學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 組織變革之內外部變革代理人之合作模式初探－以台灣大型家族企業集團為例
A Preliminary Study of Participation Modes Between Internal and External Change Agents - A Case Study of Family Business Group in Taiwan作者 張凱傑 貢獻者 林月雲
張凱傑關鍵詞 組織變革
變革代理人
家族企業
意會
Organizational Change
Change Agent
Family Business
Sensemaking日期 2012 上傳時間 11-Jul-2013 16:05:26 (UTC+8) 摘要 現代企業為了適應環境變化與組織內部成長的挑戰，必須經常進行組織變革。學術界與實務界，組織變革一向是熱門的議題。無論是漸進式或革命式組織變革都是為了使企業提升經營效能所進行的活動。許多研究均指出，這些變革活動的成敗，往往與負責診斷、啟案、執行、監控與追蹤的變革代理人有關。本研究以3家國內大型家族企業為研究個案，查出其近年所進行的組織變革，並透過半結構式訪談，訪問該組織之內部變革代理人，瞭解其如何與外部變革代理人合作以進行組織變革。本研究之研究發現如下：一、在組織變革因素中，內部變革代理人的意會受組織內部因素與其自身因素的影響高於受到外部環境因素之影響。在家族企業特徵中，最重要的影響因素是家族企業領導人。二、內部變革代理人有知性、感性與理性三種不同的意會類型，不同的意會類型在挑選外部變革代理人時分別有資源導向、關係導向、效能導向三種不同的挑選原則。三、本研究發現內部變革代理人與外部變革代理人合作的模式依參與程度的高低，可以分為三種不同的合作模式。影響組織變革成功的三種合作模式間存有一U型曲線的關係。四、高度與低度參與之合作模式較易導致組織變革成功，中度參與之合作模式，反較易導致組織變革失敗。中度參與的組織變革模式其失敗主因有兩項，其一，外部變革代理人不夠深入瞭解組織文化；其二，未能取得內部高階主管的支持。
In order to adapt to external environmental change and the challenges of internal growth, modern enterprises normally have organizational changes frequently. No matter in academic and practice field, organizational change has always been a hot topic. Either progressive or revolutionary organizational changes are intended to enable enterprises to enhance operational efficiency of the activities carried out. Many literatures have pointed out that the success of the activities of these changes, often related to change agents, who are responsible for diagnosing, initiating, performing, monitoring and tracking activities.In this research, three large domestic family businesses were investigated to identify their organizational changes in recent years. Data were collected through interviewing each organization`s internal change agent semi-structurally, to understand how they cooperated with external change agents. The findings of this study are as below:First of all, internal organizational change factors and the internal change agent`s characteristics, affect his/her sensemaking more than outside environment change factors. In family business, the most important factor is the influence of family business leader. Second, internal change agents have three different types of sensemaking, namely cognitive, perceptive and rational. Each type affects the selection of the external change agents differently, which was mainly based on resource-orientation, relationship-orientation, or performance-orientation.Third, the research found that in accordance with the level of participation of external change agents, the cooperation modes have three different levels: high-level, middle-level, and low-level participation modes. A U-curve relationship between the three kinds of cooperation mode was observed that influences the success of organizational changes.Fourth, the research found that high-level and low-level participation are more likely to result in successful organizational changes, whereas middle-level participation generally leads to failure for two main reasons. First, an external change agent did not grasp organizational culture thoroughly enough; second, the external change agent did not obtain sufficient support from the executives.參考文獻 參考文獻一、英文文獻1.Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday.2.Birkinshaw, J. Hamel G. Mol M. J. (2008). Management innovation. Academy of Management Review Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 825-845. 3.Bloomfield, B. P., & Danieli, A. (1995). The roel of management-consultants in the develoopment of information technology - the indissoluble nature of sociopolitical and technical skills. Journal of Management Studies, 32(1), 23-46. 4.Buono, Anthony F. Jamieson David. (2010). Consultation for organizational change. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.5.Case, Thomas L. Vandenberg Robert J. Meredith Paul H. (1990). Internal and external change agents. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 11(1), 4-15. 6.Chen, Xiaoping, Tsui, Anne, Farh, Larry, & Cheng, Bor-Shiuan. (2008). Empirical methods for research in organization and management: HWA TAI Publishing.7.Cummings, Thomas G. (2008). Handbook of organization development. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.8.Daft, R. L. (2001). Organization theory and design. Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western.9.Davis, G. F., & Marquis, C. (2005). Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16(4), 332-343.10.De Fontgalland, Guy. (1976). Media practitioners as change agents. In AMIC Study Seminar on Development Communication(Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research & Information Centre.). 11.Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case-study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.12.French, W. L., Bell, C., & Zawacki, R. A. (2005). Organization development and transformation: Managing effective change. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.13.Galbraith, Jay R. Kazanjian Robert K. (1986). Strategy implementation : structure, systems, and process. St. Paul: West Pub. Co.14.Hofer, Charles W. Schendel Dan. (1978). Strategy formulation : analytical concepts. St. Paul: West Pub. Co.15.Jones, Gareth R. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.16.Kaarst-Brown, M. L. (1999). Five symbolic roles of the external consultant - Integrating change, power and symbolism. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(6), 540-561.17.Kakabadse, Nada K., Louchart, Eddy, & Kakabadse, Andrew. (2006). Consultant`s role: A qualitative inquiry from the consultant`s perspective. Journal of Management Development, 25(5). 18.Keidel, R. W. (1995). Seeing organizational patterns: A new theory and language of organizational design. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.19.Kubr, Milan. (1986). Management consulting : a guide to the profession. Geneva: International Labour Office.20.Lant, T. K., & Mezias, S. J. (1992). An organizational learning-model of convergence and reorientation. Organization Science, 3(1), 47-71. 21.Leavitt, H. J. (1962). Applied organization change in industry: Structural, Technical, and Human Approaches. Office of Naval Research, Branch Office London England.22.Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics concept, Method and Reality in Social Science; Social Equilibria and Social Change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41. 23.Lippitt, Gordon L. Lippitt Ronald. (1978). The consulting process in action. La Jolla, Calif.: University Associates.24.Lunenburg, Fred C. (2010). Managing Change: The Role of the Change Agent. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 13. 25.Miller, D. (1982). Evolution and revolution - A quantum view of structural-change in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 19(2), 131-151.26.Rajagopalan, N., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). Toward a theory of strategic change: A multi-lens perspective and integrative framework. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 48-79.27.Robbins, Stephen P. (2001). Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.28.Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues., & In Maccoby, E. E. (1958). Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt,Rinehart & Winston.29.Sturdy, A. (1997). The consultancy process - An insecure business? Journal of Management Studies, 34(3), 389-413. 30.Ulrich, David. (1997). Human resource champions : the next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.31.Ulrich, David, & Brockbank, Wayne. (2005). The HR value proposition. Boston (Mass.): Harvard Business School.32.Van de Ven, Andrew H; Poole, Marshall Scott, 1995. Explaining development and change in organization. Academy of Management. The Academy of management Review;20(3),510-540.33.Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research - a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814. 34.Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.35.Yin, Robert K. (1984). Case study research : design and methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.二、中文文獻：1.王怡婷(2010)。家族企業第二代介入組織變革之個案研究—以「思维框架」為觀點探討。輔仁大學心理學系碩士論文。2.林佑軒(2010)。台灣家族企業績效之後設分析。國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。 3.林南欣(2007)。人力資源發展在日本富士通組織轉型中之促成角色探討。國立政治大學企業管理究所碩士論文。 4.林東慶(2011)。家族企業中變革管理成功因素探討-以利豐集團與特力集團為例。國立臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。5.翁毓廷(2012)。接班歷程分析－以成功組織變革之觀點探討。銘傳大學諮商與工商心理學系碩士論文。6.張明輝(2006)。教育組織變革。台北：五南。 7.陳怡靜(2007)。從智慧資本觀點探討組織變革過程中人力資源發展實務之角色。