Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 工學院
  3. 建築與城鄉研究所
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/68257
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor陳良治(Liang-Chih Chen 陳良治)
dc.contributor.authorYou-Han Huen
dc.contributor.author胡幼函zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-17T02:15:54Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-04
dc.date.copyright2018-01-04
dc.date.issued2017
dc.date.submitted2017-10-13
dc.identifier.citation一、英文文獻
Adler, P. S. (2001). “Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism”, Organization science, 12(2): 215-234.
Al-Ani, B., Bietz, M. J., Wang, Y., Trainer, E., Koehne, B., Marczak, S., ... & Prikladnicki, R. (2013). “Globally distributed system developers: their trust expectations and processes”, In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 563-574). ACM.
Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2004). “Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation”. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1): 26.
Bergmann, W. (1992). “The problem of time in sociology: An overview of the literature on the state of theory and research on the Sociology of Time, 1900-82”. Time & Society, 1(1): 81-134.
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). “Trust, reciprocity, and social history”. Games and economic behavior, 10(1): 122-142.
Bevir, M., & Richards, D. (2009). Decentring policy networks: A theoretical agenda. Public administration, 87(1): 3-14.
Boschma, R. (2005). “Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment”. Regional Studies, 39(1): 61-74.
Boschma, R. & Frenken, K. (2010). “The spatial evolution of innovation networks: a proximity perspective”. In R. a. M. Boschma, R (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionart Economic Geography. Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.
Bowles, S. & Gintis, H. (2005). “13 Social Capital, Moral Sentiments, and Community Governance”. Moral sentiments and material interests, 379.
Briscoe, G. & Mulligan, C. (2014). “Digital Innovation: The Hackathon Phenomenon”. Retrieved from Creativeworks London Working Paper
Briscoe, G., Virani, T. E. & Dima, M. (2015). “Hackathons: Why Co-location?” Retrieved from Creativeworks London Working Paper
Broussard, M. (2015) “The Secret Lives of Hackathon Junkies— I spent three days on a bus with a bunch of hackers. Here’s what I learned.” in The Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/07/the-secret-lives-of-hackathon-junkies/397895/ (Date visited: March 2, 2017)
Brown, A. (2016). Building Code, Building Relationships (Master thesis, Indiana University). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/11842 (Date visited: June 8, 2017)
Cairncross, F. (2001). “The death of distance: How the communications revolution is changing our lives”. Harvard Business Press.
Choi, M. (2016). “Organizing Open Digital Innovation: Evidence from Hackathons”.
Coase, H. (1937). “The nature of the firm”. Economica, 4(16): 386-405.
Edland, A. & Svenson, O. (1993). “Studies and findings: Time pressure and stress” in human judgment and decision making, pp.27-40.
Eisenhardt, M. & Tabrizi, N.(1995). “Accelerating adaptive processes: Product innovation in the global computer industry”. Administrative science quarterly. Pp.84-110.
Ekinsmyth, C. (2002). “Project Organization, Embeddedness and Risk in Magazine Publishing”. Regional Studies, 36(3): 229-243.
English-Lueck, J., Darrah, C. N. & Saveri, A. (2002). “Trusting strangers: work relationships in four high-tech communities”. Information, Communication & Society, 5(1): 90-108.
Engwall, M. (1998). “The project concept (s): on the unit of analysis in the study of project management”. Kluwer Academic.
Enright, M. J. (2003). “Regional clusters: what we know and what we should know Innovation clusters and interregional competition”. Springer, pp. 99-129
Feldbrugge, K. (2015). “Making Sense of the Temporary Organization in Innovation: A Case Description”. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 194: 74-84.
Fraisse, P. (1984). Perception and estimation of time. Annual review of psychology, 35(1): 1-37.
Freeman, R. E. & Evan, W. M. (1990). “Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation”. Journal of behavioral economics, 19(4): 337-359.
Gann, M. & Salter, J. (2000). “Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems”. Research policy, 29(7): 955-972.
GitHub website (https://github.com/)
Goodman, R. A. & Goodman, L. P. (1976). “Some management issues in temporary systems: A study of professional development and manpower-the theater case”. Administrative Science Quarterly, pp.494-501.
Grabher, G. (2002a). “Cool Projects, Boring Institutions: Temporary Collaboration in Social Context”. Regional Studies, 36(3): 205-214.
Grabher, G. (2002b). “The Project Ecology of Advertising: Tasks, Talents and Teams”. Regional Studies, 36(3): 245-262.
Grabher, G. (2004a). “Learning in projects, remembering in networks? Communality, sociality, and connectivity in project ecologies”. European Urban and Regional Studies, 11(2): 103-123.
