臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著經濟全球化的影響，跨國企業為了增強國外子公司與全球企業活動及策略的整合，而有不同的方法將母公司的知識移轉全球子公司。其中國際外派成為跨國企業完成全球企業整合策略的重要一環，因為企業多數的資訊藉由外派人員分享及移轉，使外派人員成為跨國母子司與全球子公司的連結橋樑，其也成為國外投資成功的重要因素之一。
本研究目的主要在驗證知識移轉的僵固因素對於跨國企業的外派人員在知識有效移轉的影響。外派人員在知識分享意願程度上可能因國家文化環境、組織文化環境、關係環境背景的不同以及移轉的知識特性不同而有所影響。本研究以知識移轉的僵固因素為自變項對在台外資企業的外派人員為研究對象，實證知識僵固因素對外派人員知識分享意願之影響性。
本研究以社會研究方法之量化及質性取向二種方法進行，以在台外資企業的外派人員為問卷發放樣本，總計發放110份問卷，回收問卷53份，扣除無效問卷3份，有效回收樣本份數為50份，有效樣本回收率為48%。其中有5位受訪者在填答量性問卷後接受訪談。本研究量化研究採用SPSS 16.0版本做問卷統計分析。質性研究則採內容分析法做深度訪談的分析。經過量化統計軟體的相關係數分析、變異數分析和迴歸分析以及質性內容分析結果發現如下：
1.國家文化環境對外派人員的知識分享意願有負相關，外派人員可能因與在台子公司知識接受者的價值觀的認定以及對做事模式的不同而受到阻礙，進而影響知識分享意願。
2.組織文化環境對外派人員的知識分享意願有正相關，外派人員可能因在台子公司的系統設備缺乏(如在職訓練、過時的訓練教材網頁)以及企業文化的不同(如強制休假制度、在台子公司計劃常常在改變)而成為知識移轉過程的阻礙，進而影響知識分享意願。
3.關係環境對外派人員的知識分享意願有正相關，但外派人員受到知識接受者的影響高過在台子公司企業和母公司之間的關係。外派人員因與知識接受者沒有信任程度，成為知識移轉過程的阻礙，進而影響知識分享意願。
4.知識的內隱性、複雜性及專屬性越高，對外派人員的知識分享意願有負相關。外派人員因缺乏經驗性的技術或是知識僵固在某些部門無法流動，而成為知識移轉過程中的障礙，進而影響知識分享意願。
5.在人口統計變數分析，外派人員的知識分享意願，女性比男性高、年齡超過35歲比35歲以下者高、碩士以上比大學者高、工作經驗超過10年者比10年以下者高、外派年資超過3年者比3年以下者高、歐洲籍和美洲籍的受訪者都表示他們有高度的知識分享意願，因為這是他們來台的任務。

To increase the global integration of business activities and strategies in headquarters and foreign subsidies, there are various ways to transfer knowledge across borders. The use of international assignments has become an integral part of Multinational Corporations’ (MNCs) business strategies because of a great amount of information movement through expatriates, who act as a link between headquarters and foreign subsidies.
The present study is to examine the impact of knowledge stickiness factors on knowledge transfer initiated by expatriates in MNCs in Taiwan. The degree of expatriates’ willingness to transfer knowledge may be influenced by cultural context, organizational content, relational context and type of knowledge. Both quantitative and qualitative method are employed in the present work. 110 questionnaires were sent out to expatriates in MNCs in Taiwan and 53 completed questionnaires were returned, among which 3 invlaid questionnaires were excluded, and 50 questionnaires were used, representing a response rate of 48 percent. After statistical analyses by T examination, correlation coefficient analysis and social stratum through SPSS 16.0 software and the content analysis of qualitative method, the following key findings are concluded:
1.The relation between the measure of “social context” and knowledge transfer willingness from expatriates is negative. This is because that the cultural value and the working patterns of expatriates are different from those of the knowledge recipients in Taiwan, which serves as a barrier for knowledge transfer processes, which, in turn, impacts expatriates’ knowledge transfer willingness further.
2.The relation between the measure of “organization context” and knowledge transfer willingness from expatriates is a positive one. This may be due to unsupported infrastructures (e.g., on-job-training and out-of-date training materials from webpage), and the difference in business culture (e.g., forced leave policy and scheduling difference). These are barriers during knowledge transfer processes and therefore impact expatriates’ knowledge transfer willingess further.
3.The relation between the measure of “relational context” and the knowledge transfer willingness from expatriates is a positive one. The expatriates are highly impacted by knowledge recipients in comparison with the relationship between Taiwan subsidiary and headquarter. The fact that there is little trust between knowledge providers and recipients is a barrier during knowledge transfer processes, which impacts expatriates’ knowledge transfer willingess further.
4.The influence of high tacit, complex and specified knowledge on expatriates’ knowedge transfer willingness is negative. This is because that expatriates are lack of experiences in delviering untechnical training, or the knowledge is sticked within some departments. These are barriers during knowledge transfer processes that impact expatriates’ knowledge transfer willingess further.
