English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88613/118155 (75%)
Visitors : 23461609      Online Users : 364
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/48943


    Title: 專案團隊內創意構想守門與創新績效關係之研究-以業界參與科專廠商為例
    The Study of Gatekeeping Mechanisms of Creative and Innovative Products
    Authors: 項維欣
    Hsiang, Wei-Hsin
    Contributors: 吳思華
    Wu, Se-Hwa
    項維欣
    Hsiang, Wei-Hsin
    Keywords: 創意構想守門
    守門能耐
    體制規則
    創新實踐作為
    創新績效
    Gatekeeping ideas
    Gatekeeping Capability
    Institutional Routines
    Innovative Enablinlg Behaviors
    Innovative Performance
    Date: 2009
    Issue Date: 2010-12-08 01:53:37 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 當社會進入以創意為主的經濟型態,如何促進豐沛創意快速衍生,是大眾關注的焦點,也為企業興衰的關鍵。創意泉源始於創造新構想的個人。許多文獻多以探究創意者出發,卻忽略創新實為創意者、守門者、社會系統互動所建構。因此,過去創新管理,多以創意者角度思考,鮮以守門觀點探討;創新、研發、創造力理論脈絡,也甚少直接研究守門內涵。
    因此,本文以Lewin守門理論為基礎,整合演化、技術守門、創造力系統、體制理論,推衍何為創意構想守門,提出其運作包含:守門能耐-贏取信任基礎的能力、提供動機誘因的能力、具備專業能力;體制規則-評估標準、互動程度等二構念五因子。之後,依此多構念架構,Hinkin(1998)嚴謹發展程序,以三群不同獨立樣本,發展具信效度的量表,驗證專案團隊內創意構想守門概念結構模型的合宜性;接著,本研究進一步嘗試以上述整合性的守門觀點,探討其內涵與創新績效的關係,釐清篩選構想的守門活動,是否真為阻礙創新的絆腳石,或其實為促進創新的關鍵;最後,本研究釐清篩選創意構想的守門活動,是阻礙創新的絆腳石,或為扶植創意構想成長,催化創新的關鍵後,探討創意構想守門是如何促進創新的發生。
    本研究以結構方程模式,分析專案團隊創意構想守門之守門能耐及體制規則、創新實踐作為與專案團隊創新績效的關係,以具創意構想守門經驗之專案團隊為研究對象,自433家公司回收111份團隊有效問卷。
    結果發現,創意構想守門能耐及創新型體制規則與專案團隊創新績效呈正相關,且體制規則調節守門能耐與創新績效之關係,且創新實踐作為亦中介創意構想守門與創新績效之關係。而本文除強調以守門角度思考對管理創新的重要性;也提出創意構想守門內涵供經理人設計創意構想守門時,一個有系統的思考框架;而所發展具信效度之量表及創意構想守門與創新績效關係的實證結果,亦可作為後續研究的基礎。
    Nowadays, the raise of economy in our society is from creative ideas. Thus, people care about how to promote abundance creative ideas growing fast. In addition, firms also get survive in serious competitions by these creative ideas. The sources of creative ideas are from brilliant creators. So, researchers of innovation management often begin their studies from the creator’s perspective. There are rarely researchers starting their researches from another actor’s view. However, this perspective ignores that the creativity is the interactions among creators, gatekeepers, and whole society.
    Therefore, this study tried to clarify what the gatekeeping is. The study follows the logic of Lewin’s gatekeeping theory, introduces the evolution perspective, and integrates the technology gatekeeper, Csikszentmihaly’s system model, and institutional theory to approach the gatekeeping in selecting creative ideas. This study proposes there are five key factors, the abilities of earning creators’ trust, raising creator’s motivation, selecting ideas’ professional abilities, evaluating standards, and the degree of interactions in the gatekeeping construct. Then, according to the Lewin’s gatekeeping theory, this study classifies these five factors into two dimensions, the gatekeeping capabilities and institutional routines. Then, basis of this theoretical model and Hinkin’s (1998) procedure, this study develops and tests the questionnaire of the gatekeeping creative ideas inside the project teams. After that, the aim of this article explores how and why the gatekeeping and the innovation performance are related.
    This research involved a survey, comprised of four sets of questionnaires concerning the gatekeepong capabilities, institutional routines, innovative enabling behaviors, and innovation performances. 111 project teams participated in the study. The quantitative analysis of the questionnaires was conducted through descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and structural equation modeling in order to indicate the direction and relationships among the four sets of variables.
    The result proves the concept theoretical model of gatekeeping creative ideas is reasonable and the questionnaire has fair reliability and validity. Furthermore, results of this study also showed a medium level of consistence among the four variables of the gatekeeping capabilities, institution routines, innovative enabling behaviors, and innovation performances. To conclude, this study may be of importance in explaining the relationship between gatekeeping and innovation performance, as well as in providing the researchers and managers with a better understanding of how and why gatekeeping in creative ideas relate to the innovation performances. Therefore, this research can be the foundation of creative ideas’ gatekeeping for innovation studies in the future. It also reminds the managers the importance of gatekeeping and provides a thinking model in managing innovations.