Grabher, G. (2004b). “Temporary Architectures of Learning: Knowledge Governance in Project Ecologies”. Organization Studies, 25(9):, 1491-1514.
Grabher, G., & Ibert, O. (2011). “Project Ecologies”. In The Oxford handbook of project management.
Granovetter, M. (1985). “Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness”. American journal of sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
Halinen, A., Medlin, C. J., & Törnroos, J. Å. (2012). „Time and process in business network research”. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(2): 215-223.
Heyl, B. S. (2001). “Ethnographic interviewing”. Handbook of ethnography, pp.369-383.
Hobday, M. (2000). “The project-based organization: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems”. Research Policy, 29: 22.
Iacono, C. S. & Weisband, S. (1997). “Developing trust in virtual teams”. Paper presented at the System Sciences, 1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). “Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams”. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14(4): 29-64.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., Shaw, T. R., & Staples, D. S. (2004). “Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams”. Information systems research, 15(3): 250-267.
Jones, C. & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2008). “Temporary Inter‐organizational Projects”.
Jones, G. M., Semel, B., & Le, A. (2015). “There's no rules. It's hackathon.”: Negotiating Commitment in a Context of Volatile Sociality. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 25(3): 322-345.
Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. N. (2002). “What do we know about proximity and distance in work groups? A legacy of research”. Distributed work, 1:57-80.
Klitmøller, A., & Lauring, J. (2013). “When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media richness, cultural difference and language commonality”. Journal of World Business, 48(3): 398-406.
Komssi M., P. D., Raatikainen M., Kindström K. & Järvinen J. (2015). “What are Hackathons for?”. IEEE Software, 32(5): 60-67.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1987). “Leadership Challenge: Hovf to Get Extraordinary Things Done in Organizations”.
Kramer, W. (1994). “Uncertainty reduction during job transitions: An exploratory study of the communication experiences of newcomers and transferees”. Management Communication Quarterly, 7(4), 384-412.
Lara, M., & Lockwood, K. (2016). Hackathons as Community-Based Learning: a Case Study. TechTrends, 60(5): 486.
Levy, S. (1984). Hackers: Heroes of the computer revolution (Vol. 14). Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
Lewis-Kraus, G. (2015) “Powers in Numbers—Scenes from DreamHack, where 23,000 people spend a weekend plugged in together.” in The New York Times Magazine, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/19/magazine/power-in-numbers.html?mcubz=0 (Date visited: March 11, 2017)
Lin, C.-Y. (2017). “The reputation-building process and spatial strategies of creative industries: A case study of product design firms in Taipei”. Environment and Planning A, 49(1): 186-204.
Lindkvist, L., Soderlund, J., & Tell, F. (1998). “Managing product development projects: on the significance of fountains and deadlines”. Organization Studies, 19(6): 931-951.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1999). “Virtual teams: The new way to work”. Strategy & Leadership, 27(1): 14-19.
Lundin, R. A., & Söderholm, A. (1995). “A theory of the temporary organization”. Scandinavian Journal of management, 11(4): 437-455.
Manning, S., & Sydow, J. (2011). “Projects, paths, and practices: sustaining and leveraging project-based relationships”. Industrial and corporate change, 20(5): 1369-1402.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004). “Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An interactive approach” (Vol. 41). Sage publications
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). “Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships”. Academy of Management Review, 23(3): 473-490.
Meyerson, D., Weick, E., & Kramer, M. (1996). “Swift trust and temporary groups”. Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research, pp. 166-195.
Morgan, K. (2004). “The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems”. Journal of Economic Geography, 1(4): 3-21.
Panteli, N., & Duncan, E. (2004). “Trust and temporary virtual teams: alternative explanations and dramaturgical relationships”. Information Technology & People, 17(4): 423-441.
Porter, M. E. & Clark, G. L. (2000). “Locations, clusters, and company strategy”. The Oxford handbook of economic geography, pp.253-274.
Powell, W. (2003). “Neither market nor hierarchy”. The sociology of organizations: classic, contemporary, and critical readings, 315: 104-117.
Rallet, A., & Torre, A. (1999). “Is geographical proximity necessary in the innovation networks in the era of global economy?” GeoJournal, 49(4): 373-380.
Rhodes, R. A. (1997). “Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability”. Open university press.
Rhoads, M. (2010). “Face-to-face and computer-mediated communication: What does theory tell us and what have we learned so far?” Journal of Planning Literature, 25(2), 111-122.
