臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

摘要
在快速變遷及競爭激烈的環境下，學習型組織確實能有較多的生存與發展的機會。雖然找出理想的學習型組織特性固然重要，但探討在不同情境下，組織應如何採行不同的學習方式，以達到組織的學習目的－創新，對組織持續發展競爭優勢而言更為重要及實用。為了填補上述有關組織學習之研究空隙，本文研究的焦點是：探討不同「內外能力」情境下之最佳學習方式？為此目的本文發展出相關的研究假設，實證進行以650家上市上櫃製造業公司為研究對象。本文發現在不同內外能力情境下，創新所需的學習方式是不同的。此外，研究結論特別指出企業本身的內外能力在「學習方式與創新績效間關係」中，扮演著關鍵性情境效應 。
根據相關之文獻探討與實證發現，本文除了提出未來的研究方向之外，並且提出管理實務之建議，內容如下：
1.當企業的「內部能力強，外部關係強」時，採行實驗學習是最佳學習方式，對躍進式創新有顯著效益；採行改良學習是最佳學習方式，對漸進式創新有顯著效益。
2.當企業的「內部能力強，外部關係弱」時，採行實驗學習是最佳學習方式，對躍進式創新有顯著效益；採行改良學習是最佳學習方式，對漸進式創新有顯著效益。
3.當企業的「內部能力弱，外部關係弱」時，採行標竿學習是最佳學習方式，對躍進式創新有顯著效益。
4.當企業的「內部能力弱，外部關係強」時，採行實驗學習是最佳學習方式，對躍進式創新有顯著效益；採行提升學習是最佳學習方式，對漸進式創新有顯著效益。

Abstract
Amid the high-speed change and fierce competitive environment, learning organizations certainly hold superior opportunity for survival and development. It is important to find the ideal characteristics of learning organization, however, to discussing that what different learning styles should be adopted under different contingency to achieve the goal of organizational learning, scilicet the innovation will be much important and practical for organization’s sustainable development of competitive advantages. For bridging the gap of the research of organizational learning that mentioned above, this research focuses on discussing the best learning style of “different internal and external capacity” under different contingency. To meet this goal, we developed relative research hypothesis, and did the survey of 650 publicly traded companies (listed companies at stock exchange market and at over-the–counter market) in manufacturing industry. We found that there exists different learning styles to encourage innovation under each different contingency. The results indicate that potential internal and external capacity is critical regulative variable between learning styles and innovation performance .
Based on literature review and our empirical results, the findings provide some new directions for future research and offer management practice about interfirm learning as follow:
1. Enterprises act as“strong internal capacities and external relationships”, it is the best style to adopt theExperimention of the significative conduct to radical innovations; it is the best style to adopt the ContinuousImprovement of the significative conduct to incremental innovations.
2. Enterprises act as “strong internal capacities and weak external relationships”,it is the best style to adopt the Experimention of the significative conduct to radical innovations; it is the best style to adopt the Continuous Improvement of the significative conduct to incremental innovations.
3. Enterprises act as “weak internal capacities and external relationships”， it is the best style to adopt the Benchmarking of the significative conduct to radical innovations.
4. Enterprises act as “weak internal capacities and strong external relationships”, it is the best style to adopt the Experimention of the significative conduct to radical innovations; it is the best style to adopt the Competency Acqusition of the significative conduct to incremental innovations.