    目次…………………………………………………………………………....... i
    表次………………………………………………………………………….... vii
    圖次……………………………………………………………………….….... ix
    第一章 總論………...…………………………………………………………. 1
    壹、研究背景………...………………………………………………... 3
    貳、研究動機………...……………………………………………....... 3
    一、實務上所浮現的問題…………………………………...……....... 3
    二、現有理論之不足…………………………………...…………....... 4
    參、研究目的與問題…………………………………...…………....... 5
    四、研究範圍…………………………………...…………………....... 5
    一、研究範疇的選擇-組織間或組織內專案團隊守門機制的選擇… 5
    二、研究對象的選擇…………………………...…………………....... 6
    伍、研究流程與論文架構…………………………...……………....... 7
    第二章 研究一 專案團隊內創意構想守門概念建構及量表發展與驗證….. 9
    摘要………...…………………………………………………………..... 11
    壹、緒論……………………………………………………………........ 12
    貳、文獻探討…………………………………………………………… 14
    一、Lewin守門理論觀點………………………………………….…… 14
    二、技術守門觀點…………………………………………………….... 14
    三、Csikszentmihalyi系統觀點…………………………………….…… 15
    四、社會網路理論……………………………………………………… 15
    五、創意構想守門的內涵…………………………………………….... 16
    六、創意構想守門的構面與因子……………………………………….. 19
    (一)守門能耐-贏取信任基礎的能力……………………………...…. 19
    (二)守門能耐-提供動機誘因的能力……………………………….... 20
    (三)守門能耐-專業能力…………………………………………….... 20
    (四)體制規則-評估標準…………………………………………….... 21
    (五)體制規則-互動程度…………………………………………….... 22
    參、研究設計與量表發展及實證結果………………………………….. 23
    一、瞭解創意構想守門概念的內涵…………………………………….. 23
    二、量表發展程序……………………………………………………….. 24
    (一)、題項產生………………………………………………………… 24
    (二)、內容效度………………………………………………………… 24
    (三)、精簡題項………………………………………………………… 25
    (四)、驗證性因素分析………………………………………………… 30
    (五)、建立收斂與鑑別效度…………………………………………… 32
    (六)、重複施測………………………………………………………… 34
    肆、結論與建議………………………………………………………….. 37
    一、理論貢獻…………………………………………………………….. 37
    (一)、Lewin守門理論…………………………………………………. 37
    (二)、技術守門觀點…………………………………………………… 38
    (三)、Csikszmentmihalyi系統觀點…………………………………… 38
    二、實務貢獻…………………………………………………………….. 39
    三、量表品質與應用…………………………………………………….. 39
    四、未來研究建議……………………………………………………….. 40
    五、研究限制…………………………………………………………….. 40
    附錄 用於探索性及驗證性因素分析之問卷調查題項及篩選結果….. 42
    第三章 研究二 專案團隊內創意構想守門與創新績效之關係探討……… 49
    摘要………...…………………………………...…………………….... 51
    壹、緒論…………………………………………………………….......... 52
    貳、文獻探討與假設推演……………………………………………… 53
    一、守門理論…………………………………………………………….. 53
    二、創新績效…………………………………………………………...... 54
    三、創意構想守門……………………………………………………….. 55
    (一)創意構想守門能耐…………………………………………......… 56
    (二)體制規則………………………………………………………...... 56
    四、創意構想守門與創新績效之關係……………………..………….... 57
    (一)創意構想守門與創新績效……………………...………...……… 57
    (二)創意構想守門能耐與專案團隊創新績效…………………...…... 58
    (三)體制規則與專案團隊創新績效………………………...………... 59
    五、體制規則對守門能耐之調節效果…………………………...……... 61
    參、研究方法…………………………………………………………….. 61
    一、研究架構…………………………………………………………….. 61
    二、研究過程…………………………………………………………….. 62
    (一)、問卷設計………………………………………………………… 62
    (二)、研究對象與樣本來源…………………………………………… 63
    (三)、問卷發放與回收情形…………………………………………… 63
    三、衡量……………………………………………………………..…… 64
    (一)、創意構想守門能耐量表………………………………………… 64
    (二)、體制規則量表…………………………………………………… 65
    (三)、專案團隊創新績效量表………………………………………… 65
    (四)、控制變項………………………………………………………… 65
    (五)、共同方法變異…………………………………………………… 66
    肆、實證結果…………………………………………………………….. 67
    一、敘述統計分析……………………………………………………….. 67
    二、相關分析…………………………………………………………….. 67
    三、創意構想守門與專案團隊創新績效……………………………….. 68
    (一)、測量模式分析結果…………………………………………........ 69
    (二)、主要效果模式………………………………………..………….. 71
    (三)、理論模式與主要效果模式之分析比較………………..……….. 71
    伍、討論與結論………………………………………………………….. 73
    一、創意構想守門與創新績效………………………………………….. 73
    (一)、創意構想守門能耐與創新績效……………………..………….. 73
    (二)、創意構想體制規則與創新績效………………………………… 74
    二、體制規則、守門能耐與創新績效………………………..………….. 74
    三、研究限制與未來研究方向………..……………………..………….. 75
    (一)、樣本取樣的限制……………………………………..………….. 75
    (二)、樣本數的不足………………………………………..………….. 76
    (三)、創新績效客觀指標的缺乏…………………………..………….. 76
    (四)、橫斷面研究的限制…………………………………………..….. 76
    (五)、單一分析層次變項的研究限制……………………..………….. 76
    (六)、回饋關係的忽略……………………………………..………….. 76
    第四章 研究三 專案團隊內創意構想守門與創新績效之關係:創新實踐作為之中介效果……….…………………………………………………. 79
    摘要………...…………………………………...…………………….... 81
