政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131918
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113318/144297 (79%)
造訪人次 : 50977977      線上人數 : 847
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131918


    題名: 文物導意：博物館商店導覽設計中的認知重塑
    Artifact Sensegiving: Cognitive Reframing in the Service Design for Museum Guided Tour
    作者: 賈斯嘉
    Chia, Szu-Chia
    貢獻者: 蕭瑞麟
    Hsiao, Ruey-Lin
    賈斯嘉
    Chia, Szu-Chia
    關鍵詞: 服務設計
    意會
    導意
    認知轉移
    認知重塑
    service design
    sensemaking
    sensegiving
    cognitive shift
    cognitive reframing
    日期: 2020
    上傳時間: 2020-09-02 13:11:28 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 服務已成為一項競爭優勢，企業致力於發展各種創新以成就愉悅的顧客體驗。設計思考、服務藍圖、顧客旅程成為服務設計炙手可熱的工具。以使用者中心，識別痛點可取得創新來源。周全考量顧客旅程，則可以將服務思維貫徹到價值鏈。我們卻忽略，在陌生狀態下，使用者惶恐的意會中，是難以釐清自己的需求。本研究以故宮商店的導覽設計為案例，分析設計者如何引導觀眾對文物的意會，也闡釋認知轉換的過程。案例中解析四項一級文物，名列於鎮館國寶之列，探索導覽中設計者所發展出的導意作法，循循善誘觀眾由生疏曲解過渡到熟悉理解。學理上，本論文點出「微旅程」的觀念，延伸顧客旅程的觀點，分析初始意會、引導意會、再次意會的三階段，解釋觀眾對文物的認知轉移過程。這個轉移過程協助我們探索認知如何重塑，說明設計者引導意框架轉換的方式。實務上，本研究提出導意式的服務設計作法，讓觀眾由百思不得其解的誤會銜接到迎刃而解的體會。設計者若能由心理層面去關注使用者隱而難知的需求，服務創新將由意會的引導而源源不絕湧現。
    Increasingly as service has become a basis of competitive advantage, enterprises commence to innovate experience to please their customers. The instrumental methods of design thinking, service blueprint and customer journey mapping therefore receives public gaze and much popularity. If we take user-centirc perspective, identifying customers’ painpoints may help obtaining source of innovation. Comprehansvie analysis of customer journey would facilitate the impregnation of service dominant logic into an enterprise’s value chain. However, we seem to ignore that users are incapable of articulating their needs when they struggle to make sense of anomalous situations with anxiety. This research undertakes the case study of National Palace Museum Store and examines how designers could develop a guided tour to redirect audience’s sensemaking towards artifacts. This effort aims to elaborate the process of audiences’ cognitive shift. The case analyses four artifacts, which are considered as first-class relic and included in National Treasure List. This attempts to explore how designers’ develop sensegiving practices in order to mentor audiences transiting from unfamiliarity to conviviality, and from misconception to comprehansion. Theoretically, this thesis indicates the concept of micro-journey and extends the analysis of customer journey by examining the three phrases of initial sensemaking, sensegiving and sense-remaking. This explicates the process of audiences’ cognitive shift towards apprehending those artifacts. This shifting process helps us explore how cognitive reframing might take place, and explains how designers guide the conversion of cognitive frames. Practically, this research proposes a sensegiving approach to service design practices, which allows audiences to bring from perplexed misunderstanding to composed enlightenment. If designers could attend to audiences’ obscure needs from their psychological dimension, users’ sensemaking would become a streaming source of service innovation.
