在企業中影響企業的存亡最主要的是創新，當企業一個新產品上市後，必須趕緊的研發下一個新產品，才能夠讓企業永續的經營。企業需要投資龐大的研發經費來培養人才與研發設備來開發新產品，但未必會看到成果，但如果沒有投資在研發這個部門，會更加速企業的滅亡。企業中常常會以獎勵的方式來激發員工有創新的想法，員工的創意往往會帶來不可思意的影響，創造了企業的利益。
研發人員的創新是如何來的？希望在這研究中可以了解到影響研發人員創新的因素是什麼。如果從台虹科技之研究個案可以看出的話，那麼對於企業在未來尋找比較有創造力的研發人員來說，是一個方向，對企業一大貢獻。企業都希望自己公司的研發團隊能夠源源不斷的有創新，讓公司不斷的有新產品，能夠在競爭市場中，永遠的領先，如何來找尋影響創為的因素，如果可以了解到影響創新的因素有那些，那麼在選擇研發人員時，就可以找到比較有創造力的人進入公司，讓研發的速度快一些，加速新產品進入市場，提昇企業的優勢，因此研究發展部門可說是企業生存的命脈。
本研究是以台虹科技公司個案的方式來進行研究，在同一家公司中，環境是相同的，公司的制度面、獎勵方式等之基礎是一樣的情況下，在這樣的條件，此個案中之研發團隊可區分五個小團隊，收集資料來探討影響創新之因素有那些？在這個研發部門中之個人因素與組織因素來探討影響創新的因素為何，與個人因素或組織因素對團隊創新所造成的影響。
本研究最主要的目的是要了解影響研發人員創新行為的因素，及團隊創新行為對研發績效是否有影響。所以本研究探討了個人因素中的人格特質，及組織因素之KEYS 量表之五大分類以及八個構面與研發人員創新行為的相關性。也對於個人因素與組織因素對團隊創新之行為相關性。個案中提供了團隊研發績效，從團隊績效與團隊創新行為來探討是否有正面影響。本研究在個人因素中之人格特質上採用五大人格特質Big Five(情緒敏感型、外向型、開放學習型、親和型、認真盡責型)的架構。組織因素中採KEYS 量表之五大分類以及八個構面的架構。以問卷的方式及訪談搜集資料後所得到的結果。
研究結果顯示，影響研發人員創新行為的最主要的因素為個人的人格特質，而團隊氣候也有一點顯著影響。人格特質中開放學習型、外向型在此個案中與創新行為影響程度較高，親和型、認真盡職型、情緒敏感型影響的程度則相對較小。在團隊氣候影響創新行為的以「自由度」之團隊氣候最具有影響研發人員創新行為，其次為「有工作挑戰性」，這是在此個案中所顯現出來。在團隊創新行為中對研發績效並沒有明顯的影響的，這與績效的衡量指標項目會有關，這是在個案中所呈現的結果。在個人的變項中會以工作的經驗與學歷會有所影響。
對於甄選研發人員可以將人格特質、工作經驗及學歷列入甄選人員的依據，可以迅速的找到適合的人員，很快的有研發績效，讓企業永續經營，這才是我研究此題目的主要目的。

The most important thing for company to stay competitive is keeping innovative. When a new product launches to the market, you must keep developing another new product to move faster than the competitors. Besides, the human resource and equipment to develop new products must be a huge investment. The returns are not always guaranteed. Without R&D investment, the company will be out of competition in a short time.The employees always be encouraged to have innovative thinking with incentives. Sometimes, their creative ideas would bring unexpected effect and benefit the company.
How does R&D personnel to have innovation? The purpose of the research is to understand the elements of innovation on R&D personnel.
From the case company, Taiflex Scientific Co., Ltd, to have creative employees would bring tremendous benefits to the company. Every company would ask the R&D team to keep innovative and to develop new products continuously in order to be the leader in the market. If we can understand what the elements of the innovation, we can recruit creative personnel and speed up the development. While the company can launch new products quicker and raise up the company competitiveness, R&D team is the main weapon to fight the competitors.
This is a case study of Taiflex Scientific Co., Ltd. There are 5 teams in the case company and all members are treated equally under same working environment and incentive policy. This study focus on the relationship between the innovative behavior of R&D personnel, also the team innovation performance and the influencing factors.
The Purpose of the study is to understand the factors of the innovative behaviors on R&D persons and the relation between innovative team and performance. The factors are personality traits and KEYS. This study adopts Five Factor Model (Big Five) that includes Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness , Conscientiousness, on the personality traits. The study of organization factors adopts KEY structure. The result is concluded from questionnaire survey and interviews.
The main factors on R&D innovation are personality traits, but team atmosphere would have only certain influence.
From the case study, Openness to Experience and Extraversion have higher contribution to innovative behavior than Neuroticism, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness.
The freedom from the team atmosphere is the main factor for R&D personnel innovation. The challenging job is the second important factor.
The case company shows that innovative team behavior has positive connection on R&D performance.
The more creative team has better performance. Besides, personnel working experience and education would have certain effect.
The purpose of the study is to know the requirements such as personality traits, working experience and education while recruiting R&D personnel. Then we can find the suitable person, have better performance and keep the company competitive.