    壹、緒論…………………………………………………………............ 82
    貳、文獻探討與假設推演……………………………………………… 84
    一、守門理論…………………………………………………………… 84
    二、創新績效………………………………………………………........ 84
    三、創意構想守門……………………………………………………… 85
    (一)守門能耐………………………………………………...………. 85
    (二)體制規則…………………………………………………............ 86
    四、創新實踐作為…………………………………………………….... 86
    五、創意構想守門與創新績效之關係………………………………… 87
    (一)創意構想守門與創新績效……………………...……...……..… 87
    (二)創意構想守門能耐與專案團隊創新績效……………….……... 87
    (三)體制規則與創新績效………………………...……………....…. 89
    六、創新實踐作為對創意構想守門與創新績效關係的中介效果….... 90
    參、研究方法………………...………………………………………..... 91
    一、研究架構…………………………...………………………………. 91
    二、研究過程…………………………………...…………………..…... 92
    (一)、問卷設計…………...………………………………………..…. 92
    (二)、研究對象與樣本來源………………………………….....……. 93
    (三)、問卷發放與回收情形…………………………...…………..…. 93
    三、衡量………………………………...………………………………. 93
    (一)、創意構想守門能耐量表……………………...………………... 93
    (二)、體制規則量表…………………...………………………..……. 94
    (三)、創新實踐作為量表……………...…………………………..…. 94
    (四)、專案團隊創新績效量表…………...………………………..…. 95
    (五)、控制變項……………………...………………………………... 95
    (四)、共同方法變異………………………………...………………... 96
    肆、實證結果……………...……………………………………………. 96
    一、敘述統計分析…………………...………………………………..... 96
    二、相關分析…………………………...………………………………. 97
    三、創意構想守門、創新實踐作為與創新績效…………………..…… 98
    (一)、測量模式分析結果……………………………...…………....... 99
    (二)、主要效果模式…………………………...…………..………... 101
    (三)、理論模式………………………………………...……..….….. 101
    (四)、飽和模式………………………………………...……..….….. 101
    伍、討論與結論……………………………...…………………….….. 105
    一、主要效果……………………………...…………………….…….. 105
    (一)、創意構想守門能耐與創新績效…………………..………….. 105
    (二)、體制規則與創新績效……………………………….………... 106
    (三)、創新實踐作為與創新績效………………………….…...…… 106
    二、中介效果………………………..………………………….……... 107
    (一)、創意構想守門、創新實踐做為與創新績效……..….….…….. 107
    三、研究限制與未來研究方向………..……………...……..…….….. 107
    (一)、樣本取樣的限制………...…………………………..………... 108
    (二)、樣本數的不足…………………...…………………..….…….. 108
    (三)、創新績效客觀指標的缺乏………………...………...……….. 108
    (四)、橫斷面研究的限制………………...……………………...….. 108
    (五)、單一分析層次變項的研究限制………...…………..………... 108
    第五章、總結……………………...………..………………………………... 111
    壹、研究發現…………………………………………………….......... 113
    一、綜合討論…………………………………………………….......... 113
    (一)創意構想守門與創新實踐作為………………………….......... 113
    1. 創意構想守門能耐與創新實踐作為….…………………….......... 113
    2. 創意構想體制規則與創新實踐作為….…………………….......... 114
    3. 創意構想守門與創新實踐作為小結….…………………….......... 115
    (二)創新實踐作為與創新績效….……………...…………….......... 115
    (三)體制規則與守門能耐….……………...………………….......... 116
    (四)創意構想守門與創新績效….………...………………….......... 116
    二、理論與實務意涵….……………....……...………………….......... 117
    (一)理論意涵….……………....……...……………………….......... 117
    1. Lewin守門理論觀點….…………....……...………………….......... 117
    2. 技術守門人觀點….…………....……...……………………........... 119
    3. Csikszentmihaly系統觀點的學門….…………....……......….......... 120
    4. Kuhn的典範觀點….…………....……...……………………........... 123
    (二)實務意涵….…………....……..........……………………........... 125
    三、研究限制與後續研究建議….…………………....……......….......... 127
    (一)研究限制….……………………………….....……......….......... 127
    (二)後續研究建議….………………………….....……......….......... 128
    參考文獻….……………………………….....……................….......... 131
    Reference: 方世杰,蔡淑梨,羅育如(2005),「從知識市場效率觀點探討組織知識之創造」,中山管理評論,第十三卷第二期,頁695~719。
    方世杰、林麗娟(2005),「參與科技專案廠商之組織學習、社會資本與技術移轉之實證研究」,管理學報,第22卷,第3期,頁195~315。
    孔恩(2000),王道還譯,科學革命的結構,初版,台北:遠流。
    申荷永(2001),充滿張力的生活空間-勒溫的心理動力心理學,初版,台北:貓頭鷹。
    余民寧(2006),潛在變項模式:SIMPLIS的應用。台北:高等教育。
    沈其泰,黃敏萍,鄭伯壎(2004),「團隊共享心智模式與知識分享行為:成員性格特質與性格相似性的調節效果」,管理學報,第二十一卷第一期,頁47~62。
    林震岩(2007),多變量分析:SPSS的操作與應用。台北:智勝文化
    邱皓政(2003),結構方程模式:LISREL的理論技術與應用,台北:雙葉書廊。
    邱皓政,陳燕禎,林碧芳(2009),「組織創新氣氛量表的發展與信效度衡鑑」,測驗學刊,第五十六卷第一期, 頁69~97。
    契克森米哈賴(Csikszentmihalyi)(1999),杜明城譯,創造力,初版,台北:時報文化。
    陳明惠(2009)創意管理。智勝文化。
    Spencer, J. W., (2003), “Global Gatekeeping, Representation, and Network Structure: A Longitudinal Analysis of Regional and Global Knowledge Diffusion Networks”, Journal of International Business Studies, 34(5), 428-442.
