Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/57042
|
| Title: | 以複雜科學觀點探討企業內部創業
Exploring intrapreneurship from complexity science perspective |
| Authors: | 嚴倢妤
Yen, Chieh Yu |
| Contributors: | 吳豐祥
Wu, Feng Hsiang
嚴倢妤
Yen, Chieh Yu |
| Keywords: | 內部創業
複雜理論
奇異吸子
台灣科技業
Intrapraneurship
Complexity Science
Strange Attractor
High-tech Industry |
| Date: | 2011 |
| Issue Date: | 2013-03-01 09:24:39 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 在變動劇烈的企業經營環境之下，內部創業是帶動公司成長的重要選項。台灣的產業經營環境中，以高科技業廠商面臨的經營環境變遷最為快速、產品生命週期最為短暫，也是台灣眾多產業中，相對高比例的以內部創業持續支持企業發展的多數，但是過往的創業與內部創業相關研究，多將創業議題視為靜態主體，不過進行內部創業的企業，因為複雜的管理流程與管理因素之變化，以動態與整體性的理論重新思考更能呈現其真義，並能提供實質的運作建議。具有動態與整體性特質的理論觀點中，複雜性科學可以詮釋非線性動態系統的演化歷程，並可以呈現系統於外在資訊輸入之下的變動，以跨層次互動所呈現的整體模態，以「過程」角度呈現內部創業研究中的企業面對環境變化之動態調適，讓企業的內部創業演變歷程更為清晰。
本研究以複雜科學作為內部創業探討的研究基礎，除了以「系統」、「動態」與「調適」等觀點為基礎外，進一步將混沌理論中的奇異吸子(strange attractor)納入探討；並從複雜科學觀點中，萃取出影響系統動態運作流程的關鍵要素：「資訊評估」、「調適性張力」、「新創事業建構」、「網絡連結」與「合作網絡確立」等五大步驟，對應企業內部創業的流程。本研究以此理論模式為主軸，進行個案選擇、訪談以及資料蒐集，對台灣四家高科技業廠商進行深入訪談，了解其內部創業過程與複雜科學觀點的對應性，以及在此對應的新觀點中內部創業之關鍵成功因素。
本研究所得到的主要結論如下：
1. 台灣科技業廠商推行內部創業的過程可用複雜科學觀點對應之。
2. 台灣科技業廠商會以調適性張力狀態作為推行內部創業的契機。
3. 台灣科技業廠商成功發展內部創業之關鍵在於流程中的資源分配。
4. 台灣科技業廠商再創後續新事業時，會受到員工個人熱忱與對新事業認同感之影響。
5. 台灣科技業廠商內部創業領導者的層級會影響新創事業發展。
6. 台灣科技業廠商會複製成功經驗發展後續的新創事業。
7. 台灣科技業廠商在公司規模擴張時，會重新設計新創事業發展模式。
本論文最後說明研究結果的學術貢獻，並針對實務與後續研究提出相關建議。
Intrapreneurship is a pivotal way for enterprises creating another way to support their continuous growth. Intrapreneurship could help large-scaled enterprises to break through the problems of rigid organizational culture and management. In the industrial environment of Taiwan, high-tech companies are confronted with varied business situation and the shortest product life cycle; these conditions have urged high-tech companies in Taiwan into executing intrapreneurship to ensure their future profit. Review researches related to intrapreneurship, most of them use the static view to describe it. However, due to the complication and the change of crucial factors in management process, the dynamic and holism view could better present the evolution process of nonlinear dynamic systems. Besides, this kind point of view could show the pattern of cross-level interaction and the dynamic adaption during the process of intrapraneurship; both could make the realization of intrapraneurship much clear.
