中文摘要
現今，IC產品在人類的生活中所扮演的角色越來越不可或缺。以台灣來說，大多數的人一舉手、一投足都會用到IC產品，如：手機、金融卡、健保卡…等等。如何將製造的過程安排妥當、將對的人放在對的位置，是一件很重要的事。所以本研究在探討製造流程中，「人」在這一個流程究竟扮演了什麼樣的角色，「人」又是怎麼透過不同的專業將IC生產出來。
一件IC產品的產生，無非要透過設計廠、代工廠、封裝測試廠…等等不同功能的工廠以進行生產。各種不同功能的工廠內都有不同的專業人員在進行生產，但是一座工廠當中，裡面也包含了更多不同的專業部門。這些不同專業的部門所要負責的是不同部份的製造過程，因為所負責的部份有所不同，所以大多數都在單一部門內分享知識而已。但現在，除了要在部門內進行知識的轉移，也必須遊走於不同的社群之間來轉移彼此的知識。這些不同的人要怎麼進行溝通、以及知識的交流，才讓整個製造過程能夠更加的完整和有效率，則是本研究將進行探討的部份。
本研究的研究方法是採用質性研究的敘說分析來進行。目的是為了補足在量化研究當中所沒有辦法表達的情境，並透過實地的觀察採集相關的個案，以及蒐集相關的輔證資料以求得個案的真實度、合理性及批判性。研究者在資料蒐集的過程當中，所採取的方式是觀察法和訪問法，在蒐集資料的過程當中，研究者會以觀察者的角色進行自然觀察，也就是在自然的情境下觀察並記錄事情發生的過程，也會對相關的人員進行訪問，主要是讓整個個案可以讓讀者容易瞭解。
本研究的撰寫主要以詮釋性的方式，將日常透過一個在實務中所發生的故事，讓人瞭解在這個研究場域中所發生的調適性的跨社群合作，並以這個故事說明出現其中的原因與結果，並將管理意涵以及實務運作方式在這一個故事中顯露出來。
本研究在實際的工作場域中發現，在以往的專業分工的架構下，雖然可以讓各部門各有其職司，並提高生產的效率。但是這些不同專業的人，在專業思維上各有各的不同，要如何透過溝通，進而交流彼此的知識。雖然在同一家公司內，大家的目標都是一致的，但是彼此的專業知識、認知與思維卻不盡相同，便容易造成溝通上的障礙，使用知識的傳遞與轉移出現問題。
本研究也在實際發生的個案當中，發現到幾個不同的溝通障礙，並將其彙整成五個不同的影響類型。分別是：(1)各部門間的連繫程度薄弱。(2)各部門的歷史包袱。(3)各部門的認知差距。(4)知識傳遞的障礙。(5)自我防衛。
本研究透過個案發現：可以謄寫在紙上或是透過言傳的知識，可以有效達到該有的錯誤防範效果，特別是一個新手工程師，但是如果要事先進行預防就更需要一個有sense的員工。要培養出一個有sense的人，只透過這些文字上的傳遞真的是夠的嗎？
在個案公司中，許多工程師對於要如何培養知識，大多都認為應該要透過實際的演練才有辦法獲得，也就是從做中學。但在這個過程當中，所要遭受到的錯誤也就更加的多，但是並不是所有的人都願意將自己受挫的故事攤開在別人的眼前。
在個案中也看到，跨疆界的知識傳遞會受到相當多的心理因素影響，如：員工自我防衛的心理態度、員工只挑選與自己有相關的知識進行採納，但這些都會阻礙有sense員工的培養，但是該如何減少這些心理因素所造成的影響，則是一個可以進行研究的部份。
本研究從跨部門知識整合切入探討，但也在觀察的過程中發現到溝通的問題首先在於打開彼此的心防，否則就沒有辦法深入了解問題發生的原因，並獲取相關的知識。
關鍵字：跨疆界、跨社群、知識整合、工作實務、調適性合作、資訊科技

