Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0602115-103816 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0602115-103816
論文名稱
Title
知識仲介者在開放式創新下的角色
The Role of Knowledge Broker in Open Innovation Framework
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
83
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2015-06-27
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2015-07-02
關鍵字
Keywords
開放式創新、向外開放式創新、創新仲介市場、知識仲介者、向內開放式創新
outbound open innovation, inbound open innovation, open innovation, knowledge broker, intermediary market
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5931 次,被下載 777
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5931 times, has been downloaded 777 times.
中文摘要
從2003年開放式創新概念提出後,許多組織改變其策略以求能在開放式創新下受益。開放式創新讓企業消除組織疆界,使創新、資源能夠自由的進出組織內外。開放式創新根據其性質,又可分為向內開放式創新以及向外開放式創新,向內開放式創新是指企業引入外界創意進入組織協助創新;向外開放式創新是指將組織內部閒置的創新釋出到外界。在做向內開放式創新及向外開放式創新時,知識仲介者的角色很重要。知識仲介者是指將知識傳播給大眾知曉的人。執行開放式創新的組織需要一個職位,將外界的資源與內部的資源做結合,他需要能夠有效的連結不同領域以產生創新。在企業間頻頻轉移與交換知識的當下,國外許多企業設立知識仲介者這職位。目前在台灣我們不確定是否存在這角色。因此本研究以個案研究法來探討這問題,我們篩選一百家企業後最後選出六間企業進行訪談。並且歸納出目前台灣沒有完美的知識仲介者,但是有向外開放式創新知識仲介者以及向內開放式創新知識仲介者。並且知識仲介者不可能只做知識仲介,知識仲介者必須有其他專長才能了解是否能將創新引入或輸出。
Abstract
This study explores The Role of Knowledge Broker in Open Innovation Framework. Open innovation is an increasingly important issue. Since open innovation concepts have been proposed in 2003, many organizations continue to change its strategy in order to be able to benefit in the open innovation. Open innovation allows companies to eliminate organizational boundaries between internal and external, which make innovation and resources can freely go out and inside. Open Innovation by its nature, can be divided into inbound open innovation and outbound open innovation. Inbound open innovation is that an organization can make outside ideas into the organization to assist innovation; Outbound open innovation refers to the internal organization released patent to the outside world, so that the patent can effectively use and organization can get premium. The knowledge broker is very important when companies conduct open innovation strategy.
The knowledge broker refers to people who disseminate knowledge to the public. Organizations which implement open innovation need an occupation who can link the external resources and internal resources. This position needs to be able to effectively link different areas to generate innovation. Because frequent transfer and exchange of knowledge, many foreign enterprises start to set up the knowledge broker.
Currently in Taiwan, we are not sure if is there existing knowledge broker, and what role is. Therefore, this study use case study to explore this issue. We screened 100 companies and selected six companies to make interview. We concluded that there is no perfect knowledge broker now, but outbound open innovation knowledge broker and in bound open innovation knowledge broker exist. And knowledge broker could not only broker knowledge, but also have the knowledge in other field. By this, it can know how and why can he outbound and inbound innovation.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書………………………………...…………....…………………..…..…….i
誌謝...……………………………………………...……………………………….….ii
中文摘要……………………………..……………………………………....…….….iii
英文摘要…………………………………………..……………………..………...….iv
圖 次…………………………………………………………………………………..viii
表 次…………………………………………………………………………………..ix
第一章 緒論………………………………………………………….……………….1
第一節 研究背景……………………………..…………………….…………..1
第二節 研究動機……………………………..…………………….…………..3
第三節 研究目的……………………………..…………………….…………..6
第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………….…………… 7
第一節 知識仲介者...……………………..………..……………….…………..7
第二節 創新……………………...……………..………………….…………...13
第三節 開放式創新……………………………..……………………………..16
第四節 知識仲介者與開放式創新……………………………………………27
第三章 研究方法……………………………..……………………………………....29
第一節 研究目的……………………………..……………………………….29
第二節 研究範圍……………………………..……………………………….29
第三節 訪談對象……………………………..……………………………….29
第四節 設計問卷與採訪……………………………..……………………….35
第五節 資料分析……………………………..……………………………….38
第四章 個案介紹……………………………..……………………………………..40
第一節 友達光電……………………………..……………………………….40
第二節 創意引睛……………………………..……………………………….41
第三節 光陽五金工廠……………………………..………………………….43
第四節 創惟股份有限公司……………………………..…………………….44
第五節 General Mobile……………………………..…………………………45
第六節 工研院……………………………..…………………………………..46
第七節 資料分析……………………………..………………………………..48
第五章 問題與討論……………………………..………………………………...…60
第一節 結果摘要與討論……………………………..……………………….60
第二節 理論與管理意義……………………………..……………………….64
第三節 研究限制……………………………..……………………………….65
第四節 未來研究建議……………………………..………………………..…66
參考文獻……………………………..…………………………………………67
參考文獻 References
魏依玲、吳彥寬, 2008, 「開放式創新下研究機構角色之轉變」, 產業與管理論壇, 第10卷第3期
胡幼慧, 1996, 質性研究 : 理論、方法與本土女性研究實例, 台北市:巨流
楊凱期, 2008, 開放式經營模式演進歷程分析之研究-以台積電為例, 國立政治大學科技管理研究所經營管理碩士學程碩士論文
Adner, R., & Levinthal, D. A. (2002). The emergence of emerging technologies. Insead.