This paper is based on complexity science. In addition to use the viewpoint of “systematic,” “dynamic” and “adaption,” this paper also brings in the viewpoint of “strange attractor.” This paper extracts key factors which affect dynamic system operation, and classifies them into five steps: “information evaluation,” “adaptive tension,” “new business construction,” “network connection” and “establishment of cooperation networks,” in order to correspond the process of intrapraneurship in enterprises. Based on this framework, this paper presents interview results of four high-tech companies in Taiwan, and finds key factors which could help the realization of intrapraneurship in this new perspect. |
| Reference: | 英文文獻
1. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes and innovation: A longitudinal study, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.45, 425-455.
2. Amit, R. and Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent, Strategic Management Journal, vol.14, 33-46.
3. Anderson, P. (1999). Complexity theory and organization science, Organization Science, vol.10(3), 216-232.
4. Aharonov, Y. and Bohm, D.(1957). Discussion of Experimental Proof for the Paradox of Einstein, Rosen, and Podolsky, Physical Review, vol.108, 1070-1076.
5. Arthur, W. B. (1994). Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy, Ann Arbor, MI.: University of Michigan Press.
6. Barnard, C. I. (1938). The Functions of the Executives, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
7. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, vol.17, 99-120.
8. Bernice, C. (1997). The Edge of Chaos, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 80.
9. Benjamin, B. A. and Podolny, J. M. (1999). Status, Quality, and Social Order in the California Wine Industry, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.44, 563-589.
10. Blanchard K.and Johnson S. (2003). The One Minute Manager, Nueva York, EUA : William Morrow.
11. Brass, D. J. and Burkhardt, M. E. (1992). Centrality and power in organization. In N. Nohria, & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action, 191-215. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
12. Brown, S. L. and Eisenhardt, K.M. (1998). Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos, Boston: Harvard Business School Press
13. Burgers, W. P., Hill, W. L. and Kim, W. C. (1993). A Theory of Global Strategic Alliances: The Case of the Global Auto Industry, Strategic Management Journal,vol.14 (6), 419-432
14. Burt, R. S. (1992). The Social Structure of Competition. In N. Nohria, & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action: 57-91. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
15. Capra, F. (1982). The Turning Point: Science, Society and The Rising Culture, New York: Simon and Schuster.
16. Clippinger III, J. H. (1999). The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
17. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
18. Cooper, A. C. and K. W. Artz (1995). Determinants of Satisfaction for Entrepreneurs, Journal of Business Venturing, vol.10(6): 439-457.
19. Cooper, R. G. (2001). Winning At New Products: Accelerating The Process From Idea To Launch, Perseus.
20. Cooper, R. G., and Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1987). Success Factors in Product Innovation, Industrial Marketing Management, vol.16(3), 215-223.
21. Corning, P. A. (1995). Synergy and Self-organization in the Evolution of Complex Systems, Systems Research, vol.12(2), 89-121.
22. Crutchfield, J. P., Farmer, J. D., Packard, N. H., and Shaw, R. S. (1986). Chaos, Scientific American, vol.255, 46-57.
23. Dollinger, M. J. (2003). Entrepreneurship: Strategies and Resources, Prentice Hall (3ed.).
24. Dooley, K. J. and Van de Ven, A. H. (1999). Explaining Complex Organizational Dynamics, Organization Science, vol.10(3), 358-372.
25. Drazin, R. and Sandelands, L. (1992). Autogenesis, a Perspective on the Process of Organizing, Organization Science, vol.3(2), 230-249.
26. Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship, Heinemann.
27. Drucker, P. F. (1993). Managing for The Future: The 1990s and Beyond, New York: Truman Talley Books/Plume.
28. Echambadi, R.A.J.,Harrison, J.S., and Sarkar, M.B. (2001). Alliance Entrepreneurship and Firm Market Performance, Strategic Management Journal, vol.22 (6-7), 701-711.
29. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theory from Case Study Research, Academy of Management Review, vol.14, 532-550.
30. Eisenhardt, K. M. and Galunic, D. C. (2000). Coevolving: At Last, a Way to Make Synergies Work, Harvard Business Review, vol.76(5), 131-143.
31. Favorov O. V. and Kelly D. G. (1994). Minicolumnar Organization within Somatosensory Cortical Segregates: II. Emergent Functional Properties, Cerebral Cortex, vol.4 (4), 428-442.