    Starkey, K., Barnatt, C. and Tempest, S., (2000), “Beyond Networks and Hierarchies: Latent Organizations in the U.K. Television Industry”, Organization Science, 11(3), 299-305.
    Steenkamp, J. B. and Trijp, V. H. (1991) “The Use of LISREL in Validating Marketing Constructs”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 8(4), 283-299.
    Stenberg, R. J., (1985), “Implicit Theories of Intelligence, Creativity, and Wisdom”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 607-627.
    Stenberg, R. J., and Lubart, T. I. (1999), “The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms”, in Handbook of Creativity, Stenberg, R. J. eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3-15.
    Stross, R., (2000), The True Story of the Six Tall Man Who Baked ebay, Webvan, and Other Billion-Dollar Start-Ups, New York: Crown Books.
    Tasi, W., (2002), “Social Structure of Coopetition within a multiunit organization: Coordination, Competition, and Intraorganizational Knowledge Sharing”, Organization Science, 13(2), 179-190.
    Thomas, J. B., Clark, S. M. and Gioia, D. A., (1993), “Strategic Sensemaking and Organizational Performance: Linkages among Scanning, Interpretation, Action, and Outcomes”, Academy of Management Journal, 36(2), 239-270.
    Thomas, J. B., S. M. Clark, andD. A. Gioia, (1993), “Strategic Sensemaking and Organizational Performance: Linkages among Scanning, Interpretation, Action, and Outcomes”, Academy of Management Journal, 36, 239-270.
    Allen, T. J., (1970), “Communication Networks in R&D Laboratories”, R&D Management, 1(1) , 14-21.
    Hershey, D. A., Walsh, D. A., Read, S. J. and Chulef, A. S., (1990), “The Effects of Expertise on Financial Problem Solving: Evidence for Goal Directed Problem Solving Scripts”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 46(1), 77-101.
    Torrance, E. P., (1966), The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-Technical Manual, Lexington, MA: Personnel Press.
    Tuchman, G., (1972), “Objectivity as Strategic Ritual: a Examination of Newsmen's Notion of Objecctivity”, American Journal of Sociology, 77, 660-679.
    Tushman, M. L., (1977), “Special Boundary Roles in the Innovation Process”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(4), 587-605.
    Van de Van, A. H. and Delbecq, A. L., (1971), “Nominal Versus Interacting Group Process for Committee Decision-making Effectiveness”, Academy of Management Journal, 14(2), 203-212.
    Van de Van, A. H., (1986), “Central Problem in the Management of Innovation”, Management Science, 32(5), 590-607.
    Van de Van, A. H., Angle, H. L. and Poole, M. S. (2000), Research on the Management Innovation-the Minnesota Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Wehner, L., Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Magyari-Beck, I., (1991), “Current Approaches Used in Studying Creativity: An Exploratory Investigation”, Creativity Research Journal, 4(3), 261-271.
    Weigelt, K. and Camerer, C., (1988), “Reputation and Corporate Strategy: a Review of Recent Theory and Applications”, Strategic Management Journal, 9(5), 443-454.
    Weisberg, R. W., (1986), Creativity: Genius and Other Myths, New York: Freeman.
    White, D. M., (1950), “The Gatekeeper: A Case Study in the Selection of News”, Journalism Quarterly, 27, 383-390.
    Heslop, L., McGregor, E. and Griffith, M., (2001), “Development of A Technology Readiness Assessment Measure: The Cloverleaf Model of Technology Transfer”, Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(4), 369-384.
    Allen, T. J., Lee, Denis M. S., and Tushman, M. L. (1980), “R&D Performance as a Function of Internal Communication, Project Management, and the Nature of the Work,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 27(1), 2.
    Allen, T. J., Tushman, M. L., Lee, and Denis, M. S. (1979), “Technology Transfer as a Function of Position in the Spectrum from Research Through Development to Technical Services,” Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 694-709.
    Alvarez, J. and Svejenova, S., (2002), “Symbiotic Careers in Movie Making: Pedro and Agustin Almodovar”, in Peierl, A. M. and Anand, N. (eds.), Career Creativity: Explorations in the Remarking of Work, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Amabile, T. M. (1988) “A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations,” Research in Organization Behavior, 10, 123-167.
    Amabile, T. M. (1998), “Motivating Creativity in Organizations: On Doing What you Love and Loving What You Do,” California Management Review, 40(1), 39-58.
    Amabile, T. M., (1983), The Social Psychology of Creativity, New York: Springer-Verlag.