5.Based to population variable, the female has higher knowledge transfer willingness than the male, those age over 35 is higher than those of age under 35, those with master degree and above is higher than those with bachelor degree, those with working experience over 10 years is higher than those with 10 years below, those with expatriation period over 3 years is higher than those with 3 years below and interviewers from Europe and America have high willingess to transfer their knowledge as this is their main task to expatrate to Taiwan.

摘要 i
ABSTRACT iii
誌謝 v
目錄 vi
圖目錄 viii
表目錄 ix
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 2
第三節 研究問題 2
第四節 研究目的 3
第二章 文獻探討 4
第一節 跨國企業知識移轉的內涵 4
第二節 內部僵固因素對跨國知識移轉的影響 11
第三節 跨國知識分享意願的內涵 15
第四節 內部僵固因素對跨國知識移轉分享意願的影響 18
第三章 研究方法 23
第一節 研究架構 23
第二節 操作性定義與衡量工具 24
第三節 研究對象與資料蒐集 27
第四節 資料分析方法 28
第四章 資料分析 33
第一節 敘述統計分析 33
第二節 信度檢定 37
第三節 因素分析 38
第四節 相關係數分析 41
第五節 變異數分析 42
第六節 迴歸分析 48
第七節 質性訪談內容分析 50
第八節 研究假設與結果 54
第五章 結論與建議 57
第一節 研究發現與討論 57
第二節 管理意涵與建議 60
第三節 研究貢獻及限制與未來研究建議 61
參考文獻 63
一、 中文文獻 63
二、 英文文獻 64
附錄一 研究問卷 70
一、中文問卷 70
二、英文問卷 75
附錄二 訪談同意書 80

一、中文文獻
吳萬益、陳碩珮和甘珮珊，「台灣企業派外人員跨文化訓練有效性之實證研究」，臺大管理論業，10(2)， 167-203頁，民國89年6月。
李家瑩，「以組織情境與關係情境為干擾變數探討知識黏度對於知識移轉成功之影響」，國立成功大學，未出版博士論文，民國96年。
林金定、嚴嘉楓和陳美花，「質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步驟分析」，身心障礙研究，Vol.3 (2)，122-136頁，2005。
陳威融，「人力資源部門在組織管理知識移轉中之角色–以跨國企業為例」，國立中央大學，未出版碩士論文，民國92年。
曾弘志，「跨國企業子公司自主權主導權行為影響因素之研究」，國立中山大學，未出版碩士論文，民國90年。
曾志弘，陳盈延，「企業海外子公司跨國知識移轉成效之研究–資源依賴與社會資本觀點」，國立屏東商業技術學院學報，第十期，171-185頁，民國97年。
楊其清，「組織內部知識移轉之探討」，能力雜誌，2001.4，100-104頁，民國90年。
二、英文文獻
Arrow, K. J. (1969). Classification nots on the production and transmission of technical knowledge, America Economic Review, 52, 29-35.
Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1989). Manageing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
Bonache, J., & Fernandez, Z. (1997). Expatriate compensation and its link to the subsidiary strategic role: A theoretical analysis, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8 (4), 457-475.
Burt, R. S. (1995). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Capello, R., & Faggian, A. (2005). Collective learning and relational proxmimity in local innovation processes. Regional Studies, 39(1), 75-87.
Cavusgil, S. T., Calantone, R. J., & Zhao, Y. (2003). Tacit knowledge transfer and firm innovation capability. The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 18(1), 6-12.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Conn, H. P., & Yip, G. S. (1997). Global transfer of critical capabilities. Business Horizons, 40(1), 22-31.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business School Press.
Dhanaraj, C., Lyles, M. A., Steensma, H. K., & Tihanyi, L. (2004). Managing tacit and explicit knowledge transferring IJVs: The role of relational embeddedness and the impact on performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 428-442.
Dixon, M. N. (2000). Common Knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Edstrom, A., & Galbraith, J. (1977). Transfer of managers as a coordination and control strategy in multinational organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 248-263.
Egbu, C. O. (2004). Managing knowledge and intellectual capital for improved organizational innovations in the construction industry: An examination of critical success factors. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 11(5), 301.
Gilbert, M., & Cordey-Hayes, M. (1996). Understanding the process of knowledge transfer to achieve successful technological innovation. Technovation, 16(6), 301-312.
Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. (1988). Creation, adoption and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 365-388.
Goh, S. C., & Richards, G. (1997). Benchmarking the learning capability of organizations. European Management Journal,15(5), 575-583.
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information System, 18(1), 185-214.
Grotenhuis, F., & Weggeman, M. (2002). Knowledge managmenet in international mergers. Knowledge and Process Management, 9(2), 83-89.
Guieford, J. P., Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, New York: McGraw-Hill.,1965
Harem, T., Krogh, G. & Roos, J. (1996). Knowledge-based strategic change. Managing Knowledge Perspective on Cooperation and Competition, SAGE Publications.
Harzing, A. (2001). On bears, bumble-bees, and spiders: the role of expatriates in controlling foreign subsidiaries, Journal of World Business, 36(4), 366-379.
