(3.237.20.246) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/15 13:50
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:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:阮怡禎
研究生(外文):Yi-Chen Juan
論文名稱:資訊新創企業創新數位產品之實踐歷程-以學悅科技公司為例
論文名稱(外文):The Digital Product Enactment Process of the Entrepreneurial IT Enterprise-The Case Study of Zuvio Company
指導教授:周子銓
指導教授(外文):Tzu-Chuan Chou
口試委員:李國光黃世禎周子銓
口試委員(外文):Gwo-Guang LeeSun-Jen HuangTzu-Chuan Chou
口試日期:2019-01-11
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣科技大學
系所名稱:資訊管理系
學門:電算機學門
學類:電算機一般學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:中文
論文頁數:123
中文關鍵詞:實踐歷程策略創業資源拼湊組織靈巧能力IT Artifact
外文關鍵詞:EnactmentStrategic EntrepreneurshipResource BricolageAmbidextrous CapabilityIT Artifact
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:144
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
台灣近年資訊創業風氣逐漸蓬勃發展,然而整體創業環境的不確定性加劇,使得許多新創企業無法繼續維持生存,根據經濟部統計顯示,目前台灣新創企業能夠存活超過五年的機率僅有1%,因此為了避免被市場淘汰,新創企業必須持續與環境互動開闢多元市場,以獲得更多創造利潤的機會,並且形成可持續成長的競爭優勢。

本研究透過策略創業深入觀察新創企業在多變的環境中如何準確識別市場機會,並且探討其新創企業在資源缺乏的情況下,如何運用資源拼湊及組織靈巧能力的觀點,快速累積利於企業發展的相關資源與內部能力,以維持企業的生存與創造持續性的競爭優勢,最後透過實踐歷程重覆的循環摸索出最適合企業發展的目標市場,為企業帶來更豐富的獲利成長。

本研究探討個案對象-學悅科技股份有限公司,創立於2013 年企業主要服務項目為各類型之數位產品。本研究將其發展歷程分為技術創業時期、產品拓展時期、新事業探索時期與策略轉換時期,分別探討此四個階段企業如何運用策略創業的概念在變動的環境中,持續地透過創業心智發掘市場上的機會,並觀察其提出何種適應市場需求的創新解決方案,進一步探究企業如何調配內部資源以追求此機會,並且經過創業思維與策略活動之間的配適後形成階段性的策略目標。而企業為了追求此目標,如何在資源缺乏的情況下尋找所需資源協助企業快速發展,並分析不同的網絡關係資源對企業產生何種影響,最後觀察各階段的發展結果如何影響企業未來方向,並統整歸納出一套「資訊新創企業創新數位產品之實踐歷程架構」,提供給其他資訊新創企業作為創新產品及探索新市場之參考依據。
In recent years, the trend of entrepreneurship has been popular and flourishing in Taiwan. However, there are many start-up companies unable to survive due to the uncertainty of difficult environment. According to the statistics of the Taiwan Ministry of Economic Affairs, only 1% Taiwan's start-up companies can survive for more than five years. In order to prevent start-up companies from being eliminated by market, they need to explore diversified markets to obtain more opportunities to create profits and competitive advantage to make companies continue to grow up.

In this research, Strategic Entrepreneurship has been applied to observe how IT start-up companies identify market opportunities accurately. Moreover, this research makes use of Resource Bricolage and Ambidextrous Capability to analyze the processes of companies quickly accumulate relevant resources and internal competencies. It has a positive impact on the survival of the company. Finally, Digital Interaction Enactment has been applied to explore how the company can find the most suitable target market and bring more growth to the company.

This research explores the development process of the case object Zuvio that established in 2013 and the main service projects are various types of digital interactive products. The development process has been divided into four stages: technology-based venture period, product expansion period, new venture exploration period and strategy transition period. This research aims to observe how Zuvio continue to identify market opportunities through entrepreneurial mindsets. Moreover, the enterprise proposes innovative solutions to meet the demand of markets and observe how enterprise allocates internal resources to pursue the opportunity. This research explores the enterprise how to obtain relevant resources and rapid development with limited resources in order to achieve the strategic goal and also analyze the impact of different resources of network relationship on the enterprise. In addition, this research examines how the results of each phase affect the future direction of the business. Finally, the research summarizes and sorts out the “The Digital Product Enactment Process of the Entrepreneurial IT Enterprise” for other IT start-ups as a basis for the innovated products and exploring new venture.
