臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

眾所周知, 知識已成為企業競爭力的重要來源. 在知識管理範疇裡, 知識分享不僅在有效知識管理中扮演一重要角色, 更是促進組織成員知識成長的關鍵所在. 再者, 因為設計乃強調多元性整合且屬於高度知識應用的專業, 所以有關設計師知識分享意願的探究即顯得格外重要. 為此, 本研究主要探討目的為: 1) 探討影響設計師知識分享意願的因素, 與2) 了解台灣企業內部設計師如何進行知識分享. 經由文獻回顧, 研究首先匯整岀知識類型, 人格特質, 權力, 信任, 組織文化等五種可能影響設計師知識分享因素. 其次, 研究以個案訪談方式了解明基電通設計師之知識分享情形, 除上述五種因素外, 研究發現獎勵制度亦可能為影響設計師知識分享的因素之一. 然後, 根據文獻探討與個案訪談結果, 研究建構出影響設計師知識分享意願因素的架構與假設. 再者, 爲進一步確認研究假設, 本研究針對已導入知識管理之23家台灣資訊業廠商的62位設計師進行實證研究. 本研究主要的發現有: 1) 當人格特質較傾向嚴謹性時, 則設計師的知識分享意願會愈高; 2) 當組織文化較傾向保守型時, 則設計師的知識分享意願會愈低; 3) 若公司設置有內在獎勵制度以鼓勵知識分享, 則設計師知識分享的意願會較高. 為能增進設計師知識分享的意願, 最後研究建議, 企業的組織文化應盡量避免傾向保守型文化, 且應考量建立一適合之知識分享獎勵制度, 以提升組織內設計知識的運用.

As we know, knowledge has been treated as one of the main sources of competitiveness for many enterprises. Within the domain of knowledge management, knowledge sharing can not only play a critical role in the effective knowledge management, but also facilitate the knowledge growth of the members of an enterprise. Moreover, the nature of design that is a profession of intensive knowledge application, and designer willingness in knowledge sharing is extraordinarily vital for such a circumstance. Therefore, the objectives of this study include: 1) to explore the factors affecting designer willingness in knowledge sharing, and 2) to discover the designer willingness in knowledge sharing in Taiwan’s Information Industry Firms. Based on literature review, this study extracted five factors, such as the type of knowledge, personality, power, trust, and organizational culture, which might affect the designer willingness in knowledge sharing, Furthermore, this study employed a depth interview with BenQ to realize how BenQ’s designers share their knowledge with others. From the case, this study found out that a reward system could be also treated as a critical factor on affecting the designer willingness in knowledge sharing. Based on the findings of literature review and case interview, this study further constructed a research framework and several hypotheses concerning the factors affecting the knowledge sharing willingness of designers. The framework was tested with data collected from 62 designers of 23 Taiwan’s information industry firms. The findings of this study confirm that: 1) the designer willingness in knowledge sharing is higher when the personality of the designer tends to be conscientious; 2) the designer willingness in knowledge sharing is low when the organizational culture is conservative; 3) the designer willingness in knowledge sharing is high when there is an internal reward system in an enterprise. Lastly, to improve the designer willingness in knowledge sharing, this study suggested that the organizational culture of an enterprise should try to avoid a conservative culture and establish an appropriate knowledge sharing reward system to enhance the utilization of design knowledge in the enterprise.

中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌 謝iii
目 錄 iv
表 目 錄vii
圖 目 錄 ix

一. 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 3
1.3 研究範圍 4
1.4 研究流程 5

二. 文獻探討 6
2.1 知識分享意願 6
2.1.1 知識分享 7
2.1.2 知識分享意願 12
2.2 影響知識分享意願因素 13
2.2.1 知識類型與知識分享意願 14
2.2.2 人格特質與知識分享意願 16
2.2.3 權力與知識分享意願 17
2.2.4 信任與知識分享意願 19
2.2.5 組織文化與知識分享意願 20
2.3 設計師之知識分享意願 22