目錄

第一章 緒論................................................................................................1
第一節 研究動機.................................................................................. 1
第二節 研究目的. .................................................................................2
第三節 研究流程.................................................................................. 3
第二章 文獻探討....................................................................................... 4
第一節 創新的定義...............................................................................4
第二節 影響創新的因素—個人因素...................................................6
第三節 影響創新的因素—組織因素...................................................17
第四節 個人創新行為...........................................................................22
第五節 團隊創新...................................................................................25
第三章 研究方法........................................................................................30
第一節 理論架構...................................................................................30
第二節 研究個案背景說明...................................................................30
第三節 研究假設...................................................................................33
第四節 研究對象...................................................................................33
第五節 訪談之設計...............................................................................34
第六節 問卷設計...................................................................................35
第七節 創新行為之績效評核...............................................................38
第八節 創新行為對團隊績效之影響...................................................38
第九節 統計分析方法...........................................................................38
第四章 個案資料分析................................................................................39
第一節 訪談內容整理.......................................................................... 39
第二節 描述性統計分析.......................................................................54
第三節 相關分析...................................................................................60
第五章 結論與建議................................................................................... 68
第一節 研究結論.................................................................................. 68
第三節 研究貢獻...................................................................................75
第四節 研究限制與建議.......................................................................76
參考文獻..................................................................................................... 77
ㄧ、中文部份.......................................................................................77
二、英文部分.......................................................................................79
三、附 錄.......................................................................................82

一、 中文部份
1.陳文雄(1975)，創造力與創造性人格之研究。師大教育研究所集刊17期。
2.陳文章 (2001)。企業技術創新績效影響因素之研究。碩士論文，長榮管理學院 經營管理研究所，台南。
3.陳世明 (2001)，知識分享與創新績效之研究—以交易成本理論觀點探討。碩士 論文，長榮管理學院經營管理研究所，台南。
4.蔡明達(2000)，市場資訊處理程序與組織記憶對行銷創新影響之研究，國立台灣大學商學研究所博士論文。
5.蔡啟通（1997），組織因素、組織成員整體創造性與組織創新之關係，國立台
灣大學商學研究所博士論文。
6.簡文娟（1999），「組織創新氣候評鑑量表之建立-以高科技產業為實證對象」， 中央大學人力資源管理所未出版碩士論文。
7.簡嘉誠(2001)，「領導風格型態、創造力人格特質搭配對組織承諾與創新績效影響關係之研究」，國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士班碩士論文。
8.劉鶴龍(1995)，「資訊電子產業科技人員與非科技人員創造力之研究」，國立政治大學科技管理研究所。
9.賴士葆(民1990)，「影響企業產品創新績效內部關鍵因素」，管理新思潮，初版，黃俊英等著，管拓文化事業公司，頁83-108。
10.王思峰 (2002)，由個人創新到群體創新：創造力的多層面理論。創造力與創意設計師資培育計畫書—商學類計畫書。台北：教育部顧問室--人文社會科學中程教育改進計畫。
11.吳明隆 (2003)，SPSS 統計應用實務。台北：松崗。
12.林文寶 (2001)，技術知識特性、整合、知識能量與組織學習對核心競爭力及創新績效關聯性之研究。博士論文，成功大學企業管理研究所，台南。
13.黃家齊 (2002)，團隊組合與創新。創造力與創意設計師資培育計畫書—商學類
計畫書。台北：教育部顧問室--人文社會科學中程教育改進計畫。
14.任金剛（1996），組織文化、組織氣候、及員工效能：一項微觀的探討，台灣大學商學研究所博士論文。
15.楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢、李亦園 (1993)，社會及行為科學研究法。台北：東 華。