    Amabile, T. M., (1985), “Motivation and Creativity: Effects of Motivational Orientation on Creative Writers”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2), 393-399.
    Amabile, T. M., Goldfarb, P. and Brackfield, S., (1990), “Social Influences on Creativity: Evaluation Coaction, and Surveillance”, Creativity Research Journal, 3(1), 6-21.
    Amabile, T. M., Hennessey, B. A. and Grossman, B., (1986), “Social Influences on Creativity: The Effects of Contracted-for Reward”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 14-23.
    Amabile, T. M., Hill K. G., Hennessey B. A., and Tighe, E. M. (1994), “The Work Preference Inventory: Assessing Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivational Orientations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.
    Hibbert, L., (2001), “Winners and Losers in the Art of Pitching for Business”, Professional Engineering, 14(4), 15-16.
    Anderson, D. A., (1982), “Handling of Controversial Merry-Go-Round Columns”, Journalism Quarterly, 59, 295-298.
    Anderson, J. C. and Gerbing, D. W., (1991), “Predicting Performance of Measures in a Confirmatory Factor Analysis with a Pretest Assessment of Their Substantive Validates”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 732-740.
    Anderson, J. C. and Gerning, D. W. (1998), “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach,” Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
    Anderson, P. and Tushman, M. L., (1990), “Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(4), 604-633.
    Angle, H. L. and A. Van de Van, (2000), “Suggestions for Managing the Innovation Journey”, in Research on the Management Innovation-the Minnesota Studies, Vand de Van, A. H., Angle, H. L. and Poole, M. S. eds. New York: Oxford University Press, 663-697.
    Angle, H. L., (2000), “Psychology and Organizational Innovation”, in Vand de Van, A. H., Angle, H. L. and Poole, M. S. (eds.), Research on the Management Innovation-the Minnesota Studies, New York: Oxford University Press.
    Baer, J.,(1998), “The Case for Domain Specificity of Creativity”, Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173-178.
    Baker, W. E. and R. R. Faulkner, (1991), “Role as Resource in the Hollywood Film Industry”, The American Journal Sociology, 97(2), 279-309.
    Baron, R. M. and D. A. Kenny, (1996), “The Moderator-mediator Variable Distinction in Social Statistical Considerations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
    Barron, F. and Harrington, D. M., (1981), Creativity and Personal Freedom, NJ: Van Nostrand.
    Hickey, J.R. (1966), “The Effects of Information Control on Perceptions of Centrality,” doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin.
    Barron, F., (1955), “The Disposition towards Originality”, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 478-485.
    Basadur, M. and Gelade, G. A., (2006), “The Role of Knowledge Management in the Innovation Process”, Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(1), 45-62.
    Basadur, M. S, (1992), “Managing Creativity: A Japanese Model”, Academy of Management Executive, 6(2), 29-42.
    Basadur, M. S., (2006), “The Power of Innovation”, How to Make Innovation a Way of Life and Put Creative Solutions to Work, London: Pitman Professional Publishing.
    Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Sanchez, R. J., Craig, J., Ferrara, P. and Campion, M. A., (2001), “Applicant Reactions to Selection: Development of the Selection Procedural Justice Scale (SPJS)”, Personnel Psychology, 54(2), 387-419.
    Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T., (1967), The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, 1st, NY: Anchor Books.
    Berger, R. M., Guilford, S. P. and Christensen, P. R., (1957), “A Factor Analytic Study of Planning Abilities”, Psychological Monographs, 71(1), 1-29.
    Bielby, W. T. and Bielby, D. D., (1994), “All Hits Are Flukes: Institutionalized Decision Making and the Rhetoric of Network Prime-time Program Development”, American Journal of Sociology, 99(5), 1287-1313.
    Bollen, K. A., (1998), “LISREL Models”, in Armitage, P. and Colton, T. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Biostatistics, England: John Wiley.
    Bouty, I., (2000), “Interpersonal and Interaction Influences of Informal Resource Exchane between R&D Researchers across Organizational Boundaries,” Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 50-65.
    Hinkin, T. R., (1998), “A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires”, Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104-121.
    Bryk, A. S. and Raudenbush, S. W. (1992), Hierarchical Linear Models: Application and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Burt, R. S., (1992), Structure Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge MA: Havard Univsrsity Press.
    Bystryn, M., (1978), “Art Galleries as Gatekeepers: The Case of the Abstract Expressions”, Social Research, 45(2), 390-408.
    Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W., (1959), “Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-multimethod Matrix”, Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.
    Campbell, D. T., (1960), “Blind Variation and Selective Retention in Creative Thought as in Other Knowledge Processes”, Psychological Review, 67(6), 380-400.
    Cardinal, L. B. and Hatfield, D. E., (2000), “Internal Knowledge Generation: The Research Laboratory and Innovative Productivity in the Pharmaceutical Industry”, Journal of Engineering Technology Management, 17(3), 247-271.
    Charkrabarti, A. K. & O’keefe, R. D., ( 1977 ), “A Study of Key Communications in Research and Development Laboratories”, Group and Organization Studies, 2(3), 336-345.
    Chen, M. H. (2006), “Understanding the Benefits and Detriments of Conflict on Team Creativity Process,” Creativity and Innovation Management, 15, 105-116.
