臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

台灣素以中小企業為主的經濟型態著稱，在知識已成為最重要生產要素的時代裡，知識服務或知識資產市場活動已然發生。知識管理如何界定、如何進行管理、如何衡量，又如形成市場，便是知識經濟時代的挑戰。為了對知識管理服務市場的實際瞭解，針對知識管理資訊技術、純粹知識管理顧問諮詢及知識管理整合服務廠商間的互動作為研究主題。並採取探索性及質化研究方式，進行實際個案訪談、彙整及分析。
本研究主要內容為瞭解現行知識管理服務市場之經營模式，企業導入知識管理過程之動機，三類知識管理服務業者在知識管理推廣扮演之角色，及三方互動關係之發展實況，並進一步探討「知識管理服務業如何推廣知識服務」、「知識管理系統建構之成功因素」等議題。並比較不同的核心技術能力與知識管理系統的經營模式有無差異，知識管理市場間的客戶回饋模式為何等議題進行研究。
本研究以三類四個個案廠商為對象，並透過問卷設計近20個深度問題與互動狀況作訪談，並獲得之發現如下：
一、知識管理系統業者對知識管理的定義與其資訊核心技術優勢有關聯性。顧問知識技術的核心能力則是與其調之方法論及顧問手法有關。
二、在推動知識管理的成功與障礙因素方面，無論是何者，認知的因素大同小異，高層的支持、具積極參與及分享文化，以及建立知識策略及知識地圖等都認為重要。
三、如果客戶條件不足或執意要導入KMS時，業者會建議由電子文件管理、ISO文件管理或知識地圖的建立為優先。
四、知識管理服務業者間的角色與互動關係調查中。顧問經常扮演第三方專業意見提供者，知識管理的教育者、推廣角色，組織及制度配合的規劃者，知識管理活動的促進者，並被要求或期待進行組織及經營知識與技術的診斷輔導任務。
五、對系統業者而言，可能扮演一個銷售及服務導向組織，角色上較傾向解決企業迫切問題，重視解決方案的更新、掌握企業經營管理等問題的核心，提供更多的服務與附加價值，降低系統架構風險的疑慮，創造價值及客源的策略性產品服務等。
六、顧問公司具定義下一代知識管理系統的角色，未來在市場上與系統業者的競合關係密切，重點是知識管理愈來愈像企業管理，系統本身則愈來愈像資訊產品，顧問如何加強產業領域知識，投入知識管理方法論、流程及知識策略的建構模式，將是未來顧問公司可以更專業及全面性的推廣來取待代系統業者的角色的機會。
七、對知識管理系統者而言，KMS導入的成功與否，主要原因並不是系統本身。
八、知識管理系統已經邁向第二代發展，系統將強調人際互動、即時行動蒐尋與分享。

Small & medium business sector has been a dominant and vibrant component of Taiwan’s economy. In this age where knowledge is becoming the most important factor, the knowledge service and knowledge assets markets are taking place. how to define Knowledge management, how is management carried out, how to measure knowledge, and how to shape market are challenges in he age of knowledge economy. This paper purports to explore the working of knowledge management service market with focuses on the information technology for knowledge management and interactions between knowledge management consulting firms and integrated service providers. The study adopts an exploratory and equalization approach by carrying out case interview, data collection, compilation and analysis.
The main objectives of the paper are to learn about the operating mode of the knowledge management service market, the motives behind businesses that incorporate knowledge management into their operation, the roles of three types of knowledge management service providers, and their interactions. The paper also touches upon several issues, including” How knowledge management service providers promote business” “The success factors for the building of knowledge management system” and examine whether there is difference among the knowledge systems offered by system providers with different core technological cape
ability, and customer feedback modes.
This study targets four companies offering three different types of service. Through questions & interactive, the author finds the following:
1.There is correlation between how system service providers define knowledge management and the strength of their core information technology. The core technological capability of consulting service provider is related to its methodology & consulting techniques.
2.Insofar as the success and barrier factors for the promotion of knowledge management, the perceptions of all interviewees are similar, that is, management support, the corporate culture of active participation and sharing, and creation of knowledge strategy and knowledge map.
3.If the customer is not prepared for or insists on incorporating KMS into their operation, the service provider would suggest the customer to give priority both e-document management, ISO document management or the creation of internal knowledge map.
4.In the investigation of the roles of service providers and their interactions, consulting service providers are typically the third-party expert opinion provider as well as the educator and promoter of knowledge management, planner of organizational and system collaborations, and advisor of knowledge management activities, They are often asked or expected to offer diagnostic and advisory services with respect to organizational and operational knowledge and know-how.
5.System service providers tend to be sale and service oriented. They typically play the role of solving the pressing needs of client, helping clients update their solution plans, getting a handle on the core problems of client’s operation and management, providing more added value services, relieving client’s doubt about the risk of system structure, and creating value and strategic products & services.
6.Consulting service providers play the role of defining the next-generation knowledge management systems and will have a close competitive relationship with system service providers. The point is knowledge management will be more like information products. For consulting service providers, they have the chance to replace system service providers if they can enhance their professional knowledge of individual industry and put more resources in the creation of modes for knowledge management methodology, flow process and knowledge strategies.