三. 個案訪談 24
3.1 個案訪談方法與工具 24
3.2 明基知識管理 25
3.3 明基設計師之知識分享意願 27
3.4 個案訪談發現 30

四. 研究架構與假設 32

五. 研究設計 38
5.1 研究方法 38
5.2 研究樣本 39
5.3 研究步驟 41
5.4 問卷設計與衡量方式 44
5.5 問卷預試 50
5.5.1 預試對象 50
5.5.2 預試修正 50

六. 研究發現與討論 52
6.1 問卷發現 52
6.1.1 受訪樣本基本資料分析 52
6.1.2 影響設計師知識分享意願之因素 55
6.1.2.1 知識類型 56
6.1.2.2 人格特質 57
6.1.2.3 權力因素 60
6.1.2.4 信任因素 63
6.1.2.5 組織文化 65
6.1.2.6 獎勵制度 68
6.1.2.7 知識分享意願 70
6.1.2.8 影響設計師知識分享意願因素探討 72
6.2 訪談發現 79
6.2.1 企業內部設計師知識分享的方法 79
6.2.2 其他影響設計師知識分享的因素 82

七. 研究結論與建議 84
7.1 研究結論 84
7.1.1 問卷結論 84
7.1.2 訪談結論 88
7.2 研究建議 89
7.2.1 知識分享意願研究的建議 89
7.2.2 管理設計師知識分享意願的建議 91

參考文獻 92

【附錄1】個案訪談問卷 102
【附錄2.1】訪談稿 (一) 103
【附錄2.2】訪談稿 (二) 121
【附錄2.3】訪談稿 (三) 134
【附錄3】影響設計師知識分享意願因素之訪談問卷 (前測版) 147
【附錄4】影響設計師知識分享意願因素之訪談問卷 (正式版) 150
【附錄5】受訪資訊類廠商資訊說明 153
【附錄6】受訪廠商聯絡方式說明 155
【附錄7】Saucier (2002) 32項人格特質形容詞 157
【附錄8.1】統計原始資料 158
【附錄8.3】統計原始資料 160
【附錄8.4】統計原始資料 161
【附錄8.5】統計原始資料 162
【附錄8.6】統計原始資料 163
【附錄8.7】統計原始資料 164
【附錄8.8】統計原始資料 165
【附錄8.9】統計原始資料 166
【附錄8.10】統計原始資料 167
【附錄8.11】統計原始資料 168
【附錄9】自傳與簡歷 169

