本研究是以個案公司為例，藉以了解企業公司盛衰起伏的背後原由。對於這些果與因，雖然不能直接以簡單的原由來歸納與說明，但其發展過程中勢必有其脈絡，可以幫助了解公司發展與適應的做法。因此本研究透過描述個案公司各項策略作為，來了解企業經營的歷程。 　　本文第貳章說明研究動機與問題，並對本研究的各項變數做必要的定義。第參章對個案公司的基本資料與背景有較多的說明。本研究主體係個案公司責任中心二(Strategic Business Unit II)，該事業單位為自動資料蒐集產業(Automatic Data Collection)的本土製造商，自1985年第一台條碼閱讀機問世至今，在產業中已將近十六年的時光。 　　十六年以來，由人機介面(Input Device)的定位，以開發個人電腦鍵盤與自動資料辨識產品(Automatic Identification & Data Capture，AID)的條碼閱讀機(Bar Code Reader)，到目前以自動資料蒐集(Automatic Data Collection)產業的主流產品攜帶式自動資料蒐集終端機(Portable Data Collection Terminal)為主的經營範疇；經銷通路從貿易商為主的型態，轉而進入經銷商與系統整合商的通路；由完全沒有產業知名度，到進入美國前十名的自動資料蒐集產業供應商。地理構形也從本土企業出發，成為跨美、歐、日與大陸都有分支機構的跨國經營。 　　從以上的說明可以了解個案公司的發展歷程，詳細的內容可以參考第參章與第肆章的兩個策略轉折點前後的各個構面分析；本文中另以競技場分析，比較個案公司歷經策略轉折點之後在體系、產業結構、產品/市場的相關位置，透過競技場分析可以讓經營者更清楚未來的策略走向。 　　本文第伍章則提出研究發現與後續研究建議，其中的研究建議較值得注意的是個案公司最新的主流產品WinCE攜帶式終端機即將進入開放式的主流環境，在開放式的主流環境對未來成長有絕對的幫助，但風險當然也就大很多。而這項經驗在個案公司早期投入個人電腦鍵盤產品時期非常類似，若能透過對個人電腦產業的反思，相信面對未來的競爭思考能有方向的指引作用。 / “The Company” has been used as an example for my thesis, that helps to understand how an enterprise been successful and going dead. Those reasons and results to be successful and dead, which maybe not easy to get conclusion from simple examples, but we did understand all possible development from those tracks. We are also possible to find the way to adapt all those changes from all tracks’ studies. 　　In this case, the chapter 2 gives the motivation and answers about the reasons to have this thesis. It also defines all variables. In Chapter 3, I give more information and back ground about “The Company.” The major studied body is the SBU II (Strategic Business Unit II) of “ The Company”. That SBU II is the Taiwanese local maker for ADC (Automatic Data Capture) industry. The SBU II produced first Bar Code Reader since 1985 and is existed in the ADC industry more than 16 years. 　　Since last 16 years, “The Company” was positioned as “Input Device Provider,” that developed the keyboard for IBM Personal Computer and Bar Code Reader for AIDC (Automatic Identification and data collection) Industry. Up to now, the business scopes of “The Company” is producing the main trend products for ADC industry, which is Portable Data Collecting Terminal. During last 16 years, the distribution channels of “The Company” are changed from “Trading Company” to “VAR (Value Added Retails) and SI (System integrators). It is also changed from “ No Named Company” becomes one of ten major players of ADC industry in USA market. The geographical point of view is also changed from Taiwanese company to become multiple locations in Europe, USA, The Mainland China and Japan. 　　The description above helps to understand the development of “ The Company”. The detailed information will refer all details in “Three Dimensional Analysis” of those two strategic turning points in the Chapter 3 and Chapter 4. In these chapters, “The Competitive Field Model” is used to compare the different related positioning between two industrial structures, Products and Markets. After that study, I hope that can guide “The Company” to be much clear the way to the future. 　　In Chapter 5, I give some comments about my own development and also give some hints for future studies. There are some key comments about “The WinCE Portable Terminals”, which are going to be the main trend products and opened architecture environment. In the opened architecture environment that is very high growth in market size and industrial business. That is of course coming with very high risky in the future. This experience is very similar with the age of IBM PC Keyboard. If we can rethink the related experience from IBM PC age that may help a lot to face all future market competition. That is one of the key reasons to have this case study.

