1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Social Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 組織中智慧資本衡量指標之研究－以財團法人工業技術研究院為例
The Measurement of the Intellectual Capital for Public Sectors: A Case Study of the Industrial Technology Research Institute.
作者 林信春
貢獻者 吳瓊恩
林信春
關鍵詞 智慧資本
德菲法
價值流量管控系統
核心價值主軸
衡量指標
日期 2009
上傳時間 9-May-2016 15:44:03 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究採用修正型德菲法研究方式，以財團法人工業技術研究院個案分析，及透過專家學者深度訪談及問卷調查結果，交叉驗證公設研究組織工研院，運用各類管理科學作為，企圖創造我國技術產業升級的價值優勢所在，同時在複雜的管理科學中，本研究更整理出一套系統，讓管理者優先找出組織的核心價值主軸，據此從價值導向的一連串的策略監控管理模式中，呈現所對應的組織智慧資本衡量指標所在。按此；運用系統化的內部組織結構重組，建構組織核心價值與相對應的智慧資本衡量指標，藉以監控管理模式，在組織中智慧資本相互作用下，讓組織的績效，得以透過價值提昇帶動突破的契機。本研究結果進一步在公務組織的行政績效考核政策上或可提供些許參考。
      智慧資本分類上，主要區分為人力資本、結構資本及社會資本三種，而策略創新是為改造組織價值的動能所在；在本研究案工研院的組織特性使然，讓創新能量明顯帶動組織的價值並成為主軸，是以創新資本從結構資本中強勢獨立，相對的流程結構資本反成弱勢。另從本研究案建立的組織價值流量管控系統實證模型下，交差驗證深度訪談、問卷調查及個案分析的結果顯示：一、工研院的智慧資本透過長期形成價值優勢來展現，在組織特性運作下，知識技術的策略創新，帶動智慧資本衡量指標的價值強度走向。二、在系統運作路徑上，工研院首先掌握組織的核心價值主軸，透過價值鏈集中於計畫的達成，蘊涵豐盛的創新資本與人力資本，並建立良好的社會資本。三、工研院的各類管理科學，朝向計畫目標IP與產業效益的價值追求，並建立起一套內部智慧資本管控組織價值的運轉模式，其中存在著以創新帶動的動能含量。四、研究工研院建立起4大類共30組的智慧資本衡量指標，透過其各類管理科學運作模式下，篩選各衡量指標價值定義，可明確的帶動組織對產業的成效展現，若能應用來帶動策略創新的目標方向，應可營造更具體的技術產業價值。
     知識是組織的核心本質，公務組織利用知識創新螺旋轉換模式，反饋遞迴來自各方的資訊，以營造更具社會價值成效的實績為目標，進行行政作業精簡革新，類此政策上的應用與創新，會是未來考核公務組織行政績效的最佳模式。
     關鍵字：德菲法、智慧資本、衡量指標、價值流量管控系統、核心價值主軸
This study uses the amendment-based Delphi method to approach to the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) case studies, and through depth interviews and survey results of experts and scholars, cross-validation of public research organization based the ITRI, the use of various types of management science as an attempt to create a the value of Taiwan`s technology industries, the advantages of upgrading, while in the complex management science, the study also put together a system that allows managers to previously identify the organization`s core values of the axis, whereby a series of value-oriented strategy for monitoring and management model, the present organization of the corresponding measure of intellectual capital is located. Here, using a systematic reorganization of the internal organizational structure, building the organization`s core values and the corresponding measure of intellectual capital in order to monitor the management model of intellectual capital in the interaction of organization, so that the performance of the organization was able to drive the value enhancement breakthrough opportunities. The results of this study public policy of the organization`s administrative performance appraisal can further provide a little information.
     Intellectual capital is divided into human capital, structural capital and social capital, while the strategy of innovation is the value of the kinetic energy for the transformation of the organization; in the case of this study, the institute`s organizational characteristics dictates, so that creative energy is driving significant value to the organization and become spindle. Innovation capital is strong independent from the structural capital; however, the relative process structural capital becomes a weak process. Another case from this study to establish the organization of the value of an empirical model traffic management and control system, the cross validation-depth interviews, questionnaires and case analysis showed as followings: First, the institute`s intellectual capital through the formation of the value of long-term advantage to present, in the operation of organizational characteristics under the strategy of knowledge and technology innovation, promote the value of intellectual capital measurement indicators into intensity. Second, the operation in the system path, the ITRI acquired the organization`s core values of axis, through the value chain and the program to reach. A rich implication of innovation capital and human capital established a good social capital. Third, all kinds of management science of the ITRI toward the pursuit of value of IP and industrial benefits plans, and establish the operation mode of organizational values under internal intellectual capital controls, in which there is innovation-driven kinetic energy content. Fourth, to research ITRI setting up a total of 30 group of four broad categories of intellectual capital measurement indicators, through its mode of operation of various types of management science, the selection of indicators to measure the value of the various indicators, is clearly driven by the organization to show the effectiveness of the industries. If these indicators can be applied to boost the strategic direction of the objectives of innovation, the ITRI should be able to create a more specific technical industrial value.