目次
目錄
摘要 iv
Abstract vi
誌謝 vii
目次 viii
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究動機 1
1.2研究目的 2
1.3研究程序 2
第二章 文獻探討 3
2.1組織學習方式 3
2.2 創新績效 6
2.3情境觀點 8
第三章 研究方法 15
3.1研究架構 15
3.2研究假設 16
3.3變數的操作性定義與衡量 20
第四章 資料分析 30
4.1基本統計描述 30
4.2信度、效度分析 30
4.3研究假設檢定 32
第五章 最佳實務案例 36
5.1實驗學習者：3M公司 36
5.2提升能力者：摩托羅拉公司 37
5.3標竿學習者：三星電子公司 39
5.4不斷改良者：阿爾卡特•貝爾公司 41
第六章 結論與建議 43
6.1研究結論 43
6.2管理上的建議 45
6.3研究限制與未來研究建議 45
參考文獻 47
表目錄
表 3.1樣本資料描述 21
表 3.2本研究理論模式量表內容摘要表 22
表 3.3組織學習方式的測量題項 23
表 3.4內部能力測量題項 25
表 3.5外部關係測量題項 27
表 3.6創新績效測量題項 27
表 4.1研究變項之描述統計量 30
表 4.2研究變項之因素分析 31
表 4.3 OLS迴歸模型:以躍進式創新為因變數(N=154) 33
表 4.4 OLS迴歸模型：以漸進式創新為因變數(N=154) 34
圖目錄

圖 2.1組織學習方式 4
圖 3.1本文研究觀念性架構 16
圖 4.1四種組織學習方式對漸進式創新檢定結果 35
圖 4.2四種組織學習方式對躍進式創新檢定結果 35

參考文獻
1.方世杰，「參與科技專案廠商之組織學習、社會資本與技術移轉之實證研究」，管理學報，第二十二卷，第三期，PP.295-315，民94年。
2.王衍泰，「社會資本對國際合資中組織學習與知識保護的影響」，國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，民91年。
3.洪清德，「使命感，客戶網路和供應商網路：影響我國電子資訊產業代工和自創品牌策略抉擇因素的探討」，管理學報，第二十一卷，第四期 pp.411 – 432，民93年。
4.林義屏，「市場導向、組織學習、組織創新與組織績效關係之研究－以科學園區資訊電子產業為例」，國立中山大學企業管理研究所博士論文，民90年。
5.陳忠仁，「知識創造來源、知識管理能力及知識屬性對創新績效影響之研究─組織學習理論觀點」，中山管理評論，第十三卷，第二期， pp.389-416，民94年。
6.楊景嫃，「育成中心進駐廠商之知識流通與創新績效關聯性研究—網絡觀點」，國立高雄第一科技大學 行銷與流通管理研究所碩士論文，民93年。
7.黃美卿，「廠商能力建構基礎之實證研究-以台灣國際新創公司為例」，國立中正大學企業管理研究所未出版之博士論文，民92年。
8.傅振焜譯，Peter Drucker著「後資本主義社會」初版，台北時報文化，民82年。
9.劉復苓譯， Yeung, A. K.; D. O. Ulrich; S. W. Nason & M.A. VonGilnow 著「組織學習能力」， 台北：聯經出版事業公司，民90年。
10.簡俊成，「外部知識移轉過程—合作關係與吸收潛力角色之研究」，國立中正大學企業管理研究所未出版之博士論文，民91年。
11.簡俊成，「外部知識移轉之研究─以台灣上市上櫃製造業公司為例」，管理學報，第二十卷，第五期 pp.47 – 964，民92年。
12.簡俊成，「內部能力、外部關係與創新績效之關係」，行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告，計畫编號：NSC91-2626-H-271-001，民92年。
13.Abernathy, W. J. & Clark, K. B., Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction, Research Policy, 14, 3-22., 1985.
14.Adler, P. S. & Kwon, Seok-Woo., Social capital: Prospects for a new concept, Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40, 2002.
15.Ahuja, G., Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: a longitudinal study, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45,425-455, 2000.
16.Ahuja, G., The duality of collaboration: Inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21,317-343., 2000a.
17.Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W., Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin, 103(3),411-423, 1988.
18.Argyris, C. & D. A. Schön., Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley PublishingCompany , 1978.
19.Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J. & Almeida, J., Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 909-924. 2000.
20.Barringer, B. R. & Bluedorn, A. C., The relationship between corporateentrepreneurship and strategic management, Strategic Management Journal, 20:421-444, 1999.
21.Bastos, P., Inter-firm collaboration and learning: The case of the Japanese automobile industry, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 18(4), 423-441, 2001.