成功的企業變革蘊涵著規範、觀念、與文化上的改變，其最終目的是要達成新規範的運作、成員對新組織的再認同、與新組織文化的再建構。一般如常管理主要考慮的是如何創造競爭優勢與提高效能，主要參照的「企業策略科學」與「科學管理學」並無法處理價值與信仰的課題，也未注重資訊與知識的流動與管理。單憑這兩類管理理論，無法因應變革管理的挑戰。本論文分析科特與彼德˙聖吉等管理學者提出的變革失敗原因，並將其歸納予批判社會學者哈伯瑪斯所述「生存環境的意義生產」的失效。作者檢討組織變革過程中的「社會規範」、「成員主觀」、與「客觀環境」等三個面向，認為有效溝通與真正共識為成功企業變革之所必需。 作者認為組織內的活動可以區分為「溝通」與「執行」兩個面向，各別對應到哈伯瑪斯所述的「實踐性理性」與「工具性理性」。本論文批判缺乏「實踐性理性」制衡的「工具性理性」妨礙企業的執行效能與知識生產，並闡述實踐性理性不可或缺的價值。唯有摒除由工具性理性發展的階層權力對溝通過程的干預，有效溝通與真正共識才能達成。作者亦就實行的層面提出在組織內建立「理想言辭情境」的方法。本論文從「實踐性理性」的觀點檢視組織變革，以「變革之輪」來闡明各變革階段應注意的工作。作者結合「生存環境的意義生產」與野中郁次郎的「組織知識創造論」檢視變革過程中，包含認知、價值觀、信仰、規範遵從、組織認同等「意義」的創造過程。如果變革過程中「實踐性理性」能得到彰顯，成功的變革會使成員得到意義生產的正向迴饋。這個「正向意義迴饋系統」將使企業進入一種得以持續對應新競爭局勢的動態平衡。 本文藉由Intel在1985年策略大轉折的實際案例來檢驗本文論述。對「導致組織變革失敗的根本原因為何?」、「如何建構適合因應外在環境的變化，並能成功完成變革的組織?」、「如何成功地完成組織的變革?」等三個組織變革管理的根本問題提出有系統的答案。本論文終結於對自我論述的批判。 / Organizational change is essential for the modern business entities to survive in the dynamic economical environment. However, many companies, which are successful in day-to-day operation, cannot accomplish the organizational change process, and result in fading out in the new competition environment. During organizational change processes, authority swinging and uncertainty about future make rumors prosperous; new rules and tactics have not been proved and are doubted; mutual trust between staffs and organization is shaky; and staffs become difficult to identify themselves with the organization. The above challenges are related to the dynamic management of information sharing, knowledge creating, staffs’ cognition, emotional consideration, mutual trust, and common consensus about new rules and the business entity’s future. The above conditions make changing management to be fundamentally different from the routine operational management. Strategic science and science management principles, which are generally adopted by companies to increase competition advantages and operational efficiency in the routine management, do not take account for the information and knowledge management, and cannot deal with the values and belief issues. Companies cannot just rely on the above two management principles to face challenges of the organizational change. The thesis analyzes the failure factors of changing management, which are disclosed by scholars like John P. Kotter and Peter M. Senge etc. The author correlates them with “meaning reproduction of living situation”, which was introduced by social critical philosopher Jürgen Habermas. Habermas believes efficient communication and true common consensus are essential to revive the meaning reproduction and to coordinate the social operation. The author inspects the “social”, ”subjective”, and “objective” aspects of the “living situation” of companies’ change phases, which were inferred from the eight steps of successful organizational changing addressed by John P. Kotter. The author elucidates that efficient communication and true common consensus are requisite for organization changing management. Habermas based on the two human basic actions, “labor” and “communication”, to categorizes rational into “instrumental rational” and “practical rational”. Instrumental rational aims at environment control and material productivity. Practical rational endeavors mutual understanding and common consensus. Habermas argued that the power developed by instrumental rational should be balanced by the values generated by practical rational; otherwise the power will oppress human society. The thesis criticizes that companies’ hierarchical power obstructs organizational operation, policy execution, information sharing and knowledge creation, as organizational instrumental rational is not tempered by corresponding practical rational. The irreplaceable values of organizational practical rational are further illustrated. To illuminate practical rational, it is necessary to eliminate the intimidation and temptation, which are induced by hierarchical power, from the communication actions. Habermas believes that comprehensive speech, true statement, right position and sincere attitude are the four valid assertions for the communication actions. If only all communicating participants have equal opportunities to partake, declare, interrogate, and explain, authorities and ideologies can be excluded from the communication actions. Habermas defined the above circumstances as the “idea speech situation”. The thesis argues that organizational activities can be categorized into the “execution” and “communication” dimensions, which correspond to the organizational “instrumental rational” and “practical rational”. Communication actions should not be interrupted by the hierarchy power of execution dimension. Rules and tactics should be supported by common consensus and thorough communication. Staffs should apply instrumental rational to execute the rules and tactics without objection. If only the organizational culture and merit system can ensure the above working principles, the business entity can achieve the advantages of both instrumental and practical rational. In additional to the theoretical elaboration, the thesis proposes manners to establish organizational ideal speech situation from “managers’ attitude”, “staffs’ consensus”, and “discussion processes” aspects. The author applies the above ideal speech situation exposition to different organizational changing management phases. The thesis constructs the organizational changing wheel to illustrate the key executive points to successfully drive continuous organizational evolution. Furthermore, the author integrates the above argumentation with the “organizational knowledge creating theory”, which was proposed by Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi. The “meaning reproduction” flow of the organizational changing wheel is constructed by investigating the internalization, externalization, universalization, and integration processes of meanings, which include information, knowledge, interests, intuition, values, belief, cognition, emotion, identification, obedience, and consensus etc. If the communication processes of the organizational change follow practical rational, and the organizational changing is successfully accomplished, staffs will received positive feedback from the intrinsic meanings they generated. The author expounds that the “positive meaning feedback loop” will accelerate the iteration of meaning reproduction cycles. The dynamic stability, supported by the “positive meaning feedback loop”, will ensure the business entity to continuously adjust itself to conquer new competition circumstances. To exam the above theorem, the author adopts Intel’s strategic transition in 1985 as an example. The case is interpreted fro