     Knowledge is the organization`s core essence of innovation. Public service organizations use the knowledge conversion spiral model of recursive feedback of information from all sides so as to create a more effective performance of the social value of the objective of streamlining administrative operations innovation, this kind of policy application and innovation and public service organizations, will be assessing the future performance of the best mode of administration.
     Keywords: Delphi method, intellectual capital, measurement indicators, the value of traffic management and control system, the core values of axis
參考文獻 一、中文書目：
     吳 定 (2005)，公共政策辭典，台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司，頁139.
     吳安妮 (2002)，剖析智慧資本，會計研究月刊，204期，頁64。
     － (2002)，平衡計分卡之精髄、範疇及整合（上），會計研究月刊，211期，頁45-54。
     － (2004)，平衡計分卡之重點發展方向，會計研究月刊，224期，頁99。
     吳思華 (2000)，網際網路智慧資本衡量與發展措施研究計畫，資策會資訊市場情報中心。
     － (2001、2002)，我國產業智慧資本先導性個案研究計畫，財團法人資訊工業策進會。
     吳瓊恩 (2006)，行政學(三版)，台北：三民書局股份有限公司，頁573-606.
     李芳齡譯，Marc, J. E., “ Making Sustainability Work.” (2007)，台北：三民書局股份有限公司，頁43-54.
     林良陽 (2002)，衡量研發機構智慧資本之研究：以工研院光電所為例，政大企業管理研究所碩士論文。
     － (2007)，智慧資本與動態能耐對硏發團隊創新績效的影響，政大科技管理研究所博士論文。
     林東清 (2007)，知識管理再版，台北：智勝文化事業有限公司。
     邱奕仁、楊世偉譯，Turban, E., D. Leidner, E. Mclean, and J.Wetherbe著 (2004)，資訊科技與管理，台北：雙葉書廊有限公司，頁508-536.
     高子梅、何霖譯，Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton 著（2006），策略校準，台北：臉譜出版：城邦文化事業股份有限公司。
     唐錦超譯，Everett M. Rogers 著 (2006)，創新的擴散，台北：遠流出版事業股份有限公司。
     陳正平、朱道凱、張淑芳、劉麗真、高子梅等譯，Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton 著 (2004)，策略地圖，台北：臉譜出版：城邦文化事業股份有限公司。
     陳澤義、陳啟斌 (2009)，企業診斷與績效評估-平衡計分卡之運用（二版）, 台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司，頁.113-120.
     黃良志、黃家齊、溫金豐、廖文智、韓志翔 (2007)，人力資源管理理論與實務，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
     黃家齊 (2002)，人力資源管理系統與組織績效-智慧資本觀點，管理學報，19卷3期，頁415-450。
     孫本初 (2002)，「組織管理新議題—智慧資本」，收錄於知識經濟與智慧資本學術研討會研討會論文集。
     － (2005)，公共管理，台北：智勝文化事業股份有限公司。
     莫永榮 (2005)，公務部門建構智慧資本之研究-加拿大政府實徵案例之分析，台北：國立台北大學公共行政暨政策學系博士論文。
     張吉成、周談輝、黃文雄 (2002)，組織知識創新-企業與學校贏的策略，台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
     程家雄 (2004)，衡量科技研發單位智慧資本之研究：以中山科學研究院為例，國防大資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
     廖建容、楊美齡、周宜芳譯，Gary Hamel著 (2007)， The future of management，台北：天下遠見出版股份有限公司。
     劉江彬、黃俊英 (2004)，智慧財產管理總論，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
     謝智謀、林維君譯；Hinton Perry 著 (2000)，統計學，台北市：弘智文化。
     簡禎富 (2007)，決策分析與管理，台北：雙葉書廊有限公司，頁229-242。
     ARC遠擎管理顧問公司策略績效事業部譯 (2009)；Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton 著 (2001)，The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in New Business Environment，台北：臉譜出版：城邦文化事業股份有限公司。
     國立政治大學商學院台灣智慧資本研究中心、財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心 (2006)，智慧資本管理，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
     二、英文書目：
     Aboody, D. and B. Lev (2000), “Information Asymmetry, R&D, and Insider gains, ” Journal of Finance, 6, pp. 2747-2766。
     Albert, A. A. and F. Dieter (2003), “The Intellectual Capital Web: A Systematic Linking Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), p.41。
     Bassi, L. J. and M. E. Van Buren (1999), “Valuing Investment in Intellectual Capital,” International Journal Technology Management, 18（5,6,7,8）, pp.414-432.