32. Fletcher, D. (2006). Entrepreneurial Process and the Social Construction of Opportunity, Entrepreneurship& Regional Development, vol.18, 421-440.
33. Fowler, A. (2000). NGDOs As A Movement in History: Beyond Aid to Social Entrepreneurship or Civil Innovation, Third World Quarterly, vol.21(4), 637-654.
34. Frank, K. A. and Fahrbachm K. (1999). Organization Culture As a Complex System: Balance and Information in Models of Influence and Selection, Organization Science, vol.10(3):253-277.
35. Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social network: Conceptual clarification, Social Networks, vol.1, 215-239.
36. Gartner, W. B. ( 1985). A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of New Venture Creation, Academy of Management Review, vol.10 (4), 696-707.
37. Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex, New York: Freeman.
38. Ginsberg, A. and M. Hay (1994). Confronting the Challenges of Corporate Entrepreneurship: Guidelines for Venture Managers, European Management Journal, vol. 12(4): 382-389.
39. Gnyawali, D. R. and Madhavan, R. (2001). Cooperative Networks and Competitive Dynamics: Structural Embeddedness Perspective, Academy of Management Review, vol. 26, 431-445.
40. Gupta A. K., Wilemon D. (1996). Changing Patterns in Industrial R&D Management, Journal of Product Innovation Management. vol.13(6), p. 497–511.
41. Harris, S. (1994). Organizational Culture and Individaul Sensemaking: A Schema-based Perspective, Organization Science, vol.5 (3), 309-321.
42. Hatch, M. J. and Schultz, M. (1997). Relations Between Organizational Culture, identity and image, European Journal of Marketing, 356-365.
43. Holland, J. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity, Addison-Wesley.
44. Hornsby, J. S., Naffziger, D. W., Kuratko, D. F., & Montagno, R. V. (1993). An Interactive Model of the Corporate Entrepreneurship Process, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, vol.17(2), 29-37. Baylor University.
45. Jarillo, J. C. (1988). On Strategic Networks, Strategic Management Journal, Vo1. 9, 31-41.
46. Johanson, J. & Mattson, L. (1987). Interorganizational Relations in Industrial System: A Network Approach compared with the Transaction-Cost Approach, International Studies of Management and Organization, vo1.17, 34-48.
47. Kanter, R. M., (1989). Swimming in New Streams: Mastering Innovation Dilemmas, California management review, vol. 31(4):45-69.
48. Kauffman, S. A. (1991). Antichaos and Adaptation, Scientific American, 64-70.
49. Kauffman, S.A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self Organization and Selection in Evolution, New York: Oxford University Press.
50. Kauffman, S. A.(1995). At Home in the Universe: the Search for Laws of Self Organization Complexity, New York: Oxford University Press.
51. Kilduff, M. and Tsai, W. P. (2003). Social Networks and Organizations, SAGE Publications.
52. Khalil T. M., Lefebvre L. A., Mason R. M.(2001). Management of Technology: The Key to Prosperity in the Third Millennium, Pergamon.
53. Kogut, B. (2000). The Network as knowledge: Generative Rules and the Emergence of Structure, Strategic Management Journal, vol.21, 405-425.
54. Larson, Andrea, (1992). Network Dyads in Entrepreneurial Settings: A Study of the Governance of Exchange Processes, Administrative Science Quarterly, vo1.37, 1992, 76-104.
55. Lichtenstein, B. (2000). Emergence as a Process of Self-organizing: New Assumptions and Insights from the Study of Non-linear Dynamic Systems, Journal of Organizational Change, vol.20, 526-544.
56. Leibold, M., Probst, G. and Gibbert, M. (2002). Strategic Management in the Knowledge Economy: New approach and Business Applications, New York: Wiley.
57. Leifer, R. (1989). Understanding Organizational Transformation Using a Dissipative Structure Model, Human Relations, vol.10, 899-916.
