請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45463
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 陳忠仁,郭瑞祥 | |
dc.contributor.author | Keng-Chuan Tsai | en |
dc.contributor.author | 蔡耿全 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T04:21:33Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2011-01-21 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2010-01-21 | |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2009-10-18 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social Cpaital: Prosects for A New Concept. Academy of Management Review , 27 (1), pp. 17-40.
2. Afuah, A. N., & Bahram, N. (1995). The hypercube of innovation. Research Policy , 24, pp. 51-76. 3. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: a longitudinal study. Adminstration Science Quarterly , 45, pp. 425-455. 4. Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 5. Alter, C., & Hage, J. (1993). Organizations Working Together. London: Sage Publications. 6. Andersson, M., & Karlsson, C. (2004). The Role of Accessibility for the Performance of Regional Innovation Systems. In C. Karlsson, P. Flensburg, & S. A. Hörte, Knowledge Spillovers and Knowledge Management. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 7. Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 82 (1), pp. 150-169. 8. Arthur, A., & APQC. (1996). The Knowledge Management Assessment Tool: External Benchmarking Version. Winter. 9. Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 72, pp. 441-462. 10. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectaions. New York: Free Press. 11. Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military, and educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 12. Beckman, C., & Haunschild, P. (2002). Network Learning: The Effects of Partner's Heterogeneity of Experience on Corporate Acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly . 13. Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review , 28 (2), pp. 238-256. 14. Bock, G. W., & Kim, Y. G. (2002). Breaking the myths of rewards: An exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resource Management Journal , 15 (2), pp. 14-21. 15. Brockhoff, K. (2003). Customers’ perspectives of involvement in new product development. International Journal of Technology Management , 26 (5/6), pp. 464-481. 16. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Oraanization Science , 2 (1), pp. 40-57. 17. Burgelman, R. A. (2002). Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in. Administrative Science Quarterly , 47, pp. 325-357. 18. Burn, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. 19. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 20. Calder, B. J., & Staw, B. M. (1975). The self-perception of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 31, pp. 599-605. 21. Campbell, J. Y. (1996). Understanding Risk and Return. The Journal ofPolitical Economy , 104 (2), pp. 298-345. 22. Chendler, A. D. (1990). Scale and Scope. Cambridge,MA : Belknap. 23. Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation, the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Havard Business School Press. 24. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adminstrative Science Quarterly , 35, pp. 128-152. 25. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology , 94, pp. 95-120. 26. Conant, J. (2002). Tuxedo Park. New York: Simon & Schuster. 27. DeGeus, A. (1988). Planning as learning. Havard Business Review , 66 (2), pp. 70-74. 28. Durbin, A. J. (1998). Leadership: Research Finding, Practice, and Skill. Houghton Mifflin Company. 29. Edquist, C. (2005). System of Innovation. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson, The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 181-208). Oxford New York: Oxford University Press. 30. Edquist, C., & Johnson, B. (1997). Institutions and Organisations in SYstems of Innovaiton. In C. Edquist, System of Innovaiton: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations (pp. 41-63). London: Pinter. 31. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review , 14 (4), pp. 532-550. 32. Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology , 2, pp. 335-362. 33. Enkel, E., Kausch, C., & Gassmann, O. (2005). Managing the risk of customer integration. European Management Journal , 23, pp. 203-213. 34. Fagerberg, J. (2005). Innovation - A Guide To The Literature. New York: Oxford University Press. 35. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nels, R. R. (2005). The Oxford handbook of innovation. New York : Oxford University Press. 36. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 37. Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The Economics of Industrial Innovation (Third Edition ed.). London: Creative Print and Design. 38. Gassmann, O. (2006). Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management , 36 (3), pp. 223-228. 39. Granovetter, M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology , 78, pp. 1360-1380. 40. Granstrand, O., Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Multi-Technology Corporations: Why they have 'Distributed' Rather than 'Distinctive Core' Competencies'. California Management Review , 39 (4), pp. 8-25. 41. Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal , 20 (5), pp. 397-420. 42. Gupta, A. K., & Smith, K. G. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal , 49 (4), pp. 693-706. 43. Hagedoorn, J. (1993). Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizatinoal modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal , 14 (5), pp. 371-385. 