     Bontis, N. (1999), “Managing Organizational Knowledge by Diagnosing Intellectual Capital：Framing and Advancing the State of the Field,” International Journal of Technology Management, 18 (5), pp.433-462.
     Bukh, P. N., H. T. Larsen, and J. Mouritsen (2001), “Contructing Intellectual Capital Statement,” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17, pp.87-108.
     Chen, J., Z. Zhu, and H.Y. Xie (2004), “Measuring Intellectual Capital: A new Model and Empirical Study,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (1), pp.195-212.
     Chen, S. and C. J. Choi (2004), “Creating a knowledge-based city: The example 0f Hsinchu Science Park, ”Journal of Knowledge Management, 8 (5), pp.73-82.
     Couper, M. R. (1984), “The Delphi Technique: A Tool for Collecting Opinions in Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), pp.417-25.
     Drucker, P. (1993), “Post-Capitalist Society,” Harper Collins.
     Edvinsson, L. and M. S. Malone (1997), “Intellectual Capital Realizing Your Company True Value by Finding its Hidden Roots,” Harper Collins, pp.43-68.
     Goodman, C.M. (1987), “The Delphi Technique: A Critique,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, 12 (6), pp.729-734.
     Green, B., M. Jones, D. Hughes, and A. Williams (1999), “Applying the Delphi Technique in a Study of GPs’ (general practitioner’s) Information Requirements,” Health and Social Care in the Community, 7 (3), pp.198-205.
     Hafeez, Khalid, YanBing Zhang, and Naila Malak（2002）,“Core Competence for Sustainable Competitive Advantage: A Structured Methodology for Identifying Core Competence, ” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49 (1), pp.28-35.
     Holden, M. C. and J. F. Wedman (1993), “Future Issues of Computer-mediated Communication: The results of a Delphi study,” Educational Technology Research and Development, 4 (1), pp.5-24.
     Hurwitz, J. (2002), “The Linkage between Management Practices, Intangible Performances and Stock Returns,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3 (1), pp.51-61.
     Jeffery, A. Mello (2006), “Strategic Human Resource Management Thomson, ” South-Western, p.165.
     Jao, I. W. (1996), “The Determinants of Enter-partner Learning in Cross-border Contract Manufacturing Alliance-A Study of Taiwanese IT Firms,” Unpublished Dissertation, London Business School, 1996.
     Jones, H. and B.C. Twiss (1978), “Forecasting Technology for Planning Decision,” New York: Petrocelli Books.
     Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2004), “Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes,” Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
     Lepak, D. P. and S. A. Snell (1999), “The Human Resource Architecture：Toward Theory of Human Capital Allocation and Development,” Academy of Management Review, 24(1), pp.31-48。
     Lin, Y. Y. (2003), “Progression and Maximization of Intellectual Capital：Organization Development Perspective,” 2003 International Forum on Intellectual Capital in Taiwan, pp.D1-1-D1-15。
     Manfred, B. and K. H. Leitner (2002), “Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital: The Case of Research Technology Organization,” Singapore Management Review, 24(3), pp10
     Mead, D. M. (1992), “Innovations in Nursing Care, the Development of Primary Nursing in Wales Unpublished Report,” Department of Health, London.
     Mouritsen, J. (1998), “Driving Growth: Economic Value-added versus Intellectual Capital,” Management Accounting Research, 4, pp.461-482。
     Nahapiet, J. and S. Ghoshal (1998), “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital and The Organizational Advantage,” Academy of Management Review (23:2), pp.242-266.
     Nonaka, Ikujiro and Hirotaka Takeuchi (1995), “Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation, ” The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press, pp.69-89.
     Ng, Artie W. (2006), “Reporting Intellectual Capital flow in Technology-based Companies; Case Studios of Canadian Wireless Technology Companies,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7（4）, p.492。
     Prahalad, C. K. and Gary Hamel (1990), “The Core of the Corporation,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 1990, pp.77-91.
     Porter, M. E. (1980), “Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors,” New York: The Free Press.