58. Lee Choonwoo, Lee Kyungmook, Pennings J. M. (2001). Internal Capabilities, External Networks, and Performance: a Study on Technology-based Ventures, Strategic Management Journal, vol.22(6-7), 615–640.
59. Lengnick-Hall C. A. and Wolff, I. A. (1999). The Similarities and Contradictions in the Core Logic of Three Strategy Research Streams, Strategic Management Journal, vol.20, 1109-1132.
60. Lissack, M. (1999). Complexity: The Science, Its Vocabulary, and Its Relation to Organizations, Emergence, vol.1(1), 110-126.
61. Lorenz, Edward N. (1963). Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow. J. Atmos. Sci., vol.20, 130–141.
62. Lounsbury, M. and Glynn, M. A. (2001). Cultural Entrepreneurship: Stories, Legitimacy, and the Acquisition of Resources, Strategic Management Journal, vol.22, 545-564.
63. Low, M. B. and Srivatsan, V. (1994). What Does It Mean to Trust an Entrepreneur? In S. Birler, & I. C. MacMillan (Eds.), International entrepreneurship, 59-78. London: Routledge.
64. Macintosh, R. and Maclean, D. (1999). Conditioned Emergence: A Dissipative Structures Approach to Transformation, Strategic Management Journal, vol.20, 297-316.
65. Mair, J. and Marti’, I. (2009). Entrepreneurship in and around Institutional Voids: A Case Study from Bangladesh, Journal of Business Venturing, vol.24, 419-435.
66. Martin, Paul and Lorenz, E. N.(1993). The Essence of Chaos, Physics Today, vol.48(2),54
67. Mathews, K., M. White & Long, R.G. (1999). Why Study the Complexity Sciences in the Social Sciences? Human Relations, vol. 52(4): 439-462.
68. McDaniel, R. R. Jr. and Walls, M. E. (1998). Professional Organizations Stuck in the Middle: A Complex Adaptive Systems Approach to Achieving Organizational Turnaround in Adverse Situations, Advances in Applied Business Strategy, vol.5, 131-152.
69. McKelvey, B. (1999). Complexity Theory in Organization Science: Seizing the promise or becoming a fad? Emergence, vol.1(1), 3-32.
70. McKelvey, B. (2001). What is Complexity Science? It is Really Order-creation Science, Emergence, vol.3(1), 137-157.
71. Miles, R. E. and Snow C. C. (1992). Causes of Failure in Network Organizations, California Management Review. vol.35(Summer), 53-72.
72. Mitchell, A.(2007). Intrapreneurship; Enabling Postgraduate Researchers to Drive Organisational Innovation, University of Strathclyde.
73. Mitchell, J.C. (1969). The Concept and Use of Social Nnetworks, In J.C. Mitchell (ed.) , Social Networks in Urban Situations, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1-50.
74. Mitchell, R. K., Busenitz, L., Lant, T., McDougall, P. P., Morse, E. A. and Smith, J.B. (2002). Toward a Theory of Entrepreneurial Cognition: Rethinking the People Side of Entrepreneurship Research, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 93-104.
75. Moore, J. F. (1996). The Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems, Harper Business.
76. Morel, B. & Ramanujam, R. (1999). Through the Looking Glass of Complexity: the Dynamics of Organizations as Adaptive and Evolving Systems, Organization Science, vol.10(3), 278-293.
77. Muffatto, M. and M. Faldani (2003). Open Source as a Complex Adaptive System, Emergence , vol.5 (3), 83-100.
78. Murphy, G. B., J. W. Trailer, et al. (1996). Measuring Performance in Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Business Research vol.36(1), 15-23.
79. Oden, Howard W.(1997). Managing Corporate Culture, Innovation and Intrapreneurship, Quorum Books (Westport, Conn.)
80. Oliver, C. (1997). Sustainable Competitive Advantage: Combining Institutional and Resource-based Views, Strategic Management Journal, vol.18, 697-713.
81. Olson, E.M., Walker, O.C. and Ruekert, R.W. (1995). Organizing for Effective New Product Development: The Moderating Role of Product Innovativeness, Journal of Marketing vol. 59(1), 48-62.
82. Pappas, Richard A., and Donald S. Remer (1985). Measuring R&D Productivity, Research Management vol.28(3), 15-22.
83. Pennings, J. M. (1981). Strategically Interdependent Organizations: Handbook of Organizational Design, New York, Oxford University Press
84. Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, H. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective, New York, Harper & Row.
85. Pinchot III, G.(1985). Intrapreneuring: Why You Don`t Have to Leave the Corporation to Becomean Entrepreneur, New York: Harper& Row.
86. Pinchot III, G., Pellman, R. (1999) . Intrapreneuring in Action: a Handbook of Business Innovation. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco.
87. Powell, W. W. (1987). Hyrid Organizational Arrangements: New Form or Transitional Development? California Management Review, vo1.30(1), 67-87.
88. Powell, W. W. (1990), Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vo1. 12, 295-336.
89. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 41, 116-145.
90. Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of Chaos: Man`s New Dialogue with Nature, New York: Bantam Books.
91. Roberts, E.B. (1980). New Ventures for Corporate Growth, Harvard Business Review, July/Aug. 134-142.
92. Roberts, E. B. and Berry, C. A. (1985). Entering New Business: Selecting Strategies for Success, Sloan Management Review, 3-17.
93. Sarason, Y. and Dillard, J. (2006). Entrepreneurship As the Nexus of Individual and Opportunity: A Structuration View, Journal of Business Venturing, vol.21,286-305.
94. Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi R. A. J., Harrison S. J.(2001). Alliance Entrepreneurship and Firm Market Performance, Strategic Management Journal, vol.22(6-7), 701–711
95. Schroeder, M. (1990). Fractals, Chaos, Power Laws, Minites from and Infinite Paradise, New York : Freeman.
96. Scott, S. G. and Lane, V. R. (2000). A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity, Academy of Management Review, vol.25, 43-62.
97. Sine, W.D. and Lee, B.H. (2009). Tilting at Windmills? The Environmental Movement and the Emergence of the U.S. wind Energy Sector, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 54, 123-155.
98. Shane, S. (2000). Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurship Opportunities, Organization Science, vol.11 (4), 448-469.
99. Shane,S. and Venkataraman,S.(1992). The Effects of Cultural Differences on New Venture Championing Behavior. The Wharton School of The University of Pennsylvania, working paper
100. Smith, C. and Gemmill, G. (1991). Change in the Small Group: A Dissipative Structure Perspective, Human Relations, vol.44, 697-716.
101. Souder, W. E. and Jensen, S. A. (1999). Management Practices Influencing New Product Success in the USA and Scandinavia: a Cross-cultural Comparative Study, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol.16, 183–203.
102. Souder W. E., Song X. M. (1998). Analyses of U.S. and Japanese Management Processes Associated with New Product Success and Failure in High and Low Familiarity Markets, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol.15 (3), 208–223.
103. Stacey, R. D. (1996). Complexity and Creativity in Organizations, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
104. Steyaert, C. and Katz, J. (2004). Reclaiming the Space of Entrepreneurship in Society: Geographical, Discursive and Social Dimensions, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, vol.6, 179-196.
105. Struwig, F.W. and Stead, G.B. (2001). Planning, Designing and Reporting Research, Masker Miller Longman, Cape Town.
106. Swedberg, R. (2000). Entrepreneurship: the Social Science View. New York: Oxford University Press.
107. Swenson, R. (1989). Emergent Attractor and the Law of Maximum Entropy Production: Foundations to a Theory of General Evolution, Systems Research, vol.6 (3), 187-197.
108. Sykes H. B. (1993). Business research: A New Corporate Function, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 8(1):1-8
109. Sykes, H. B. and Z. Block (1989). Corporate Venturing Obstacles: Sources and Solutions. Journal of Business Venturing, vol.4(3), 159-167.