摘要I
ABSTRACTII
致謝III
目錄IV
表目錄VI
圖目錄VII
第一章、緒論1
1.1 研究背景與動機1
1.2 研究問題與目的2
1.3 研究範圍與流程4
1.4 論文架構6
第二章、文獻探討8
2.1 實踐歷程(Enactment)8
2.2 策略創業(Strategic Entrepreneurship)11
2.2.1 策略創業之定義11
2.2.2 策略創業之要素15
2.3 資源拼湊(Resource Bricolage)19
2.3.1 資源拼湊之定義19
2.3.2 資源拼湊之要素21
2.3.3 網絡關係拼湊(Network Bricolage)23
2.4 組織靈巧能力(Ambidextrous Capability)24
2.4.1 組織靈巧能力之定義24
2.4.2 組織靈巧能力之要素26
2.5 IT Artifact29
第三章、研究方法與架構30
3.1 研究方法30
3.1.1 質化研究31
3.1.2 個案研究32
3.2 研究架構33
3.3 研究觀察重點37
3.4 研究對象40
3.5 資料蒐集與分析41
第四章、個案描述與分析44
4.1 個案公司簡介44
4.2 經營團隊成員背景描述46
4.3 個案公司發展歷程47
4.3.1 第一階段:技術創業時期(2011-2013)47
4.3.2 第二階段:產品拓展時期(2013-2014)50
4.3.3 第三階段:新事業探索時期(2015-2016)54
4.3.4 第四階段:策略轉換時期(2017-2018)58
4.4 個案分析63
4.4.1 第一階段:技術創業時期(2011-2013)63
4.4.2 第二階段:產品拓展時期(2013-2014)72
4.4.3 第三階段:新事業探索時期(2015-2016)81
4.4.4 第四階段:策略轉換時期(2017-2018)92
4.4.5 分析總結103
第五章、研究結論與建議111
5.1 結論與研究貢獻111
5.2 研究限制與未來研究方向114
參考資料115
中文部分115
英文部分115
網站部分123
中文部分
1. 陳向明,2002,社會科學質的硏究 ,五南圖書出版股份有限公司 。
2. 黃秋霞,2016,淺談量化與質性研究的反思,臺灣教育評論月刊, 5(9),149-154。
3. 張宏榮,2009,策略創業之整合模式,經營管理論叢,5(1),81-98。
4. 謝如梅、莊為傑、方世杰,2011,資源拼湊、創業經驗與新事業機會之初探性研究:社會網絡觀點,第14 屆科際整合管理研討會,441-453。

英文部分
1. Adner, R. and Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24: in press.
2. Alfred A. Marcu and Marc H. Anderson (2008). Commitment to an Emerging Organizational Field, Institutional Entrepreneurship, and the Perception of Opportunity- An Enactment Theory. Industry studies association working papers series, 22.
3. Allen S. Lee, Manoj A. Thomas and Richard L. Baskerville (2013). Going Back to Basics in Design: From the IT Artifact to the IS Artifact. Proceedings of the Nineteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, 15-17.
4. Alvarez, S. A. & Barney, J. B. (2002). Resource-based theory and the entrepreneurial firm. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset: 89-105.Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
5. Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the capability rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing 69(4), 61-83.
6. Barney, J. B. and Arikan, A. M. (2001). The resource-based view: Origins and implications. In M. A. Hitt, R. F. Freeman, and J. S. Harrison (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management: 124-188. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
7. Baker, T. (2007). Resources in play: Bricolage in the Toy Store (y). Journal of Business Venturing, 22(5), 694-711.
8. Baker, T. Miner, A. S. and Eesley, D. T. (2003). Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process. Research Policy, 32, 255-276.
9. Baker, T. and Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing:Resource construction through entreprenurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 329-366.
10. Beckman, C. M. (2006). The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 741-758.
11. Charmaz, K. (1996). The search for Meanings – Grounded Theory. In. J. A. Smith, R. Herre, & L. Van Langenhove (Eds), Renthinking Methods in Psychology, 22-49.
12. Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
13. Cunha, M. P. (2005). Bricolage in organization ‘ FUENL Working Paper Series, No 474, Uninversidad Nova de Lisboam, Faculdada de Economia.
14. Covin, J. G. and Slevin, D. P. (2002). The entrepreneurial imperatives of strategic leadership. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, and D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset: 309-327. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
15. Danneels, E. (2002) The Dynamics of Product Innovation and Firm Competences. Strategic Management.
16. Danneels, Erwin (2003). Tight-loose coupling with customers: The enactment of customer orientation. Strategic Management Journal 24: 559-576.
17. Dewar, R. D. and Dutton, J.E. (1986). The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis. Management Science, 32(11), 1422-1433.
18. Ferneley, E. and Bell, F. (2006). Using bricolage to integrate business and information technology innovation in SMEs. Technovation, 26(2), 232-241.