     Reinhardt, R., M. P. Bornemann, and U. Schneider (2001), “ Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management：Perspectives on Measuring Knowledge, in M. Dierkes, A.B. Antal, J. Child & I.Nonaka（eds.）,” Handbook of Organizational learning and knowledge, pp.794-820. New York：John Wiley & Sons.
     Roos, J., G. Roos, L. Edvinsson, and N. C. Dragonetti (1997), “ Intellectual Capital：Navigating in the New Business Landscape,” London Macmillan Business.
     Sanchez, M. Paloma and Elena Susana (2006), “ Intellectual Capital in Universities; Improving Transparency and Internal Management,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7 (4), p.529。
     Teece, D., G. Pisano, and A. Shuen (1997), “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management,” Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7) , pp.509-534.
     Whiteman, N.I. (1990), “The committee meeting alternative: Using the Delphi technique,” The Journal of Nursing Administration, 20(4), pp.30-36.
     Williams, P. L. and C. Webb (1994), “ The Delphi technique: a methodological discussion,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, pp.180-186.
     Wu, S. H., L.Y. Lin, and M.Y. Hsu (2006), “Intellectual capital, dynamic capabilities, and innovative performance of organizations,” International Journal of Technology Management, forthcoming.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
行政管理碩士學程
95921069
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095921069
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 吳瓊恩zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 林信春zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 林信春zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2009en_US
dc.date.accessioned 9-May-2016 15:44:03 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 9-May-2016 15:44:03 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 9-May-2016 15:44:03 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0095921069en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/95334-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 行政管理碩士學程zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 95921069zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究採用修正型德菲法研究方式，以財團法人工業技術研究院個案分析，及透過專家學者深度訪談及問卷調查結果，交叉驗證公設研究組織工研院，運用各類管理科學作為，企圖創造我國技術產業升級的價值優勢所在，同時在複雜的管理科學中，本研究更整理出一套系統，讓管理者優先找出組織的核心價值主軸，據此從價值導向的一連串的策略監控管理模式中，呈現所對應的組織智慧資本衡量指標所在。按此；運用系統化的內部組織結構重組，建構組織核心價值與相對應的智慧資本衡量指標，藉以監控管理模式，在組織中智慧資本相互作用下，讓組織的績效，得以透過價值提昇帶動突破的契機。本研究結果進一步在公務組織的行政績效考核政策上或可提供些許參考。
      智慧資本分類上，主要區分為人力資本、結構資本及社會資本三種，而策略創新是為改造組織價值的動能所在；在本研究案工研院的組織特性使然，讓創新能量明顯帶動組織的價值並成為主軸，是以創新資本從結構資本中強勢獨立，相對的流程結構資本反成弱勢。另從本研究案建立的組織價值流量管控系統實證模型下，交差驗證深度訪談、問卷調查及個案分析的結果顯示：一、工研院的智慧資本透過長期形成價值優勢來展現，在組織特性運作下，知識技術的策略創新，帶動智慧資本衡量指標的價值強度走向。二、在系統運作路徑上，工研院首先掌握組織的核心價值主軸，透過價值鏈集中於計畫的達成，蘊涵豐盛的創新資本與人力資本，並建立良好的社會資本。三、工研院的各類管理科學，朝向計畫目標IP與產業效益的價值追求，並建立起一套內部智慧資本管控組織價值的運轉模式，其中存在著以創新帶動的動能含量。四、研究工研院建立起4大類共30組的智慧資本衡量指標，透過其各類管理科學運作模式下，篩選各衡量指標價值定義，可明確的帶動組織對產業的成效展現，若能應用來帶動策略創新的目標方向，應可營造更具體的技術產業價值。
     知識是組織的核心本質，公務組織利用知識創新螺旋轉換模式，反饋遞迴來自各方的資訊，以營造更具社會價值成效的實績為目標，進行行政作業精簡革新，類此政策上的應用與創新，會是未來考核公務組織行政績效的最佳模式。
     關鍵字：德菲法、智慧資本、衡量指標、價值流量管控系統、核心價值主軸		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) This study uses the amendment-based Delphi method to approach to the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) case studies, and through depth interviews and survey results of experts and scholars, cross-validation of public research organization based the ITRI, the use of various types of management science as an attempt to create a the value of Taiwan`s technology industries, the advantages of upgrading, while in the complex management science, the study also put together a system that allows managers to previously identify the organization`s core values of the axis, whereby a series of value-oriented strategy for monitoring and management model, the present organization of the corresponding measure of intellectual capital is located. Here, using a systematic reorganization of the internal organizational structure, building the organization`s core values and the corresponding measure of intellectual capital in order to monitor the management model of intellectual capital in the interaction of organization, so that the performance of the organization was able to drive the value enhancement breakthrough opportunities. The results of this study public policy of the organization`s administrative performance appraisal can further provide a little information.