英文摘要
Today，IC products have become a essential in the human life. Take the daily life of Taiwan’s people for example, people use the IC products in every minutes: mobile phone, credit card, health insurance card, etc. The competition between IC products also has been a vital war for the company to protect its market position. Time to market for the IC product has also become more and more important for the company to maintain or even survive. More powerful performance of the IC product rely on more professional marketing position forecast, innovated design and time to market manufacturing.
To realize a IC product come from the manufacturing through the IC design house, foundry and the package. There should be with different expertise between the companies or inside the company. How to make sure with correct manufacturing through these expertise to meet the time-to-marketing challenge is very important, especially, right people in right position. What’s the role-play for the people during the manufacturing between and within the company/groups will be the focus in this thesis. Take the example for a semiconductor manufacturing company, there are divided with different functions of department. Each department has its own knowledge-based function to maintain or develop the related knowledge for a IC manufacturing. People should do the knowledge transfer inside the department and, moreover, the related functions with other departments. How do improve the efficiency through the effective communication and knowledge sharing will be discussed.
The main results of this thesis are as the below
1. There are with built-up boundary between different groups/department organization due to its different job functions and expertise. It will be resulted as the communication barrier or knowledge transfer problem between these groups/organization even their goal is the same.
2. 5 categories can be identified for these barriers on the knowledge transfer and communication between different expertises.
3. Defined SOP(standard operation procedure) to communicate through documents and intensive discussion meeting can be improved to effective for the knowledge transfer between different groups/department organization, especially for the fresh engineers.
4. The psychological factor of human between different groups/organization is found to be another issue to block the knowledge transfer. How to eliminate the factor can be next study focus.

目 錄
目 錄 3
表目錄 5
圖目錄 6
中文摘要 7
英文摘要 10
誌 謝 12
第一章 緒論 13
第一節 研究動機 13
第二節 研究目的 14
第三節 研究問題 14
第二章 知識管理之理論探討與發展 16
第一節 知識內嵌的本質：內嵌於物件、認知與互動 16
第二節 實踐才能知曉(Knowing in Practice) 19
第三節 知識疆界與跨域合作的觀點 21
第三章 研究場域與方法 25
第一節 研究場域 25
第二節 研究方法 27
第四章 研究發現 30
第一節 專案實務背景 30
第二節 個案一：「錯誤，來自被遺漏的小事情！」 33
一、個案背景回顧 33
二、問題的開端 35
三、初步的問題偵查 36
四、峰迴路轉的偵查 37
五、柳暗花明 40
六、個案小結 40
第三節 個案二：「消失的框框！」 41
一、個案背景 42
二、框框在哪裡？ 44
三、分頭搜查 44
四、結果 46
第五章 個案分析與管理意涵 47
第一節 資料分析 47
一、「錯誤，來自被遺漏的小事情！」個案分析 47
二、「消失的框框！」個案分析 48
第二節 管理意涵 49
一、「錯誤，來自被遺漏的小事情！」管理意涵 49
二、「消失的框框！」管理意涵 51
第六章 結論與建議 54
第一節 結論 54
第二節 未來研究建議 58
參考文獻 59
一、中文部份： 59
二、英文部分： 59


表目錄
表2-1-1 三個知識內嵌觀點的整理與比較………………………………………19
表4-1-1 各作業主要工作及其內…………………………………………………30
表4-3-1 『框框』功能舉例………………………………………………………43

圖目錄
圖4-1-1 邏輯代換示意……………………………………………………………31
圖4-1-2 工作流程示意……………………………………………………………32
圖4-2-1 初步的問題偵查流程示意………………………………………………37
圖4-2-2 峰迴路轉的偵查流程示意………………………………………………39
圖4-3-1 框框在哪裡？流程示意…………………………………………………44
圖4-3-1 分頭搜查流程示意………………………………………………………46
圖6-1-1 本研究個案溝通問題彙整結構圖………………………………………56

參考文獻
一、中文部份：
1. 劉念琪，韓君豪，2002。探索知識工作者專業知識之取得—以新竹科學園區工業工程人員為例，管理學報，第十九卷第六期，1045-1071。