19. Goksel Yalcinkaya, Roger J. Calantone, and David A (2007). GriffithAn Examination of Exploration and Exploitation Capabilities: Implications for Product Innovation and Market Performance. Journal of International Marketing, American Marketing Association, 15(4), 63-93.
20. Hagedoorn, J. and Duysters, G. (2002) Learning in Dynamic Inter-Firm Networks: The Efficacy of Multiple Contacts. Organization Studies, 23, 525.
21. Hitt, M. A. Ireland, R. D. and Sirmon, D. (2003). A Model of Strategic Entrepreneurship: The Construct and its Dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963-989.
22. Hitt, M. A. Ireland, R. D. Camp, S. M. and Sexton, D. L. (2001). Strategic Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Stratrgics for wealth. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 479-491.
23. Hitt, M. A. Ireland, R. D. Hoskisson R. E. (2001). Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization.
24. Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., and Hoskisson, R.E. (2009), Strategic management: Competitiveness and globalization. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
25. Hitt, M. A. Ireland, R. D. Camp, S. M. and Sexton, D. L. (2002). Strategic entrepreneurship: Integrating entrepreneurial and strategic management perspectives. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset: 1-16. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
26. Hoskisson, R. E. and Busenitz, L.W. (2002). In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Market uncertainty and learning distance: 151-172. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
27. Hoang, H. and Antoncic, B. (2003). Network-based research in entrepreneurship: A critical review. Journal of Business Venturing 18, 165-187.
28. Holmqvist, Mikael (2004). Experiential learning processes of exploitation and exploration within and between organizations: An empirical study of product development. Organization Science, 15, 70-81.
29. Hughes, M., P. Hughes, and R.E. Morgan. (2007). Exploitative learning and entrepreneurial orientation alignment in emerging young firms: Implications for market and response performance. British Journal of Management 18, 359-75.
30. Ireland, R. D. and Hitt, M. A. (1999). Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive, 13(1): 43-57.
31. Ireland, R. D. Hitt, M. A. Camp, S. M. and Sexton, D. L. (2001a). Integrating entrepreneurship and strategic management actions to create firm wealth. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 49-63.
32. Ireland, R. D. Kuratko, D. F. (2001). Corporate entrepreneurship and middle-level managers’ entrepreneurial behavior: relationships, outcomes, and consequences. Working paper, University of Richmond.
33. Ireland, R.D. and Webb, J.W. (2007). Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating competitive advantage through streams of innovation. Business Horizons, 50, 49-59.
34. Jansen, J.J.P., F.A.J. van den Bosch, and H.W. Volberda. (2005). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science 52, 1661-74.
35. Johnson, L. K. (2002). The organizational identity trap. MIT Sloan Management
Review, 43(4): 11.
36. Kahn, R. L. & C. F. Cannell. (1957). The Dynamics of Interviewing: Theory, Technique, and Cases, New York, John Wiley & Sons, 22-64.
37. Kenagy, J.W. and Christensen, C. M. (2002). May. Diagnosis for health care’s “financial flu.” Healthcare Financial Management: 62-66.
38. Kirzner, I. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: an Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature 35, 65-80.
39. Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383-397.
40. Levi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. Levinthal, Daniel A. and James G. March (1993), “The Myopia of Learning,” Strategic Management Journal , 14 (Winter Special Issue), 95-112.
42. Lin, Z., Yang, H.B. and Demirkan, I. (2007) The Performance Consequences of Ambidexterity in Strategic Alliance Formations: Empirical Investigation and Computational Theorizing. Management.
43. Luke, B. and Verreynne, M. L. (2006). Exploring strategic entrepreneurship in the public sector. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 3(1), 4-26.
44. March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitaiton in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
45. March, S.T. and Smith, G.F. (1995). Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology, Decision SupportSystems , 15, 251-266.
46. McGrath, R. M. (1999). Falling forward: Real options reasoning and entrepreneurial failure. Academy of Management Review, 24: 13-30.
47. McGrath, R. G. and MacMillan, I. (2000). The entrepreneurial mindset. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
48. McLagan, P.A. (1983). Models for Excellence, The American Society for Training and Development, Washington, DC.
49. Meyer, G. D. and Heppard, K. A. (2000). Entrepreneurship as strategy: Competing on the entrepreneurial edge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
50. Miles, G. Heppard, K. A. Miles, R. E. & Snow, C. C. (2000). Entrepreneurial strategies: The critical role of top management. In G. D. Meyer & K. A. Heppard (Eds.), Entrepreneurship as strategy: Competing on the entrepreneurial edge: 101- 114.
51. Miller, K. D. and Folta, T. B. (2002). Option value entry timing. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 65-–665.
52. Miner, A.S. Bassoff, P. Moorman, C. (2001). Organizational improvisation and learning: a field study. Administrative Science Quarterly 46, 304-337.