     Intellectual capital is divided into human capital, structural capital and social capital, while the strategy of innovation is the value of the kinetic energy for the transformation of the organization; in the case of this study, the institute`s organizational characteristics dictates, so that creative energy is driving significant value to the organization and become spindle. Innovation capital is strong independent from the structural capital; however, the relative process structural capital becomes a weak process. Another case from this study to establish the organization of the value of an empirical model traffic management and control system, the cross validation-depth interviews, questionnaires and case analysis showed as followings: First, the institute`s intellectual capital through the formation of the value of long-term advantage to present, in the operation of organizational characteristics under the strategy of knowledge and technology innovation, promote the value of intellectual capital measurement indicators into intensity. Second, the operation in the system path, the ITRI acquired the organization`s core values of axis, through the value chain and the program to reach. A rich implication of innovation capital and human capital established a good social capital. Third, all kinds of management science of the ITRI toward the pursuit of value of IP and industrial benefits plans, and establish the operation mode of organizational values under internal intellectual capital controls, in which there is innovation-driven kinetic energy content. Fourth, to research ITRI setting up a total of 30 group of four broad categories of intellectual capital measurement indicators, through its mode of operation of various types of management science, the selection of indicators to measure the value of the various indicators, is clearly driven by the organization to show the effectiveness of the industries. If these indicators can be applied to boost the strategic direction of the objectives of innovation, the ITRI should be able to create a more specific technical industrial value.
     Knowledge is the organization`s core essence of innovation. Public service organizations use the knowledge conversion spiral model of recursive feedback of information from all sides so as to create a more effective performance of the social value of the objective of streamlining administrative operations innovation, this kind of policy application and innovation and public service organizations, will be assessing the future performance of the best mode of administration.
     Keywords: Delphi method, intellectual capital, measurement indicators, the value of traffic management and control system, the core values of axis		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論……………………………………………………… 5
     第一節 研究背景與動機 …………………………………………………… 7
     第二節 研究目的與問題…………………………………………………… 10
     第三節 研究架構與流程…………………………………………………… 11
     第四節 名詞界定………………………………………………………… 14
     
     第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………… 14
     第一節 智慧資本的意涵與理論基礎……………………………………… 14
     第二節 智慧資本的架構與累積的方法…………………………………… 22
     第三節 組織中智慧資本管理模式與建構創新的組織文化……………… 24
     第四節 策略形成與管理運作產生流量模式……………………………… 37
     第五節 組織中智慧資本的衡量指標篩選………………………………… 52
     
     第三章 研究設計………………………………………………… 91
     第一節 文獻分析法…………………………………………………………91
     第二節 深度訪談與問卷調查法……………………………………………92
     第三節 資料分析法…………………………………………………………94
     第四節 研究設計內容………………………………………………………98
     第五節 研究範圍與限制 …………………………………………………101
     
     第四章 財團法人工業技術研究院個案分析 ………………… 105
     第一節 使命與願景……………………………………………………… 106
     第二節 組織架構與核心業務…………………………………………… 106
     第三節 工研院各類管理運作現況……………………………………… 110
     第四節 技術領域特性與內在環境分析………………………………… 153
