這些年來，由於全球市場激烈競爭、人力成本不斷提高及對外貿易成長漸緩等因素，再加上中國大陸及東南亞國家（如越南）提供低廉的製造勞力，使得台灣製造業紛紛將製造工廠轉移至這些國家。這個現象已引起台灣高層的重視，並鼓勵產業界應往更高層次的研發與設計中心發展。另外，政府單位（如工業局）也提供配合的經費支援有意願的廠商進行研發與設計，而新產品設計（New Product Development， NPD）就是重要的補助項目之一。以台灣的製造業為例，進行NPD已是企業重要的競爭策略。其重要性除了可以擺拖日本製造廠在專業技術的控制之外，也可以為該企業創造差異化，並進軍國際市場。因此，國內的製造廠皆朝這個方向在努力。
在NPD的過程中涉及多個階段。例如，Cooper（1983）提出產品構想、初期評估、概念設計、產品發展、產品測試、工程試產及量產上市等七個階段。同時，參與NPD的單位或部門也不少。以產品的開發為例，參與的單位包括商品企劃、營業、研發、生產、模具設計、品管部門等，甚至是零件供應商或是經銷商。這種協同式（collaborative）的開發方式具有集思廣義、共同合作等優點，也獲得業者的採用，然而在開發過程中仍不免有費時（如部門間的互動）、費力（如人工式的資料傳遞）、資料正確性（如設計圖的版本）等問題的存在。
面對上述的問題，多數的企業是透過既有的IT來解決，如簡單型式的e-mail或是較複雜的企業資源規劃（enterprise resources planning， ERP）、產品資料管理（product data management， PDM）等系統。這些系統各有其功能性，如e-mail的重點在溝通，ERP整合生產、人事、會計、財務、行銷等資訊，而PDM則強調工程資料的管理。從NPD的過程來看，這些系統僅能提供部份的功能，而無法支援整個協同過程之所需。例如，e-mail無法提供同步的溝通，ERP缺乏研發部門所需的設計模組，而PDM僅有工程的資料，若其他部門需要的相關資料仍需自行開發軟體來處理。
由於IT的快速進展，再加上公司與公司、部門與部門或個人與個人間在企業營運或工作上的合作需求，使得協同商務（collaborative commerce）的概念逐漸獲得重視，並可彌補e-mail，ERP或PDM等系統在NPD過程中的不足之處。協同商務中主要包括協同規劃、協同行銷、協同產品商務（或開發）、協同服務等系統分類，其中以協同產品開發與NPD的關係最為密切。目前市場的主要廠商包括PTC，HP，IBM等，而該系統的優點在於可有效控管NPD流程、建立NPD的作業標準、累積新產品設計與製造的經驗等。例如，法國的Airbus公司1995年就使用PTC公司的Windchill系統進行協同式的飛機設計。而台灣則於1999年在政府單位的經費輔助下，才有製造業者將該系統應用於新機種的設計上。導入協同產品開發軟體的最主要目的在於應用IT支援NPD過程。
由於IT的導入過程是企業認定該IT成功或失敗的重要期間，而過程中能否調適（adaptation）得宜，則是判定IT成功或失敗的關鍵依據。因此，有些學者從調適的觀點來探討IT的導入過程。例如，Leonard – Barton（LB）（1988）提出科技與組織應相互調適的模式，以解決導入過程中技術（如IT原有的規格）、達交系統（dilivery system）（如訓練課程）、績效準則（如對活動的影響程度）等方面的失調（misalignment）現象。Susman et al.（2003）則提出在使用協同科技時，需注意工作、團隊及組織與該科技間的失調，並應設法解決。DeSantics and Poole（1994）提出調適性結構理論（adaptive structuration theory， AST），該理論的重點在強調科技、工作、組織環境、群組等結構的專用性（appropiration）。若專用性愈高，則決策績效也愈高。Tyre and Orlikowski（1994）認為科技調適的過程並非漸近與連續（gradual and continuous），而是高度地不連續。他們指出調過程中會不連續地產生差異事件（discrepancy event），該事件是提供企業一個機會去審視既有流程的合適性或是將既有流程修正為新的方式。
上述的研究雖然提供重要的結果，但Majchrzak et al.（2000）認為新科技導入過程的研究結果仍未能清楚地描述所有的現象，因此他們透過火箭設計的專案，並以協同科技（如e-mail，資料分享或電子白板）為應用，探討專案進行過程之調適現象。Majchrzak et al.已將協同科技與NPD做結合，但該結果僅應用簡單型且小型的協同科技（如e-mail），卻缺乏對複雜且大型的協同產品開發軟體的探討，同時該結果雖然以NPD的應用，但並未提出NPD的每一個階段（如工程試產）的調適情況。另外，歐美國家（如法國Airbus公司）導入協同產品開發軟體於NPD過程的成熟經驗是值得參考，但不同國家的特有情況仍是考量重要因素。以台灣為例，應用協同產品開發軟體支援NPD過程仍只有少數的個案，這些個案的導入經驗是值得深入瞭解，以做其他企業導入的參考。因此，本研究選擇台灣製造業有導入協同產品開發軟體且已結案的一個個案，並輔以相關的調適理論（如LB模式、AST、差異事件等），以深入探討導入前、中、後的調適情況與結果分析。

In recent years, due to severe global market competition, increase of manpower costs and decrease in foreign trade, plus low-price labor costs from China and southeastern Asia countries (eg. Vietnam), all these factors enforce Taiwan manufacturing, such as motorcycle industry, moving their production factories to those countries. This phenomenon has been brought to Taiwan government’s attention, and this crisis has encouraged our industrial circles to develop higher-level R&D and design center. Furthermore, the official department (eg. Industrial Development Bureau) also supplies enterprises with expenses support to conduct R&D and design. Within New Product Development (NPD) is one of the major subsidiary entries. Take Taiwan motorcycle industry as an example. To develop NPD is an essential competitive strategy for enterprise. On the one hand, this strategy has helped Taiwan motorcycle industry to be independent of technical domination from Japan; on the other hand, it has created differentiation in motorcycle industry and consolidated the foundation marching into international market. This is also what internal manufacture enterprises strive for.
