近年來台灣設計實力漸漸在國際間嶄露頭角，根據經濟部「設計產業發展旗艦計畫」統計，在2002 至2008 年間，台灣在德國iF 設計獎、Red dot獎、美國IDEA獎和日本G-Mark獎等全球四大工業設計獎中囊括651 項獎項，2010年台灣在Red dot獎的表現僅次於地主德國，而2011年台灣也將舉辦台北世界設計大會，台灣的設計實力將向全世界發光。 在台灣設計實力備受肯定之餘，好的設計卻須經過商業化的過程，並通過市場的考驗，而設計產業中的「競賽」是將作品推向市場端的守門機制之一，因此本研究以守門機制的理論，探討台灣設計產業競賽。 本研究的核心問題為台灣設計類競賽機制是否適當？選人才與選作品競賽設計機制有何差異？本研究之研究架構為投入流程和產出(Input-Process-Output Model)模型，並輔以競賽架構去分析台灣最具影響力之競賽，分別為「光寶創新獎」和「國際青年設計創業家獎」。經過文獻探討和個案田野訪談後，有以下的結論： 1. 設計競賽宗旨的訂定，主要與主辦單位背後動機相符。良好的競賽設計，其競賽宗旨、競賽成果和評選重點具有一致性。 2. 競賽流程中之邊界設定將影響參賽作品/參賽者的輪廓。選作品之邊界設定較廣泛，而選人才之邊界設定限制較嚴謹。 3. 競賽流程中的評選機制，對競賽成果的樣貌具有決定性的影響。良好的競賽設計應在評選機制的設計，朝向完整審查和開放式的互動設計。選人才之評選機制比選作品較為多層次變化，因選到「對」的人需要較複雜的評選機制。 4. 在競賽流程的獎勵設計上，主辦單位應思考如何在有限的預算下，創造包含參賽者、主辦單位和競賽三方最大的價值。同時也須思考此獎勵設計是否能吸引主辦單位想要的參賽者，和篩選出來的競賽成果是不是能與競賽宗旨契合。 5. 競賽流程的加值效果可以運用在競賽每一個環節上，讓參賽者、主辦單位和競賽三方獲得加值效果。競賽的加值效果來自於主辦單位對於競賽的重視程度與努力有關，與選人才或選作品之競賽類型較無關。 6. 競賽之成果會隨著競賽宗旨而決定，但競賽過程中，會產生其它如對主辦單位和台灣設計產業的附加價值。 / In recent years, Taiwanese design ability has gradually been out-standing. According to “The flagship project of the development of design industry” by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (R.O.C.), from 2002 to 2008, Taiwanese designers have won 651 awards in the four main worldwide industrial design awards, iF Awards, Red dot Awards, International Design Excellence Award (IDEA) and Good Design Award (G-Mark). The number of awards Taiwanese designers got in 2010 Red dot Awards is even only after the hosting country, Germany. In 2011, Taiwan will also be the hosting country of the “2011 IDA Congress Taipei & Taiwan Int’l Design Expo”, from which Taiwanese design ability will be promoted to the world. While the ability of Taiwanese design has been approved from these competitions, a good design product must go through the process of commercialization and the numerous trial of the market. As “Competition” in design industry is one of the gatekeeping that pushes the product to the market, this study attempts to explore the design competition in Taiwan based on the theory of gatekeeping. The core issue of the study is to examine the suitability of competing mechanisms in design awards in Taiwan and the difference between the competition of choosing designers or design products. Utilizing the Input-Process-Output Model and the structure of competition as the theoretical framework to analyze the most influential design competitions in Taiwan, two Taiwanese design competitions, Lite-On Award and International Young Design Entrepreneurs Awards (IYDE), are included in this study. Conclusions of this study can summarize as the following: 1. The purpose of the design competitions mainly corresponds with the motivation of the organizers. The purpose of the awards, competition outcome, and the point of evaluation should be consistent in a good design competition. 2. The bounding condition of the competition process will influence the profile of the designers/works. The bounding conditions of competitions that choose works are wider than the competitions that choose designers. 3. The evaluation mechanism in the competing process will have decisive influence on the outcome of the competition. A great competition should be oriented toward a complete verification and an open interactional design. The competitions of choosing designers have more variation in their evaluation mechanism than the competitions of choosing works as it is more difficult to choose the “right” designer(s). 4. The organizers should think about how to maximize the value of the designers, the organizers, and the competition itself under the limited budget. At the same time, they should also consider if the design awards can attract the attention of the type of designers the organizers would like to have, and if the outcome of competition is consistent with the purpose of the competition. 5. The value-added effects of the competition can be applied to every part of the awards, which will benefit the designers, organizers and the competition. The value-added effects of the competition have correlation with the endeavor of the organizers but are irrelevant with the competition of choosing designers or choosing works. 6. The outcome of the design competition may be decided based on the purpose of competitions. However, it will generate the value-added effects to the organizer and Taiwan design industry.