在快速變動的環境下，全球企業致力於持續創新以維持競爭優勢。創新是不同知識重組的過程。技術知識與顧客知識成為建構知識互補，達到創新的重要因素。過去的研究著重於測試互補效果的存在以及對於結果的影響。然而，針對知識互補的過程缺乏詳細的瞭解。本研究的目的即希望經由瞭解技術知識與顧客知識如何互補達到創新的過程，對於知識互補建構完整的概念。本研究包含兩個研究問題: (1) 如何定義兩種組織知識（技術知識與顧客知識）的知識互補？(2) 組織如何管理知識互補（技術知識與顧客知識）以達到創新？ 本研究經過反覆的文獻探討及深度個案訪談後，將知識互補定義為一種狀態，當某一種知識提供另外一種知識的缺乏，經過知識互動後增加為了達到某個特定目的的全部價值。此外，建構知識互補過程開始於察覺為了達到某個特定目標知識的不足，進而確認另一種知識來補足它。經過知識互動後，互動的深度及廣度有所變化，兩種知識可能逐漸增加或產生知識質變而達到創新。 本研究基於文獻探討及個案分析的結果提出五個命題。命題主要是針對知識互補的過程、階段及不同類型的知識互補進行探討。本研究發現知識互補有三種型態：基礎性互補、突現性互補及機會性互補。 本研究利用動態觀點分析研發及業務部門知識互動情形，進而瞭解組織建構知識互補的過程。這種過程導向的研究不僅發現知識互補的存在，更進一步解釋知識互補的建構過程。組織可藉由動態管理知識互動以建構知識互補的過程，來達到持續創新的目的。本研究著重於知識本身，知識互補的概念、流程及型態對於創新及知識管理提供未來進一步研究的基礎。 / Global enterprises are currently engaged in continuous innovation to compete and sustain themselves in the dynamic changing market. The development of innovation is a process of novel combination of different kinds of knowledge. Both technological and customer knowledge have been identified as crucial for building knowledge complementarity for delivery of innovation. Researches have examined the existence of complementarity between inputs and the effect of output. Nevertheless, detailed understanding of the process of knowledge complementarity development is still lacking. The objective of this study is to develop a complete concept of knowledge complementarity with a thorough understanding of how technological knowledge complements customer knowledge in the process of adaptation and innovation. There are two research questions, as follows. (1) How can we define knowledge complementarity between the two kinds of organizational knowledge (technological knowledge and customer knowledge)? (2) How do organizations manage knowledge complementarity between technological knowledge and customer knowledge for innovation? Through iterative analyses of the existing literature and examination of empirical data, this study clarifies the definition of knowledge complementarity as a situation in which one source supplies knowledge that another source lacks, thus increasing the total value for achieving a specific purpose through knowledge interaction. The process of building knowledge complementarity starts with sensing the insufficiency of knowledge for a specific goal and identifying sources that can satisfy the deficiency. Then, through knowledge interactions, the scope and depth of the knowledge of the interactive parties are increased and evolved, resulting in an increased innovative value for the specific purpose. Based on the literature review and observation of case studies of T Probe Card and Cyber Software, five propositions were formulated. These propositions concern the sequences of the process of knowledge complementarity and different types of knowledge interaction for knowledge complementarity. The three types of knowledge complementarity identified are: infrastructural complementarity, emergent complementarity, and opportunity complementarity. In different to the static view to examine the relationship between knowledge management variables, this study uses a dynamic view to understand knowledge interaction between R&D and sales department in the process of building knowledge complementarity. This process-oriented study not only examines the existence of complementarity but also provides the explanation for "how" something happened and the sequence of events leading to the outcome. Rather than placing focus on the interactive activities, the underlying point of this study is on the knowledge itself. Operationalizable indexes of the scope and depth of knowledge interaction have been clearly developed for the purpose of examining knowledge interaction and their interplay in different types of knowledge complementarity. The concept, process and distinctive types of knowledge complementarity provide essential input to innovation and knowledge management. Organizations intent to build sustained innovation capability could benefit from this study by dynamically managing knowledge interactions for complementarity of different purposes.