    Cooper, R. G., (1993), Winning at New Product: Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch. Reading, 1st, MA: Perseus Books.
    Cooper, R., Edgett, S. and Kleinschmidt, E., (2002), “Optimizing the Stage-gate Process: What Best Practice Companies are Doing-part I”, Research-Technology Management, 45(5), 21-27.
    Hirsch, P. M., (1972), “Processing Fads and Fashions: An Organization-set Analysis of Cultural Industry Systems”, American Journal of Sociology, 77(4), 639-659.
    Cooper, R., Edgett, S. and Kleinschmidt, E., (2002), “Optimizing the Stage-gate Process: What Best Practice Companies are Doing-part II”, Research-Technology Management, 45(6), 43-49.
    Cortine, J. M., Chen, G. and Dunlap, W. P. (2001), “Testing Interaction Effects in LISREL: Examination and Illustration of Available Procedures”, Organizational Research Methods, 4 (4), 324-360.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999), “Implications of A Systems Perspective for the Study of Creativity”, in The Handbook of Creativity, Sternberg, R. J., eds. New York: Cambridge University Press, 313-335.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M., (1988), “Society, Culture, and Person: A System View of Creativity”, in The Nature of Creativity, Sternberg, R. J., eds. New York: Cambridge University Press, 325-339.
    Daft, R.L., (1995), Organization Theory and Design. New York: West Publishing Company.
    De Meyer, A., (1984), “A Technological Innovation in an R&D Department”, Research Policy, 14(6), 315-328
    Deci E. L. and Ryan R. M. (1985), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
    Delmestri, G., Montanari, F. and Usai, A., (2005), “Reputation and Strength of Ties in Predicting Commerical Success and Artistic Merit of Independents in the Italian Feature Film Industry”, Journal of Management Studies, 42(5), 975-1002.
    Diez, M. A., (2001), “The Evaluation of Regional Innovation and Cluster Policies: Toward a Participatory Approach”, European Planning Studies, 9(7), 907-923.
    Dimaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W., (1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields”, American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
    Hirsch, P. M., (1975), “Organizational Effectiveness and the Institutional Environment”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(3), 327-344.
    Dimaggio, P. J., (1977), “Market Structures, the Creative Process, and Popular Culture”, Journal of Popular Culture, 11(2), 436-452.
    Doerner, D. and Schaub, H., (1994), “Errors in Planning and Decision Making and the Nature of Human Information Processing”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 43(4), 433-453.
    Dougherty, D., (1999), “Organizational Capacities for Sustained Product Innovation”, Advances in Management Cognition and Organizational Information Processing, 6, 79-114.
    Drazin, R. and Schonhoven, C. B., (1996), “Community, Population, and Organization Effects on Innovation: A Multilevel Perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1065-1083.
    Driks, K. T., (2000), “Trust in Leadership and Team Performance: Evidence from NCCU Basketball”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 1004-1012.
    Elsbach, K. D. and R. M. Kramer, (2003), “Assessing Creativity in Hollywood Pitch Meetings: Evidence for a Dual-Process Model of Creativity Judgments”, Academy of Management Journal, 46(3), 283-301.
    Elsbach, K. D., (2003), “How to Pitch a Brilliant Idea”, Harvard Business Review, 81(9), 117-123.
    Erkko, A., (1998), “Evaluation of RTD in Regional Systems of Innovation”, European Planning Studies, 6(2), 131-141.
    Feist, G. J., (1998), “A Meta-Analysis of Personality in Scientific and Artistic Creativity”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290-309.
    Flegel, R. C. and Chaffee, S. H. (1971), ”Influences of Editors,Readers, and Personal Opinions on Reporters,” Journalism Quarterly, 48, 645-651.
    Hirsch, P.M., (1977), “Occupational, Organizational and Institutional Models in Mass Media Research: Toward an Integrated Framework”, In Strategies for communication research, P. M. Hirsch, P. V. Miller, and F. G. Kline ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Fleming., L. and Waguespack, D. M., (2007), “Brokerage, Boundary, Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Community”, Organization Science, 18(2), 165-180.
    Florida, R., (2002), The Rise of the Creative Class: And How it’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life, 1st, NY: Basic Books.
    Flynn, M., Dooley, L., O’Sullivan, D. and Cormican., K., (2003), “Idea Management for Organization Innovation”, International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(4), 417-442.
    Ford, C., (1996), “A Theory of Individual Creative Action in Multiple Social Domains”, Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112-1142.
    Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F., (1981), “Evaluation Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error”, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
    Galbraith, J. R., (1982), “Designing the Innovation Organizations”, Organizational Dynamics, 11(1), 5-25.
    Galford, R. and Drapeau, A. S. (2003), “The Enemies of Trust,” Harvard Business Review, 81(2), 88.
    Gardner, H., (1988), “Creative Lives and Creative Works: A Synthetic Scientific Approach”, In R. J. Stenberg (eds.), The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspective, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Gardner, H., (1993), Creating Minds, New York: Basic Books.
    Gieber, W. (1956), “Across the Desk: A Study of 16 TelegraphEditors,” Journalism Quarterly, 33, 423-432.
    Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., Johnson, R. A. and Moesel, D. D., (1996), “The Market for Corporate Control and Firm Innovation”, Academy of Management Journal, 20(4), 767-798.
