| Summary: | 企業常藉由採納新科技的作法提升本身的競爭力，科技因此成為創造企業核心競爭力的關鍵。但是要讓科技在組織中發揮其功能，並不是一件容易的事，科技的導入常伴隨著新工作方式的產生，而團隊成員不一定能馬上轉換工作方式，或接受新的工作方式，因此需要經歷過一段調適的過程，使得科技能融入到組織的工作例規當中，成為組織例規的一部份。過去的文獻從例規的觀點談科技採納並不多，本研究從組織例規的觀點著手，探究科技採納的過程中科技與組織的調適行為。
本研究以質性研究的方法進行，長期觀察與分析一家台灣知名的電腦代工廠商，研究其導入產品生命週期管理系統以提升其設計鏈績效的歷程。透過分析優品公司採納產品生命週期管理系統的前後時期，工作例規與審核變化的變化；以及分析內嵌在產品生命週期管理系統中的組織例規，以瞭解組織中的工作例規與審核例規變化的情形。最後，本研究發現有一種例規衝突的現象，我稱之為「例規越界」，這是過去文獻所未曾提及的情況，但是卻對科技採納產生重大的影響。這是科技中的組織例規與採納科技後組織的新例規之間的衝突，我將在研究中呈現不同例規間的衝突對於科技採納的影響。
本研究在學理上的貢獻有三：首先，反思在科技調適的文獻中，是否忽略了科技精神的重要性？調適不能只重視功能面的調適，更需要注重精神面的調適。其次是，透過反思審核例規背後的精神，去凸顯出當使用者在與科技進行調適時，是如何產生學習上的失靈。當使用者能有效的解讀科技的精神時，調適才有可能更有效。最後，回應Feldman的單一例規變化的主張，進行延展性解釋，本研究發現例規是否成為變動的來源取決於例規間互動的關係，其中例規變動的方向，不僅取決於例規間變動的關係，還取決於使用者是否能反思例規的內涵。因此，本研究認為組織例規不只是像Feldman所主張的「例規是變革的來源」，而且還是「例規的反思是變革的路徑」。
=== The organization always promotes its competitive ability by adopting new technology. Therefore, technology has been a key element to build core competitive for organization. However, it is a hard work for technology to develop its performance in organization. When organization adopts a new technology, organization will accompany to develop a new work routine. But a lot of organization members could not switch or accept their work routines to new routines. Therefore, organization needs a period of time to adapted technology, then the technology will embed in organizational routine to be a part of organizational routines. In past literatures, there are seldom use “organizational routine” to explore technology adoption. The study will take the “organizational routine” view to understand adoptive process in technology and organizational adaption.
The study is an qualitative research that reviews and analysis a famous computer OEM ( Original Equipment Manufacturer) in Taiwan. The study explore the process of a company adopted the PLM（product Lifecycle Management） to improve the performance of design-chain management. In the study , I analysis the organizational routines and the organizational routines embedded in PLM that before and after adopt PLM. And, the study find a routines conflict phenomenon that I call “routine crossover”. It is a important phenomenon in technology adoption that never discuss in prior research.
The theoretical contribution as followings: First, the study reflected whether those prior literatures ignore the important of the “Technology Spirit” ? The technology adaption could not only focus on functional level but also spirit level. Second, by to reflect the spirit that embedded in technology, the study illustrate that the “learning disfunction” and argued that the effective technology adaption was come from effective interpret the technology spirit. Third, the study respond Feldman’s argument that “Organizational routines as a source of continuous change”, extend to “The reflect of organizational routines is a path of change.”
|
|---|