    參考文獻: 朱彩馨，2015，「溫故不知新：半新科技的意會調適」，《中山管理評論》，第1期，第23卷，137-183頁。
    江淑琳、張瑜倩，2016，「更民主的科學溝通：科學類博物館實踐公眾參與科學之角色初探」，《傳播研究與實踐》，第1期，第6卷，199-227頁。
    吳詩怡、張翰璧、蔡芬芳，2018，「博物館展示與客家記憶：以臺灣客家文物館為例」，《博物館與文化》，第16期，47-90頁。
    李如菁、何明泉，2009，「博物館文化商品的再思考：從跨界的觀點出發」，《設計學報》，第4期，第14卷，69-84頁。
    周婧景，2017，「敘事心理學：博物館展覽闡釋的心理仲介─以美國下東區移民公寓博物館為例」，《博物館學季刊》，第1期，第31卷，59-75頁。
    林榮泰，2009，「文化創意產品設計：從感性科技，人性設計與文化創意談起」，《人文與社會科學簡訊》，第1期，第11卷，32-42頁。
    耿鳳英，2006，「虛與實：新世紀的博物館展示趨勢」，《博物館學季刊》，第1期，第20卷，81-96頁。
    曾信傑，1998，「博物館、報章媒體與觀眾的互動」，《博物館學季刊》，第3期，第12卷，59-64頁。
    曾信傑，2001，「特展－博物館行銷的利器？」，《博物館學季刊》，第3期，第15卷，39-49頁。
    黃馨瑩、趙依庭、蔡瑞煌，2013，「適用於博物館的資通訊化服務設計－以故宮 iPalace 頻道為例」，《圖書館學與資訊科學》，第39期，第1卷，84-97頁。
    廖世璋，2016，「後博物館概念的都市藝術策展－以基隆黃色小鴨為例」，《博物館學季刊》，第4期，第30卷，73–95頁。
    劉婉珍，2004，「虛與實之間：博物館教育改革的契機」，《博物館學季刊》，第1期，第18卷，19-28頁。
    歐素華，2019，「精準分眾以創新：由使用者行為引導媒體服務設計」，中山管理評論，第27期，第1卷，11-56頁。
    鄭淑文、許家瑋、林詠能，2018，「數位時代下的博物館觀眾經驗」，《博物館與文化》，第15期，31–51頁。
    蕭瑞麟，2016，《思考的脈絡：創新可能不擴散》，台北：天下文化出版社。
    蕭瑞麟，2017，（第四版）《不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辨脈絡》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。
    蕭瑞麟，2019，《服務隨創：少力設計的邏輯思維》，台北：五南書局學術專書。
    蕭瑞麟、侯勝宗、歐素華，2011，「演化科技意會—衛星派遣科技的人性軌跡」，《資訊管理學報》，第4期，第18卷，1-28頁。
    蕭瑞麟、許瑋元，2010，「資安洞見：由使用者痛點提煉創新來源」，《組織與管理》，第3期，第2卷，93-128頁。
    Agar, M. 1980. The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography. New York: Academic Press.
    Antorini, Y. M., Muniz, J. A. M., & Askildsen, T. 2012. Collaborating with customer communities: Lessons from the Lego Group. Sloan Management Review, 53(3): 73-79.
    Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. 2006. Open source software user communities: A study of participation in Linux user groups. Management Science, 52(7): 1099-1115.
    Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. 2004. Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4): 523-549.
    Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 404–441.
    Bartunek, J. M. 1984. Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(3): 355-373.
    Beck, A. T. 1979. Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Press.
    Beckman, S. L., & Barry, M. 2007. Innovation as a learning process: Embedding design thinking. California Management Review, 50(1): 25-56.
    Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., & Morgan, F. N. 2008. Service blueprinting: A practical technique for service innovation. California Management Review, 50(3): 66-94.
    Boje, D. M. 1995. Stories of the storytelling organization: a postmodern analysis of Disney as ‘Tamara-land`. Academy of Management Journal, 38(4): 997-1035.
    Boudreau, M.-C., & Robey, D. 2005. Enacting integrated information technology: A human agency perspective. Organization Science, 16(1): 3-18.
    Brown, T. 2008. Design thinking. Hardvard Business Review, June: 85-92.
    Brown, T. 2009. Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York: Harper Collins.
    Bruner, J. 1990. Acts of Meaning. Boston: Harvard University Press.
    Cardon, M. S., Stevens, C. E., & Potter, D. R. 2011. Misfortunes or mistakes?: Cultural sensemaking of entrepreneurial failure. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1): 79-92.
    Chesbrough, H. W. 2006. Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
    Chesbrough, H. W. 2011. Bringing open innovation to services. Sloan Management Review, 52(2): 85-90.
    Claussen, J., Kretschmer, T., & Mayrhofer, P. 2013. The effects of rewarding user engagement: The case of Facebook Apps. Information Systems Research, 24(1): 186-200.
    Crossick, G. 2018. Museums, audiences and collections: Thinking about historical context. Cultural Trends, 27(4): 232-238.