    Gieber, W. (1960), “How the Gatekeepers View Local Civil Liberties News,” Journalism Quarterly, 37, 199-205.
    Glynn, M. A., (1996), “Innovative Genius: A Framework for Relating Individual and Organizational Intelligences to Innovation”, Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1081-1111.
    Gold, B., (1988), “Charting a Course to Superior Technology Evaluation”, Sloan Management Review, 30(1), 19-27.
    Griffin, A. and Page, A. L. (1993), “An Interim Report on Measuring Product Development Success and Failure,” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4, 291-308.
    Guilford, J.P., (1967), The nature of human intelligence, New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Gulati, R., (1998), “Alliances and Networks”, Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317.
    Hair, J. F., (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
    Hair, Jr. J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., and Tatham, R. L. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle, River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Hammond, K. J., (1990), “Case-based Planning: A Framework for Planning from Experience”, Cognitive Science, 14(4), 385-443.
    Hauge, A., (2006), “Gatekeepers and Knowledge Diffusion in the Fashion Industry”, DRUID-DIME Academy Winter 2006 PhD Conference.
    Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1999), “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance”, Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
    陳明惠、張元杰、陳咨明、毛凱立(2007),「網路型態與研發專案團隊績效:以專案發展階段的觀點」,台灣管理學刊,第7卷,第1期,頁1~24。
    Jackson, P. W. and Messick, S. (1959), The Person, the Product and the Response: Conceptual Problems in the Assessment of Creativity. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
    Jepperson, R.L., (1991), “Institutions, Institutional Effects, and Institutionalism”, In The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, Powell, Walter W. and Dimaggio, Paul J. eds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 143-163.
    Judd, R. P., (1961), “The Newspaper Reporter in a Suburban City”, Journalism Quarterly, 38, 35-42.
    Kasof, J., (1993), “Six Bias in the Naming of Stimulus Person”, Psychological Bulletin, 113(1), 140-163.
    Kasof, J., (1995), “Social Determinants of Creativity: Status Expectations and the Evaluation of Original Products”, Advances in Group Process, 12(2), 167-220.
    Kasof, J., (1996), “Explaining Creativity: the Attributional Perspective”, Creativity Research Journal, 8(4), 311-366.
    Katz, A. and Giacommelli, L., (1982), “The Subjective Nature of Creativity Judgments”, Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 20(1), 17-20.
    Katz, D. and Kahn, R. L., (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizations, 2nd, New York: Wiley.
    Katz, D., (1964), “The Motivational Basis of Organizational Behavior”, Behavioral Science, 9(2), 131-146.
    Katz, R. and Tushman, M. (1979), “Communication Patterns, Project Performance, and Task Characteristics: An Empirical Evaluation and Integration in an R&D Setting,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23(2), 139-162.
    陳明惠、陳相甫(2008),「研發團隊社會網路的個案研究:以專案發展階段的觀點」,科技管理學刊,第13卷,第3期,頁1~31。
    Kerrick, J. S., Anderson, T. E., and Swales, L. B. (1964), „Balance and the Writer's Attitude in News Stories and Editorials,” Journalism Quarterly, 41, 207-215.
    Kitchell, S., (1995), “Corporate Culture, Environmental Adaptation, and Innovative Adaptation: A Qualitative/Quantitative Approach”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(2), 192-205.
    Koen, P., Ajamian, G., Boyces, S., Clamen, A., Fisher, E., Fountoualakis, S., Johnson A., Prui, P., and Seibert, R., (2002), “Fuzz-front End: Effective Methods, Tools and Techniques,” in PDMA Toolbook for New Product Development, Belliveau, P., Friffin, A., and Soremeyer, S. eds. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2-35.
    Kubey, R., Reed, L., and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996), “Experience Sampling Method Applications to Communication Research Questions,” Journal of Communication, 46(2), 99-105.
    Kuhlmann, S., (1998), “Moderation of Policy Making? Science and Technology Policy Evaluation beyond Impact Measurement- the Case of Germany”, Evaluation, 4(2), 130-148.
    Lei, D., J. W. Slocum, and R. A. Pitts, (1999), “Design Organizations for Competitive Advantage: the Power of Unlearning and Learning”, Organizational Dynamics, 27(93), 24-38.
    Lewicki, R. J. and Bunker, B. B. (1996), “Developing and Maintaining Trust in Work Realtionships,” in Trust in Organizations, Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. et al., eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publication Inc.
    Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., and Bies, R. (1998),”Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities,” Academy of Management Review, 23, 438-458.
    Lewin, K. (1933), “Environmental Forces in Child Behavior and Development,” In Handbook of child psychology, Murchison C. Eds. Worchester, MA: Clark University Press.
    Lewin, K., (1947), “Frontiers in Group Dynamics: II Channels of Group Life, Social Planning and Action Research”, Human Relatioin, 1(1), 143-153.
    彭台光、高月慈、林鉦棽(2006),「管理研究中的共同方法變異:問題本質、影響、測試和補救」,管理學報,第23 卷,第1 期,頁77~98。
    Lewin, K., (1951), Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers, 1st, New York: Harper.
    Liden, R. C. and Maslyn, J. M., (1998), “Multidimensionality of Leader-Member Exchange: An Empirical Assessment through Scale Development”, Journal of Management, 24(1), 43-72.