Ahlstrom, D. (2010). Innovation and growth: How business contributes to society. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 11-24.
Almirall, E., & Casadesus-Masanell, R. (2010). Open versus closed innovation: A model of discovery and divergence. Academy of management review, 35(1), 27-47.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
Arora, A., & Gambardella, A. (2010). Ideas for rent: an overview of markets for technology. Industrial and corporate change, 19(3), 775-803.
Beamish, P. W., & Lupton, N. C. (2009). Managing joint ventures. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2), 75-94.
Betz, F. (1993). Strategic technology management. McGraw-Hill.
Bielak, A. T., Campbell, A., Pope, S., Schaefer, K., & Shaxson, L. (2008). From science communication to knowledge brokering: the shift from ‘science push’to ‘policy pull’. In Communicating science in social contexts (pp. 201-226). Springer Netherlands.
Bogers, M., Afuah, A., & Bastian, B. (2010). Users as innovators: a review, critique, and future research directions. Journal of management.
Bromley, D. A. (2004). Technology policy. Technology in society, 26(2), 455-468.
Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2006). In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management science, 52(1), 68-82.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). The logic of open innovation: managing intellectual property. California Management Review, 45(3), 33-58.
Chesbrough, H. (2007). The Market for Innovation: Implications for Corporate. California Management Review, 49(3), 45.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). The era of open innovation. Managing innovation and change, 127(3), 34-41.

Christensen, C. M. (1997). The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials).
Christensen, J. F., Olesen, M. H., & Kjær, J. S. (2005). The industrial dynamics of Open Innovation—Evidence from the transformation of consumer electronics. Research policy, 34(10), 1533-1549.
Clark, J., & Guy, K. (1997). Innovation and competitiveness. Technopolis, Brighton.
Clemens, E. S. (1986). Of asteroids and dinosaurs; the role of the press in the shaping of scientific debate. Social Studies of Science, 16, 421-456.
Dodgson, M., Gann, D., & Salter, A. (2006). The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: the case of Procter & Gamble. R&D Management, 36(3), 333-346.
Drucker, P. F. (2002). The discipline of innovation. 1985. Harvard business review, 80(8), 95-100.
Drucker, P. F., & Noel, J. L. (1986). Innovation and Entrepreneurship: practices and principles. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 34(1), 22-23.
Edelman, B., & Eisenmann, T. R. (2010). Google, Inc. President and Fellows of Harvard College.
Fisher, F. M. (2000). The IBM and Microsoft Cases: What's the Difference?. American Economic Review, 180-183.
Fosfuri, A. (2006). The licensing dilemma: understanding the determinants of the rate of technology licensing. Available at SSRN 650108.
Frankel, E. G. (1990). Introduction (pp. 1-20). Springer Netherlands.
Franklin, M., Searle, N., Stoyanova, D., & Townley, B. (2013). Innovation in the application of digital tools for managing uncertainty: the case of UK independent film. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(3), 320-333.
Fredberg, T., Elmquist, M., & Ollila, S. (2008). Managing Open InnovationPresent Findings and Future Directions.
Gassmann, O. (2006). Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&d Management, 36(3), 223-228.
Grindley, P. C., & Teece, D. J. (1997). Licensing and cross-licensing in semiconductors and electronics. California Management Review, 39(2), 8-41.
Hargadon, A. (1998). Firms as knowledge brokers. California management review, 40(3), 209-227.
Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative science quarterly, 9-30.
Higgins, J. M. (1995). Innovation: the core competence. Planning review, 23(6), 32-36.
Jackson, N. (2003). Introduction to brokering in higher education. In N. Jackson (Ed.), Engaging and changing higher education through brokerage (pp. 3-20). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Jacobson, N., Butterill, D., & Goering, P. (2004). Organizational factors that influence university-based researchers’ engagement in knowledge transfer activities. Science Communication, 25(3), 246-259.
Johri, A. (2008, October). Boundary spanning knowledge broker: An emerging role in global engineering firms. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2008. FIE 2008. 38th Annual (pp. S2E-7). IEEE.
Kanter, R. M. (1988). Three tiers for innovation research. Communication Research, 15(5), 509-523.