二、英文部份：
1.Amabile, T. M. (1982), Social psychology of creativity: a consensual assessment technique, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997-1013.
2. Amabile, T. M. (1983), “The Social Psychology of Creativity,” New York: Springer-Verlag.
3. Amabile, T. M. and Gryskiewicz, S. S. (1987),”Creativity in the R&D laboratory”,
Technical report no. 30 , Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC.
4. Amabile, T. M.(1988), A model of creativity and innovation in organizations, In B.
M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 10,123-167, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
5. Amabile, T. M. & Gryskiewicz, N. (1989), “The creative environment scales: The work environment inventory”, Creativity Research Journal, 2, 231-254.
6. Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996), Assessing the work environment for creativity, Academy of Management Journal, 39(5),1154-1184
7. Amabile, Teresa M. (1997),”Motivating Creativity in Organization: On Doing What You
Love and LOVING What You Do ,”California Management Review, Vol.40,No.1(Fall),39-58.
8. Amabile, T. M., & R. Conti (1999), “Changes in the Work Environment for Creativity during Downsizing”, Academy of Management Journal, 42,630–640.
9. Amabile, T. M., C. N. Hadley & S. J. Kramer (2002), “Creativity under theGun”, Harvard Business Review, 80:52–61.
10.Amabile T. M., E. A. Schatzel, G. B. Moneta & S. J. Kramer (2004), “Leadre
Behaviors and The Work Environment for Creativity: Perceived Leader Support”, The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 5-32.
11. Allport, G.W. (1961), “Pattern and Growth in Personality,” New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
12. Andrews, Jonlee and Daniel C. Smith (1996), “In Search of the Marketing
I magination：Factors Affecting the Creativity of Marketing Programs for Mature
Products,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 33(May), 147-187.
13. Costa, P. T. Jr. and McCrae, R. R. (1992), “Four ways five factors are basic,” Personality and Individual Differences. 13. p653-665.
14. Costa, P. T. Jr. and McCrae, R. R. (1992), “Revised NEO personality inventory”.
15. Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1996). The Creative Personality Psychology today, July/August, 36-40
16. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990).The Domain of Creativity, In M. A. Runco and R.
S. Albert (Eds.), Theory of Creativity: 190-212, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publishing.
17. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997), Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harpercollins.
18. Drucker, Peter F. (1986), “Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles,” New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.
20. David Hesmondhalgh, The Cultural Industries, Sage, 2002, P.1-14
21. Hurt, H., Joseph, K. & Cook, C. (1977), Scales for the measurement of innovativeness, Human Communication Research, 4, 58-65.
22.Hoegl, M. & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork Quality and the Success of innovative Projects: A Theoretical Concept and Empirical Evidence.Organization science, 12(4), 435-449
23. Hoegl, M., Weinkauf, K. & Gemuenden, H. G. (2004). Interterm Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study. Organization science, 15(1), 38-55
24. Kanter, R. (1988), When a thousand flowers bloom Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organizations, In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 10, 169-211, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
25. Kirton, M. (1976), Adaptors and innovators: A description and measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 622-629.
26. Kleysen, R. F. & Street, C. T. (2001), Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovative behavior, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 284-296.
27. Kim, W. Chan and Renee Mauborgne (1997), “Value Innovation: The Strategic
Logic of High Growth,” Harvard Business Review, January-February, 103-112.
28.McCrae, RR.＆ Costa, PT Jr. (1987), “Validation of the five-factor modelof personality across instruments and observers,” Journal of Personality＆Social
Psychology, Vol. 52 , pp.81-90.
29. Mumford, Michael D. and Sigrid B. Gustafson (1988), “Creativity Syndrome:
Integration, Application, and Innovation,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol.103 (January), 27-44.
30. Robinson, Alan G. and Sam Stern (1997), “Corporate Creativity: How Innovation and Improvement Actually Happen,” SF：Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
31. Robert T. Keller (1992), “Transformational Leadership and the Performance of Reasearch and Development Project Groups,” Journal of Management, Vol. 18, No. 3, 489-501.
32. Rogers, E. (1983), Diffusion of Innovations, 3rd ed., Free Press, NY.
Robbins, S. P. (1996), Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies andapplications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
33. Scott, S.G. and Bruce, R.A. (1994), “Determinants of innovative behavior : A path
model of individual innovation in workplace,” Academy of Management Journal,
37(3), 580-607.
34. Schumpeter, J. (1934), The theory of economic development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. Sternberg and Lubart, T. L. (1996), “ Investing in Creativity,” American Psychologist. Vol. 51(7), 77-688.
36. Tushman, M. L. & Anderson, P. (1986), Technological discontinuities and organizational environments, Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 439-465.
37. West M. A. (1987), A measure of role innovation at work, British Journal of SocialPsychology, 26, 83-85.
38. West, M. & Farr, J. (1989), Innovation at work: psychological perspectives, SocialBehavior, 4, 15-30.