NPD process involves several stages. For example, in 1994 Cooper brought up product composition, initial evaluation, concept design, product development, product test, engineering trial production and limited quantity to market, these 7 stages, and NPD participant units or departments are quite a lot. For example, in motorcycle development process, participant units include merchandise plan, sales, R&D, manufacture, mold design, and quality control departments, and even parts supplier or motorcycle agent. This kind of collaborative development method has the advantages of putting heads together so as to get better results and cooperation. However, it remains existing problems with wasting time and efforts on inter-department interaction and manual data communication, and data accuracy (eg. version of design chart).
To cope with the above problems, most enterprises are solving via existing IT system, such as simplex e-mail, more complex ERP (enterprise resources planning, ERP) or PDM (product data management, PDM). These systems have their own functions. E-mail focuses on communication; ERP integrates information of manufacture, human resources, finance, and marketing; PDM puts emphasis on engineering data management. In the viewpoint of NPD, these systems can only provides partial functions, but are incapable of support the requirements of entire collaborative process. For example, e-mail cannot supplies simultaneous communication; ERP lacks of design mold required by R&D department; PDM only has engineering data. If other departments need related data, they must develop other software to obtain.
Because of swift progress in IT plus the cooperation demands in business operation among enterprises, departments and individuals, all these arouse attention on collaborative commerce, and it can also recover the disadvantages of e-mail, ERP or PDM while operating in NPD process. Collaborative commerce contains collaborative scheme, collaborative marketing, collaborative product commerce (or development) and collaborative service, these system classifications. Within them, collaborative product development binds NPD most. In current, the main manufacturers are PTC, HP and IBM. The merits of the system lie in effective controlling NPD process, constructing NPD operation standard, and accumulating experiences in new product design and manufacture. For example, in1995 Airbus in France had used PTC Windchill to conduct collaborative aircraft design. In 1999, there was Taiwan manufacturer under government’s subsidy applying this system on new motorcycle model design. The main objective to introduce collaborative product development software is applying IT to support NPD process.
IT introduction process is an important period for enterprises to identify whether it is successful or not, and the adaptation during the process is the key accordance to determine success or failure of IT. Therefore, some scholars discuss IT introduction process from adaptation point of view. For example, Leonard – Barton（LB）（1988）addresses mutual adaptation mode between technology and organization to resolve misalignment during introduction process in technology (original IT specification), delivery system (training courses), performance criteria (impact upon activity). Susman et al.（2003）addresses that while using collaborative technology, the misalignments between technology and work, team and organization should be solved. DeSantics and Poole（1994） bring up adaptive structuration theory（AST）. The theory emphasizes on appropiration in technology, work, organizational environment and group. The higher the appropiration is, the higher the decision performance will be. Tyre and Orlikowski（1994）deem the technology adaptation is not gradual and continuous, but highly discontiunous. They indicate that in adaptation discrepancy events will discontinuously occur. This event provides enterprise an opportunity to review the suitability of existing process or a method to modify present process.