中文部分

中華徵信社, 2004, 2004台灣地區大型企業排名Top 5000, 中華徵信社, 第34版, 台北.
尤克強, 2001, 知識管理與創新, 天下遠見出版, 台北.
王思峰, 林于荻, 陳禹辰, 2003, 組織文化如何影響知識分享之探索性個案研究, 台大管理論叢, 第13卷, 第2期, 頁59-99.
王誕生, 徐其力, 2003, 組織文化與知識分享動機對知識分享之影響研究, 中山管理評論, 第十一卷, 第三期, 頁409-431.
江岷欽, 1993, 組織分析, 五南圖書出版, 台北.
行政院主計處, 1991, 中華民國職業標準分類, 行政院主計處, 台北.
行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局, 2000, 中華民國職業分類典, 行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局, 台北.
吳明隆, 2003, Spss 統計應用實務, 文魁資訊出版, 二版, 台北.
沈鵬飛, 林志信, 2003, 知識類型, 人格特質與激勵制度對知識分享意願影響之研究, 致理學報, 第17卷, 頁89-110.
明基電通, 2004, 公司簡介, <http://www.benq.com.tw/asp/front/BenqMain.asp?Me nuHead=211&ShowType=program&FileURL=bqp/introduce.asp&GenMenu=&RootId=>(Accessed Jan, 2005).
林立軒, 宋同正, 2002, 設計知識移轉績效評估模式建構之初探, 中華民國設計學會2002年設計學術研究成果研討會 (光碟版), 頁83-88, 台北.
林宜雯, 2004, 從利社會行為觀點探討組織成員知識分享意願的影響因素, 東南技術學院,第26期, 頁215-226.
林東清, 2003, 知識管理, 智勝文化出版, 台北.
邱淑芬, 張莉慧, 陳雲龍, 2003, 組織文化, 組織知識創造情境與組織創造之關聯性研究－以台灣資訊硬體產業為例, 管理與系統, 第十卷, 第四期, 頁389-410.
洪光遠, 鄭慧玲, 1995, 人格心理學, 桂冠出版社, 台北.
夏征農, 1991, 語詞辭海, 上海辭書出版, 初版, 台北, 頁1095 .
夏侯欣鵬, 2000, 權力與信任對組織內知識分享意願之研究, 政治大學未出版博士論文.
周敬煌, 1989, 工業設計, 大陸書局, 台北.
浩漢設計, 李雪如, 2003, 搞設計－工業設計 & 創意管理的24堂課, 藍鯨出版, 初版, 台北.
張忠謀, 1998, IC教父: 張忠謀的策略傳奇, 天下雜誌, 台北.
張紹勳, 2002, 知識管理, 滄海書局, 初版, 台中.
陳永隆, 莊宜昌, 2003, 知識價值鏈 (The Knowledge Value Chain), 中國生產力中心, 台北, 頁275.
陳 譚, 1985, 人格特質與檢驗績效間關係之探討, 國立台灣科技大學未出版博士論文.
陸谷孫, 1992, 英漢大辭典, 台灣東華書局出版, 初版二刷, 台北.
黃希庭, 1998, 人格心理學, 東華書局, 台北.
黃廷合, 吳思達, 2004, 知識管理－理論與實務, 全華科技圖書出版, 初版, 台北, 頁246.
黃俊英, 2000, 多變量分析, 中國經企研究所, 七版, 台北.
董玉娟, 2004, 知識分享意願影響前因之研究: 威脅之情境效果, 人力資源管理學報, 第4期, 第3卷, 頁117-138.
楊國樞, 文崇一, 吳聰賢, 李亦園, 2001, 社會及行為科學研究法 (上冊), 東華出版, 十三版, 台北.
資策會, 2004, 2004資訊工業年鑑, MIC資訊市場情報中心, 台北.
鄭仁偉, 黎士群, 2001, 組織公平, 信任與知識分享行為之關係性研究, 人力資源管理學報, 第1卷, 第2期, 頁69-93.
鄭伯勳, 張東峰, 1983, 心理學, 桂冠出版, 三版, 台北.
蔡振昌, 2003, 全球華人知識管理推動實務, 中國生產力中心, 初版, 台北.
鄧成連, 1999, 設計管理: 產品設計之組織, 溝通與運作, 亞太圖書, 台北.
鍾明鴻, 1994, 創新與設計管理- 提升設計管理的推行方法與實務, 超越企管出版, 台北.
鍾嘉興, 宋同正, 2005, 影響設計師知識分享意願因素之研究－以明基電通為例, 2005國際創新設計研討會, 國立台北科技大學研討會論文集, 頁7-14.
邊守仁, 1999, 產品創新設計- 工業專案的解構與重建, 全華科技出版, 初版, 台北.
戴國良, 2004, 組織行為學, 五南圖書出版, 初版, 台北.