     第五節 SWOT分析與策略管理………………………………………… 160
     第六節 品質及目標管理………………………………………………… 162
     第七節 各類智慧資本管理概述 …………………………………………167
     
     第五章 研究結果分析 ………………………………………… 175
     第一節 研究路徑與說明……………………………………………………175
     第二節 訪談、問卷調查結果分析…………………………………………184
     第三節 工研院組織價值鏈形成建議………………………………………197
     第四節 工研院智慧資本管理結構模式形成建議…………………………201
     第五節 工研院智慧資本指標定義形成建議………………………………205
     
     第六章 結論與建議………………………………………………213
     第一節 研究發現 ………………………………………………………… 213
     第二節 研究建議 ………………………………………………………… 223
     
      參考文獻………………………………………………… 231
     附錄：
     附錄一：智慧資本各構面二、三層指標操作性來源…………………………239
     附錄二：深度訪談紀錄四份……………………………………………………247
     附錄三：問卷調查表一~三回 …………………………………………………275
     附錄四：數據資料分析表件……………………………………………………293
     表1：工研院智慧資本衡量指標第一次問卷調查結果排序彙整表………293
     表2：第二回現行中工研院智慧資本衡量指標價值強度排序彙整表……295
     表3：第二回理想中工研院智慧資本衡量指標價值強度排序彙整表……297
     表4：現行中指標價值強度四組個別題項描述性摘要統計(二回）…… 299
     表5：理想中指標價值強度四組個別題項描述性摘要統計(二回） …… 301
     表6：現行中四組個別題項第二回問卷調查共識一致性分析 ……………303
     表7：理想中四組個別題項第二回問卷調查共識一致性分析 ………… 305
     表8：第三回現行中工研院智慧資本衡量指標價值強度排序彙整表 ……307
     表9：第三回理想中工研院智慧資本衡量指標價值強度排序彙整表 ……309
     表10：現行中指標價值強度四組個別題項描述性摘要統計(三回） ……311
     表11：理想中指標價值強度四組個別題項描述性摘要統計(三回） ……313
     表12：現行中四組個別題項第三回問卷調查共識一致性分析 ………… 315
     表13：理想中四組個別題項第三回問卷調查共識一致性分析 ………… 317
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     圖目錄
      頁次
     附圖1-1：研究架構圖………………………………………………………… 12
     附圖1-2：研究流程圖………………………………………………………… 13
     附圖2-1：Edvinsson 智慧資本示意圖 …………………………………… 17
     附圖2-2：Skandia 價值規劃圖 …………………………………………… 18
     附圖2-3：Skandia AFS公司智慧資本導航架構圖………………………… 19
     附圖2-4：Skandia AFS公司智慧資本模式圖……………………………… 20
     附圖2-5：智慧資本的理論基礎……………………………………………… 22
     附圖2-6：智慧資本分類及架構圖…………………………………………… 23
     附圖2-7：四種模式所創造的知識…………………………………………… 26
     附圖2-8：組織知識創造的螺旋……………………………………………… 27
     附圖2-9：組織知識創造過程五個階段模式………………………………… 28
     附圖2-10：組織的人力資本結構與人力資源管理…………………………… 29
     附圖2-11：人力資本的三階層衡量系統……………………………………… 30
     附圖2-12：圖2-12：修訂智慧資本分類及架構圖…………………………… 37
     附圖2-13：結合一般管理、智慧資本與知識管理的概念架構……………… 38
     附圖2-14：策略形成系統圖…………………………………………………… 41
     附圖2-15：Skandia AFS「領航者」智慧資本管理…………………………43
     附圖2-16：ARC智慧資本模型…………………………………………………44
     附圖2-17：智慧資本網絡……………………………………………………… 45
     附圖2-18：平衡計分卡的實施流程…………………………………………… 46
     附圖2-19：平衡計分卡引導智慧資本內容圖………………………………… 50
     附圖2-20：平衡計分卡策略性目標影響策略性智慧資本形成圖…………… 51
     附圖4-1：工研院組織結構圖 …………………………………………………107
     附圖4-2：工研院的產業價值鏈 …………………………………………… 158
     附圖5-1：管理智慧資本形成價值優勢之循環模式 ……………………… 176
     附圖5-2：工研院的產業價值鏈 ………………………………………………200
     附圖5-3：工研院智慧資本（管理）模式細部流程圖 …………………… 204
     
     
      表目錄
      頁次
     附表2-1：智慧資本的定義 …………………………………………………… 16
     附表2-2：智慧資本的創造累積方法………………………………………… 24
     附表2-3：傳統與策略性人力資源管理的差異……………………………… 31
     附表3-1：四分位差一致性程度之判別……………………………………… 97
     附表3-2：德菲法訪談問卷諮詢學者專家一覽表…………………………… 99
     附表4-1：工研院與國際同類型研究機構比較－技術成果………………… 130
     附表4-2：工研院與國際同類型研究機構比較－美國專利被引證次數…… 131
     附表4-3：2007年工研院法人科專研發經費人力及執行統計……………… 143
     附表4-4：2008年工研院法人科專研發經費人力及執行統計……………… 145
     附表5-1：工研院智慧資本各構面二、三層指標操作型定義表 ……………205		zh_TW
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095921069en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 智慧資本zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 德菲法zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 價值流量管控系統zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 核心價值主軸zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 衡量指標zh_TW
dc.title (題名) 組織中智慧資本衡量指標之研究－以財團法人工業技術研究院為例zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Measurement of the Intellectual Capital for Public Sectors: A Case Study of the Industrial Technology Research Institute.en_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文書目：
     吳 定 (2005)，公共政策辭典，台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司，頁139.