Robert, L. P., Denis, A. R., & Hung, Y.-T. C. (2009). “Individual swift trust and knowledge-based trust in face-to-face and virtual team members”. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(2), 241-279.
Rosell, B., Kumar, S., & Shepherd, J. (2014). “Unleashing innovation through internal hackathons”. In Innovations in Technology Conference, 2014 IEEE , pp. 1-8.
Rosenau, N. (1992). “The relocation of authority in a shrinking world”. Comparative politics, pp.253-272.
Rotter, J. B. (1967). “A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust”. Journal of personality, 35(4): 651-665.
Söderlund, J. (2000). “Temporary organizing-characteristics and control forms Projects as business constituents and guiding motives”. Springer, pp. 61-74.
Sako, M. (2006). “Does trust improve business performance”. Organizational trust: A reader, pp.267-294.
Schamp, E. W., Rentmeister, B., & Lo, V. (2004). “Dimensions of proximity in knowledge-based networks: the cases of investment banking and automobile design”. European Planning Studies, 12(5): 607-624.
Semlinger, K. (2008). “Cooperation and competition in network governance: regional networks in a globalised economy”. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 20(6): 547-560.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications.
Stack Overflow website (http://stackoverflow.com/)
Sydow, J. (1998). “Understanding the constitution of interorganizational trust”. Trust within and between organizations: Conceptual issues and empirical applications, pp.31-63.
Torre, A. (2008). “On the Role Played by Temporary Geographical Proximity in Knowledge Transmission”. Regional Studies, 42(6): 869-889.
Trainer, E. H., Kalyanasundaram, A., Chaihirunkarn, C., & Herbsleb, J. D. (2016). “How to Hackathon: Socio-technical Tradeoffs in Brief, Intensive Collocation”. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, San Francisco, California, USA.
Williamson, O. E. (1993). “Calculativeness, trust, and economic organization”. The Journal of Law and Economics, 36(1, Part 2): 453-486.
Wright, E. O. (2010). “Envisioning real utopias” (Vol. 98): Verso London.
Zeller, C. (2002). “Project teams as means of restructuring research and development in the pharmaceutical industry”. Regional studies, 36(3): 275-289.

二、中文文獻
吳玉雯(2009)〈Open Hack Day 在地、社群應用火熱〉。取用日期: 2016年11月2日(http://www.runpc.com.tw/news.aspx?id=100415)
吳瓊恩(2002)〈公共行政學發展趨勢的探究: 三種治理模式的互補關係及其政治理論基礎。《公共行政學報》7: 173-220。
林姿葶、鄭伯壎(2013)〈組織中的時間與時間觀: 回顧與展望〉。《本土心理學研究》40: 143-195。
俞可平(2000)《治理和善治》。北京: 社會科學文獻出版社。
洪士灝(2015)〈洪士灝:從自造者、黑客松談以社群合作發展知識經濟〉。取用日期: 2016年10月21日(http://www.bnext.com.tw/column/view/id/35823)
活動通(ACCUPASS)網站。取用日期:2016年11月30日(https://www.accupass.com/?city=all)
科技新報(2015)〈推動科技創新,台大舉辦千人國際黑客松〉。取用日期: 2016年11月2日 (http://technews.tw/2015/08/14/ntu-2015-hackntu/)
張容瑛、周志龍 (2006)〈音樂產業全球化,流動著床與生產模式的重塑—台灣流行音樂產業為例〉。《台灣土地研究》9(1): 33-61。
張凱迪(2015) 〈臺大黑客松之後的省思:黑客松本質不是比賽,更不是創業競賽〉。取用日期: 2016年10月22日 (http://www.meetclub.tw/article/view/id/36267)
莊正民、方世杰(2013)〈「組織內與組織間治理」 的本質與策略意涵〉。《臺大管理論叢》23(S1): 1-24。