Koch, M. J., & McGrath, R. G. (1996). Improving labor productivity: Human resource management policies do matter. Strategic management journal, 17(5), 335-354.
Kramer, D. M., & Wells, R. P. (2005). Achieving Buy-In Building Networks to Facilitate Knowledge Transfer. Science Communication, 26(4), 428-444.
Lamoreaux, N. R., & Sokoloff, K. L. (1999). Inventors, firms, and the market for technology in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In Learning by doing in markets, firms, and countries (pp. 19-60). University of Chicago Press.
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic management journal, 27(2), 131-150.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2008). Open innovation in practice: an analysis of strategic approaches to technology transactions. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 55(1), 148-157.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2011). Open innovation: Past research, current debates, and future directions. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(1), 75-93.
Lomas, J. (2007). The in-between world of knowledge brokering. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 129-132.
Lucas, H., & Goh, J. (2013). Disruptive technology: how Kodak missed the digital photography revolution. Engineering Management Review, IEEE, 41(4), 81-93.
Marquis, D. G. (1969). The anatomy of successful innovations. Innovation, 1(7), 28-37.
Meyer, M. (2010). The rise of the knowledge broker. Science Communication, 32(1), 118-127.
MOSS KANTER, R. O. S. A. B. E. T. H. (2006). Innovation: the classic traps. Harvard Business Review. Boston.
Oldham, G., & McLean, R. (1997). Approaches to knowledge-brokering. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 23(06).
Osborne, T. (2004). On mediators: Intellectuals and ideas trade in the knowledge society. Economy and Society, 33, 430-447.
Pawlowski, S. D., & Raven, A. (2000). Supporting Shared Information Systems: Boundary Objects. Communities, and Brokering.
Satterfield, D., Burd, C., Valdez, L., Hosey, G., & Shield, J. E. (2002). The “in-between people”: Participation of community health representatives in diabetes prevention and care in American Indian and Alaska Native communities. Health Promotion Practice, 3(2), 166-175.
Sakkab, N. Y. (2002). Connect & develop complements research & develop at P&G. Research-Technology Management, 45(2), 38-45.
Satterfield, D., Burd, C., Valdez, L., Hosey, G., & Shield, J. E. (2002). The “in-between people”: Participation of community health representatives in diabetes prevention and care in American Indian and Alaska Native communities. Health Promotion Practice, 3(2), 166-175.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (Vol. 55). Transaction publishers.

Shinn, T. (2002). The triple helix and new production of knowledge: prepackaged thinking on science and technology. Social Studies of Science, 32, 599-614.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 15). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Surridge, B., & Harris, B. (2007). Science-driven integrated river basin management: a mirage?. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32(3), 298-312.
Sverrisson, A. (2001). Translation networks, knowledge brokers and novelty construction:Pragmatic environmentalism in Sweden. Acta Sociologica, 44, 313-327.
Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15, 285–305.
Thomke, S. (2001). Enlightened experimentation: The new imperative for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 79(2), 66-75.
Trott, P., & Hartmann, D. A. P. (2009). Why'open innovation'is old wine in new bottles. International Journal of Innovation Management, 13(04), 715-736.
Utterback, J. M., & Suarez, F. F. (1993). Innovation, competition, and industry structure. Research policy, 22(1), 1-21.
Uzzi, B., & Spiro, J. (2005). Collaboration and creativity: The small world Problem1. American journal of sociology, 111(2), 447-504.
Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, J. P., Vanhaverbeke, W., & De Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6), 423-437.
Van De Vrande, V., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Gassmann, O. (2010). Broadening the scope of open innovation: past research, current state and future directions. International Journal of Technology Management, 52(3/4), 221-235.
van der Meer, H. (2007). Open innovation—the Dutch treat: Challenges in thinking in business models. Cre- ativity and Innovation Management, 16(2), 192–202.
Vogel, A., & Kaghan, W. N. (2001). Bureaucrats, brokers, and the entrepreneurial university. Organization, 8(2), 358-364.
von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wachelder, J. (2003). Democratizing science: Various routes and visions of Dutch
Watts, D. J. (1999). Small worlds: the dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton university press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
West, J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2008). Getting clear about communities in open innovation. Industry and Innova- tion, 15(2), 223–231.
Wyld, D. C. (2010). Speaking up for customers: Can sales professionals spark product innovation? Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(2), 80–82.
Wyld, D. C., & Maurin, R. (2009). Keys to innovation: The right measures and the right culture? Academy of Man- agement Perspectives, 23(2), 96–98.
Zhao, Z. J., & Anand, J. (2009). A multilevel perspective on knowledge transfer: Evidence from the Chinese automo- tive industry. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 959– 983.
網路資料:
劉基欽, 2009, 開放式創新之文獻回顧與探討, http://www.slideshare.net/chichinliu/ss-presentation-889057
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code