110. Thietart, R. A. and Forgues, B. (1995). Chaos Theory and Organization. Organization Science, vol.6(1), 19-31. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from Expanded Academic ASAP Plus database.
111. Tichy, N.M., Tushman, M. L. and Fombrun C. (1979). Social Network Analysis for Organizations, Academy of Management Review, vo1.4 (4), 507-519.
112. Thorelli, H.B. (1986). Networks: Between Markets and Hierarchies, Strategic Management Journal, vo1.7, 37-51.
113. Utterback, J.M., Allen, T.J., HoUomon J.H. and Sirbu M.A., Jr. (1976). The Process of Innovation in Five Industries in Europe and Japan, IEEE Transactions On Engineering Management, vol.23(1), 3.
114. Uzzi, B. and Gillespie, J. J. (2002). Knowledge Spillover in Corporate Financing Networks: Embeddedness and the firm`s Debt Performance, Strategic Management Journal, vol.23, 595-618.
115. Van de Ven, A. S., H. and Villanueva, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship Pursuits of Self- and Collective Interests, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, vol.1, 353-370.
116. Venkataraman, S. (1997). The Distinctive Domain of Entrepreneurship Research: An Editor’s Perspective, In J. Katz and R. Brockhaus (eds.), Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth, Greenwich: JAI Press.
117. Vriend, N. J. (1994). A New Perspective on Decentralized Trade, Economie Appliquee, vol.47, 5-22.
118. Wagner, Harvey E. (1991). The Open Corporation, California Management Review, vol. 33(4),46-60
119. Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. New York: Simon & Schuster.
120. Weick, K. E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing, Addison-Wesley.
121. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
122. Westhead, P., Wright M. and Ucbasaran D. (2001). The Internationalization of New and Small Firms: A Resource-based View, Journal of Business Venturing, vol.16(4), 333-358.
123. Wheatley, M. J. (1992). Leadership and the New Science: Learning about Organization from an Orderly Universe, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
124. Wheatley, M. J. and Kellner-Rogers, M. (1996). Self-organization: The Irresistible Future of Organizing, Strategy & Leadership, vol.24(4), 18-24.
125. Wiener, N. (1949).Extrapolation, Interpolation,and Smoothing of Stationary Time Series, MIT Press (Cambridge, MA).
126. Wheelwright, S. (1992). Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality, Free Press.
127. Whetten. D. A. (1982). Issues in Conducting Research, In Rogers, D. L. & Whetten, D. A., (eds.), Interorganizational Coordination: Theory, Research, and Implementation, Ames: The Iowa State University Press, 97-121.
128. White, H. C. (1992). Identity and Control. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
129. Williamson, Oliver E. (1991). Comparative Economic Organization: the Analysis of Discrete, Structural, Alternatives, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vo1.a6, 269-296.
130. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
131. Yutchman, E. & Seashore, S.E.(1967). A System Resource Approach to Organizational Effectiveness, American Sociological Review, 891-903.