22.Bettis RA. & Hitt MA., The new competitive landscape, Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue 16,7-20, 1995.
23.Blyler, M., & Coff, R, W., Dynamic capabilities,social, and rent appropriation: Ties that spit pies, Strategic Management Journal, 24（7）, 677-686, 2003.
24.Burns, G. & B. Napier., Linking Creativity, Common Vision, and Customer Connection: Synergy for Organizationl Competitiveness, National Productivity Review/Autumn, 587-600, 1994.
25.Burt, R. S., Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992.
26.Burt, R. S., The contingent value of social capital, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42,339-365, 1997.
27.Chandler GN. Hanks SH., Market attractiveness strategies and venture performance, Journal of Business Venturing , 9,331-350, 1994b.
28.Chung, S., Singh, H. & Lee, K., Complementarity, status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation, Strategic Management Journal, 21,1-22, 2000.
29.Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A., Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on earning and innovation.”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1),128–152, 1990.
30.Coleman, J. S., Foundations of social theory, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press, 1990.
31.Conner, K. R. & Prahalad, C. K., A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism, Organization Science, 7(5), 477-501 , 1996.
32.Covin, JG. & Slevin DP., A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice , 16（1）,7-24 , 1991.
33.Covin, JG. & Miles MP., Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice , 23（3）,47-63, 1999.
34.Crossan, M.M., Lane, H W. & White, R. E., An organizational learningframework: From intuition to institution, Academy of Management 24(3):,522-537, 1999.
35.Damanpour, Fariborz, Organizational Innovation: aMeta-Analysis of Effects of Det, Academy of Mangment Journal, 34(3),555-591, 1991.
36.Dekker, H. C., Control of inter-organizational relationships: Evidence on appropriations coordination requirements. Accounting, Organization and society, 29, 27-49, 2004.
37.De Long, David W. & Liam Fahey, Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management, The Academy of Management Executive, 14（4）, 113-127, 2000.
38.Dollinger MJ. Entrepreneurship: strategies and resources. Irwin, Boston. MA , 1995.
39.Drucker, P. F., Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles, Landon:Heinemann, 1985
40.Drucker, P., Post-Capitalist Society, Harper-Collins., 1993.
41.Drucker, P. F., Knowledge-Worker Productivity: The Biggest Challenge, California Management Review, 41,79-95, 1999.
42.Duguet, E., Knowledge Diffusion, Technological Innovation and TFP Growth at the Firm Level: Evidence from French Manufacturing, Paris I - Economical Mathematical Applications, Vol. 105 . 2000.
43.Dyer, J. H. & Singh, H., The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of inter-organizational competitive advantage, Academy of Management Journal, 23 (4),660-679, 1998.
44.Dyer, J. H. & Nobeoka, K., Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: The TOYOTA case, Strategic Management Journal, 21, 345-367, 2000.
45.Fiol, C. M. & Lyles, M. A., Organizational learning, Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803-813, 1985.
46..Fornell, C. and Larcker, D., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18,39-50, 1981.
47.Gaedeke. R. M., & Tootelian, D. H., The Fortune 500 list-An endangered species for academic research, Journal of Business Research, 4,283-288, 1976.
48.Galbraith, J. R., Organization Design. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley Publishing, 1973.
49.Garvin, D. A., Building a learning organization, Harvard Business Review,
74(4), 78-91., 1993.
50.Gary Hamel; Peter Skarzynski., Innovation: The new route to wealth, Journal of Accountancy, 192( 5), 65-68, 2001.
51.Geletkanycz M.A., Brian K Boyd & Sydney Finklestein, The strategic value of CEO external directorate networks: Implications for CEO Compensation, Strategic Management Journal, 22(9), 889-898, 2001.
52.Granovetter, M.s., The Strength of Weak Ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78,1360-1380 , 1973,
53.Grant, R. M., Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109-122 , 1996.
54.Gulati, R., Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances, Academy of Management Journal, 38, 85-112, 1995.
55.Gulati, R., Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19,293-317, 1998.
