響。外在環境與個人特質等因素，造成知識分享上的障礙，使得知識無法得到最佳的傳播與利用。本研究以社會交換理論為基礎，藉由信任、合作、互惠、利他、組織因素…等研究構念建構一知識分享模式，探討知識分享之意願與行為，並經由實證研究來驗證各研究構念間的相關性。
本研究以電子相關產業人員為實證對象，進行問卷調查，共發出500份問卷，回收得到受測者共279份的資料。以統計方法分析回收之問卷資料，發現下列結果：
一、 研究模式中經驗證，知識分享行為受到信任、合作、互惠、利他與組織因素…等因素的直接影響，且這些主要變因對知識分享都具有直接且正向的影響力，呈現正相關的關聯性。
二、 所有研究變項之間的關係，經驗證均呈現正相關之關聯性，顯示各變項間具有正面相關的關係存在。
整體而言，知識分享行為和信任、合作、互惠、利他、組織因素…等研究構念全部呈現正面相關性，顯示電子相關產業人員在知識分享行為上，樂意與其他成員分享個人知識。
關鍵詞： 知識分享、社會交換

Knowledge is one of the most important resources to sustain the competitive advantages for modern corporations. However, the competition among enterprises does not emphasize on physical assets any more. More and more attention is paid to the importance of intellectual assets. Consequently, knowledge sharing turns out to be a significant factor for knowledge creation. The increasingly specialized knowledge, along with the factors of external environment and personal characteristics, build up a barrier to prevent from knowledge sharing, and thus the optimal utilization of corporate knowledge becomes impossible. This study, based on the theoretical framework of Social Exchange Theory (SET), adopts constructs such as trust, cooperation, reciprocity, altruism, and organizational factor to develop a knowledge sharing model. Then discusses the employees’ willingness of sharing knowledge and how knowledge actually being shared within organizations.
We designed a “knowledge sharing” questionnaire for this study. The subjects include the employees in electronic-related industries. 500 questionnaires were sent out and 279 were returned. Data were analysed by SPSS, and the results show that all the factors such as trust, cooperation, reciprocity, and altruism are positively correlated with employees’ behavior of knowledge sharing.
In summary, the factors such as trust, cooperation, reciprocity, altruism, organizational factor etc. are all positively correlated with the behaviour of knowledge sharing. It shows that the employees in electronic-related industries are prone to contribute and share their personal knowledge with each other.
Keywords: knowledge sharing, social exchange

目 錄
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究動機及背景∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙1
第二節 研究目的與問題∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙5
第三節 研究步驟∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙6
第四節 概念架構∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙8
第五節 研究範圍與限制∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙9
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 知識分享∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙10
第二節 知識分享的理論基礎∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙23
第三節 社會交換理論∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙28
第四節 社會交換與知識分享∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙33
第五節 知識分享的相關變數∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙36
第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究架構∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙50
第二節 研究假設∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙52
第三節 研究變項與操作化定義∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙59
第四節 問卷設計、對象與分析方法∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙62
第四章 研究結果與資料分析
第一節 基本資料分析∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙63
第二節 信度與效度之檢測∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙67
第三節 研究變項分析∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙68
第四節 研究假設的模式驗證與假說檢定∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙76
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 研究結果之說明∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙80
第二節 研究建議∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙82
參考文獻 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙84
問卷資料 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙90
表 次
第二章 文獻探討
表2.1.1 Purser & Pasmore 的知識分類∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙10
表2.1.2 內隱及外顯知識的分別∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙11
表2.1.3 學者與知識分享相關研究一覽表∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙21
表2.4.1 社會交換理論學者與本研究模式相關之理論構念∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙35
表2.5.1 知識分享之相關變數與相關學者之理論∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙46
第三章 研究方法
表3.1.1 研究架構下之相關變數∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙50
表3.3.1 研究變項的操作化定義與相關文獻∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙59
表3.4.1 變數之操作化來源∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙62
第四章 研究結果與資料分析
表4.1.1 所屬產業之基本資料表∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙63
表4.1.2 員工總人數之基本資料表∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙64