陳東升(2012)〈社群治理與社會創新〉。《臺灣社會學刊》49: 1-40。
陳金貴(2013)〈治理之理論與發展〉。《公共治理季刊》1(1): 25-36。
彭盛韶(2016) 〈公私協力,台灣黑客改造政府〉。取用日期: 2016年10月22日(https://theinitium.com/article/20160602-opinion-g0v1/)
彭漣漪(2007)〈Yahoo!軟體開發 開放網友參與〉,《知識贏家》。取用日期: 2017年07月30日
智慧城市黑客松活動網頁。取用日期:2016年11月30日 (http://smartcity.org.tw/hackathon/)
硬塞的網路趨勢觀察(2016)〈300萬獎助金!g0v 零時政府徵求公民科技創新專案〉,取用日期: 2017/04/02 (https://www.inside.com.tw/2016/12/20/g0v-3-million-project)
程晏鈴(2015)〈黑客松精神讓創新種子發光〉,《天下雜誌》,第580期,9月。取用日期: 2017年01月05日
馮靖惠(2015) 〈亞洲最大黑客松競賽 台大獲亞軍〉,《聯合報》。取用日期:2016年10月21日 (https://udn.com/news/story/6928/1140249)
黃厚銘(2001)《虛擬社區中的身份認同與信任》(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣大學社會學研究所博士論文。
黑客松台灣(Hackathon Taiwan)官方網站。取用日期:2016年06月26日、2017年04月02日 (https://hackathon.tw/)
黑客松台灣(Hackathon Taiwan)臉書粉絲專頁。取用日期:2016年06月26日 (https://www.facebook.com/HackathonTaiwan/?fref=ts)
楊友仁、夏鑄九(2003)〈跨界生產網絡的在地化聚集與組織治理模式: 以大蘇州地區資訊電子業臺商為例〉。《地理科學學報》36: 23-54。
零時政府(g0v)官方網站。取用日期:2016年11月26日 (http://g0v.tw/zh-TW/index.html)
零時政府(g0v)臉書粉絲專頁:https://www.facebook.com/g0v.tw/?fref=ts
臺大黑客松(HackNTU)官方網站。取用日期:2016年09月19日 (https://major2016.hackntu.org/)
臺大黑客松(HackNTU)臉書粉絲專頁。取用日期:2016年09月19日、2017年07月05 (https://www.facebook.com/hackNTU/?fref=ts)
劉坤億(2002) 〈地方政府治理機制的創新挑戰: 市場治理模式的功能與限制〉。《法政學報》15: 79-113。
劉哲榮(2002) 《知識經濟時代的治理模式: 科層, 市場與社群模式功能之研究》。國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
蔡秀涓(2006)〈虛幻或實存? 組織信任概念與影響原因回顧暨展望〉。
國立政治大學公共行政學系,《公共行政學報》 21: 163-178。
鄧凱元(2013)〈駭客鄉民用程式碼「拆」政府〉,《天下雜誌》,第538期,3月。取用日期: 2016年11月27日 (http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5054859)
鄭作彧(2013)〈時間生態學: 時間社會學的新研究概念建立之嘗試〉。《臺灣社會學刊》52: 31-78。
謝佩璇、吳虹霓(2015) 〈專案團隊隱性知識管理之績效評估〉。《商略學報》7(4): 267-280。
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/68257-
dc.description.abstract在數位時代知識資訊的交流下,發展出由實體空間與虛擬空間所交織出的創新地景,本研究尤其在探討個人或是專案團隊(project team)在實體及虛擬空間中不同的創新活動,以及影響其創新過程與治理機制。以數位經濟下的創新活動—黑客松(Hackathon)作為經驗研究對象,活動強調聚集不同專業領域的行動者在一個實體空間,透過不同的專案團隊進行短期且密集的合作與互動,以開發出解決當前產業技術或是社會問題的創新方案。

遂此,本研究欲探討暫時性專案型組織的運作模式與治理機制,其如何在有限的時間內回應高度不穩定、快速變動的環境,同時又能建立合作信任關係、促使創新想法的產生。當專案團隊成員間的技術依賴關係是組織內部運作動能時,組織信任(trust)關係則是增強組織強度的關鍵因素。透過研究分析不同類型的專案團隊的運作模式,發現專業背景與熟悉程度影響組織信任的建立,而在這個過程,專案團隊外部因素(主辦方和贊助方)同時影響暫時性專案組織的治理機制。
黑客松活動場域是形成關係空間和行動者網絡的重要因素,特別是探討虛擬空間(virtual space)與實體空間是如何影響專案團隊的治理機制。研究發現專案運作過程中實體空間與虛擬空間交互使用,可以加速專案的運作效率外,也可以使專案組織在特定的專案階段,以更快速的方式建立成員間的信任關係。暫時性組織也體現了時間的重要性,專案團隊成員透過建立組織的時間常模(timing norms)進行組織內部的運作與安排,作為專案團隊的治理機制。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractIn this digital era, the exchange of information and knowledge fueled an innovative and ground-breaking horizon comprised of physical and virtual spaces. This research focuses on the innovation activities conducted by different organizations that occur in both physical and virtual spaces, and how their innovation progress and governance mechanisms are influenced by the activities. It targets Hackathon, a sprint-like event in which computer programmers and professionals from different fields collaborate intensively as a project team, so as to solve social issues and industrial technology obstacles.