Although above researches have provided vital results, research result from Majchrzak et al.（2000）about new technology introduction process still cannot clearly describe all phenomena. Hence, they have discussed adaptation in project process via rocket design project and used collaborative technology (such as e-mail, data sharing or electric board) Majchrzak et al. has connected collaborative technology and NPD, but the research has discussed small and simple collaborative technology only (such as e-mail), but lacked of result of large and complex collaborative product development software. Meanwhile, although the result is the application of NPD, it does not provide the adaptation of each NPD stage (such as engineering trial manufacture). Furthermore, the mature experiences from western countries, such as Airbus in France, in introduction of collaborative product development software in NPD is worthy of consultation, but the specific situations in different countries should be taken into consideration. In Taiwan, cases which application of collaborative product development software supports NPD are still rare, but these introduction experiences are worthy of making thorough inquiry for other enterprises’ reference. Therefore, the article has selected a case closed study of Taiwan manufacturing that introduced collaborative product development software and accompanied with related adaptation theory (such as LB mode, AST, discrepancy event, etc.) to thoroughly investigate adaptation conditions and result analysis before, in the middle of, and after introduction.

摘要 II
ABSTRACT IV
目錄 VII
圖目錄 XI
表目錄 XII
第一章 緒論 1
1.1. 研究背景 1
1.2. 研究動機與目的 2
第二章 文獻探討 6
2.1. 協同商務(COLLABORATION COMMERCE) 6
2.1.1. 協同商務的定義(COLLABORATIVE COMMERCE) 7
2.1.2. 與產品資訊相關的協同作業 10
2.2. 協同產品商務(COLLABORATIVEPRODUCT COMMERCE CPC) 14
2.2.1. 協同產品電子商務的定義與分類 14
2.2.2. 企業需要協同產品電子商務的因素 16
2.3. 新產品開發作業 19
2.4. 調適性結構化理論(ADAPTIVE STRUCTURATION THEORY) 21
2.5. 科技與組織的調適模式 24
第三章 研究架構與研究方法 30
3.1. 研究架構 30
3.2. 研究流程 31
3.3. 研究構面 33
3.4. 個案選擇 36
3.5. 資料蒐集與分析方式 37
第四章 個案描述 40
4.1. 新產品開發流程階段 40
4.2. 系統導入前狀況分析 44
4.2.1. 目的 44
4.2.2. 新科技(CPC)之結構 46
4.2.3. 其他結構來源 48
4.3. 系統導入中狀況分析 52
4.3.1. 產品企劃提案階段導入狀況 52
4.3.2. 研發企劃階段導入狀況 54
4.3.3. 設計審查階段導入狀況 55
4.3.4. 產品研究發展階段導入狀況 56
4.3.5. 產品確認及測試階段導入狀況 57
4.3.6. 產品量產確認階段導入狀況 59
4.3.7. 工程試產階段導入狀況 61
4.3.8. 量產上市及市場驗證階段導入狀況 63
4.4. 系統導入中差異事件分析 66
4.4.1. 導入中ACCESS INFORMATION之差異事件分析 66
4.4.2. 導入中KNOWLEDGE CAPTURE之差異事件分析 69
4.4.3. 導入中KNOWLEDGE SHARING之差異事件分析 71
4.4.4. 導入中DECISION MAKING之差異事件分析 74
4.5.系統導入後狀況分析 78
4.5.1. 導入後ACCESS INFORMATION之差異事件分析 81
4.5.2. 導入後KNOWLEDGE CAPTURE之差異事件分析 82
4.5.3. 導入後KNOWLEDGE SHARING之差異事件分析 84
4.5.4. 導入後DECISION MAKING之差異事件分析 85
4.6. 差異事件的調適 86
4.6.1. 差異事件的調適方式 86
4.6.2. 調適不佳的差異事件 89
第五章 資料分析與研究發現 93
5.1.AST 模型的研究發現 93
5.2. 科技與組織的調適模式 94
第六章 結論 97
參考文獻 101
中文部份 101
英文部份 102
參考網站 104
附錄A.各階段之差異事件列表 105
A.1. 產品企劃提案階段的差異事件 105
A.2. 產品研發企劃階段的差異事件 109
A.3. 產品設計審查階段的差異事件 113
A.4. 產品研究發展階段的差異事件 117
A.5. 產品確認測試階段的差異事件 121
A.6. 產品量產確認階段的差異事件 125
A.7. 產品工程試產階段的差異事件 129
A.8. 產品市場檢證階段的差異事件 133

中文部份
[1] 黃貝玲，“協同商務－勾勒第二波電腦網路革命的商業模式”，電子化企業經理人報告，遠擎，Number 34，2002年6月，pp.12-21。
[2] 白光華，“創新協同產品研發” 2003年6月，pp.41-46。
[3] 黃貝玲，“協同商務價值鏈管理”，電子化企業經理人報告，遠擎，Number 20，2001年4月，pp.12-23。
[4] 高秀美，“協同商務技術－台灣製造業超越OEM模式的關鍵要素”，電子化企業經理人報告，遠擎，Number 34，2002年6月，pp.26-32。
[5] 吳宗璠，資訊管理個案研究方法，資訊管理實證研究方法研討會資料，1995。

英文部份
[6] Heppelmann， J.， “Collaborative Commerce in the Design Chain，” Implementation Road Map at IMET 2000 Expo， Rosemont， IL， USA， 2000
[7] Aberdeen Group， “Collaborative Product Commerce：Delivering Product Innovations at Internet Speed，” Aberdeen Group Market Viewpoint， Vol.12， No. 9， 1999.