表4.1.3 研發人數之基本資料表∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙64
表4.1.4 成立年數之基本資料表∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙65
表4.1.5 本研究各構面之平均值與標準差∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙65
表4.2.1 研究模式中各構念信度∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙67
表4.3.1 研究模式中各變數之相關分析∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙68
表4.3.2 迴歸分析中知識分享與各主要變因之迴歸係數∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙70
表4.3.3 迴歸分析中知識分享與各主要變因之決定係數∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙71
表4.3.4 迴歸分析中知識分享與各主要變因之變異數分析∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙72
表4.3.5 迴歸分析中知識分享與全部主要變因之迴歸係數∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙74
表4.3.6 迴歸分析中知識分享與全部主要變因之決定係數∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙74
表4.3.7 迴歸分析中知識分享與全部主要變因之變異數分析∙∙∙∙∙∙∙74
第五章 結論與建議
表5.1.1 研究假設之檢定結果∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙80
圖 次
第一章 緒論
圖1.3-1 研究流程∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙7
圖1.4-1 概念架構∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙8
第二章 文獻探討
圖2.1-1 核心能力與知識活動間的關係∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙12
圖2.1-2 知識的移轉∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙16
圖2.1-3 不同層次上的知識螺旋∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙17
圖2.1-4 知識分享創造模式∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙18
圖2.1-5 IBM知識管理架構∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙19
圖2.5-1 知識轉換架構∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙43
圖2.5-2 交換關係之結果矩陣∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙45
第三章 研究方法
圖3.1-1 研究架構∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙51
圖3.2-1 研究模式第一部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙52
圖3.2-2 研究模式第二部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙53
圖3.2-3 研究模式第三部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙54
圖3.2-4 研究模式第四部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙55
圖3.2-5 研究模式第五部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙56
圖3.2-6 研究模式第六部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙56
圖3.2-7 研究模式第七部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙57
圖3.2-8 研究模式第八部份∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙58
圖3.3-1 研究假設∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙61
第四章 研究方法
圖4.4-1 研究變項之Pearson相關係數關係圖∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙76
圖4.4-2 各研究變項與知識分享∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙79

1. 王宜敏(2001)，影響資訊人員知識分享行為之因素--以社會交換理論為基礎，國立中山大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
2. 方世杰與方世榮(2000)，「知識管理：觀念架構的建立」，商管科技學刊，Vol. 1(3)，pp. 355-374.。
3. 林士智(1999)，知識管理理論模式初探--組織取向與資訊科技運用，東海大學工業工程研究所碩士論文。
4. 林銓鋃(2000)，企業知識管理之應用架構--國內知識導向組織的個案研究，國立中山大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
5. 吳有順(2000)，網路社群知識分享過程之研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
6. 徐楊順(2000)，知識分享意願、組織公平與信任關係之研究，朝陽科技大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
7. 夏侯欣鵬(2000)，信任與權力對組織內知識分享意願影響之研究--以銀行放款部門主管為例，國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文。
8. 孫本初，「學習型組織的內涵與運用」，空大行政學報第三期，五月，民84，4-5 頁。
9. 陳介玄、高承恕(1991)，「台灣企業運作的社會秩序:人情關係與法律」，東海學報，第32期，pp219-232
10. 彭懷真(1989)，台灣企業業主的關係與其轉變--一個社會學的分析，東海大學社會學研究所博士論文。
11. 連麗文(2000)，消費金融商品創新知識管理之研究，東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
12. 黃國良、黃俊英(1994)，社會交換學派行銷思想的理論內涵與評估，台北銀行月刊，第二十五卷，第七期，pp.20-34
13. 黎士群(1998)，組織公平、信任與知識分享行為之關係性研究--以Unix系統管理人員為例，銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
14. 潘品昇(1999)，企業實施知識管理與電子商務關聯性之研究，大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
15. 蔡佳蓉(1999)，保險業主管領導型態、員工服務態度與其工作績效相關性之研究--以國泰人壽公司為例，國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
16. 劉常勇, 中山大學 劉常勇教授網路教學網頁, 1999
17. 戴文坡&普賽克(1999)，知識管理(Working Knowledge)，中國生產力中心，pp.3-22.
18. 蘇柏州(2000)，企業員工知識分享意願因素之研究，長榮管理學院經營管理研究所碩士論文。
1. Adams, J.S., “ Inequity in Social Exchange, “ IN L. Berkowite, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology: Vol.2, New York: Academic Press, 1965, pp.267-299
2. Alavi, M.(1997), KPMG Peat Marwick U.S.: One Giant Brain. Harvard Business School (Case), July 11
3. Alderson, W.(1965), Dynamic Marketing Behavior: A Functionalist Theory of Marketing, Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
4. Anderson, C.(1996), ”Computer as Audience: Mediated Interactive Message”, Interactive Marketing, Chap11, NTC Business Books
5. Armstrong & John Hagel(1996), ”The real value of on-line communities”, Harvard Business Review
6. Argyris, Chris & Donald A. Schon(1978), Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective, MA: Addison-Wesley Publication.