Hendriks, P. (1999). Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on motivation for knowledge sharing, Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
Hodgetts, R. M. & Luthans, F. (2000). International management: culture, strategy, and behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Cultural consequences: International differences in work related values, Beverly Hills, California: Sage.
Hult, G. T., & Ferrel, O. C. (1997). Global organization learning capabity in purchasing: Construct and measurement. Journal of Business Research, 40, 97-111.
Cronin, J. J., Baker, T. L., & Hawes, J. M. (1994). An assessment of the role performance measurement of power-dependency in marketing channels. Journal of Business Research, 30, 201-210.
Kacker, M. (1998). International flow of retailing know-how: Bridging the key issues in understand changing control. Journal of Technology Management. 17(6), 433-443.
Kandemir, D., & Hult, G. T. M. (2005). A conceptualization of an organizational learning culture in international joint ventures. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(5), 430-436.
Kedia, B., & Bhagat, R. (1988). Cultural constraints on transfer of technology across nations: Implications for research in international and comparative management. Academy of Management Review, 13, 559-571.
Kerwin, K., & Woodruff, D. (1992). Can olds hitch its wagon to Saturn’s star? Business Week, November, 23, 74.
Kim, L. (1998). Technology policies and strategies for developing countries: Lessons from the Korean experiences. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,10(3), 311-323.
Kimball, D. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (2000). Transfer and expertise. The Oxford handbook of memory. Oxford University Press.
Kindleberger, C. P. (1984). Multinational Excursions, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24, 625-645.
Kostova, T. (1999). Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24, 308-324.
Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2002). Adoption of an organizational practice by the subsidiaries of the MNC: institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 215-233.
Lam, A. (1997). Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: Problems of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies,18, 973-996.
Lilienthal, D. (1960). The multinational corporation. In Management and Corporations, 1985, edited by Ashen Melvin, and G.L. Bach, 119-159. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lord, M. D., & Ranft, A. L. (2000). Organizational learning about new international markets: Exploring the internal transfer of local market knowledge. Journal of International Business Studies, 31, 573-589.
Lyles, A. M., & Salk, E. J. (1996). Knowledge acquisition from foreign parents in international joint ventures empirical examination in the Hungarian context. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(5), 877-903.
Machlup, F. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States. Princeton University Press Publications.
Minbaeva, D. B., & Michailova, S. (2004). Knowledge transfer and expatriation in multinational corporations. Employee Relations, 26(6), 663-679.
Minichiello V., Aroni R., Timewell E., & Alexander L. (1995). In-depth interviewing, (2nd ed.). South Melbourne: Longman.
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 242-266.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I. , Toyama, R., & Konno N. (2000). SCEI, ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33, 5-34.
O’dell, C., & Grayson, C. (1998). If only we knew what we know: identification and transfer of internal best practices. California Management Review, 40(3), 154-174.
Pak, Y. S., & Park, Y. (2004). A framework of knowledge transfer in cross-border joint ventures: an empirical test of the Korean context. Management International Review, 44(4), 417-434.
Perlmutter, H. (1969). The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation. Columbia Journal of World Business, 9-18.
Phene, A., Madhok, A., & Liu, K. (2005). Knowledge transfer within the multinational firm: What drives the speed of transfer? Management International Review, 45, 53-74.
Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. New York: M. E Sharp Inc.
Porter, M. E. (1986). Changing Patterns of International Competition. California Management Review, 28, 9-40.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Riusala, K., & Suutari, V. (2004, November-December). International knowledge transfers through expatriates. Thunderbird International Business Review, 46(6), 743-770.
Robbins, R. D. (1984). Internationalization of Business: An introduction. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press.
Schein, E. H. (1996). Three cultures of managmenet: The key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 9-21.
Senge, P. (1997). Sharing knowledge. Executive Excellence, 11, 232-250.
Simonin, B.L. (1999). Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 595-623.
Sorensen, C., & Lundh-snis, U. (2001). Innovation through knowledge codification. Journal of Information Technology, 16, 83-97.
Steensma, H, K. & Lyles, M. A. (2000). Explaining IJV survival in a transitional economy through social exchange and knowledge-based perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 831,851.
Sundaram, A. K. & Black, J. S. (1992). The environment and internal organization of multinational enterprises. Academy of Management Review, 17(4), 729-757.
Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27-43.
Teece, D. (1997, June). Techology transfer by multinational corporations: The resource cost of transferring technological know-how. Economic Journal, 242-261.
Tung, R. (1993). Managing corss-national and intra-national diversity. Human Resource Mangement, 32(4), 461-477.
Von Hippel, E. (1994). “Stickey information” and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science, 40(4), 429-439.
Westphal, T. G., & Shaw, V. (2005). Knowledge transfers in acquistions: an exploratory study and model. Management International Review, 45(2), 75-100.
Williams M. (1997). Social Surveys: Design to Analysis. In: T. May (Ed.) Social Resarch Issues, Methods and Process. Buckinhgham: Open University Press.