Therefore, this thesis will discuss about the operational patterns and the governance mechanisms of temporary organizations. How these organizations build trust and collaborative relationships in an environment defined by uncertainty and instability in order to create innovation ideas within limited timeframe. When the organizational momentum is based on members’ dependency on each other’s technical knowledge, “trust” becomes a critical factor in strengthening the relationship internally. Through investigation on various types of project teams, it is found that the professional backgrounds and level of familiarity between members are two main factors of trust building. Furthermore, external factors such as event organizers and sponsors also play important roles in forming governance mechanisms of project-based organizations.
The field of Hackathon event is also an important factor of forming a relational space and actor networks, especially when reviewing how virtual and physical spaces could affect the governance mechanisms of project-based organizations. The result of this research shows that when working space alternates between physical and virtual,, not only the efficacy of productivity increases, and the speed of trust-building also raises in specific project stage. Consequently, temporary organizations reflect the importance of time. Through building timing norms in temporary organizations, members manage and operate the organization, which forms the governance mechanisms within the organization.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T02:15:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ntu-106-R02544005-1.pdf: 6160936 bytes, checksum: b854bb72c61384542bbb0d822b07f6fe (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2017
en
dc.description.tableofcontents口試委員會審定書 ........................................ ⅰ
謝誌 .................................................... ⅱ
中文摘要 ............................................... ⅲ
ABSTRACT (英文摘要) . ................................ ⅳ
第一章 緒 論 .......................................... 1
第一節 研究動機 ............................................... 1
第二節 研究發問及研究內容 ..................................... 3
第三節 文獻回顧 ............................................... 5
第四節 研究設計與方法 ........................................ 20
第二章 黑客松發展與介紹 ................................ 27
第一節 黑客松的發展脈絡 ...................................... 27
第二節 活動的特質與流程 ...................................... 29
第三節 台灣黑客松的發展 ...................................... 31
第三章 黑客松專案團隊形成與運作機制 .................... 34
第一節 專案團隊的形成 ........................................ 34
第二節 形成專案團隊的治理活動 ................................ 37
第三節 時間對於專案團隊治理機制的影響 ........................ 49
第四節 小結 .................................................. 52
第四章 專案團隊運作與信任建立 .......................... 54
第一節 專案團隊在組隊活動中的信任議題 ........................ 54
第二節 專案團隊在專案執行中的信任議題 ........................ 59
第三節 小結 .................................................. 63
第五章 虛實空間與專案團隊間的治理關係 .................. 65
第一節 虛擬空間與專案團隊間的治理機制 ........................ 65
第二節 實體空間與專案團隊間的治理機制 ........................ 69
第三節 虛實空間交互使用與專案團隊間的治理機制 ................ 74
第四節 小結 .................................................. 75
第六章 綜合討論與未來研究建議 .......................... 76
第一節 研究結論 .............................................. 76
第二節 理論意涵 .............................................. 79
第三節 未來研究建議 .......................................... 81
參考文獻 ............................................... 82
英文文獻 ...................................................... 82
中文文獻 ...................................................... 88
附錄 ................................................... 91
附錄一 黑客松初步訪談大綱 .................................... 91
附錄二 黑客松細步訪談大綱 .................................... 95
dc.language.isozh-TW
dc.subject虛實空間zh_TW
dc.subject時間zh_TW
dc.subject信任zh_TW
dc.subject治理機制zh_TW
dc.subject暫時性專案型組織zh_TW
dc.subject黑客松zh_TW
dc.subjectTemporary Organizationsen
dc.subjectTimeen
dc.subjectTrusten
dc.subjectGovernance Mechanismen
dc.subjectHackathonen
dc.subjectVirtual and Physical Spaceen
dc.title暫時性專案型組織的治理機制—以臺灣黑客松活動為例zh_TW
dc.titleExamining Governance Mechanisms of Temporary Organizations:
The Case of Hackathon Events in Taiwan
en
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear106-1
dc.description.degree碩士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee林政逸(Cheng-Yi Lin 林政逸),廖世偉(Shih-Wei Liao 廖世偉)
dc.subject.keyword黑客松,暫時性專案型組織,虛實空間,治理機制,信任,時間,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordHackathon,Temporary Organizations,Virtual and Physical Space,Governance Mechanism,Trust,Time,en
dc.relation.page100
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU201703360
dc.rights.note有償授權
dc.date.accepted2017-10-13
dc.contributor.author-college工學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept建築與城鄉研究所zh_TW
顯示於系所單位:建築與城鄉研究所

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-106-1.pdf
  未授權公開取用
6.02 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


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。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved