在一個科技制度化的時代，科技人員不再個別地從事研究，而是經由任務小組（Task Force）或工作團隊（Team Work ）的組織方式來從事集體的創作。就組織設計權變 研究途徑的觀點言之，此種由科技人員為主所組成的技術機構，其所面臨的環境、使 用的技術、組成的成員均不同於一般行政機關或產業組織，故其組織內部的結構和過 程必有特殊之設計。 本篇論文以省屬農林技術機構（包括五個試驗所及桃園區農業改良場）為研究對象， 就組織設計之權變研究途徑及科技人員在組織中之行為研究為理論基礎，採用文獻分 析法、問卷調查法以及觀察訪問法對研究對象目前之組織設計情形作詳盡之分析，嘗 試對既有的學理主張予以檢證，進而提出建議供實務者及後讀研究者之參考。全文共 七章，約九萬餘言，茲將各章簡述如次： 第一章，緒論：敘述研究動機與目的、有關名詞詮釋，以及研究方法和研究對象。 第二章，理論基礎與研究架構，提出本篇論文之理論基礎，包括組織設計之權變研究 途徑以及科技人員在組織中進行之研究，並提出論文的研究架構和基本假設。 第三章，省屬農林技術機構之結構面設計，就研究對象其組織結構面設計之情形加以 分析討論，包括水平分化情形、垂直分化情形、結構型式以及結構特性。 第四章，省屬農林技術機構之過程面設計，就研究對象其組織過程面設計之情形加以 分析討論，包括領導與激勵過程、溝通與互動過程、決策與目標設定過程、以及控制 考核與績效評估過程。 第五章，省屬農林技術機構之權變因素設計：探究可能影響技術機構組織設計的內外 在因素，包括策略與技術特性、環境與人員特性、昇遷與報酬制度。 第六章，問卷調查結果之分析與討論，就上述各種組織變項之特性，編成問卷，對五 所一場之技術研究人員加以施測，並就調查結果作相關分析，及不同組樣本之差異分 析。 第七章，結論：除了對整個研究過程加以檢討，並對研究發現加以整理，提出建議。

知識工作團隊簡單的說就是由知識工作者所組成的工作團隊。隨著網際網路的發展日新月異，有越來越多具有共同工作目標的知識工作者組成知識工作團隊並嘗試透過虛擬社群溝通及執行任務。當這些知識工作者不以面對面的方式接觸，而是透過虛擬社群彼此相遇和互動時，在虛擬社群中所發生的活動如何影響知識工作團隊的特徵就成為本研究的主要目的。這些知識工作團隊的特徵則被解釋為是一些足以影響團隊運作成效的變數。 　本研究以開放原始碼軟體發展社群「傲爾網」作為探討上述關係的研究個案，在研究中則發現一種新型態的「邦聯式虛擬社群」。這種以分散式虛擬社群架構所建置社群，不同於傳統集中式的虛擬社群架構，它無所謂集中管理的機構，而是由一群群獨立運作，並且分散在不同場域的知識工作團隊基於共同的利益而彼此結合。 　研究結果顯示，邦聯式虛擬社群的經營者必須(1)提供強有力的跨場域溝通能力、(2)以面對面集會輔助成員的互動以及(3)透過契約規範團隊的產出，才能有效經營此類社群。另外社群訴求的主題也是此類社群是否可以成長茁壯的關鍵。 Anonymous, “Massive shortages of knowledge workers are predicted through 2000,” Managing Office Technology, Vol. 41, Iss. 9, Sep 1996, p. 35. Applegate, L. M., McFarlan, F. W., and McKenney, J. L., Corporate Information Systems Management: Text and Cases 5th Edition, 1999, pp. 173-178. Armstrong, A. and Hegal, J. III, Net gain: Expanding markets through virtual communities, 1997, pp. 8-10. Armstrong, A. and Hegal, J. III, Net gain: Expanding markets through virtual communities, 1997, pp. 132-149. Barsky, N. P. and Marchant, G., “The most valuable resource-measuring and managing intellectual capital,” Strategic Finance, Vol. 81, Iss. 8, Feb 2000, pp. 58-62. Belanger, F., “Workers’ propensity to telecommute: An empirical study,” Information & Management, Vol. 35, Iss. 3, Sep 1999, pp. 139-153. Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., and Higgs, A. C., “Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups,” PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 46, 1993, pp. 823-850. Campion, M. A., Papper, E. M., and Medsker, G. J.,”Relations between work team characteristics and effectiveness: A replication and extension,” PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 49, 1996, pp. 429-452. Carroll, J. M., “Book review of New Community Networks: Wired for Change, The Information Society,” Vol. 14, 1998, pp. 249-250. Carvbone, J. and Milligan, B., “Harley-Davidson win by getting suppliers on board,” Purchasing, Vol. 129, Iss. 5, Sep 2000, pp. 52-65. Court, A. W., “The relationship between information and personal knowledge in new product development,” International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1997, pp. 123-138. Dickeson, R. V., “Understanding knowledge workers,” Printing Impressions, Vol. 42, Iss. 6, Nov 1999, p. 76. Drucker, P. F., “Focusing on the new world economy,” Modern Office Technology, Vol. 37, Iss. 11, Nov 1992, pp. 8-12. Drucker, P. F., “Focusing on the new world economy,” Modern Office Technology, Vol. 37, Iss. 11, Nov 1992, pp. 53-80. Emerman, J., “You say you want a revolution? Toward a virtual community on aging,” Generations, Vol. 21, Iss. 3, Fall 1997, pp. 63-68. Etzioni, A. and Etzioni, O., “Communities: Virtual vs. real”, Science, Vol. 277, Iss. 5324, 1997, p. 295. Etzioni, A. and Etzioni, O., “Face-to-face and computer-mediated communities, acomparative analysis,” The Information Society, Vol. 15, 1999, pp. 241-248. Figallo, C., Hosting Web Communities: Building Relationships, Increasing Customer Loyalty, And Maintaining A Competitive Edge, 1998, pp. 1-4. Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R., “Motivation through the design of work: Test of theory,” ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN PERFORMANCE, Vol. 16, 1976, pp. 250-279. Hamel, J., Dufour, S., and Fortin, D., Case Study Methods, 1991, pp. 28-50. Harrigan, K. R. and Dalmia, G., “”Knowledge workers: The last bastion of competitive advantage,” Planning Review, Vol. 19, Iss. 6, Nov/Dec 1991, pp. 4-10. Henderson, J. C. and Lee, S. C., “Managing I/S design teams: A control theories perspective,” Management Science, Vol. 38, Iss. 6, June 1992, pp. 757-777. Herndl, C. G. and Nahrwold, C. A., “Research as social practice－a case study of research on technical and professional communication,” WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, Vol. 17, No.2, Apr 2000, pp. 258-296. Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A., and Noe, R. A., “Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 50, Iss. 4, Winter 1997, pp. 877-904. Kanter, R. M., “Knowledge workers,” Executive Excellence, Vol. 17, Iss. 1, Jan 2000, pp.15-16. Komito, L., “The net as a foraging society: Flexible communities,” The Information Society, Vol. 14, 1998, pp. 97-106. Levitt, J., “Virtual development teams,” Informationweek, Iss. 808, Oct 16, 2000, p. 151. Michalski, J., “What is virtual community? ”, New Perspectives Quarterly, Vol. 12, Iss. 2, Spring 1995, pp. 44-45. Mosco, V., “Myth-ing links: Power and community on the information highway,” The Information Society, Vol. 14, 1998, pp.57-62. Romm, C., Pliskin, N. and Clarke, R., “Virtual communities and society: Toward an integrative three phase model,” International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 17, No. 4, 1997, pp. 261-270. Schwandt, T., Constructivist, Iinterpretivist Approaches to Human Inquiry, Handbook of Qualitative Research, 1994, pp. 118-125. Venkatraman, N. and Henderson, J. C., “Real strategies for virtual organizing,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 40, Iss. 1, Fall 1998, pp. 33-48. West, J. E., “Intelligence + community = creativity,” Research Technology Management, Vol. 43, Iss. 6, Nov/Dec 2000, pp. 30-32. Weston, J. “Old freedoms and new technologies: The evolution of community networking,” The Information Society, Vol. 13, 1997, pp.195-201. Williams, R. L. and Cothrel, J., “Four smart ways to run online communities,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 14, Iss. 4, Summer 2000, pp .81-91.

本研究是以個案研究的方式，探討台北縣立國民中學的工作團隊之知識性活動與知識管理的差距。分析的項目包括知識管理關鍵因素和組織環境等二部分。同時也對工作團隊面臨的問題及其因應對策進行了解。其中知識管理關鍵因素包括知識的取得、知識的創造、知識的儲存等三項。組織環境的部分包括人員和組織行政的配合情況。 本研究發現，台北縣國民中學教師所組成的工作團隊，雖然在沒有知識管理的認知下，其知識性活動和已在實施的知識管理專案，相距並不大。若是將各個工作團隊採行的知識性活動加以彙整，則這個差距將更小。所以，如果要在這些單位中實施知識管理，應是可行的。 關鍵詞：工作團隊、知識管理、知識的獲得、知識的儲存、知識的創造、小班教學精神、課程統整、多元智慧、電腦輔助教學。 / This research is adopted to the method of case study: deeply discussing the difference between the knowledge activities and knowledge management ( KM ) of the work teams of junior high schools in Taipei County. The analysis items include two parts: the feature components of knowledge management and organizational environment. At the same time, the research also gets understanding in the facing problems of the team work and their coordinate strategies. In detail, the feature components of knowledge management include knowledge gaining, knowledge creation, and knowledge saving. The organizational environment includes the members and administrators of the work teams and their cooperation. The research found that the work teams of the teachers of junior high schools in Taipei County even if without acknowledgement in knowledge management, their knowledge activities are corresponding to the cases of current practicing of knowledge management. If to collect all the knowledge activities addressed by each work teams, the difference is getting smaller. Therefore, it is to say that to practice the knowledge management is doable. Key wards: work team, knowledge management(KM), Knowledge gaming, Knowledge saving, Knowledge creation, the sprits of small class instruction, curriculum integration, multiple intelligences, computer assisted instruction ( CAI ).