創新來自知識的互動。本研究將創新知識來源分成客戶類知識與技術類知識，並將企業創新分成新產品開發、解決客戶問題與提高企業自身創新能耐，以探討知識互動特性對不同類型創新的影響。本研究針對業務端與研發端的知識互動，採個案研究的方式，蒐集14個企業創新個案。分析結果發現，高深度的知識互動是新產品開發成功的關鍵；不同客戶問題，所需的知識互動廣度與深度則不一；若欲提高企業自身創新能耐，需要的是高廣度的知識互動。本研究透過不同實際個案歸納出各類創新類型下的知識互動特性，除了有助於更加瞭解知識互動對創新的影響之外，亦有助於企業經營實務上的操作。 / The objective of this study is to understand the impact of intra-organizational knowledge interaction on business innovative performance. The study divided knowledge of innovation into customer-related knowledge and technology-related knowledge, and classified business innovation into product innovation, problem-solving innovation and general innovation capability. Focusing on the knowledge interaction between sales people and R&D engineers the study analyzed 14 business innovation cases in four selected companies. The results reveal that high depth of knowledge interaction is the key to product innovation while the level of the depth and scope of the knowledge interaction is highly related to the context of the problems to be solved. In regard to general innovation capability, high scope of knowledge interaction seems to be the influential factor. The findings about intra-organizational knowledge interaction provide insights about how different levels of the scope and depth of knowledge interaction affect different types of business innovation and offer useful guide in managing technology and customer knowledge in business practices.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a comprehensive concept of knowledge interaction offering a robust understanding of how technological knowledge interacts with customer knowledge. There are three research questions: (1) How can we define the knowledge interaction between the two kinds of organizational knowledge (customer knowledge and technological knowledge)? (2) What are the indexes shaping the quality of knowledge interaction between customer knowledge and technological knowledge for innovation? (3) How do organizations develop innovation under the different forces driving the knowledge interaction? Through analysis of existing literature and examination of empirical data, this study will apply a theoretical framework and hypotheses to measuring the knowledge interaction between customer knowledge and technological knowledge.

當管理策略的發展開始從既有的「純競爭策略」，逐漸轉變為一種陰陽相依、競合相倚的觀念時，這種「陰」與「陽」同時存在或交替出現的「競合策略」便成為管理學者爭相研究的焦點。然而，即使有關於競合的理論與研究不勝枚舉，但是能以知識為探討的立足點，來瞭解廠商間創新研發競合關係的研究並不多見。再者，過去有關區域創新或是產業聚落的研究，多半強調合作創新，顯少討論區域內的競爭。進一步而言，對於區域內廠商在創新研發方面同時「競合並存」的研究，特別是針對「競爭導向的合作」與「合作導向的競爭」兩種創新競合的情境下，廠商間的知識分享與知識保護的情形，更是付之闕如。因此，本研究的目的，即在回應這些文獻缺口，對於廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，其知識互動的實際作為，做一深入的探究。 本研究在研究方法上採用多重個案研究方法，以全球最著名的區域創新系統之一台灣中部地區的工具機群聚為主要的研究場域。在研究的過程中，以兩階段的深度訪談，針對中部地區的工具機暨零組件產業之競合關係進行瞭解，並找出兩個特殊的創新研發競合案例。進一步地，針對此兩案例中廠商的創新研發「競合關係」與知識互動的實際作為，做深入的比較與分析。 本研究經歸納彙整研究命題後，進一步得到以下結論： 一、第三方單位在區域內廠商之創新研發競合關係與知識互動中扮演重要的角色，包括中介協調、主動催生與管理計畫、技術移轉與檢測驗證等。 二、廠商在不同的「競合關係」情境下，會因營運範疇相似度的不同，而有不同的知識分享類型與交流管道。在營運範疇相似度高的情況下，會以基礎理論知識來進行分享，且以正式的討論會議為主要的知識交流管道；在營運範疇相似度度低的情況下，會以應用層面的技術知識進行分享，在知識交流的管道上不僅會有正式的討論會議，還會透過非正式的方式進行交流。 三、廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，會因未來競爭的可能性與營業秘密的考量，而採取不同的知識分享方式，包括選擇性分享、不願意分享以及主動進行分享等。 四、廠商在不同的創新研發「競合關係」情境下，儘管知識保護的緣由不同，都會以契約內的保密協議做為最主要的知識保護方式。 在學術研究方面，本研究不同於以往的文獻從「市場」或是「資源」的角度來探究「競合關係」，而是以創新研發中最根本的要素–「知識」，來探究創新研發的「競合關係」。其次，不僅瞭解到第三方單位是促成競爭廠商形成合作研發聯盟的重要推手，亦從廠商不同的競合情境下，其知識互動的作為，整理出「知識互動的影響因素」。因此，本研究在學術研究上做出以下的貢獻： 一、過往競合方面的研究，主要是以一般性的策略領域為主，本研究則特別針對廠商在「創新研發」上的「競合」行為來加以探討。 二、過往的競合理論對於市場與資源的定義不夠完整與明確，且認為市場與資源是分別影響競爭與合作的不同要素。本研究更細緻地以「知識」的層次來加以探討，發現「知識」對廠商間的競合行為有很大的影響；此外，知識層次的觀點亦會使市場與資源間的界限變得模糊。 