英文部分

Allen, Richard, S. and Kilmann, Ralph, H., 2001, The Role of the Reward System for a Total Quality Management Based Strategy, Journal of Organizational Change, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 110-131.
Ansoff, H. I., 1979, Strategic Management, Macmillan, London, UK.
Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., and Almeida, J. G., 2000, Effects of Age at Entry, Knowledge Intensity, and Imitability on International Growth, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 909-924.
Bartol, Kathryn, M. and Srvastava, Abhishek, 2002, Encouraging Knowledge Sharing: The Role of Organizaitonal Reward Systems, Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, Vol. 9, No.1, pp. 64-76.
Bayley, S., 1991, Taste: The Secret Meaning of Things, Faber and Faber, London.
Boehle, Sarah, 2001, Knowledge Management Expert Larry Prusak to Keynote at Training 2002, Training, Set., Vol.38, No.9, pp. 24-25.
Brelade, Susan and Haman, Christopher, 2003, Knowledge Workers Want to Reap Rewards, Strategic Human Resource Magement, Vol. 2, Jan./Feb., pp.18-21.
Brockman, B. K. and Morgan, R. M., 2003, The Role of Existing Knowledge in New Product Innovativeness and Performance, Decision Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 385-419.
Candy, Linda, 1998, Representations of strategic Knowledge in design, Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 379-390.
Connelly, Catherine, E. and Kelloway, Kevin, E., 2003, Predictors of Employees''s Perceptions of Knowledge Sharing Cultures, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 294-301.
Cooper, Rachel and Press, Mike, 1997, The Design Agenda- A Guide to Successful Design Management, John Wiley and Sons, 2 edition, Chichester.
Costa, Jr. T. Paul, 1991, Clinical Use of the Five- Factor Model: An Introduction, Journal of Personality AssessMent, Vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 393-398.
Davenport, T. H., Jarvenpaa, S., and Beers, M., 1996, Improving Knowledge Work Processes, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 188-199.
Davenport, T. H. and Prusak, L., 1998, Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Baston Massachusetts, MA.
Drucker, Peter F., 1988, The Coming of the New Organization, Harvard Business Review, Jan./Feb., pp. 45-53.
Drucker, Peter F., 1996, Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management, Harvard Business School Press, p.197.
Drucker, Peter F, 2001, The Essential Drucker: Management, the Individual and Society, edited Butterworth-Heinemann.
French, J. R. P. and Raven, B., 1959, The Bases of Social Power, In Cartwright (Ed.), Study of social power. Ann Arbor, Institute for Social Research, MI.
Gambetta, D., 1988, Trust Making and Breaking Cooperative Reations, Oxford University Press, UK.
Ghoshal, Sumantra and Bartlett, Christopher, 1997, The Individualized Corporation: A Fund Amentally New Approach to Management, HarperBusiness, New York.
Gieskes, Jose, F. B. and Hyland, Paul, W.,2003, Learning Barriers in Continuous Product Innovation, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26, No. 8, pp. 857-970.
Gordon, Ray and Grant, David, 2004, Knowledge Management or Management of Knowledge? Why People Interested in Knowledge Management Need to Consider Foucault and the Construct of Power, Journal of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 27-38.
Grant Rpbert M., 1996, Toward a Knowledge–Based Theory of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 109-122.
Guielford, J. P., 1965, Fundamental Statisics in Psychology and Education, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
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.
Hersey, P. and nAtermeyer, W. E., 1979, Power Perception Profile, Center fo Leadership Studies, CA.
Hong, P., Doll, W. F., Nahm, A. Y., and Li X., 2004, Knowledge Sharing in Integrated Product Development, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 102-112.
Hosmer, L. T., 1995, Trust: The Connecting Link Between Organizational Theory and Philpsphical Ethics, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, pp. 222-234.
Howells, G. P., 1996, Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Technology Transfer, Technology Analysis and Stategic Management, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 91-106.
Industrie Forum Design Hannover, 2005, iF Picture Library, <http://www.ifdesign.de/7_0_0_e> (Accessed July, 2005).
Kaiser, H., 1974, An index of factor simplicity, Psychometrika, Vol. 39, pp. 31-36.
Kaplan, A., 1964, Power in Perspective, Tavistock, London, UK.
Kim, W. C. and R. A. Mauborgne, 1998, Procedural Justice, Strategic Decision Making ,and the Knowledge Economy, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp.323-338.
Kimball, F., 1998, Shedding Light on Knowledge Work Learning, The Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 8-16.
Laursen, K. and Mahnke, V., 2001, Knowledge Strategies, Firm Types, and Complementarity in Human- Resource Practices, Journal of Management and Government, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1-28.