    D`Andreta, D., Marabelli, M., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. 2016. Dominant cognitive frames and the innovative power of social networks. Organization Studies, 37(3): 293-321.
    Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. S. 1994. Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research: 1-17. London: Sage.
    Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 517-554.
    Edelman, D. C., & Singer, M. 2015. Competing on customer journeys. Harvard Business Review, 93(11): 88-87.
    Eisenhardt, K. M. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1): 25-32.
    Fichter, D., & Wisniewski, J. 2017. Tackling the omnichannel experience with customer journey mapping. Computers in Libraries, 37(8): 4-7.
    Foldy, E. G., Goldman, L., & Ospina, S. 2008. Sensegiving and the role of cognitive shifts in the work of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 19(5): 514-529.
    Gamble, J. R., McAdam, R., & Brennan, M. 2019. How user‐centric innovation is affecting stakeholder marketing strategies: Exploratory findings from the music industry. European Management Review, 16(4): 1175-1193.
    George, E., Chattopadhyay, P., Sitkin, S. B., & Barden, J. 2006. Cognitive underpinning of institutional persistence and change: A framing perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2): 347-365.
    Gerstner, W.-C., König, A., Enders, A., & Hambrick, D. C. 2013. CEO narcissism, audience engagement, and organizational adoption of technological discontinuities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2): 257-291.
    Gioia, D., & Chittipeddi, K. 1991. Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6): 433-448.
    Goffman, E. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
    Gopal, A., & Prasad, P. 2000. Understanding GDSS in symbolic context: Shifiting the focus from technology to interaction. MIS Quarterly, 24(3): 509-546.
    Griffith, T. 1999. Technology features as triggers for sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 472-488.
    Heracleous, L., Wirtz, J., & Johnston, R. 2005. Kung-Fu service development at Singapore Airlines. Business Strategy Review, 16(4): 26-31.
    Hienerth, C., Keinz, P., & Lettl, C. 2011. Exploring the nature and implementation process of user-centric business models. Long Range Planning, 44(5–6): 344-374.
    Hirsch, P. M. 1986. From ambushes to golden parachutes: Corporate takeovers as an instance of cultural framing and institutional integration. American Journal of Sociology, 77: 800-837.
    Höllerer, M. A., Jancsary, D., & Grafström, M. 2018. ‘A picture is worth a thousand words’: Multimodal sensemaking of the global financial crisis. Organization Studies, 39(5-6): 617-644.
    Howard-Grenville, J. A., & Hoffman, A. J. 2003. The importance of cultural framing to the success of social initiatives in business. Academy of Management Executive, 17(2): 70-84.
    Hsiao, R.-L., Wu, S. W., & Hou, S. T. 2008. Sensitive cabbies: Ongoing sense-making within technology structuring. Information and Organization, 18(4): 251–279.
    Idoughi, D., Seffah, A., & Kolski, C. 2012. Adding user experience into the interactive service design loop: A persona-based approach. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(3): 287-303.
    Karsten, H. 1995. It`s like everyone working around the same desk: Organizational readings of Lotus Notes Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 7(1): 3-32.
    Kim, J., Lee, S., & Park, Y. 2013. User-centric service map for identifying new service opportunities from potential needs: A case of App Store applications. Creativity & Innovation Management, 22(3): 241-264.
    Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. 1999. A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretative field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1): 67-94.
    Lee, G. K., & Cole, R. E. 2003. From a firm-based to a community-based model of knowledge creation: The case of the Linux kernel development. Organization Science, 14(6): 633-649.
    Lin, H.-E., & McDonough, E. F. 2014. Cognitive frames, learning mechanisms, and innovation ambidexterity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31: 170-188.
    Lounsbury, M. 2006. Strategy as practice: An activity-based approach. Organization Studies, 27(6): 906-909.
    Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. 2015. Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective. MIS Quarterly, 39(1): 155-176.
    Maanen, J. V. 1979. The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4): 539-550.
    Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. 2007. Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1): 57-84.
    Malinowski, B. 1944. A scientific theory of culture. Chapel Hill,: The University of North Carolina press.
    Markus, M. l. R. D. 1988. Information technology and organizational change: Causal structural in theory and research. Management Science, 34(5): 583-598.
    Newman, M., & Noble, F. 1990. User involvement as an interaction process: A case study. Information Systems Research, 1(1): 89-113.