三、過往的競合理論概括性地提出既競爭又合作的概念，本研究進一步地提供「競爭導向的合作」（競中帶合）與「合作導向的競爭」（合中帶競）兩種情境的實證研究結果。 四、過往的研究較少提出第三方單位在競合關係中扮演的角色，本研究藉由實證並提出區域內廠商在進行創新研發競合關係時，第三方單位的主要角色與重要性。 五、過往區域創新系統或產業群聚的研究以探討廠商間的合作為主，本研究再加入「競爭」的要素做為研究廠商創新研發「競合關係」的基礎。 整體而言，本研究將「競中帶合」與「合中帶競」做清楚的定義，進一步地以知識作為廠商進行創新研發競合的根本要素，並提出第三方單位的重要性。在實務上，提供知識互動的影響因素作為廠商進行競合與知識互動時的參考依據。 / Management strategy has gradually transformed from “pure competition” to the coexistence of competition and cooperation, also known as co-opetition, where “co-opetition strategy” has become a popular research focus for scholars who study management. Scholars, upon observing such trend where “peace” and “warfare”- or “yin” and “yang”- exists either at the same time or occurs alternatively, begin to add the “cooperative” element (yang) into the traditional concept of “competition” (yin). Although immense theories and researches on the concept of co-opetition exist, researches that attempt to reveal the co-opetition relationship in the realm of R&D and Innovation among firms from the standpoint of knowledge have been scarce. Regional Innovation Systems is a field full of cooperation and competition, yet past research mostly focused on cooperation and innovation instead of discussing the competition among firms in the region. That is, few researches focused on discussing the cooperation and competition coexisting at the same time in the realm of R&D and Innovation among firms. Moreover, researches that particularly discuss the situation of knowledge sharing and knowledge protection among firms from two R&D and Innovation co-opetition types of “Competition-dominated cooperation” and “Cooperation-dominated competition” relegate said situations to the category of things unknown. Therefore, this research aims to fill the gap in such literature by conducting deep explorations into knowledge interaction among firms in one region, particularly from two R&D and Innovation co-opetition types. This research adopts a multi-case study method while the main field of research focuses on one of the most renowned global Regional Innovation Systems: the machinery cluster in central Taiwan. During the process of the research, a two-stage, in-depth interview was conducted to understand the co-opetition relationship among the machine tool and component firms in the central Taiwan, and has identified two special case studies of R&D and Innovation co-operation. Furthermore, this research focus on the R&D and Innovation co-opetition relationship among firms and their practices of knowledge interaction in these two cases, and conducts in-depth comparisons and analysis. By conducting two-stage in-depth interviews, this study summarizes the research propositions and further obtains the following conclusions: 1.Third party plays an important role in R&D and innovation co-opetition knowledge interaction among firms in the same region, including the roles of intermediary coordination, taking the initiative to spawn and manage projects, and transferring, testing and verification of technology. 2.In different “co-opetition” types, the types of knowledge sharing and exchange channels among firms are different according to how similar they are in operational scope. In the case of high similarity in operational scope, basic and theoretical knowledge is shared, and formal meetings are the main channel of knowledge exchange. In the case of low similarity in operational scope, technical and applied knowledge is shared, and the channels of knowledge exchange do not only have formal meetings, but also communicate informally. 