Lueche, Richard, 2003, Managing Creativity and Innovation (Harvard Business Essentials), Harvard Business School Press.
Martin, Fojt, 1995, Making Reengineering Human, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 9, No. 3, p.52.
Marquardt, J. M., 2002, Five Elements of Learning, Executive Excellent, Vol. 19, No. 9, pp. 15-16
Mascitelli, Ronald, 2000, From Experience: Harnessing Tacit Knowledge to Achieve Breakthrough Innovation, Journal of Product Innvation Management, Vol. 17, pp. 179-193.
Mcallister, Daniel, J., 1995, Affect- and Cognition-based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 24-59.
Miller, W. L. and Morris, L., 1999, 4TH Generation R&D- Managing knowledge, Technology, and Innovation, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Morita, Matutaro and Takanashi, Tomohiro, 1999, Knowledge Management practice: Nyuumon KM, Kihon to Jitsurei, Kanki publishing Inc, Tokyo, JP.
Muller, Win and Pasman, Gert, 1996, Typology and the Organization of Design Knowledge, Design Studies, Vol. 17, pp. 111-130.
Nonaka, Ikujiro, 1994, A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation, Organization Science, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 14-37.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H., 1995, The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Konno, N., 2000, SECI, Ba and Leadership a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation, Long Range Planning, Vol. 33, pp. 5-34.
Nunnally, J., 1978, Psychometric Theory, 2nd Editon, McGarw-Hill, New York.
Petrock, F., 1990, Corporate Culture Enhances Profits, HR Magazine, Vol. 35, No.11, pp. 64-66.
Polanyi, M., 1966, The Tacit Dimension, Anchor Doubleday Books, New York.
Purser, R. E. and Pasmore, W. A., 1992, Organizing for Learning, In William A. Pasmore and Richard W. Woodman, Research in Organizational, Change and Development, London: JAI Press, pp. 37-114.
Quinn, J. B., 1993, Intelligence Enterprise, Free Press, New York.
Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P. A., and Findelstein, S., 1996, Management Professional Intellect: Making the Most of the Best, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74, No. 2, pp. 71-80.
Quinn, R. E. and Mcgrath, M. R., 1985, The transformation of Organizational Cultures: A Competing Value Perapective, in P. Frost and others, Organizational Culture, pp. 315-334.
Quinn, R. E., 1988, Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of Hish Performance, Jossey- Bass, San Francisco.
Ramesh, Balasubramaniam and Tiwana, Amrit, 1999, Supporting Collaborative Process Knowledge Management in New Product Development Teams, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 27, pp. 213-235.
Raven, B. H. and Kruglanski, A. W., 1975, Conflict and Power, P. C. Swingle (ed.), The Structure of Conflict, Academic Press, N. Y.
Ronchi, S., Chapman, R. and Corso, M., 2003, Knowledge Management in Continuous Product Innovation: A Contingent Approach, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26, No.8, pp. 871-886.
Roozenburg, N. F. M. and Eekels, J., 1995, Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
Rousseau, S. B., Sitkin S. B., Burt, R. S. and Camerer, C., 1998, Not So Different Afer All: Across-Discipline View or Trust,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 393-404.
Saucier, Gerard,1994, Mini-Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg''s Unipolar Big- Five Markers, Journal of Personality AssessMent, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 506-516.
Saucier, Gerard, 2002, Orthogonal Markers for Orthogonal Factors: The Caseof the Big Five, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 36, pp. 1-31.
Senge, P. M., 1990, The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, Doublenday, Currency, New York.
Senge, P. M., 1997, Sharing Knowledge, Executive Excellence, Vol. 15, No. 6, pp.11-12.
Smith, J. B. and Barclay, D. W., 1997, The Effects of Organizational Differences and Trust on the Effectiveness of selling Partner Relationships, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61, pp. 3-21.
Sitkin, S. B. and Stickel, D., 1996, The Road to Hell: The Dynamics of Distrust in An Era of Quality, Trust in Organizations: Frontier of Theory and Research, Thousand Oaks, pp.196-215.
Stauffer, D., 1999, Why people hoard knowledge, Across the board, September.
Steers, R. M. and Porter, L. W., 1991, Motivation and Work Behavior, 5th ed. Mcgraw-Hill, New York.
Tannenbaum, R., 1968, Control in Organizations, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Truch, Edward, 2001, Trust in Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Management, July/Aug., p. 33.
Tua, Haldin-Herrgard, 2000, Difficulties in Diffusion of Tacit Knowledge in Organizations, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 357-365.
Voelpel, C. Sven, Dous, Malte and Davenport, H. Thomas, 2005, Five Steps to Creating a Global Knowledge-Sharing System: Siemens'' ShareNet, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 9-23.