跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.233.217.106) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/17 21:35
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:李燕強
研究生(外文):Yen-Chiang Lee
論文名稱:發展中船公司建造規範知識管理系統之行動研究
論文名稱(外文):Action Research to Develop the Knowledge Management System for Full Specification of CSBC
指導教授:蔡敦浩蔡敦浩引用關係楊碩英楊碩英引用關係
指導教授(外文):Stephen D. TsaiShowing Young
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立中山大學
系所名稱:企業管理學系研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:英文
論文頁數:120
中文關鍵詞:知識管理系統行動研究核心知識
外文關鍵詞:Action ResearchCore KnowledgeKnowledge Management System
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:23
  • 點閱點閱:665
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:258
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:6
本研究的主要目的在於經由發展一套建造規範知識管理系統雛型的行動歷程中,探索適合於中船公司的知識管理做法及模式。本研究採行行動研究,以中船公司設計處基本設計課為實驗場,船廠的核心知識--商船建造規範知識為主要對象,發展一套建造規範知識管理系統的雛型,在系統發展的過程中,透過行動中的反思(Reflection-in-Action)與對行動的反思(Reflection-on-Action),針對各個行動方案所遭遇的問題與困境進行反思,藉以修正行動方案,逐步完成系統的建構,並從行動方案的實施歷程中尋求新的發現,作為中船持續推動知識管理的參考。
本研究結果,獲得下列四項主要發現:
一、建立開放式工作平台,營造知識管理的情境,並從行動中學習,完成建造規範知識系統雛形的建立。
二、藉由實務工作者的共同參與、規劃與學習,有助於形成知識管理的未來情境與推動知識管理的共識。
三、發掘組織學習與知識分享的模式,並與知識管理系統相互結合,有助於形成知識創新的管理機制。
四、發展出知識管理行動研究的參考架構與中船知識管理的推動模式。
The main purpose of this study was to investigate the suitable practice and model of knowledge management for CSBC through the action progress of developing a prototypical knowledge system intended for management of Full Specification.
This study belongs to action research. The experiment field was Basic Design Section of Design Department in CSBC. It targeted at the shipyard’s core knowledge--Full Specification to develop a prototypical knowledge management system of Full Specification. Through reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action in the process of developing system, the problems and dilemmas encountered by each action plan were reflected to seek for solutions and to revise the action plan. Then the knowledge management system was built. From the progress of action plan, it sought for new findings which can be the reference for CSBC to promote knowledge management continuously.
The results of this study were as follows:
1) The environment of knowledge management was built by creating the open working platform. And a prototypical knowledge management system of Full Specification was built by learning-from-action.
2) By the participating, planning, learning of practitioners, it was helpful to emerge the future scenario of knowledge management and the common consensus to advance the knowledge management.
3) The model of organization learning and knowledge sharing was found. If the model combined with the knowledge management system, it was helpful to form the procedure of creating knowledge.
4) The reference frame of action research for knowledge management and the driven model of knowledge management for CSBC were developed.
目 錄
摘要i
ABSTRACTii
圖目錄iii
表目錄iv
第壹章 緒論1
第一節 研究背景與動機3
第二節 研究目的5
第三節 名詞釋意6
第四節 研究範圍及限制8
第貳章 理論基礎與文獻探討9
第一節 知識管理9
第二節 系統思考與理想化設計21
第三節 行動研究25
第參章 研究方法與流程33
第一節 研究方法35
第二節 研究場域與對象38
第三節 研究者的角色40
第四節 研究流程41
第五節 起始的行動方案設計43
第六節 資料蒐集與分析48
第肆章 研究結果與反思51
第一節 行動方案實施歷程與成果51
第二節 實務工作者對知識管理的瞭解與看法80
第三節 組織內的學習活動與知識分享91
第四節 綜合討論:研究者的反思與新發現100
第伍章 結論與建議106
第一節 研究發現摘要107
第二節 結論114
第三節 建議116
參考文獻118
參考文獻
附錄
圖目錄
圖2.1:知識的演化過程11
圖2.2:資訊與知識之間的轉換13
圖2.3:資訊、知識與技術間的關係14
圖2.4:Ellen M. Knapp 知識管理架構16
圖2.5:微軟的知識管理構面17
圖2.6:Arthur Andersen知識管理架構18
圖2.7:ZACK顯性知識的管理架構20
圖2.8:互動式管理24
圖2.9:互動式規劃24
圖2.10:行動研究的特徵27
圖2.11:行動研究螺旋29
圖2.12:Elliott’s 行動研究模式30
圖3.1 : 研究架構34
圖3.2 : 行動研究概念圖37
圖3.3:中船設計處基本設計課組織圖39
圖3.4:研究流程42
圖3.5:開放式工作平台架構47
圖3.6:資料分析流程50
圖4.1:知識管理系統架構73
圖4.2:學習模式95
圖4.3:研究流程的整理101
圖4.4:知識管理系統推動模式105
圖5.1:知識管理研究新架構112
表目錄
表4.1:新船建造規範之相關知識調查整理61
表4.2:建造規範知識文件64
表4.3:學習模式與實際案例的比較98
表4.4 : 學習模式與知識管理系統的結合99