     吳安妮 (2002)，剖析智慧資本，會計研究月刊，204期，頁64。
     － (2002)，平衡計分卡之精髄、範疇及整合（上），會計研究月刊，211期，頁45-54。
     － (2004)，平衡計分卡之重點發展方向，會計研究月刊，224期，頁99。
     吳思華 (2000)，網際網路智慧資本衡量與發展措施研究計畫，資策會資訊市場情報中心。
     － (2001、2002)，我國產業智慧資本先導性個案研究計畫，財團法人資訊工業策進會。
     吳瓊恩 (2006)，行政學(三版)，台北：三民書局股份有限公司，頁573-606.
     李芳齡譯，Marc, J. E., “ Making Sustainability Work.” (2007)，台北：三民書局股份有限公司，頁43-54.
     林良陽 (2002)，衡量研發機構智慧資本之研究：以工研院光電所為例，政大企業管理研究所碩士論文。
     － (2007)，智慧資本與動態能耐對硏發團隊創新績效的影響，政大科技管理研究所博士論文。
     林東清 (2007)，知識管理再版，台北：智勝文化事業有限公司。
     邱奕仁、楊世偉譯，Turban, E., D. Leidner, E. Mclean, and J.Wetherbe著 (2004)，資訊科技與管理，台北：雙葉書廊有限公司，頁508-536.
     高子梅、何霖譯，Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton 著（2006），策略校準，台北：臉譜出版：城邦文化事業股份有限公司。
     唐錦超譯，Everett M. Rogers 著 (2006)，創新的擴散，台北：遠流出版事業股份有限公司。
     陳正平、朱道凱、張淑芳、劉麗真、高子梅等譯，Robert S. Kaplan & David P. Norton 著 (2004)，策略地圖，台北：臉譜出版：城邦文化事業股份有限公司。
     陳澤義、陳啟斌 (2009)，企業診斷與績效評估-平衡計分卡之運用（二版）, 台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司，頁.113-120.
     黃良志、黃家齊、溫金豐、廖文智、韓志翔 (2007)，人力資源管理理論與實務，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
     黃家齊 (2002)，人力資源管理系統與組織績效-智慧資本觀點，管理學報，19卷3期，頁415-450。
     孫本初 (2002)，「組織管理新議題—智慧資本」，收錄於知識經濟與智慧資本學術研討會研討會論文集。
     － (2005)，公共管理，台北：智勝文化事業股份有限公司。
     莫永榮 (2005)，公務部門建構智慧資本之研究-加拿大政府實徵案例之分析，台北：國立台北大學公共行政暨政策學系博士論文。
     張吉成、周談輝、黃文雄 (2002)，組織知識創新-企業與學校贏的策略，台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
     程家雄 (2004)，衡量科技研發單位智慧資本之研究：以中山科學研究院為例，國防大資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
     廖建容、楊美齡、周宜芳譯，Gary Hamel著 (2007)， The future of management，台北：天下遠見出版股份有限公司。
     劉江彬、黃俊英 (2004)，智慧財產管理總論，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
     謝智謀、林維君譯；Hinton Perry 著 (2000)，統計學，台北市：弘智文化。
     簡禎富 (2007)，決策分析與管理，台北：雙葉書廊有限公司，頁229-242。
     ARC遠擎管理顧問公司策略績效事業部譯 (2009)；Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton 著 (2001)，The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in New Business Environment，台北：臉譜出版：城邦文化事業股份有限公司。
     國立政治大學商學院台灣智慧資本研究中心、財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心 (2006)，智慧資本管理，台北：華泰文化事業股份有限公司。
     二、英文書目：
     Aboody, D. and B. Lev (2000), “Information Asymmetry, R&D, and Insider gains, ” Journal of Finance, 6, pp. 2747-2766。
     Albert, A. A. and F. Dieter (2003), “The Intellectual Capital Web: A Systematic Linking Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), p.41。
     Bassi, L. J. and M. E. Van Buren (1999), “Valuing Investment in Intellectual Capital,” International Journal Technology Management, 18（5,6,7,8）, pp.414-432.
     Bontis, N. (1999), “Managing Organizational Knowledge by Diagnosing Intellectual Capital：Framing and Advancing the State of the Field,” International Journal of Technology Management, 18 (5), pp.433-462.
     Bukh, P. N., H. T. Larsen, and J. Mouritsen (2001), “Contructing Intellectual Capital Statement,” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17, pp.87-108.
     Chen, J., Z. Zhu, and H.Y. Xie (2004), “Measuring Intellectual Capital: A new Model and Empirical Study,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (1), pp.195-212.
     Chen, S. and C. J. Choi (2004), “Creating a knowledge-based city: The example 0f Hsinchu Science Park, ”Journal of Knowledge Management, 8 (5), pp.73-82.