56.Gulati, R., Network location and leaning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 397-420 , 1999.
57.Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham and W. C. Black. Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th edition.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.
58.Hall, R., A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage, Strategic Management Journal, 14,607-618, 1992.
59.Henderson RM. Clark KB., Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms, Administrative Science Quarterly , 35, 9-31, 1990.
60.Hitt, M. A., Dacin, M. T., Levitas, E., Arregle, J. & Borza, A., Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives, Academy of Management Journal, 43, 449-467, 2000.
61.Holm D. B., Kent Eriksson., Jan Johanson., Creating value through mutual commitment to business network relationships, Strategic Management Journal , 20( 5),467-486 1999.
62.Huber, George P., Organizational Learning: The contributingProcesses and the Literatures. Organization Science, February, 88-115, 1991.
63.Hubert Gatignon, Michael L Tushman, Wendy Smith & Philip Anderson, A structural approach to assessing innovation: Construct development of innovation locus, type, and characteristics, Management Science, 48(9),1103-1122, 2002.
64.Inkpen, A. C.& Dinur, A. Knowledge Management Process andinternational joint ventures, Organization Science, 9(4), 213-239, 1998.
65.Kale, P. ; Singh, J. & Perlmutter, H., Learning And Protection Of Assets In Strategic Alliances: Building Relational Capital, Strategic Management Journal, 2(3),217-237, 2000.
66.Kim, W.C. &R. Mauborgne, Procedural Justice, Strategic Decision Making, and the Knowledge Economy, Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 323- 338, 1998.
67.Kline, R. Principles and practice of structural equation model. New York: Guilford Press, 1998.
68.Knight, G.A., Cross-cultural reliability and validity of a scale to measure firm entrepreneurial orientation, Journal of Business Venturing , 12, 213-225, 1997.
69.Kogut, B. & Zander, U., Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology, Organization Science, 3, 383-397, 1992.
70.Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. e., Strategic alliances oas social capital: A multidimensional view, Strategic Management Journal, 23（9）,794-816, 2002.
71.Lado AA, Wilson MC., Human resource systems and sustained competitive advantage: a competency-based perspective, Academy of Management Review, 19（4）,699-728, 1994.
72.Lane, P., & Lubatkin, M., Relative Absorptive Capacity and Interorganizational Learning, Strategic Management Journal, 19,461-477, 1998.
73.Lane, P. J., Salk, J. E. & Lyles, M. A., Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures, Strategic Management Journal, 22,1139-1161, 2001.
74.Lawrence, P. R. & J. W. Lorsch, Organization and Environment, Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press, 1967.
75.Lee, C., Lee, K. & Pennings, J. M., Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures, Strategic Management Journal, 22,615-640, 2001.
76.Lei, D., Hitt, M. A. & Bettis, R., Dynamic core competition through meta-learning and strategic context, Journal of Management, 22, 549-596, 1996.
77.Lumpkin, G.T. & Dess G. G., Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance, Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172, 1996.
78.Mabey, Christopher & Graeme Salaman., Strategic Human Resource Management.Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1995.
79.March, J. G., Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning, Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87, 1991.
80.Martinez, J. I. & J. C. Jarillo, The Evolution of Research on Coordination Mechanisms in Multinational Corporations, Journal of International Business Studies, Fall,489-514, 1989.
81.McEvily, B. & Zaheer, A., Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133-1156, 1999.
82.Miller, D., The correlates of entrepreeurship in three types of firms, Management Science, 29(July), 770-791, 1983.
83.Mosakowski, E., Organizational boundaries and economic performance: An empirical study of entrepreneurial computer firms. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2): 115-133, 1991.
84.Mosakowski E., Entrepreneurial resource, organizational choice, and competitive outcomes, Organization Science, 6, 625-643, 1999.
85.Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S., Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organization Advantage, Academy of Management Review, 23, 242-266, 1998.
86.Nelson BR & Winter SG., The Schumpeterian trade-off revisited, American Economic Review, 72, 114-132, 1982.
87.Nonaka, I., A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation, Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37, 1994.
