現今企業廣泛地採用整合資訊系統，旨在能夠獲得多方面的效益，並且達到提升競爭力的最終目的。然而，由於不恰當的系統控制與彈性配置，無法實現期望成效的情況十分普遍。本研究延伸Adler和Borys於1996年對於強制性系統和實現性系統的討論至過度應用的情境，並在本作中以「過度控制」和「過度彈性」詮釋。 為了回答整合資訊系統過度控制和過度彈性之「何種」、「為何」、及「如何」等面向的研究問題，本作用下列四步驟建立研究方法。首先進行文獻探討，以獲得時常相互衝突的兩種系統設置之問題還有可行解決方案的基礎認知。第二，透過訪談五家企業進行多重個案研究，以增進對現實情況的洞見。第三，展開跨案例分析討論過往研究和實務案例之間的異同，最後，建立結論彙整與總結本研究的發現。 響應於我們的研究問題，本研究對大部分於過往研究中提及的問題皆有所發現，並且提出在不同情境中的幾種新式解決方案。這些解決方案可以分為系統設計、人員、以及政策等三方面探討。對於系統過度控制的案例，本研究提出在特定的情境中，系統有維持控制的必要，而在系統的觀點之外，員工責任的重新配置以及外部專家的支援亦可被視為可能的解決方式。至於系統過度彈性的案例，員工教育訓練必須與系統重新設計須並行，並且使用者需求以及彈性政策在早期的系統設計階段必須詳加檢視。 / Nowadays, enterprises widely adopt integrated information systems to obtain various types of advantages for the ultimate goal of increased competitiveness; however, there are common circumstances under which the expected outcomes fail to be realized because of inappropriate control and flexibility system configurations. This research extends Adler and Borys’ 1996 discussion on coercive and enabling systems to situations of misuse, which is construed as over-control and over-flexibility in this work. To shed light on our research questions of “what,” “why,” and “how” dimensions regarding integration system over-control and over-flexibility, this paper’s research method is established with the following four steps. First, a literature review is conducted to acquire a fundamental understanding to the issues and the possible resolving approaches regarding the two often contrary system configurations. Second, multiple case studies are carried out with five enterprise interviews to gain insight into real-world situations. Third, a cross-case analysis is continued to discuss the similarities and the differences between previous research and empirical cases, and finally, conclusion of this paper is built to aggregate and summarize our findings. In response to our research questions, most of the problems that are discussed in previous studies are identified in our empirical cases, and several novel approaches to resolve the problems in different contexts are proposed as our findings, which could be discussed from the perspectives of system design, people, and policy. For system over-control cases, this paper proposes that in certain circumstances, system should remain control, and beside system perspectives, employee empowerment, responsibility redesign, and external experts’ support should also be considered as possible approaches. With regard to system over-flexibility cases, employee education should be carried out in parallel with system redesign, and user requirements and flexibility policy should be carefully reviewed at early system design stage.