近年來，企業在快速變遷的競爭環境下，產品生命週期愈來愈短，企業研發成本日漸提高，企業單靠自行研發已不符合成本效益且無法快速回應市場需求，因此學者Chesbroug提出開放式創新的概念，利用外部力量協助創新。期望能藉由匯集群體智慧進行較有效益的創新，提升研發效益及組織績效。本研究目的為利用質化個案訪談及量化實證資料了解台灣企業開放式創新採用之現況，並進一步探討資訊科技能力實際如何影響開放式創新與組織績效的關連。
本研究樣本主要為台灣企業，總共 93 家企業樣本。利用PLS模型證名資訊科技能力及研發能力對於開放式創新具有正面影響。而開放式創新對於組織績效也具有顯著的正向影響效果。量化實證調查完後，並實際訪談兩間公司如何使用資訊科技幫助與外界共同進行創行同時驗證與量化實證資料是否有出入。並希望能了解業界對於這樣創新策略的實施對其是否是有幫助。
根據量化實證及質化訪談結果我們可以得知，資訊能力對於企業而言可以幫助其與外部資源做更有效率的連結並且使得外部單位或資源也能較輕易的與內部取得聯繫合作。在現今資源及資訊均開放的社會組織不需要獨立作所有事情，透過開放與外界資源整合，節省時間及成本才能跟上現代社會快速變遷的腳步。

In recent years, Enterprises are confronting short product life cycle as well as more complex competitive environment. It makes Enterprises raise them research cost. It is hard for enterprises to achieve cost effective and to satisfy current market demand immediately by doing the research and development job alone. Therefore, open innovation concept has been brought up by professor Chesbroug in 2003. Open innovation is a concept that enterprises can use external resources that cross different fields to innovate. The purpose of this study is to understand the implementation of open-innovation in Taiwanese Enterprise by case study and quantitative model. Furthermore, this research explores the connection of information capabilities, open innovation and firm performance. The results show that information capabilities and open innovation have a significant correlation and open innovation and firm performance also have a significant correlation. Through case study and quantitative model, we found that the open innovation is become more and more popular in Taiwan industry in order to survive and success in competitive marketplace.

第一章、 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 4
第三節 研究流程 5
第二章、 文獻探討 7
第一節 開放式創新 7
第二節 開放式創新衡量指標 11
第三節 影響開放式創新的因素 19
第四節 組織績效 22
第三章、 研究架構與方法 24
第一節 研究流程 24
第二節 研究架構 25
第三節 研究假說 27
第四節 變數之操作性定義及衡量 30
第五節 研究樣本與資料分析方法 32
第四章、 資料分析與討論 35
第一節 樣本描述性統計 35
第二節 信效度分析 38
第三節 研究模型驗證及假說檢定 43
第五章、 個案探討 47
第一節 個案簡介及動機 47
第二節 訪談對象介紹 49
第三節 C公司訪談內容摘要 51
第四節 H公司訪談內容摘要 55
第五節 訪談內容總結 56
第六節 訪談內容與量化結果探討 58
第六章、 結論與建議 59
第一節 結論 59
第二節 研究貢獻 61
第三節 研究限制 62
第四節 未來研究建議 63
附錄一：測量模型問項之交叉負荷量檢測 64
附錄二：問卷 68
參考文獻： 73

吳萬益, & 林清河. (2000). 企業研究方法, 台北: 華泰書局.
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碩士論文
潘浩煒. (2011). 開放式創新探討: 揚明光學個案研究. 交通大學管理學院科技管理學程學位論文.
Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS quarterly, 169-196.
Bhatt, G. D., & Grover, V. (2005). Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: An empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(2), 253-277.
Chandler, A. D. (1994). Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism: Belknap Pr.
Chesbrough, H., & Crowther, A. K. (2006). Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Management, 36(3), 229-236.
Chesbrough, H., & Schwartz, K. (2007). Innovating business models with co-development partnerships. Research-Technology Management, 50(1), 55-59.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology: Harvard Business Press.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006a). The era of open innovation. Managing innovation and change, 127.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2006b). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape: Harvard Business Press.
Chesbrough, H. W., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (2006). Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm: Oxford University Press, USA.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information systems research, 14(2), 189-217.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128-152.
De Jong, J. P. J., Vanhaverbeke, W., Kalvet, T., & Chesbrough, H. (2008). Policies for open innovation: Theory, framework and cases: Tarmo Kalvet.
Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. (1996). The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of Management journal, 949-969.
Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., & Chesbrough, H. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, 39(4), 311-316.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
Gassmann, O. (2006). Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management, 36(3), 223-228.
Gassmann, O., & Enkel, E. (2004). Towards a theory of open innovation: three core process archetypes.
Gomes-Casseres, B. (1997). The alliance revolution: The new shape of business rivalry: Harvard University Press.
Griffin, A., & Page, A. L. (1993). An interim report on measuring product development success and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10(4), 291-308.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C. (1998). Black (1998), Multivariate data analysis: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., & TATHAN, R. L. Y. B. (1992). WC; Multivariate data analysis with readings: McMillan Publishing, New York.
Herstad, S. J., Bloch, C., Ebersberger, B., & van de Velde, E. (2008). Open innovation and globalisation: Theory, evidence and implications. Vision Era-Net-Shared knowledge bases for sustainable innovation policies, 96.
Kaplan, A. M., Schoder, D., & Haenlein, M. (2007). Factors influencing the adoption of mass customization: The impact of base category consumption frequency and need satisfaction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(2), 101-116.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. Harvard business review, 70(1).
Kusunoki, K., Nonaka, I., & Nagata, A. (1998). Organizational capabilities in product development of Japanese firms: a conceptual framework and empirical findings. Organization Science, 699-718.
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. (2007). The drivers of technology licensing: An industry comparison. California management review, 49(4), 67.
Pavitt, K. (2003). 5. Specialization and Systems Integration. The Business of Systems Integration, 1(9), 78-93.
Rai, A., Patnayakuni, R., & Seth, N. (2006). Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS quarterly, 225-246.
Rai, A., & Tang, X. (2010). Leveraging it capabilities and competitive process capabilities for the management of interorganizational relationship portfolios. Information systems research, 21(3), 516-542.
Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386.
Sabherwal, R., & Chan, Y. E. (2001). Alignment between business and IS strategies: A study of prospectors, analyzers, and defenders. Information systems research, 12(1), 11-33.
Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, J. P. J., Vanhaverbeke, W., & De Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6-7), 423-437.
Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of management review, 801-814.