7.For system service providers, the system itself is not the main factor for the successful implementation of KMS.
8.The knowledge management system products have entered the second generation, which stress personal interactions as well as instant search and sharing of activity information.

目　錄
頁數
謝　辭………………………………………………………………………………………… Ⅰ
中文論文提要………………………………………………………………………………… Ⅱ
英文論文提要………………………………………………………………………………… Ⅲ
目　錄………………………………………………………………………………………… Ⅴ
表　次………………………………………………………………………………………… Ⅶ
圖　次………………………………………………………………………………………… Ⅷ
第一章　緒　論 ………………………………………………………………………………1
第一節　研究背景 ………………………………………………………………………1
第二節　研究動機 ………………………………………………………………………5
第三節　研究目的 ………………………………………………………………………7
第四節　研究架構 ………………………………………………………………………8
第二章　文獻探討……………………………………………………………………………11
第一節　知識與知識管理……………………………………………………………… 11
第二節　知識管理策略………………………………………………………………… 44
第三節　知識服務產業…………………………………………………………………59
第四節 知識管理服務市場…………………………………………………………… 68
第五節 知識資產之衡量………………………………………………………………75
第六節 知識管理服務文獻架構………………………………………………………86
第三章　研究方法……………………………………………………………………………89
第一節　個案研究方法…………………………………………………………………89
第二節　研究流程………………………………………………………………………90
第三節　研究設計………………………………………………………………………92
第四節　研究限制………………………………………………………………………97
第四章　個案實證分析………………………………………………………………………98
第一節　鼎新電腦………………………………………………………………………98
第二節　意藍科技 ……………………………………………………………………112
第三節　太世科網路行銷 ……………………………………………………………128
第四節 中國生產力中心 ……………………………………………………………142
第五章　個案總結與命題發展 ……………………………………………………………167
第一節 個案資料彙整 ………………………………………………………………153
第二節 命題發展 ……………………………………………………………………164
第六章　結論與建議 ………………………………………………………………………174
第二節　研究結論 ……………………………………………………………………174
第二節　對知識管理服務業者之建議 ………………………………………………181
第三節　後續研究之建議 ……………………………………………………………183
參考文獻 ……………………………………………………………………………………184
附錄一　本研究訪談問卷 …………………………………………………………………188
附錄二　經濟部工業局M3技術服務機構知識管理項目技術服務能量登錄項目………191

參考文獻
中文部份
1.Lotus知識管理應用方案，台北：美商蓮花公司，民國八十八年。
2.王美音譯，知識創新之泉: 智價企業的經營，台北：遠流，民國八十七年十一月，pp.27-39，譯自Leonard-Barton, Dorothy(1995)。
3.宋偉航譯，智慧資本: 資訊時代的企業利基，台北：智庫，民國八十八年一月，pp.1-2，譯自Thomas A. Stewart(1997)。
4.吳思華，策略九說：策略思考的本質，台北：麥田，民國八十五年九月，pp.108-109。
5.林英峰，「知識經濟與知識管理」，知識管理研討會：領導21世紀之經營管理，國立政治大學商學院，民國八十九年五月。
6.彼得‧杜拉克，後資本主義社會，台北：時報文化，民國八十三年。
7.胡瑋珊譯，知識管理: 企業組織如何有效運用知識，台北：中國生產力中心，民國八十八年十一月，p.238，譯自Thomas H. Davenport & Laurence Prusak(1998)。
8.馬曉雲，知識管理實務應用，台北：華彩軟體，民國八十九年一月。
9.張君強，專業服務業知識管理之研究─以會計師事務所為例，政治大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文，民國八十八年六月。
10.莊素玉、張玉文，張忠謀與台積的知識管理，台北：天下遠見，民國八十九年二月，p.17。
11.劉權瑩，資訊服務業知識管理之研究─以台灣HP與台灣IBM為例，政治大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文，民國八十八年七月。
12.劉偉京，知識管理的第一本書，商周出版，台北：民國八十九。
13.承立平、王思粵，海峽兩岸中小企業創業與成長環境之比較研究，經濟部中小企業處委託，民國九十年。
14.王健全、孫克難，知識經濟下中小企業的發展策略，中小企業處委託計畫，中華經濟研究院，民國九十年。
15.胡瑋珊譯，知識商務，台北：中國生產力出版，民國九十一年。
16.林于荻、王思峰、陳禹辰，組織文化如何影響知識分享之探索性研究，臺大管理論叢，民國九十年。
17.杜順榮，軟體工業生產力提昇特輯，台北：民國九十一年八月。
18.張淑萍，知識管理與資訊管理應用相關性研究，台科大管研所，民國八十九年。
19.辜輝--，企業電子化知識管理策略，師大工教博士論文，民國八十九年。
20.陳木生，知識管理下組織學習之研究-以盛餘公司為例，中山企研所碩士論文，民國九十一年。
21.馬豔、楊小勇、龔曉鶯，知識經濟，台北：揚智文化，民國九十二年。
22.陳永隆、莊宜昌，知識價值鏈，台北：中國生產力中心，民國九十二年。
23.孫本初，湯皓宇，組織管理新利器─知識管理，立法院院聞，第二十八卷，第七期，民國八十九年。
24.鄭晉昌，「企業學習地圖與員工學習策略-企業組織之知識管理」簡報資料，民國九十年十一月，頁11。
25.MIC對我國資訊產業高階經理人對「智慧資本衡量」及未來智慧資本發展應強化的調查結果，民國八十九年。
26.王瓊淑譯，笑傲第三波---駕馭知識經濟的管理法則，台北：經典傳訊，民國八十八年。
27.李堅明，產業知識管理技術輔導與推廣計畫執行成果簡報，經濟部工業局委託台灣綜合研究院對建立知識管理績效量化指標報告，民國九十年十二月。
英文部份
1.Grant, Robert M. (1996), “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,” Strategic Information Today (1998), Jul-Aug, p.51.