參考文獻王文科,民82, 教育研究法。二版,台北:五南圖書公司。張世平,民80, 行動研究法。收錄於黃光雄、簡茂發(民80)教育研究法,台北:師大書苑。張吉成, 民90,科技產業知識創新模式建構之研究,國立臺灣師範大學工業教育研究博士論文。彼得‧杜拉克,1993,後資本主義社會,傅振焜譯,台北:時報。陳柏璋, 1998,教育研究方法的新取向─質的研究方法(增訂二版),台北:南宏。夏林清譯,(Altrichter, Posch & Somekh 著),1997,行動研究方法導論─教師動手作研究,台北:遠流。劉常勇,1999,“幾個有關知識管理議題之初探”, /www.cme.org.tw/know/勤業管理顧問公司(Arthur Andersen Business Consulting), 1999, 知識管理的第一本書, 劉京偉譯,商周出版Ackoff, Russell L., 1999, Re-creating the Corporation, New York Oxford, Oxford Unversity Press.Altrichter, H., 1991, Do we need an alternative methodology for doing alternative research ? Recollections of a summer day at the Victorian coast as giving rise to some deliberations concerning the methodology of action research and the unity of science. In O. Zuber- Skerritt (Ed.), Action Research for Change and Development (pp.79-92). Aldershot/ rookfield: Avebury.Carr, W. and Kemmis, S., 1986, Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research, Falmer Press, London. Corey, S.M., 1953, Action Research to Improve School Practice, New York: Teachers College Press.Cunningham, J. Barton, 1993, Action Research and Organization Development, Praeger Publishers.Davenport and Prusak, 1998, ”Working knowledge: How Organization Manage What They Know”, Harvard Business School Press.Ebbutt, D., 1985, “Educational Action Research : Some General concerns and Specific Qulbbles.”, In Burgess. R.(ed.), Issues in Educational Research.Ellen M. Knapp, 1998, “Knowledge Management”, Business & Economic Review, July-Sept, P.5Elliott, J., 1991, Action Research for Educational Change, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Feldman, A., 1994, “Erzberger’s Dilemma: Validity in Action Research and Science Teacher’s Need to Know”, Science Education, 78(1), P83-101Greenwood, D.J. and Levin M., 1998, Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Grundy, S. & Kemmis, S., 1981, “Educational Action Research in Australia: The state of the Art”,Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education.Hopkins, D., 1985, A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research. Philadephia: Open University Press.Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R., 1997, The Action Research Planner (3rd ed.). Deakin University Press, Victoria, Australia.Nonaka, I., 1994, “The dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”, Organization Science, 5,1, pp96-104.Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995, The Knowledge-creating Company, Oxford University Press, Inc. Nonaka, I., 1998, “The concept of ba:Building a foundation of knowledge creation,” California Management Review, Vol.40, No.3, pp.40-54O’Dell, Carla and C. Jackson Grayson, Jr., 1998, “If only we knew what we know: the ttransfer of internal knowledge and best practice”, New York: Free PressPapows, Jeff , 1999, Enterprise.com, Perseus Plblishing .Polanyi, Michael, 1967, The tacit Dimension, New York: M.E. Sharp Inc. Reason, & Bradbury, 2001, “Introduction: Inquiry and Participation in Search of a World Worthy of Human Aspiration”, Handbook of Action Research, CA: Sage Publications.Sena and Shani, 1999, “Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Creation: Towards an Alternative Framework” in Knowledge Management Handbook, edited by J. Liebowitz, New York: CRC PressSimon, H. A., 1977, The New Science of Management Decision, Chapter 2, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 39-81Susanne Hauschild, Thomas Licht, and Wolfram Stein, 2001, “Creating a knowledge culture”, The McKinsey Quarterly 2001 Number 1Zack, Michael H., “ Managing codified knowledge”, Sloan Management Review, summer 1999, PP.45-57Zuber-Skerrit, O., 1992, “Improving Learrning and Teaching Through Action Learning and Action Research”, Draft paper for the HERDSA Conference 1992 University of Queensland.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top