7. Badaracco, Joseph (1991), The Knowledge Link: How Firm Compete through Strategic Alliance, Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
8. Bagozzi, Richard P.(1978), “ Marketing as Exchange, “ American Behavioral Scientist, 21(March/April), pp.535-536
9. Blau, P.(1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, 1964
10. Bostrom, R.P.(1989), “ Successful Application of Communication Techniques to Improve the Systems Development Process, “ Information & Management (16), pp.279-295
11. Dansereau, F., Graen, G. & W.J. Haga(1975), “ A Vertical Dyad Linkage Approach to Leadership in Formal Organizations, “ Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol.13,pp.46-48
12. Davenport, H.T., “ The Principle of Knowledge Management and Four Case Studies,” Knowledge and Process Management, 4(3), 1997, pp.187-208
13. Dreyfus, H.L. & S. E. Dreyfus(1986), Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer, New York: Free Press.
14. Drucker, P. F., “ Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge,”California Management Review, Vol.41, No.2, Winter 1999, pp: 79-95.
15. Emerson, R.A.(1962), “ Power-dependence Relations, “ American Sociological Review, 27, pp.31-41
16. French, J.R. & B.H. Raven(1959), “The Base of Social Power, “ In D CartWright (ed.), Studies in Social Power, An Arbor, MI.: University of Michigan Press.
17. Grant, Robert(1997),”The Knowledge-Based View of the Firm: Implication for Management Practice,” Long Range Planning, Vol.30, pp.450-454.
18. Hansen, M.T.(1999), “ The Search-transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Sub-units, “ Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.44, pp.82-111
19. Harem Thorvald & Krogh Georg von & Roos Johan,(1996) “ Knowledge-Based Strategic Change”, in Georg von Krogh & Johan Roos(ed.), Managing Knowledge-Perspectives on Cooperation and Competition, SAGE Publications
20. Hedlund,G.(1994), “ A Model of Knowledge Management and the N-Form Corporation, “ Strategic Management Journal, Vol.15, pp-73-90
21. Hendriks, P.(1999), “ Why Share Knowledge? The Influence of ICT on Motivation for Knowledge Sharing, ” Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 6, No.2, pp.91-100
22. Hickson, D.J., C.R. Hinning, C.A. Lee, R.E. Schnech & J.M. Pennings(1971), “ A Strategic Contingency Theory of Intra-organizational Power, “ Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.16
23. Hidding, G. & Shireen, M.C.(1998), “ Anatomy of a Learning Organization: Turning Knowledge into Capital at Anderson Consulting, “ Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. , No.1, pp.3-13
24. Hinings, C.R., D.J. Hickson, J.M. Pemmings & R.E. Schneck(1974), “ Structural Conditions of Intra-Organizational Power, “ Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.14,pp.378-397
25. Hoffman, M.L.(1975), “ Altruistic Behavior and the Parent-Child Relationship, “ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.31, pp937-943
26. Holthouse, Dan(1998),”Knowledge Research Issues,” California Management Review, Vol.43, No.3, pp.277-280.
27. Homans, G.C.(1958), “ Social Behavior as Exchange, “ The American Journal of Sociology, pp.597-606
28. Hope, J. and Hope, Tony, “ Competing in the third wave：the ten key management issues of the information age, “ Harvard Business School Press, 1997. 【Hope, J. and Tony Hope, 笑傲第三波，經典傳訊， 1999。】
29. Hosmer, L.T.(1995), “ Trust: The Connecting Link between Organizational Theory and Philosophical Ethics, “ Academy of Management Review, Vol.20, pp.379-403
30. Janz, B., Colquitt, J. & Noe, R.,” Knowledge Worker Team Effectiveness: The Role of Autonomy, Interdependence, Team Development, and Contextual Support Variables”. Personal Psychology. Durham, Winter, 1997.
31. Jehn, K. Shah, A. & Pradhan, P., “Interpersonal Relationship and Task Performance: An Examination of Mediating Processes in Friendship and Acquaintance Groups”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, April ,1997.
32. Jones, G. & George, J.(1998), “ The Experience and Evolution of Trust: Implication for Cooperation and Teamwork, “ Academy of Management Review, Jul 1998
33. Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K, The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-performance Organization, New York: Harper Collins, 1993.