3.In different “R&D and innovation co-opetition” types, firms will take different approaches in sharing knowledge (either being selective, not willing, or actively sharing) due to future competition possibilities and trade secrets. 4.Firms differ in their reasons for knowledge protection in different “R&D and innovation co-opetition” types, but will mostly rely on confidential agreements within their contracts as the main measure for knowledge protection. While past academic research mostly explores "co-opetition relationship" from the perspective of "market" or "resource", this research explores R&D and innovation co-opetition with the most essential element, “knowledge”. Not only is it understood that third-party units are important promoters of competitive firms in forming R&D alliances, "the influencing factors of knowledge interaction" from the perspective of their knowledge interaction under different co-opetition types is concluded. Therefore, this research aims to produce the following contributions in the academic field: 1.Past co-opetition researches mostly focus on generic and strategical fields, this research focuses particularly on bahviors of “co-opetition in R&D and innovation” among firms. 2.Past co-opetition theories’ definitions on markets and resources are insufficient and imprecise, for they describe markets and resources as different factors that affect competition and cooperation. This research offers a finer exploration from the aspect of “knowledge”. This research finds that “knowledge” has an immense impact on co-opetition behaviors. In addition, the knowledge-level viewpoint further blurs the boundary between markets and resources. 3.Past co-opetition theories offered the generic concept of simultaneous competition and cooperation This research further provides empirical research results of two scenarios: "competition-dominated cooperation" and "cooperation-dominated competition". 4.Past researches seldom discuss the role that third parties play in co-opetition. This research states the importance of third parties in the firms’ “co-opetition relationships” through empirical evidence when it comes to R&D and innovation in the region. 5.Past researches of regional innovation systems or clusters primarily focus on cooperation between firms, this research adds the factor of “competition” as a research basis for understanding firms’ co-opetition relationships in and R&D and innovation. Overall, this research clearly defines "competition-dominated cooperation" and "cooperation-dominated competition", and views “knowledge” as a fundamental element of R&D and innovation co-opetition, putting forward the importance of third-party units. In practice, provide the influential factors of knowledge interaction as a reference for firms to conduct co-opetition and knowledge interaction.

本研究之目的在探索國內科技產業的發展過程中，科技公司創業及經營的過程裡，創投公司對科技公司之知識互動關係，探討創投公司在科技公司各經營階段所扮演的角色及功能，創投公司可以提供科技公司之附加價值，影響創投事業與科技公司知識互動之因素，以及創投公司對科技創新之影響。 　　創投公司與科技公司知識互動成功之因素，在於科技公司之知識及資源的需求，以及創投公司所具有之條件，依據上述個案分析發現，其主要關鍵因素如下： 　　1.創投公司之資金為科技公司迫切需要之財務外援。 　　2.經營團隊對資金募集陌生或沒信心。 　　3.認同創投公司之專業能力。 　　4.經營團隊缺乏專業經營管理經驗，對外部知識之依賴度高。 　　5.對創投公司之組織網絡資源（上游零組件材料、下游客戶、策略投資人、新技術來源等）依賴度高。 　　6.產業之成熟度低且變動幅度大，產業前景不明，經營團隊對外部知識之依賴度高。 　　7.企業轉型方向未定，對新產業不熟悉，需要創投公司協助。 　　8.科技公司與創投團隊彼此有深厚的互信基礎。 　　9.科技公司之經營團隊對投資環境陌生。 　　10.創投團隊具有協助科技公司企業重整成功的經驗。 　　11.創投公司掌握科技公司具影響力的股權及決策權。 　　12.創投公司瞭解新市場趨勢。 　　本研究分析歸納之研究發現如下： 　　一、創業經營互動構面 　　【研究發現一】：科技公司的種子期及創建期，創投公司扮演催生者及創業智囊的角色。 　　【研究發現二】：科技公司的成長期及擴張期，創投公司扮演資源提供者與仲介者的角色。 　　【研究發現三】：科技公司的成熟期，創投公司扮演股票上市推動者角色。 　　【研究發現四】：科技公司的重整期，創投公司扮演企業改造者角色。 　　【研究發現五】：產業組織網絡的綿密度，會影響創投公司之投資品質。 　　【研究發現六】：創投公司的投資金額會影響知識互動之程度。 　　【研究發現七】：僅資金投資的創投公司漸不受科技公司歡迎，具有附加價值的創投公司才有較多空間。 　　