53. Minichiello V., Aroni R., Timewell E. & Alexander L. (1995), In-depth Interviewing, (2nd ed.),South Melbourne: Longman.
54. Mosakowski, E. (2002). Overcoming resource disadvantages in entrepreneurial firms: When less is more. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset: 106-126. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
55. Mom, T.J.M., Van den Bosch, F.A.J. and Volberda, H.W. (2007) Investigating Managers’ Exploration and Exploitation Activities: The Influence of TopDown, Bottom Up, and Horizontal Knowledge.
56. Perkmann, M. and Spicer, A. (2014). How Emerging Organizations Take Form: The Role of Imprinting and Values in Organizational Bricolage. Organization Science 25(6), 1785-1806.
57. Priem, R. L. and Butler, J. E. (2001a). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, 26: 22-40.
58. Porac JF, Thomas H, Baden-Fuller C. (1989). Competitive groups as cognitive communities: the case of Scottish knitwear manufacturers. Journal of Management Studies 26(4): 397-416.
59. Rowe, W. G. (2001). Creating wealth in organizations: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1): 81-94.
60. Salancik, Gerald R. (1977b). ‘Commitment is too easy!’ Organizational Dynamics 6(3): 62-80.
61. Saetre, A. S. Soernes, J. O. Browning, L. D. and Keri K. Stephens (2003). Organizational Members’ Enactment of Organizational Environments and Media Use: A Study of ICT Practices in Norway and the United States. InSITE - “Where Parallels Intersect.”
62. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
63. Schindehutte, M., and M.H. Morris. (2009). Advancing strategic entrepreneurship research: The role of complexity science in shifting the paradigm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 33, no. 1, 241-76.
64. Senyard, J. Baker, T. Steffens, P. and Davidsson, P. (2014). Bricolage as Path to Innovativeness for Resource-Constrained New Firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 211-230.
65. Simon, H.A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
66. Sirmon, D. G. and Hitt, M. A. (2003). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(4), 339-358.
67. Sirmon, D.G., M.A. Hitt, and R.D. Ireland. (2007). Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Academy of Management Review 22, 273-92.
68. Smith, K. G. and Di Gregorio, D. (2002). Bisociation, discovery, and the role of entrepreneurial action. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, and D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset: 129-150. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
69. Steffens, Paul R. Senyard, Julienne M. and Baker, T. (2009). Linking resource acquisition and development processes to resource-based advantage: bricolage and the resource-based view. In: 6th AGSE International Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, 4-6.
70. Stinchfield, B. T., Nelson, R. E. and Wood, M. S. (2013). Learning from Levi‐ Strauss' legacy: art, craft, engineering, bricolage, and brokerage in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(4), 889-921.
71. Smircich, L., & Stubbard, C. (1985). Strategic management in an enacted world. Academy of Management Review, 10 (4), 724-736.
72. Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Organizational environments and organizational information processing. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The New Handbook of Organizational Information, 197-230. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
73. Teece, David J. (2006). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Haas School of Business Working Paper.
74. Thornston, G.C. (1992). Assessment Centers in Human Resource Management, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
75. Tushman, M. L. and Anderson, P. (1986). Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439-465.
76. Tushman, Michael L. and O’Reilly, Charles A. (1996). The ambidextrous organization: managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38, 1-23.
77. Tushman, Michael L. and O’Reilly, Charles A. (1997). Winning through innovation: A practical guide to leading organizational change and renewal. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
78. Tushman, Michael L., Smith, Wendy K., Wood, Robert C., Westerman, George and O’Reilly, Charles A. (2007). Organizational designs and innovation streams. Harvard Business School Working Paper
79. Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. In: Katz, J. (Ed.), Advances in Entrepreneurship: Firm Emergence and Growth. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
80. Wagner, R. K. (2000). Practical intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence, 380-395. New York: Cambridge University Press.
81. Weber, K. and M.A. Glynn (2006). Making Sense with Institutions: Context and Action in Karl Weick’s Theory. Organization Studies, 27(1), 1639-1660.
82. Weick, K. E. (1969). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.
83. Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
84. Weick, K. E. (2001). Making sense of the organization. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
85. Williams M.(1997), Social Surveys: Design to Analysis. In: T. May (ed.) SocialResearch Issues, Methods and Process, Buckingham: Open University Press.

網站部分
1. 學悅科技官網 https://www.zuvio.com.tw/
2. Business Next 數位時代 https://www.bnext.com.tw
3. GVM 遠見雜誌 https://www.gvm.com.tw
4. CNA 中央通訊社 https://www.cna.com.tw/
5. TechNews 科技新報 http://technews.tw
6. TechOrange 科技報橘 https://buzzorange.com/techorange/
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