88.Nunnally, J. R., Psychometric theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978.
89.Penrose, E., The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: John Wiley., 1959.
90.Popper, M., & Lipshitz, R., Organizational learning: mechanisms：A styuctural and cultural approach to organizational learning, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 34 ,167-179, 1998.
91..Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W. & Smith-Doerr, L., Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41,116-145, 1996.
92.ReagansRr., & McEvily B., Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48,240-267, 2003.
93.Roberts EB, Hauptman O., The financing thresh-old effect on success and failure of biomedical and pharmaceutical start-ups, Management Science, 33, 381-394, 1987.
94.Rowley, T., Behrens, D. & Krackhardt, D., Redunant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries, Strategic Management Journal, 21,369-386, 2000.
95.Schepers JG., Ralf Schnell.& Pat Vroom., From ideas to business--how Siemens bridges the innovation gap, Research Technology Management, 42( 3), 26-31, 1999.
96.Schumann, P. A., Prestwood, D. C., Tong, A. H.& Vanston, J. H., Innovate: Straightpath to quality customer delight & competitive advantage, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1994.
97.Schumpeter JA., The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and business cycle, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1934.
98.Schumpeter JA., The cgeative response in economic history, Organizational Learning Economic History , 7,149-159, 1947.
99.Senge, P. M., The Fifth Discipline- the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, New York: Doubleday., 1990.
100.Shiu, W.J., The Proactive Change in OEM Scope: The Case of Taiwanese OEM Firms., Unpublished Master thesis, National Chengchi University, （in Chinese）2003.
101.Shrader, RC. & Simonn M., Corporate versus independent new ventures: resource, strategy and performance differences, Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 151-162 , 1997.
102.Simonin B. L., Ambiguity and the Process of Knowledge Transfer in Strategic Alliances, Strategic Management Journal, 20,267-286, 1999.
103.Slater, S.F., and J.C. Narver , Market orientation and the learning organization., Journal of Marketing. 59: 63-74, 1995.
104.Spender, J. C. & Grant, R. M., Knowledge and firm: Overview. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue Winter 1996), 5-9, 1996.
105.Stata, R., Organizational learning: the key to management innovation, Sloan Management Review, 30(1), 64-73., 1989.
106.Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. & Shuen, A., Dynamic Capabilitiesand Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509-533, 1997.
107.Tidd, J. & Trecohella, M.J., Organizational and technological antecedents for knowledge acquisition and learning, R & D Management, 27(4), 359-375, 1997.
108.Tsai, W., Sumantra Ghoshal , Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks, Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476, 1998.
109.Tsai W., Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of Intraorganizational linkages, Strategic Management Journal, 21,925–939, 2000.
110..Tsai,W., Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance, Academy of Management Journal,44(5),96-1004, 2001.
111.Tushman M. & Anderson P., Technological discontinuities and organizational environments, Administrative Science Quarterly, 31,439-465, 1986.
112.Uzzi, B., The resources and consequence of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect, American Sociological Review, 61, 674-698, 1996.
113.Uzzi, B. & Lancaster, R., Relational embedded and learning: The case of bank loan manager and their clients, Management Science, 49(4), 383-399, 2003.
114.Yeung, A. K., Ulrich, D. O., Nason, S. W., & Ann Von Glinow, M., Organizational learning capability, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
115.Yli-Renko, H.; Autio, E. & Sapienza, H. J., Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms, Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7),587-613, 2001.
116.Yli-Renko, H.; Autio, E. , & Tontti, V., Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and international growth of technology-based new firms, International Business Review, 11,279-304, 2002.
117.Zaheer, A., McEvliy B. & Perrone, V., Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance, Organizational Science, 9,141-159, 1998.
118.Zahra SA. Nielson AP, Bogner WC., Corporate entrepreneurship, knowledge and competence development, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 23(3), 169-189, 1999.
119.Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Huse, M., Entrepreneurship in medium-size companies: exploring the effects of ownership and governance systems, Journal of Management, 26(5), 947-976, 2000.