For the revolution of ¡§the Third Wave¡¨, theorists have made arguments of the new tasks of organizations. Davenport and Prusak(1998: 19) have argued that the knowledge of the work force, the efficiency of organization¡¦s utilization of knowledge, and the speed of acquisition and utilization of new knowledge have become the only lifeblood of competitive advantage of organizations. Organizations make employees achieve some degree of ¡§knowing¡¨ by the usage of ¡§justified beliefs¡¨. So that they would be capable of the performance ,which is necessary for the organization to create value in the market and survive. Thus helping employees to obtain the knowledge necessary for performance more efficiently has become one of the major issues of management. Trying to conclude arguments of working knowledge, organizational learning, and knowledge management in literatures, we build up a framework to analyze the structure of knowledge management system in organizations. First, We draw different types of important working knowledge to organizations out of the operation styles of knowledge in organizations. Also, we sum up different characteristics of learning behaviors in different levels in organizations and the relationships between the learning behaviors and the knowledge base of organizations. Therefore, we could find out the relationship between the working knowledge needed by organizations, the learning behaviors, and the knowledge management system in organizations. Based on the literature review and qualitative data analysis and, we have the findings as follow: 1. Organizations that need tacit working knowledge to help employees to finish tasks would make learning assumptions of Constructionism; therefore they would focus on the construction of shared meaning. Information system that makes the communication easier would be needed most. Those who need explicit knowledge would make learning assumptions of Congnitivism and need integrated data base which give updated and correct information. 2. Organizations that develop knowledge strategy in existing knowledge domains intend to learn from the internal resources. Therefore they would need a system that helps to find the experts who know the answers and provide solutions. Organization that explore in new knowledge domains more likely to learn from the outside resource. Usually they send a group as learning agent for the organization. This agent would learn then integrate the new knowledge and the needs and operations of the organization. For this reason, the kind of knowledge system needed is to convey the new integrated knowledge from the agent to the rest of the organization. 3. The societal sub-system like language in common play more important role in knowledge management system than information system along.

This study developed and tested a contingency model of group communication in Korean workgroups that posited that the communication effectiveness and group performance of workgroups is determined by the “fit” of communication practices with organization structure and group relational climate. A contingency model incorporates three variables: contingency variables, response variables, and performance variables. Based on a review of the literature on Korean organizations and groups, the model incorporated two contingency variables: organizational structure and group relational climate. Organizational structure was indexed by the level of centralization and formalizations in the organization. Group relational climate was indexed by the level of closeness and group conformity among members. The response variables, communication practices of Korean workgroups, was measured in terms of the frequency of formal and informal meetings held by the workgroups. Two types of performance were measured: communication effectiveness and performance level. The contingency model hypothesized that the level of communication effectiveness and group performance of a workgroup that engages in communication practices which fit the requirements of organizational structure and group relational climate will be higher than that of a group whose communication practices do not fit the requirements of organizational structure and group relational climate. It also hypothesized the communication effectiveness group performance would be lower in groups which faced conflicting contingencies than in groups that faced consistent contingencies. A survey of 409 members of 84 workgroups in 37 Korean organizations was conducted. Results of this study supported the predictions of the contingency model. In particular, centralization, formalization, and closeness were significant contingency variables. The hypothesis regarding conflicting contingency was not supported. Implications of the study regarding the contingency theory, group communication and group effectiveness, and the nature of Korean groups and organizations are discussed.

本研究主要探討日本企業於90年代面臨泡沫經濟、金融風暴、全球化、資訊經濟以及服務經濟的變革。許多大企業過去因為追求成長而組織逐漸膨脹，使得面臨外部環境快速變遷時，發生反應遲鈍、人員創新力不足、資源過度分散的現象。在這一波變革當中，日本企業一方面要重整組織，一方面要踏入新的事業領域，使得變革格外艱困。90年代的泡沫經濟，正好提供日本企業深思反省的機會，也讓研究學者提供了企業變革的最佳樣本。 由於日本政府正式將獨占禁止法的純控股公司禁令解除，預計2001年進一步更改稅法為連結經營的模式，因此被禁止五十年的控股公司經營模式將被許多大企業多所採用。本研究藉由三大綜合電機廠商－株式會社日立製作所、株式會社東芝、三菱電機株式會社－的探討，逐步了解日本企業這一波組織變革的手法，以及控股公司組織架構在企業變革上所扮演的角色。 本研究從策略思維、組織架構、經營系統著手探討，發現在各個環節上都是企業變革的重要考量。日本企業的經營策略逐漸轉型為以中期規劃為主；原本製造導向轉變為以服務為導向；80年代過張造成的的資源分散，現在則努力執行選擇與集中企業資源；面對著資訊時代的來臨，投資網路與通訊新事業；隨著全球化的變化，企業不只有著重於日本市場，更以策略聯盟的方式以拓展全球市場。 由於控股公司架構的施行，可以幫助企業易於事業重組與進入新事業、企業轉變成為以策略為重點、權力分配朝向大幅授權與分權自主。就管理制度而言，為了適應mega-competition的競爭環境，反應速度是重要的考量，因此除了維持生產效率之外，經營效率亦是訴求重點。強調創新精神、加速決策過程、採用績效制度、藉助資訊系統等，以搭配控股公司的組織架構，期待能創造出另一波為人稱道的日本式經營。 本研究的結果，正是吾人探索二十一世紀經營之典範。對於台灣企業而言，台灣企業一直和日本企業保持著亦師亦友的角色，日本企業所面臨的大小問題，似乎都是台灣企業未來極有可能遇見的狀況，透過日本企業的深入了解，不但給予台灣企業警惕，也提供台灣企業良好的教材。 / The research studies Japanese firms' changes in face of bubble economy, financial crisis, and globalization as well as digital and service economy. Due to rapid growth in the 1980s, while facing the fast changes of business environment in the past decade, most of Japanese companies suffered from slow responses, insufficient innovation, and over diversified resources. To revitalize the organizations, they are willing to invest in new businesses on the other hand. Because of the lift of pure holding company and reform of consolidated tax system, many Japanese companies are announcing that they will transform themselves to new organizations in form of holding company that had been banned for fifty years. Through the search of three giant general electric firms- Hitachi, Ltd., Toshiba Corporation, and Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, the research discusses how the Japanese enterprises change and how the holding company structure plays in organizational changes. In terms of strategic rethinking, organizational adaptation, and managerial revitalization, Japanese companies are transforming from long term planning to midterm, from manufacturing orientation to service, from diversified resource to selection and focus, and from general electric businesses to network and communications. Not only is Japanese market emphasized, but international markets also are exploited by numbers of global strategic alliances. The introduction of holding company structure helps companies enter new businesses easily, focus efforts on strategies rather than on operations, and delegate more authorities to lower levels. Under the new structure, management system should be changed simultaneously. To survive in new business environment called mega-competition, fast response and managerial efficiency are points. Moreover, entrepreneurship, speedy decision making process, performance-based evaluation, and information system are adopted to fit both strategic rethinking and organizational adaptation. Scrutinizing Japan's adaptation to environment can give Taiwanese companies more understandings of new Japanese business operations. What the research reveals can warn Taiwan of falling into the same path as of Japan.