    Norman, D. A. 1988. The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
    Normann, R., & Ramirez, R. 1993. From value chain to value constellation: Designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review, 71(4): 65-77.
    Orlikowski, W. J. 1996. Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1): 63–93.
    Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations Organization Science, 11(4): 404–428.
    Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. 1994. Technology frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2): 174-207.
    Orlikowski, W. J., & Hofman, D. 1997. An improvisational model for change management: The case of groupware technologies. Sloan Management Review, Winter: 11-21.
    Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. 2003. How users matter: The co-construction of users and technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Patriotta, G. 2003. Sensemaking on the shop floor: Narratives of knowledge in organizations. Journal of Management Study, 40(2): 349-375.
    Pettigrew, A. 1992. The character and significance of strategy process research. Strategic Management Journal, 13: 5-16.
    Pettigrew, A. M. 1987. Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6): 649-670.
    Pruitt, J. 2006. The persona lifecycle: Keeping people in mind throughout product design. San Francisco: Elsevier.
    Reason, P. 1994. Co-operative inquiry, participatory action research and action inquiry: Three approaches to participative inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
    Romney, M., & Johnson, R. G. 2020. Show me a story: Narrative, image, and audience engagement on sports network Instagram accounts. Information, Communication & Society, 23(1): 94-109.
    Rouleau, L. 2005. Micro-practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: How middle managers interpret and sell change every day. Journal of Management Studies, 42(7): 1413-1441.
    Sanday, P. R. 1979. The ethnography paradigms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 527-538.
    Schildt, H., Mantere, S., & Cornelissen, J. 2020. Power in sensemaking processes. Organization Studies, 41(2): 241-265.
    Schön, D. A., & Rein, M. 1994. Frame reflection: Toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books.
    Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. 2003. The cycles of corporate branding: The case of the Lego company. California Management Review, 46(1): 6-26.
    Schultze, U. 2000. A confessional account of ethnography about knowledge work. MIS Quarterly, 24(1): 3-42.
    Starbuck, W. H. 2009. Cognitive reactions to rare events: Perceptions, uncertainty, and learning. Organization Science, 20(5): 925-937.
    Stigliani, I., & Elsbach, K. D. 2018. Identity co‐formation in an emerging industry: Forging organizational distinctiveness and industry coherence through sensemaking and sensegiving. Journal of Management Studies, 55(8): 1323-1355.
    Su, N. 2015. Cultural sensemaking in offshore information technology service suppliers:A cultural frame perspective. MIS Quarterly, 39(4): 959-983.
    Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. 1991. Evidence for cognitive load theory. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4): 351-362.
    Tax, S. S., McCutcheon, D., & Wilkinson, I. F. 2013. The service delivery network: A customer-centric perspective of the customer journey. Journal of Service Research, 16(4): 454-470.
    von Hippel, E. 1986. Lead users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science, 32(7): 791-805.
    von Hippel, E. 1988. The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
    von Hippel, E. 2001. Innovation by user communities: Learning from open-source software. Sloan Management Review, 42(4): 82-86.
    Voorhees, C. M., Walkowiak, T., Fombelle, P. W., Gregoire, Y., Bone, S., Gustafsson, A., & Sousa, R. 2017. Service encounters, experiences and the customer journey: Defining the field and a call to expand our lens. Journal of Business Research, 79: 269-280.
    Walsham, G. 1995a. The emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Information Systems Research, 6(4): 376–394.
    Walsham, G. 1995b. Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4: 74-81.
    Weick, K. E. 1977. Organization Design: Organizations as Self-Designing Systems. Organizational Dynamics, 6(2): 30-46.
    Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in Organization. London: Sage.
    Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. 2005. Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4): 409-425.
    Whittington, R. 2006. Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27(5): 613-634.
    Yagi, N., & Kleinberg, J. 2011. Boundary work: An interpretive ethnographic perspective on negotiating and leveraging cross-cultural identity. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(5): 629-653.
    Yin, R. K. 1994. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Zalesny, M. D. 2009. Strategy as Practice: Research directions and resources. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1): 169-170.
    Zott, C., & Huy, Q. N. 2007. How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1): 70-105.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    科技管理與智慧財產研究所
    107364107
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107364107
    資料類型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001561
    顯示於類別:[科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    410701.pdf14617KbAdobe PDF233檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