[8] META Group， The Four Horsemen of Collaboration， META Group， 2001.
[9] Leonard-Barton (1988)， “Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization” Elservier Science Publishers B.V.(North-Holland)
[10] Gerald I. Susman， Barbara L. Gray， Jogh Perry， Candace E. Blair(2003)， “Recognition and reconciliation of differences in interpretation of misalignments when collaborative technologies are introduced into new product development team” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management
[11] Gerardine DeSanctis，Marshall Scott Poole， “Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use： Adaptive Structuration Theory” Organization Science /Vol.5， No.2， May 1994
[12] Marcie J. Tyre， Wanda J. Orlikowski， “Windows of Opportunity：Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations” Organization Science/Vol. 5， No.1，feburyary 1994
[13] Ann Majckrzak， Ronald E. Rice， Arvind Malhotra， Nelson King， Sulin Ba， “Technology Adaptation： The Case of A Computer-Supported Inter-Organizational Virtual Team” MIS quarterly Vol.24 No.4， pp569-600 December 2000
[14] InsightShare， “The New Collaboration： A Business Imperative” white paper， March 1， 2002
[15] CIMdata Inc.， collaborative Product Definition management (cPDm)：An Overview， Ann Arbor：CIMdata Inc.， 2001.
[16] Burdick， D.， Bond， B.， Miklovic， D.， Pond， K. and Eschinger， C.， “C-Commerce：The New Arena for Business Applications，” Research Note， Gartner Group， 1999.
[17] Goldman Sachs， MatrixOne， Inc.-Technology：B2B e-Commerce， Goldman Sachs， 2000.
[18] Deise， M.V.， Nowikow， C.， King， P. and Wright A.， Executive’s Guide to E-Business：from Tactics to Strategy， New York：John Wiley & Sons， 2001.
[19] Aberdeen Group， Beating the Competition with CPC， Boston：Aberdeen Group， 2000.
[20] Cooper， R. G. and Kleinschmidt， E. J. “Resources Allocation In The New Product Development Process”， Industrial Marketing Management， Vol. 17，1998， pp. 249-262.
[21] Gupta， A.K. and Wilemon， D.L.， "Accelerating The Development ofTechnology- Based New Products"， California Management Review， 1990.
[22] Edwards， Tim， “The Sociological of Translation; Technology Transfer & The Teaching Company Scheme”， Aston Business School， Aston University， Birmingham， RP 0005，March 2000
[23] Saren， M. "A Classification of Review Models of The Intra-Firm Innovation Process"， R&D Management， Vol. 14， No. 1， 1984， pp. 11-24.
[24] Song， X. Michael and M. Montoya-Weiss (1998)， "Critical Development Activities for Really New versus Incremental Products，" Journal of Product Innovation Management， 15：2， 124-135.
[25] Cooper，Robert G.(1983)， “A Process Model for Industrial New Product Development，” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management， Vol.30， No.1 PP.2-11
[26] Yin， R.K.， Case Study Research： Design and Methods， London：Sage Publications Inc， Second Edition， 1994.
[27] Gable， G.， “Integrating Case Study and Survey Research Methods：An Example in Information Systems，” European Journal of Information Systems， Vol.3， Number 2，1994， pp.112-126.
[28] Benbasat， I.， Goldstein， D. and Mead M.， “The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information System”， MIS Quarterly， Vol.11， No 3， Sept 1987， pp.369-386.
[29] Yin， R. K.， "Case study Research：Design and Methods"， Newburry Park Calif.， Sag Publications， 1989， pp46

參考網站
[30] TaiwanCNET新聞專區，“麥克波特：網路協同引領下一波電子商務”， http：//taiwan.cnet.com/news/ec/story/0，2000022589，20019105，00.htm，Accessed：2001。
[31] PTC，http：//www.ptc.com/，Accessed：2003。
[32] PTC(參數科技)台灣，http：//www.ptc.com/taiwan，Accessed：2003。
[33] 張瓊文，“新競爭時代中CPC網路協同產品商務的競爭優勢”，JAYA城邦網路，http：//www.jaya.com.tw/ARCWAY/index14.shtml，Accessed：2003。
[34] CoCreate，http：//www.cocreate.com/，Accessed：2003。
[35] MatrixOne，http：//www.matrixone.com/，Acessed：2003。