2.Knapp, E.M. (1998), “Knowledge Management,” Business & economic Review, Jul-Sep, p.5.
3.Leonard-Barton, Dorothy (1992), “Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol.13, special issue, pp.11-125.
4.Management Journal, Vol.17, Winter Special Issue, 1996, pp.109-122.
5.Nonaka , Ikujiro & Hirotaka Takeuchi(1995), The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press, New York.
6.Polanyi, M. (1967), The Tacit Dimension, N.Y.: M. E. Sharp Inc.
7.Quinn, James Brian, Philip Anderson and Syndey Finkelstein (1996),“Managing Professional Intellect: Making the Most of the Best,” Havard Business Review Mar-Apr.
8.Smith,K.(1995), “Interactions in Knowledge System: Foundations Policy Implications and Empirical Methods,” STI Review, No.16, pp.69-102.
9.Toffler, A. (1990), Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century, N.Y.: Bantam Books.
10.Bonora,E.A,andRevang,O.(1991), “A StrategicFramework forAnalyingProfessional Servies firms-Developing Strategies for sustained Performance,”Strategic Management Society Interorganizational Conference ,Toronto,Canada.
11.Drucker, P. F. (1993),Post-capital Society, Harper Collins.
12.Grant, Robert M. (1996), Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory often firm, ”Strategic Management Journal, Vol.17, Winter Special Issue, 1996, pp.109-122.
13.Haukness, J(1999), Innovation in Services－A Questionnaire Survey, STEP Group, Oslo.
14.Cohen, W.B. and D.A Eventual. (1990), ”absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly,Vol.35,No.1,p. 128-152.
15.Davenport, T.H. and L. Prusak (1998), Working Knowledge: How Organization Mange What They Know, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1998.
16.Nonaka, I., P. Byosiere, C. c. Borucki, and N.Konno (1994), “Organizational Knowledge creation Theory: A first Comprehensive Test”, International Business Review (Special Issue).
17.Nonaka , I. and H. Takeuchi (1995), The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press.
18.Papow, K. (1999),Enterprise .Com , Peruses Publishing.
19.Popper, K. (1973), Objective Knowledge, Oxford University Press.
20.Polanyi,M.,Personal Knowledge: Toward a Post-Critical Philosophy, Harper Torchbook,New York,1962.
21.Quinn J.B. Anderson P ,and F .Sydney (1996), “Leveraging Intellect”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol.10,No.3,pp.7-27.
22.Sarvary , M. (1999), “Knowledge Management and Competition in the Consulting Industry”, California Management Review, Vo1.41, No.2, Winter.
23.Shein,E.H.,Organizational Culture and Leadership (2ed),Jossey-Bass,San Franciso,1992.
24.Stewart, T.A. (1997), Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations, New York : Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.
25.Teece,D.J.1998.Capturing Value From Knowledge Assets:The New Economy ,Markets For Know-how ,and Intangible Assets.California Management Review,40:55-79.
26.Trespasses, M. (1997), “Surviving Radical Technological Change Through Dynamic Capability: Evidence From the Typesetter Industry”, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol.6, pp.341-377.
27.Wiig Karl M. (1994), Knowledge Management: The Central Management Review, Vol.41, Spring, pp.125-145.
28.Zack Michael H. (1999), ”Managing Codified Knowledge”,California Management Review, Vol.40, Iss.4, pp.45-58.
29.Biggs .J.(2000)，Teaching for quality learning at university.U.K:Open University Press.
30.Tiwana, A., The Knowledge Management Toolkit, Prentice Hall, Inc (2000).
31.King, W.R.，MIS Quarterly (1995, March)
32.Harrington, H. J. (1991), Business Process Improvement, The Breakthrough Strategy for Total Quality, Productivity, and Competitiveness, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
33.Arthur Anderson Business Consolting (1999). Zukai Knowledge Managemenet.Japan. TOKYO Keizai Inc.
34.Miles & al.(1995), Knowledge-Intensive Business Services-User, Carriers and Sources of Innovation, EIMS Publication No.15, EC.
35.David J.Skyrme,”Capitalizing on Knowledge”(2001).
36.American Productivity & Quality Center (2001)，Measurement for Knowledge Management.
37./www.knowledgeassociates.com/website3/Kmanagement.nsf.