二、科技創新互動構面 　　【研究發現八】：創投公司主導資本效率，協助科技公司之技術創新，兩者合力推動經濟發展。 　　【研究發現九】：創新技術透過創業過程取得卓越財務報酬，為科技產業技術成長的動因。 　　【研究發現十】：科技背景的創投公司，較主動推動技術創業，為科技成長做先鋒，財務背景創投公司則傾向於協助經營為主，為科技成長做後援。 　　【研究發現十一】：技術創新的分散性及開放性，促使創投公司的存在與發展。 　　【研究發現十二】：科技知識與經營管理知識的模組化結合，促使新創科技公司與創投公司密切合作。 　　三、知識管理互動構面 　　【研究發現十三】：創投公司的產業網路知識及經營管理知識，對科技公司的協助，優於創投公司之金融資本之效益。 　　【研究發現十四】：產業成熟度越低，創投公司與科技公司之知識互動越緊密。 　　【研究發現十五】：技術導向的技術領先公司，與創投公司之知識互動程度越低。 / The objectives of this thesis intend to explore the knowledge interactive relationship between the venture capitalist and technology industries as well as the key success factors (KSFs) to initiate the interactive basis. Based on the knowledge interactive relationship, this study presents : the roles and functions of the venture capitalist during different business stages, the added-value that the venture capitalist provided, the key factors influencing the interactive relationship, and the changes in technology and innovation as influenced by the venture capitalist. 　　The key success factors initiating the interactive relationship between the venture capitalist and technology industries are the technology company's demand in knowledge and resources as well as the knowledge and resources that the venture capitalist can provided. 　　This study was conducted by using case study methodology covering four samples of high-tech companies and two venture capitalists. The results of this study are as follows: 　　1. During the seed and start-up stages of technological companies, the venture capitalist acts as the promoter and start-up consultant. 　　2. During the growth and development stages of technological companies, the venture capitalist acts as the resource-provider and coordinator. 　　3. During the late stage of technological companies, the venture capitalist acts as the IPO promoter. 　　4. During the re-orgnization stage of technological companies, the venture capitalist acts as the re-structurer. 　　5. The industrial network of the venture capitalist will influence the company's investment performance. 　　6. The investment amount will influence the knowledge interactive intensive of the venture capitalist. 　　7. The venture capitalist only affords capital but without knowledge have been worked difficult. Only the venture capitalists with smart-money and value-added will have development space. 　　8. The venture capitalist leads the capital efficiency and the technical companies lead the technology innovation. Both of them promote the development of economics. 　　9. Start-up new companies with innovative technologies to purchase excellent financial reward are the motive factor of technology development. 　　10. The venture capitalists with technical background will more actively promote the innovative technologies start-up. The venture capitalists with financial background will focus on the management of the investee. 　　11. The diversity of technology innovation builds up the development space basis of the venture capitalists. 　　12. The modularization of the technical innovation and business management is the key factor in pushing the knowledge interactive between technical companies and venture capitalists. 　　13. The industrial network and management knowledge contributions of the venture capitalists are more than the contributions of the capital benefit. 　　14. The more amorphous of the industry, the more knowledge interactive activities between the technical companies and the venture capitalists. 　　15. The more technical-oriented companies, the less knowledge interactive activities between the technical companies and the venture capitalists.