二、英文部分：
1. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. 2001. Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1): 107-136.
2. Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. 2001. Tacit knowledge: some suggestions for operationalization. Journal of Management Studies, 38(6): 811-829.
3. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3): 404-441.
4. Blackler, F. 1995. Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: An overview and interpretation. Organization Studies, 16(6): 1021-1046.
5. Boland, R. J., & Tenkasi, R. V. 1995. Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowledge. Organization Science, 6(4): 350-372.
6. Boland, R. J., Tenkasi, R. V., & Te'eni, D. 1994. Designing information technology to support distributed cognition. Organization Science, 5(3): 456-477.
7. Carlile, P. R. 2002. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4): 442-455.
8. Carlile, P. R. 2004. Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5): 555-568.
9. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128-152.
10. Constant, D., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. 1996. The kindness of strangers: the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7(2): 119-135.
11. Contu, A., & Willmott, H. 2003. Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14(3): 283-296.
12. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. 2002. A mapping framework for strategic making. In Huff, A. S., & Jenkins, M. (Eds.) Mapping strategic knowledge: 173-195. London: Sage.
13. Gherardi, S. 2000. Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations. Organization, 7: 329-349.
14. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3): 481-510.
15. Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(winter):109-122.
16. Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. 1999. What’s your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review, 77(2): 106-16.
17. Huber, G. P. 2001. Transfer of knowledge in knowledge management systems: Unexplored issues and suggested studies. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(2): 72-79.
18. Hsiao, R.L., Tsai, D.H., & Lee, C. F. 2006. The problems of embeddedness: knowledge transfer, coordination and reuse in information systems. Organization Studies, (forthcoming).
19. Kellogg, K.C., Orlikowski, W.J. & Yates, J. 2006. Life in the trading zone: structuring coordination across boundaries in postbureaucratic organizations. Organization Science, 17(1): 22-44.
20. Kostova, T. 1999. Transformational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2): 308-324.
21. Lam, A. 1997. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: problem of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18(6): 973-996.
22. Lam, A. 2000. Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: an integrated framework. Organizational Studies, 21(3): 487-513.
23. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Markus, M. L. 2001. Toward a theory of knowledge reuse: types of knowledge reuse situations and factors in reuse success. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1): 57-93.
25. McDermott, R. 1999. Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41(4): 103-117.
26. Nidumolu, S. R., Subramani, M., & Aldrich, A. 2001. Situated learning and the situated knowledge web: Exploring the ground beneath knowledge management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (1): 115-50.
27. Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1): 14-37.
28. Orlikowski, W. J. 2002. Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3): 249-273.
29. Pentland, B. T. 1995. Information systems and organizational learning: the social epistemology of organizational knowledge systems. Accounting Management and Information Technologies, 5(1): 1-21.
30. Pickering, J. M., & King, J. L. 1995. Hardwiring weak ties: inter-organizational computer-mediated communication, occupational communities and organizational change. Organization Science, 6(4): 479-486.
31. Polanyi, M. 1966. The Tacit Dimension, Garden City, NY: Anchor.
32. Sambamurthy, V. & Subramani, M. 2005. Special issue in information technologies and knowledge management. MIS Quarterly, 29(1): 1-7.
33. Schultze, U. 2000. A confessional account of ethnography about knowledge work. MIS Quarterly, 24(1): 3-41.
34. Schultze, U., & Boland, R. J. 2000. Knowledge management technology and the reproduction of knowledge work practices. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9: 193-212.
35. Snowden, D. 2002. Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(2): 100-111.
36. Swap, W., Leonard, D., Shields, M., & Abrams, L. 2001. Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1): 95-114.
37. Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 27-43.
38. Thompson, M. P. A., & Walsham, G. 2004. Placing knowledge management in context. Journal of Management Studies, 41(5): 725-747.
39. Tsoukas, H. 1996. The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 11-25.
40. Tyre, M. J., & von Hippel, E. 1997. The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations. Organization Science, 8(1): 71-83.
41. Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. 2000. It is what one does: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9: 155-173.
42. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Oractice: Learning. Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.