44. Hägerstrand, T. (1970). What about people in regional science? Regional Science Association Papers , pp. 7-21. 45. Hagg, I., & Johanson, J. Firms in Network: A New View of Competitive Power. Stockholm: Business and Social Research Institute. 46. Hardy, C., Phillips, E., & Phillips, T. B. (2003). Resources, knowledge and influence: The organizational effects of interorganizational collaboration. Journal of Management Studies , 40 (2), pp. 321-347. 47. Harrison, J. S. (2003). Strategic Management of Resources & Relationships. John Wiley & Sons,Inc. 48. Hensler, D. A., & Faizul, H. (2005). Value creation: knowledge flow, direction, and adaptation. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital , 2 (3), pp. 278-287. 49. Hirsch, P. M., & Levin, D. Z. (1999). Umbrella advocates versus validity police: A life-cycle model. Organization Science , 10, pp. 199-212. 50. Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2001). Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization. South-Western College Publishing. 51. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social Behavior as Exchange. American Journal of Sociology , 63 (6), pp. 597-606. 52. Kogut, B. (1988). Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management Journal , 9 (4), pp. 319-332. 53. Kuhn, T. S. (1987). What are scientific revolutions? In L. Kruger, L. J. Daston, & M. Heidelberger, The probabilistic revolution (Vol. 1, pp. 7-22). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 54. Kumar, K., & van Dissel, H. G. (1996). Sustainable collaboration: Managing conflict and cooperation in interorganizational systems. MIS Quarterly , 20 (3), pp. 279-300. 55. Lawson, C., & Lorenz, E. (1999). Collective Learning, Tacit Knowledge and Regional Innovative Capacity. Regional Studies , 33 (4), pp. 305-317. 56. Lazonick, W. (2005). The Innovative Firm. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson, The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 29-55). New York: Oxford University Press. 57. Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 58. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Learning , 14, pp. 95-112. 59. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science , 2 (1), pp. 71-87. 60. Molm, L. D. (2000). Theories of social exchange and exchange networks. In G. R. (Eds.), Handbook of social theory (pp. 260-272). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 61. Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2005). Global Brain. New Jersey: Wharton School Publishing. 62. Nelson, R. (1991). Why Do Firms Differ, and HoDoes It Matter. Strategic Management Journal , Special issue, pp. 61-74. 63. Osterloh, M., & Frey, B. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms. Organization Science , 11 (5), pp. 538-550. 64. O'Sullivan, M. (2000). Contests for Corporate Control: Corporate Governance and Economic Performance in the United States and Germany. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 65. Pavitt, K. (2005). Innovation Process. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson, The Oxford Handbook Of Innovation (pp. 86-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 66. Porter, M., & Stern, S. (2001). Innovation: Location matters. Sloan Management Review , 42 (4), pp. 28-43. 67. Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review , 68 (3), pp. 275-292. 68. Robey, D., & Sales, C. A. (1994). Designing Organizations. Homewood: Richard Irwin. 69. Rosenberg, N. (1994). Exploring the Black Box: Technology, Economics, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 70. Rothwell, R., Freeman, C., Horsley, A., Jervis, V., Robertson, A., & Townsend, J. (1974). SAPPHO Updated-Project SAPPHO Phase Ⅱ. Research Policy , 3 (3), pp. 258-291. 71. Rothwell, R. (1994). Toward the fifth-generation Innovation Process. International Marketing Review , 11 (1), pp. 7-31. 72. Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant Governance Structure: An analysis of structural and relational embeddeness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal , 21, pp. 369-389. 73. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, Mass.: Havard University Press. 74. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper and Row. 75. Simonin, B. L. (2004). An empirical investigation of the process of knowledge transfer in international strategic alliances. Journal of International Business Studies , 35, pp. 407–427. 76. Solow, R. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics , 39, pp. 312-320. 77. Spek, V. D., & Spijkervert, A. (1997). Knowledge Management: Dealing Intelligently with Knowledge. In J. Liebowitz, & L. Wilcox, Knowledge Management And Its Integrative Elements. New York: CRC Press. 78. Surowiecki, J. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations. New York: Doubleday. 79. Szulanski, G. (1996). ExploringInternal Stickiness: Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice Within the Firm. Strategic Management Journal , 17(Winter Special Issue), pp. 27-43. 80. Teece, D. J. (1985). Profiting from technology innovation: Implications for inetegration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy , 15 (6), pp. 285-305. 81. Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California management review , 22 (2), pp. 8-30. 82. Utterback, J. M., & Abernathy, W. J. (1975). A dynamic model of process and product innovaiton. Omega , 3 (6), pp. 639-656. 83. Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizaitons: The network effects. Ammerican Sociological Review , 61, pp. 674-698. 84. Van de Ven, A., Polley, D. E., Garud, R., & Venkataraman, S. (1999). The Innovaiton Journey. New York: Oxford University Press. 85. Very, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic Leadership And Organizational Learning. Academy of Management Review , 29 (2), pp. 222-240. 86. von Hipple, E. (1976). The Dominant Role of Users in the Scientific Instrument Innovation Process. Research Policy , 5 (3), pp. 212-239. 87. von Hippel, E. (1988). The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. 88. von Hipple, E. (2005). Democratizing Innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge,MA. 89. Weibull, J. (1980). On the Numerical Measurement of Accessibility. Environmental Planning A, , 12, pp. 53-67. 90. Zolo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science , 13 (3), pp. 339-351. 91. Zook, C., & Allen, J. (2001). Profit from the core: growth strategy in an era of turbulence. Cambrodge, Mass: Harvard Business Press. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45463 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 隨著資訊網路技術的發展,產業環境的變遷速度越來越快,企業已無法完全自內部取得持續創新所需的所有資源,因此,開放式創新的概念成了下一世代創新的新趨勢。然而,開放式創新在和過去創新理論的結合和實際應用上仍缺乏有系統的研究。本研究奠基在組織學習理論和社會資本理論,提出一個開放式創新的分類架構,以知識範疇和互動模式為兩軸將開放式創新分成四種類型:拼圖式創新、生態體系創新、觸酶式創新和選秀式創新,並探討這四種不同創新模式在創始者能耐、創新本質、互動本質和參與者型態等構面中的異同。
創使者能耐提出了實行開放式創新所要具備的能力組合,而互動本質則利用社會網絡分析方法,以簡捷的圖示展現出不同種類開放式創新中的領導基礎和網絡結構,參與者型態則探討參與者的動機、角色和理想的數量。另外,本研究亦導入包括P&G、Google、IBM和NTT DoCoMo等著名案例,透過對個案的深入分析,提供實務業如何成功實行開放式創新的最佳典範。 研究結果發現:在不同的開放式創新類型中,成功的開放式創新創使者都擁有特殊且關鍵的核心能耐,搭配適合的社會網絡架構和選擇適當的參與者。本研究主要的貢獻在於導入組織學習和社會資本的觀點,豐富開放式創新概念的理論基礎,並提供一套完整的架構,提供實務界一個執行開放式創新的指導方針。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Nowadays, firms are impossible to acquire sufficient resources internally to keep continuing innovation due to the fast-changing industrial environment. The concept of open innovation has become the trend of next generation innovation. Nevertheless, there are few systematic studies aimed at researching the connection with previous innovation theories and practical applications. The study is based on organizational learning and social capital theory and aimed at providing a framework of the classification of open innovation, categorizing open innovation into four types and discussing the parallel and different parts in the constructs of initiator’s competency, innovation attribution, interaction essences, and participant type respectively.
This research also illustrates the social structure in each type with simple and clear diagrams based on social network analysis. Moreover, several typical cases will be introduced and discussed, including P&G, Google, IBM, and NTT DoCoMo. Through sophisticated analyses, we hope we could present the best practice to explain how firms could implement open innovation successfully. The study points out that in different types of open innovation, the successful innovators have the traits of key core competency, matching appropriate social network structure, and choosing proper participants. The critical contribute of the study is to bring in the viewpoint of organizational learning and social capital, enriching the theoretical basis of open innovation and providing a well-defined framework which is also a guideline to carry out open innovation. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T04:21:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-98-R96741022-1.pdf: 695030 bytes, checksum: 7f7566a8a9430dabeb35c593c09047e3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝詞 I
中文摘要 II ABSTRACT III TABLE OF CONTENT IV LIST OF TABLES V LIST OF FIGURES VI CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background and Research Purposes 1 1.2 Research Procedure 3 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 4 2.1 Open Innovation 4 2.1.1 Open Innovation Evolution 4 2.1.2 Open Innovation Taxonomy 8 2.2 Related Theories 14 2.2.1 Organizational Learning 14 2.2.2 Social Capital 20 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS 25 3.1 Methodology 25 3.2 Open Innovation Typology 27 3.3 Constructs and Dimensions 33 3.4 Study Case Profiles 39 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS 45 4.1 Jigsaw Puzzle Model-Google Earth 45 4.2 Runway Model-P&G C+D 51 4.3 Enzyme Model-IBM Innovation JAM 56 4.4 Ecosystem Model-NTT DoCoMo i-Mode 61 4.5 Summary 66 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION 71 5.1 Research Conclusions 71 5.2 Managerial Implications and Research Contributions 72 5.3 Research Limitations and Future Research 73 REFERENCES 75 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 開放式創新類型與分析-組織學習與社會資本觀點 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Open Innovation Typology and Analysis – Organizational Learning and Social Capital Perspective | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 98-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃怡芬,白?芸 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 開放式創新,組織學習,社會資本,社會交換,社會網絡分析, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Open Innovation,Organizational Learning,Social Capital,Social Exchange theory,Social Network Analysis, | en |
dc.relation.page | 84 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2009-10-19 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 商學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-98-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 678.74 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。