中文文獻
1. 王美雅（2004），概念型創新的動態擴散過程--複雜理論觀點，國立政治大學科技管理研究所博士論文。
2. 孔恩（Kohn，T.S.），1994。科學革命的結構，程樹德、傅大為、王道還、錢永祥譯，台北：遠流出版社。
3. 吳思華（1992），產業網絡與產業經理機制之探討，第一屆產業管理研討會論文集，台北：輔仁大學管理學院，豐群基金會。
4. 吳豐祥（1997），高科技公司內部創新事業的機制之實證研究，科技管理學刊，87-108。
5. 何瑾瑜（2005），內部創業過程中創業夥伴間互動關係之探討，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
6. 呂惠茹（1996），虛擬組織型態與環境回應能耐關聯之研究，國立政治大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
7. 官志亮、林三偉（2009），組織內部創業影響因素與組織績效之關連性研究，金融創新與科際整合學術研討會論文。
8. 洪鉛財、張瑞顯（2002），知識管理模式與新事業績效關聯之研究－以集團企業多角化進入連鎖業之個案為例，管理與系統，第九卷第一期，127-144。
9. 翁明祥、司徒達賢、黃俊英 （1989），技術創新政策與事業經營策略的配合對技術創新績效之影響―台灣合成樹脂業實證研究，管理評論第八卷，123-139。
10. 唐人璠（2003），企業多角化內部創業經營策略之研究-以電信業工程部門為例，國立中山大學企業管理系研究所碩士論文。
11. 唐啟發、陳冠中（2006），台灣地區創業投資公司經營績效之研究，人文暨社會科學期刊，第二卷第二期，53-66。
12. 涂敏芬（2002），以混沌觀點探討產業與技術改變，國立清華大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
13. 高明瑞、蔡依倫（2009），鑲嵌的社會創業歷程：制度革新觀點，創業管理研究，第四卷第四期，107-134。
14. 張苙雲、譚康榮（1999），形構產業網路，網路台灣－企業的人情關係與經濟理性（張苙雲主編），台北：遠流出版公司，17-64。
15. 莊文忠（2008），績效衡量與指標設計：方法論上的討論，公共行政學報，第二十九期，61-91。
16. 陳昭霖（2004），組織特性與內部創業精神之研究，淡江大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
17. 陳家聲、吳奕慧（2007），華人創業家的心理與行為特質之初探，創業管理研究，第二卷第一期，1-30。
18. 陳朝福（2003），組織轉型研究：新科學典範的創造性演化觀點，台灣大學商學研究所未出版博士論文。
19. 陳澤義（2011），科技與創新管理，三版，華泰書局。
20. 張力（2000），關係網絡的建立構面與經理人對關係網絡認知之研究，淡江大學管理科學學系碩士論文。
21. 許士軍（2002），知識社會下的管理與領導，EMBA世界經理文摘。
22. 許育誠（1993），組織網路特性、網路型態與網路策略之關連，國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
23. 許起裕（1996），策略演化與產業生態變遷之理論探討，台灣大學國際企業研究所未出版碩士論文。
24. 黃俊潔（2003），創業投入、創業策略、創業類型與創業績效間關聯性之研究—以台灣電工器材業為例，國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
25. 黃琬淇、廖述良（2005），以系統方法發展國家環境管理指標系統架構，工業污染防治，第九十三期，101-120。
26. 熊學彥（1992），內部創業開闢事業第二春，統領雜誌。
27. 趙政岷（1999），網路合作關係之決定因素探討—以台灣出版業為例，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
28. 蔡文鈞（2005），制度性創新事業的動態浮現歷程：複雜科學觀點，國立政治大學科技管理研究所博士論文。
29. 蔡敦浩、利尚仁、林韶怡（2007），複雜性科學典範下的創業研究，創業管理研究，第二卷第一期，31-60。
30. 蔡敦浩、藍紫堂（2004），新興產業發展的複雜調適系統觀點—以台灣E-Learning產業為例，管理學報，第二十一卷第六期，715-732。
31. 劉常勇、謝如梅（2006），創業管理研究之回顧與展望：理論於模式探討，創業管理研究。
32. 謝如梅、劉常勇（2009），創新機會辨識：創業警覺能力、先前知識、資訊獲取之關聯性研究，組織與管理，第二卷第二期，77-107。
33. 劉橫智（2000），華人研發創業者之生涯研究，中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
34. 劉秉正（1994），非線性動力學與混沌基礎，台北市：徐氏基金會出版。
35. 賴士葆（1990），科技策略與新產品發展績效相關之研究，科技管理論文集，大業文教基金會，25-50。
36. 蕭志同、金必煌、邱英雄、楊千（2001），企業集團內部創業模式---以宏碁集團為例，中央警察大學「資訊、科技與社會學報」，2001 年創刊號，1-16。
37. 蘇小鳳（2009），企業主管資訊取得行為研究，國立中興大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理研究所
99359006
100 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099359006 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 900601.pdf | 15558Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 2857 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