34. Kim, W.C. & Mauborgn, R.A.(1998), “ Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge Economy, “ Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 1997, pp.65-75
35. Kim, W.C. & Mauborgne, R.A. “ Procedural Justice, Strategic Decision Making, and the Knowledge Economy, ” Strategic Management Journal, 19, 1998, pp.323-338
36. Koenig, M., “ The 1998 Conference Board Conference, “ Information Today, July/August, pp.13 & pp.51, 1998
37. Kotler, Philip(1972), “ The Generic Concept of Marketing, “ Journal of Marketing, 36(April), pp.46-54
38. Krogh, G.(1998), “ Care in Knowledge Creation,” California Management Review; CA Berkley, Spring 1998
39. Leonard Barton, D.(1995), Wellsprings of Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1995.
40. Lind, E. A. & Tyler, T.R.(1988), The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Plenum Press, New York, 1988
41. Macneil, I. R., “ Relational Contacts: What we do and do not know, “ Wisconsin Law Review. 45, 1985, pp.483-535
42. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. & Schoorman, F.D.(1995),” An Integration Model of Organizational Trust, “ Academy of Management Review, Jul 1995
43. McInnes, William(1964), “ A Conceptual Approach to Marketing, “ in Reavis Cox, Wroe Alderson, and Stanley J., Shapiro, eds., Theory in Marketing, Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., pp.51-67
44. Münch, R.(1993), Sociological Theory: From the 1850s to the Present, Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers
45. Musen, A.M.(1992), “ Dimensions of Knowledge Sharing and Re-sue, “ Computer and Bio-Medical Research, Vol.25, pp.435-467
46. Myrna, Gilbert. & Martyn, Cordey-Hayes(1996), Understanding the Process of Knowledge Transfer to Achieve Successful Technological Innovation, Technovation, Vol. 16, Iss. 6, Jun 1996, p.301-312.
47. Nancy, M.D.(2000), “ Common Knowledge: How Companies thrive by Sharing What They Know, “ Harvard Business School Press, Boston
48. Newell, A.(1982), “ The Knowledge Level, “ Artif Intel, Vol.18, pp.87-127
49. Neilsen, Eric H.(1969), “ Understanding and Managing Intergroup Conflict, “ in Jay W Lorsch and Paul R. Lawrence, eds., Managing Group and Intergroup Relations(Homewood, III.: Irwin and Dorsey, 1972), pp.329-343
50. Nonaka & Takeuchi., The Knowledge-Creating Company, UK: Oxford University Press, 1995.
51. Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi.H. and Umermoto, K.(1996), “ A Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation “, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol.11, pp833-845
52. Ojala, M., “ Knowledge is power, ” Econtent, June-July, 1999.
53. Organ, D.W.（1988）, “ Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The good syndrome. “ Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
54. Pasmore, William A. & Purser, Roland E, “ Designing Work Systems for Knowledge Workers, “ The Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 16,Jul/Aug , 1993, pp.78-84
55. Pfeffer, J.( 1998), “ The Human Equation: Building profits by putting people first, “ Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
56. Polanyi, Michael, The Tacit dimension, 1967
57. Pollard, D.(2000), “ Becoming Knowledge-Powered: Planning the Transformation, “ Information Resources Management Journal, pp.54-63
58. Quinn, J.B. , Anderson, P. , Finkelstein, S. (1996),”Managing Professional Intellect: Making the Most of the Best,” Harvard Business Review, March-April
59. Quinn, James Brian & Anderson, Philip & Finkelstein, Sydney,Leveraging intellect, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 10, Iss. 3, Aug 1996, pp. 7-27
60. Rousseau, D. M. & Parks, J.M., “ The contacts of individuals and organizations, “ In B.M. Staw and L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior. 15, Greenwich, C.T.: JAI Press. 1993., pp.1-43
61. Senge, P. ,”Sharing Knowledge,” Executive Excellent, Nov 1997
62. Smith, C. A., & Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P., (1983), Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology,Vol.68,No.4, PP.353-663
63. Stauffer, D., “ Why people hoard knowledge, ” Across the board, September, 1999
64. Stewart , T. A., Intellectual Capital : The New Wealth of Organizations, New York : Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group , Inc., 1997.【Stewart , T. A., 宋偉航譯，智慧資本，智庫文化，1999。】
65. Thibaut, J., Friedl N. & Walker, L.(1974), “ Compliance with Rules: Some Social Determinants, “ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 1974, pp.792-801
66. Thibaut, J. & Walker, L., Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis, Eribaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1975
67. Thibaut, J. & Walker, L., “ A Theory of Procedure, “ California Law Review, 66, 1978, pp.541-566
68. Tjosvold, Dean(1988), “ Cooperative and Competitive Interdependence: Collaboration between Department to Serve Customer, “ Group and Organizational Studies 13, pp274-289.
69. Toffler, Alvin, The Third Wave, New York: William Morrow, 1980.
70. Turner, J.H.(1986), The Structure of Sociological Theory, Chicago: The Dorsey Press.
71. Williamson, O.E. (1975), “ Markets and Hierarchies, ” Free Press, New York
72. Williamson, O.E. (1985), “ Comparative Economic Organization: The Analysis of Discrete Structural Alternatives, ” Administrative Science Quarterly, Val. 36, pp.269.