當創新總是發生在不同專業領域的交界之處，團隊成員之間有效的知識互動便成為組織維持其競爭優勢的必要因素，因此為了持續創新，團隊成員必須克服不同專業領域所存在的知識邊界障礙，以便能夠整合團隊成員的知識與專長。在資訊系統的開發過程中，系統分析階段是觀察系統分析人員與使用者知識互動的最佳情境，因此本研究首先探索系統分析情境下影響互動雙方知識分享意願的前因，即創新氣氛與互動雙方的互動投入程度，並檢測這些因素之間的關係及影響。其次，本研究彙整四類邊界物件的內容，即語法的、語意的、實務的與隱喻的邊界物件，探討不同類別的邊界物件之間的關係及對專案創意的影響，並更進一步探究互動雙方的知識分享意願對各類邊界物件的影響。 研究樣本來自258位學生所扮演的系統分析人員及258位業界使用者，研究結果發現創新氣氛會同時影響系統分析人員與使用者的知識分享意願。當系統分析人員的互動投入程度越高，使用者的互動投入程度也會提高。使用者的互動投入程度會正向影響系統分析人員及使用者自身的知識分享意願；但是系統分析人員的互動投入程度卻對使用者的知識分享意願產生直接且負向的影響。 此外，系統分析人員的知識分享意願只對隱喻的邊界物件有正向影響，而使用者的知識分享意願卻對這四類邊界物件皆無顯著影響。在這四類邊界物件之中，只有實務的邊界物件對專案創意具有正向的影響，而隱喻的邊界物件則對於語法的、語意的、實務的邊界物件三者具有正向的影響，因此隱喻的邊界物件可以藉由實務的邊界物件對專案創意產生正向的間接效果。出乎意料之外，語意的邊界物件對專案創意具有負向的影響。在實務方面，本研究建議組織應該藉由增加實務的邊界物件和隱喻的邊界物件，以提高專案創意嶄露的可能性。 / As innovation happens from the boundaries between different specialty domains, effective knowledge interaction among participants has become a competitive necessity for organizations. In order to improve innovation, it is necessary for participants to deal explicitly with the interpretive barriers and further synthesize their expertise. During the development of information system, most knowledge interactions, which are conducted by systems analysts and users, can be observed in the phase of systems analysis. Thus, this study intends to explore not only factors that may affect participants’ intention to share knowledge, but also types of boundary objects in the context of systems analysis. As an innovative organizational climate and participants’ interaction involvement are identified as antecedents of participants’ intention to share knowledge, the relationships among these factors are studied. Besides, while four types of boundary objects are summarized, their effects on project innovativeness are discussed. Then, the influence of participants’ intention to share knowledge on the occurrence of four types of boundary objects was further examined. The results, based on data collected from 258 student analysts and 258 users, indicate that an innovative climate positively and directly influences both systems analysts and users’ intention to share knowledge. While systems analysts’ interaction involvement has a strong influence on users’ interaction involvement, which is measured by responsiveness, perceptiveness and attentiveness, users’ interaction involvement also has positive effects on both systems analysts and users’ intention to share knowledge; unexpectedly, systems analysts’ interaction involvement is negatively related to users’ intention to share knowledge. In addition, while systems analysts’ intention to share knowledge only influences the occurrence of metaphoric boundary objects, users’ intention to share knowledge does not demonstrate any significant effect on four types of boundary objects. Out of syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and metaphoric boundary objects, only pragmatic boundary objects had a strong positive effect on project innovativeness. As metaphoric boundary objects are shown to have positive effects on all other three types of boundary objects, metaphoric boundary object affects project innovativeness indirectly through pragmatic boundary objects. Surprisingly, semantic boundary objects negatively affects project innovativeness, although not very strongly. A practical implication is the possibility of increasing project innovativeness by enhancing both pragmatic boundary objects and metaphoric boundary objects.