國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文。 8.陳彥君(1997)。家族企業繼任與組織、策略變革及其績效之關係。國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。9.陳泰和(2001)。台灣家族企業接班人選擇因素之研究－以交易成本、信賴機制、網絡關係之觀點探討。國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。 10.黃德榮(2007)。變革代理人引領組織變革之關鍵成功因素之研究。國立交通大學管理學院高階主管管理碩士學程碩士論文。11.蕭景鴻(2012)。家長式領導之後設分析。國立中正大學心理研究所碩士論文。12.蘇品潔(2008)。人力資源客戶服務代表角色之個案研究。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士。 13.廖育鈴(2010)。組織內知識移轉的因素及顧問品質對ERP系統導入績效之影響。國立成功大學高階管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。14.劉宜真(2009)。中階管理者之意會與推行變革之關聯。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。15.魏鸞瑩(2006)。企業組織變革能耐之研究-以發展自有品牌之過程為例。國立臺灣師範大學工業科技教育學系博士論文。16.王振寰、溫肇東(2011)。 百年企業 產業百年: 臺灣企業發展史。台北：巨流。17.侯勝宗、蕭瑞麟(2008)。科技意會－衛星派遣的人性軌跡。台北：培生集團。18.蕭瑞麟 (2007)。不用數字的研究：鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究。台北：培生集團。 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所
100355018
101資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100355018 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 林月雲 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) 張凱傑 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) 張凱傑 zh_TW dc.date (日期) 2012 en_US dc.date.accessioned 11-Jul-2013 16:05:26 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 11-Jul-2013 16:05:26 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 11-Jul-2013 16:05:26 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0100355018 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/58750 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 企業管理研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 100355018 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 101 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 現代企業為了適應環境變化與組織內部成長的挑戰，必須經常進行組織變革。學術界與實務界，組織變革一向是熱門的議題。無論是漸進式或革命式組織變革都是為了使企業提升經營效能所進行的活動。許多研究均指出，這些變革活動的成敗，往往與負責診斷、啟案、執行、監控與追蹤的變革代理人有關。本研究以3家國內大型家族企業為研究個案，查出其近年所進行的組織變革，並透過半結構式訪談，訪問該組織之內部變革代理人，瞭解其如何與外部變革代理人合作以進行組織變革。本研究之研究發現如下：一、在組織變革因素中，內部變革代理人的意會受組織內部因素與其自身因素的影響高於受到外部環境因素之影響。在家族企業特徵中，最重要的影響因素是家族企業領導人。二、內部變革代理人有知性、感性與理性三種不同的意會類型，不同的意會類型在挑選外部變革代理人時分別有資源導向、關係導向、效能導向三種不同的挑選原則。三、本研究發現內部變革代理人與外部變革代理人合作的模式依參與程度的高低，可以分為三種不同的合作模式。影響組織變革成功的三種合作模式間存有一U型曲線的關係。四、高度與低度參與之合作模式較易導致組織變革成功，中度參與之合作模式，反較易導致組織變革失敗。中度參與的組織變革模式其失敗主因有兩項，其一，外部變革代理人不夠深入瞭解組織文化；其二，未能取得內部高階主管的支持。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) In order to adapt to external environmental change and the challenges of internal growth, modern enterprises normally have organizational changes frequently. No matter in academic and practice field, organizational change has always been a hot topic. Either progressive or revolutionary organizational changes are intended to enable enterprises to enhance operational efficiency of the activities carried out. Many literatures have pointed out that the success of the activities of these changes, often related to change agents, who are responsible for diagnosing, initiating, performing, monitoring and tracking activities.In this research, three large domestic family businesses were investigated to identify their organizational changes in recent years. Data were collected through interviewing each organization`s internal change agent semi-structurally, to understand how they cooperated with external change agents. The findings of this study are as below:First of all, internal organizational change factors and the internal change agent`s characteristics, affect his/her sensemaking more than outside environment change factors. In family business, the most important factor is the influence of family business leader. Second, internal change agents have three different types of sensemaking, namely cognitive, perceptive and rational. Each type affects the selection of the external change agents differently, which was mainly based on resource-orientation, relationship-orientation, or performance-orientation.Third, the research found that in accordance with the level of participation of external change agents, the cooperation modes have three different levels: high-level, middle-level, and low-level participation modes. A U-curve relationship between the three kinds of cooperation mode was observed that influences the success of organizational changes.Fourth, the research found that high-level and low-level participation are more likely to result in successful organizational changes, whereas middle-level participation generally leads to failure for two main reasons. First, an external change agent did not grasp organizational culture thoroughly enough; second, the external change agent did not obtain sufficient support from the executives. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 誌謝 II中文摘要 IIIABSTRACT IV目錄 VI圖目錄 VIII表目錄 VIII壹、緒論 1第一節 研究背景 1第二節 研究動機與目的 4第三節 研究流程 6第四節 預期研究成果 7貳、文獻探討 8第一節 組織變革 8第二節 變革代理人 15第三節 家族企業 20參、研究方法 28第一節 研究架構 28第二節 研究方法回顧 29第三節 研究方法設計 32肆、個案分析結果 38第一節 個案公司變革事件內涵 38第二節 內部變革代理人的意會 48第三節 與外部變革代理人的合作模式 54第四節 合作模式對組織變革成敗之影響 56第五節 研究發現 58伍、結論 72第一節 研究結論 72第二節 管理意涵 74第三節 研究者的反思 76第四節 研究限制暨後續研究建議 77附錄 80附錄一 訪談題綱 80附錄二 個案公司組織變革次級資料表 82附錄三 G公司部份訪談逐字稿 88參考文獻 90圖目錄圖 1-1 研究流程圖 6圖 2-1 組織變革與組織理論其它三大構面關聯圖 8圖 2-2 組織變革三維模型 10圖 2-3 家族企業的定義與類型 25圖 3-1 研究架構圖 28圖 3-2 資料蒐集架構圖 36圖 4-1 本研究個案公司之組織變革三維模型 48圖 4-2 研究發現與研究架構對照圖 58圖 4-3 組織變革成功可能性與變革代理人合作程度的關係 66圖 4-4 彙整後的研究發現 71表目錄表 2-1 組織變革成因與其內涵 11表 2-2 近代主要之組織理論與其內涵 12表 2-3 以Lewin變革三步驟理論檢視相關文獻 14表 2-4 組織變革的意會活動 16表 2-5 人力資源從業人員之角色 18表 2-6 整理國外學者對家族企業定義 21表 2-7 整理國內學者對家族企業之定義 22表 2-8 台灣家族企業類型 24表 2-9 家族企業特徵整理表 26表 3-1 Eisenhardt的個案研究八步驟 30表 3-2 主要資料蒐集法比較表 32表 3-3 個案公司與訪談對象基本資料 34表 4-1 本研究變革事件一覽 39表 4-2 組織變革事件屬性與說明 46表 4-3 內部變革代理人的意會 52表 4-4 個案公司變革資料彙整表 52表 4-5 與外部變革代理人合作的三個階段與九項步驟 55表 4-6 變革事件與合作模式對照表 57表 4-7 合作模式與變革成敗關係一覽表 57表 4-8 不同的意會與合作模式 64表 4-9 內外部變革代理人之三種合作模式 65 zh_TW dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100355018 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 組織變革 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 變革代理人 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 家族企業 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 意會 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Organizational Change en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Change Agent en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Family Business en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Sensemaking en_US dc.title (題名) 組織變革之內外部變革代理人之合作模式初探－以台灣大型家族企業集團為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A Preliminary Study of Participation Modes Between Internal and External Change Agents - A Case Study of Family Business Group in Taiwan en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 參考文獻一、英文文獻1.Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday.2.Birkinshaw, J. Hamel G. Mol M. J. (2008). Management innovation. Academy of Management Review Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 825-845. 3.Bloomfield, B. P., & Danieli, A. (1995). The roel of management-consultants in the develoopment of information technology - the indissoluble nature of sociopolitical and technical skills. Journal of Management Studies, 32(1), 23-46. 4.Buono, Anthony F. Jamieson David. (2010). Consultation for organizational change. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.5.Case, Thomas L. Vandenberg Robert J. Meredith Paul H. (1990). Internal and external change agents. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 11(1), 4-15. 6.Chen, Xiaoping, Tsui, Anne, Farh, Larry, & Cheng, Bor-Shiuan. (2008). Empirical methods for research in organization and management: HWA TAI Publishing.7.Cummings, Thomas G. (2008). Handbook of organization development. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.8.Daft, R. L. (2001). Organization theory and design. Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western.9.Davis, G. F., & Marquis, C. (2005). Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16(4), 332-343.10.De Fontgalland, Guy. (1976). Media practitioners as change agents. In AMIC Study Seminar on Development Communication(Singapore: Asian Mass Communication Research & Information Centre.). 11.Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case-study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.12.French, W. L., Bell, C., & Zawacki, R. A. (2005). Organization development and transformation: Managing effective change. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.13.Galbraith, Jay R. Kazanjian Robert K. (1986). Strategy implementation : structure, systems, and process. St. Paul: West Pub. Co.14.Hofer, Charles W. Schendel Dan. (1978). Strategy formulation : analytical concepts. St. Paul: West Pub. Co.15.Jones, Gareth R. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.16.Kaarst-Brown, M. L. (1999). Five symbolic roles of the external consultant - Integrating change, power and symbolism. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(6), 540-561.17.Kakabadse, Nada K., Louchart, Eddy, & Kakabadse, Andrew. (2006). Consultant`s role: A qualitative inquiry from the consultant`s perspective. Journal of Management Development, 25(5). 18.Keidel, R. W. (1995). Seeing organizational patterns: A new theory and language of organizational design. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.19.Kubr, Milan. (1986). Management consulting : a guide to the profession. Geneva: International Labour Office.20.Lant, T. K., & Mezias, S. J. (1992). An organizational learning-model of convergence and reorientation. Organization Science, 3(1), 47-71. 21.Leavitt, H. J. (1962). Applied organization change in industry: Structural, Technical, and Human Approaches. Office of Naval Research, Branch Office London England.22.Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics concept, Method and Reality in Social Science; Social Equilibria and Social Change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41. 23.Lippitt, Gordon L. Lippitt Ronald. (1978). The consulting process in action. La Jolla, Calif.: University Associates.24.Lunenburg, Fred C. (2010). Managing Change: The Role of the Change Agent. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 13. 25.Miller, D. (1982). Evolution and revolution - A quantum view of structural-change in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 19(2), 131-151.26.Rajagopalan, N., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). Toward a theory of strategic change: A multi-lens perspective and integrative framework. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 48-79.27.Robbins, Stephen P. (2001). Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.28.Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues., & In Maccoby, E. E. (1958). Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt,Rinehart & Winston.29.Sturdy, A. (1997). The consultancy process - An insecure business? Journal of Management Studies, 34(3), 389-413. 30.Ulrich, David. (1997). Human resource champions : the next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.31.Ulrich, David, & Brockbank, Wayne. (2005). The HR value proposition. Boston (Mass.): Harvard Business School.32.Van de Ven, Andrew H; Poole, Marshall Scott, 1995. Explaining development and change in organization. Academy of Management. The Academy of management Review;20(3),510-540.33.Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research - a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814. 34.Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.35.Yin, Robert K. (1984). Case study research : design and methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.二、中文文獻：1.王怡婷(2010)。家族企業第二代介入組織變革之個案研究—以「思维框架」為觀點探討。輔仁大學心理學系碩士論文。2.林佑軒(2010)。台灣家族企業績效之後設分析。國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。 3.林南欣(2007)。人力資源發展在日本富士通組織轉型中之促成角色探討。國立政治大學企業管理究所碩士論文。 4.林東慶(2011)。家族企業中變革管理成功因素探討-以利豐集團與特力集團為例。國立臺灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。5.翁毓廷(2012)。接班歷程分析－以成功組織變革之觀點探討。銘傳大學諮商與工商心理學系碩士論文。6.張明輝(2006)。教育組織變革。台北：五南。 7.陳怡靜(2007)。從智慧資本觀點探討組織變革過程中人力資源發展實務之角色。國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文。 8.陳彥君(1997)。家族企業繼任與組織、策略變革及其績效之關係。國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。9.陳泰和(2001)。台灣家族企業接班人選擇因素之研究－以交易成本、信賴機制、網絡關係之觀點探討。國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文。 10.黃德榮(2007)。變革代理人引領組織變革之關鍵成功因素之研究。國立交通大學管理學院高階主管管理碩士學程碩士論文。11.蕭景鴻(2012)。家長式領導之後設分析。國立中正大學心理研究所碩士論文。12.蘇品潔(2008)。人力資源客戶服務代表角色之個案研究。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士。 13.廖育鈴(2010)。組織內知識移轉的因素及顧問品質對ERP系統導入績效之影響。國立成功大學高階管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。14.劉宜真(2009)。中階管理者之意會與推行變革之關聯。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。15.魏鸞瑩(2006)。企業組織變革能耐之研究-以發展自有品牌之過程為例。國立臺灣師範大學工業科技教育學系博士論文。16.王振寰、溫肇東(2011)。 百年企業 產業百年: 臺灣企業發展史。台北：巨流。17.侯勝宗、蕭瑞麟(2008)。科技意會－衛星派遣的人性軌跡。台北：培生集團。18.蕭瑞麟 (2007)。不用數字的研究：鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究。台北：培生集團。 zh_TW