     Couper, M. R. (1984), “The Delphi Technique: A Tool for Collecting Opinions in Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), pp.417-25.
     Drucker, P. (1993), “Post-Capitalist Society,” Harper Collins.
     Edvinsson, L. and M. S. Malone (1997), “Intellectual Capital Realizing Your Company True Value by Finding its Hidden Roots,” Harper Collins, pp.43-68.
     Goodman, C.M. (1987), “The Delphi Technique: A Critique,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, 12 (6), pp.729-734.
     Green, B., M. Jones, D. Hughes, and A. Williams (1999), “Applying the Delphi Technique in a Study of GPs’ (general practitioner’s) Information Requirements,” Health and Social Care in the Community, 7 (3), pp.198-205.
     Hafeez, Khalid, YanBing Zhang, and Naila Malak（2002）,“Core Competence for Sustainable Competitive Advantage: A Structured Methodology for Identifying Core Competence, ” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49 (1), pp.28-35.
     Holden, M. C. and J. F. Wedman (1993), “Future Issues of Computer-mediated Communication: The results of a Delphi study,” Educational Technology Research and Development, 4 (1), pp.5-24.
     Hurwitz, J. (2002), “The Linkage between Management Practices, Intangible Performances and Stock Returns,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3 (1), pp.51-61.
     Jeffery, A. Mello (2006), “Strategic Human Resource Management Thomson, ” South-Western, p.165.
     Jao, I. W. (1996), “The Determinants of Enter-partner Learning in Cross-border Contract Manufacturing Alliance-A Study of Taiwanese IT Firms,” Unpublished Dissertation, London Business School, 1996.
     Jones, H. and B.C. Twiss (1978), “Forecasting Technology for Planning Decision,” New York: Petrocelli Books.
     Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (2004), “Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes,” Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
     Lepak, D. P. and S. A. Snell (1999), “The Human Resource Architecture：Toward Theory of Human Capital Allocation and Development,” Academy of Management Review, 24(1), pp.31-48。
     Lin, Y. Y. (2003), “Progression and Maximization of Intellectual Capital：Organization Development Perspective,” 2003 International Forum on Intellectual Capital in Taiwan, pp.D1-1-D1-15。
     Manfred, B. and K. H. Leitner (2002), “Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital: The Case of Research Technology Organization,” Singapore Management Review, 24(3), pp10
     Mead, D. M. (1992), “Innovations in Nursing Care, the Development of Primary Nursing in Wales Unpublished Report,” Department of Health, London.
     Mouritsen, J. (1998), “Driving Growth: Economic Value-added versus Intellectual Capital,” Management Accounting Research, 4, pp.461-482。
     Nahapiet, J. and S. Ghoshal (1998), “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital and The Organizational Advantage,” Academy of Management Review (23:2), pp.242-266.
     Nonaka, Ikujiro and Hirotaka Takeuchi (1995), “Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation, ” The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press, pp.69-89.
     Ng, Artie W. (2006), “Reporting Intellectual Capital flow in Technology-based Companies; Case Studios of Canadian Wireless Technology Companies,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7（4）, p.492。
     Prahalad, C. K. and Gary Hamel (1990), “The Core of the Corporation,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 1990, pp.77-91.
     Porter, M. E. (1980), “Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors,” New York: The Free Press.
     Reinhardt, R., M. P. Bornemann, and U. Schneider (2001), “ Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management：Perspectives on Measuring Knowledge, in M. Dierkes, A.B. Antal, J. Child & I.Nonaka（eds.）,” Handbook of Organizational learning and knowledge, pp.794-820. New York：John Wiley & Sons.
     Roos, J., G. Roos, L. Edvinsson, and N. C. Dragonetti (1997), “ Intellectual Capital：Navigating in the New Business Landscape,” London Macmillan Business.
     Sanchez, M. Paloma and Elena Susana (2006), “ Intellectual Capital in Universities; Improving Transparency and Internal Management,” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7 (4), p.529。
     Teece, D., G. Pisano, and A. Shuen (1997), “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management,” Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7) , pp.509-534.
     Whiteman, N.I. (1990), “The committee meeting alternative: Using the Delphi technique,” The Journal of Nursing Administration, 20(4), pp.30-36.
     Williams, P. L. and C. Webb (1994), “ The Delphi technique: a methodological discussion,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, pp.180-186.
     Wu, S. H., L.Y. Lin, and M.Y. Hsu (2006), “Intellectual capital, dynamic capabilities, and innovative performance of organizations,” International Journal of Technology Management, forthcoming.		zh_TW