    Locke E. A. and Latham G. P. (1990), “Work Motivation and Satisfaction: Light at the End of the Tunnel,” Psychological Science, 1(4), 240-246.
    Lonergan, D., Scott, C., Ginamarie, M. and Mumford, M. D., (2004), “Evaluative Aspects of Creative Thought: Effects of Appraisal and Revision Standards”, Creativity Research Journal, 16(2 & 3), 231-246.
    Lubart, T. I., (2001), “Models of the Creative Process: Past, Present, and Future”, Creativity Research Journal, 13, 295-308.
    Maguire, S., Hardy, C. and Lawrence, T. B., (2004), “Institutional Entrepreneurship in Emerging Fields: HIV/AIDS Treatment Advocacy in Canada”, Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 657-679.
    March, J. G. and Olsen J. P. (1976), Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations. Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
    Mauws, M. K., (2000), “But is it Art? Decision Making and Discursive Resources in the Field of Cultural Production”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(2), 229-244.
    Mayer, R., J. Davis, and F. Schoorman, (1995), “A Integration Model of Organization Trust”, Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.
    McCombs, M. E. and Shaw, D. L. (1976), “Structuring the "unseen environment," Journal of Communication, 26, 18-22.
    黃芳銘(2007),結構方程模式:理論與應用,六版,台北:五南圖書出版公司。
    McLain, D. L. and Hackman, K. (1999), “Trust, Risk, and Decision-making in Organization Change,” Public Administration Quarterly, 23(2), 152-176.
    Menzel, H. R., (1996), “Scientific Communication Five Themes from Social Science Research”, in Griffith, B. C. (eds.), Key Papers in Information Science, NY: Knowledge Industry Publication.
    Meyer, John W. and Rowan B., (1977), “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony,” American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
    Meyersib, D., Weicj, K. and Karmer, R., (1996), “Swift Trust and Temporary Groups”, in Karmer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. ( eds. ), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, Calif.: Sage Publications.
    Mumford, M. D., (2000), “Managing Creative People: Strategies and Tactics for Innovation”, Human Resource Management Review, 10(3), 313-351.
    Mumford, M. D., (2001), “Something Old, Something New: Revisiting Guilford's Conception of Creative Problem Solving”, Creativity Research Journal, 13(3&4), 267-276.
    Mumford, M. D., Lonergan, D. C. and Scott, G. M., (2002), “Evaluating Creative Ideas: Process, Standards, and Context”, Critical Inquiry, 22(1), 21-30.
    Mumford, M. D., Marks, M. A., Connelly, M. S., Zaccaro, S. J. and Johnson, J. F., (1998), “Domain-Based Scoring of Divergent Thinking Tests: Validation Evidence in an Occupational Sample”, Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 151-163.
    Mumford, M. D., Schultz, R. M. and Van D., (2001), “Performance in Planning & Processes, Requirements, and Others”, Review of General Psychology, 5(3), 213-240.
    Nisbett, R. and Ross, L., (1980), Human Interface: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgement, 1st, New York: Prentice-Hall.
    項維欣、吳思華、陳意文(2010),「專案團隊內創意構想守門概念建構及量表發展與驗證」,中山管理評論,通過二審修改中。
    Nisbett, R., and Ross, L. (1980), Human Interface: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgement, New York: Prentice-Hall.
    Nyhan, R. C. and Marlowe, H. A. (1997), “The Psychometric Properties of the Organizational Trust Inventory,” Evaluation Review, 21(5), 614-625.
    Opshal, R. L. and Dunnette, M. D., (1966), “The Role of Financial Compensation in Industrial Motivation”, Psychological Bulletin, 66(2), 94-118.
    Osterlund, J., (1995), “Individual Competence and Group Behavior within a Living System”, Behavioral Science, 40(1), 7-15.
    Ping, R. A. (1996), “Latent Variable Interaction and Quadratic Effect Estimatioin: A Two-step Technique Using Structural Equation Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, 199, 166-175.
    Politis, J. D., (2003), “The Connection between Trust and Knowledge Management: What are its Implications for Team Performance”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(5), 55-66.
    Powell, W. W., (1978), “Publishers' Decision-making: What Criteria do they Use in Deciding which Books to Publish”, Socail Research, 45(2), 227-252.
    Roberts, E. B. and Fusfeld, A. R., (1981), “Staffing the Innovative Technology-based Organization”, Sloan Management Review, 22(3), 19-35.
    Rodgers, E. M. and Adhikarya, R., (1979), “Diffusion of Innovations: Up to Date Review and Commentary”, in Nimmo, D. (eds.), Communications Yearbook 3, NJ: Transactioin, 27-81.
    Rothenberg, A. and Greenberg, B., (1974), The Index of Scientific Writings on Creativity: Creative Men and Women, Hamden, CT: Archon Books.
    葛林穆迪(2001),杜默譯,Linux傳奇-讓比爾蓋茲坐立難安的天才,初版,台北:時報文化。
    Rothenberg, A. and Greenberg, B., (1976), The Index of Scientific Writings on Creativity: Grenal, 1566-1974, Hamden, CT: Archon Books.
    Rothenberg, A., (1990), Creativity and Madness, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
    Runco, M. A. and Basadur, M. (1990), “Assessing Ideational and Evaluative Skill and Creative Styles and Attitudes,” Proceedings of the International Engineering and Management Conference. Santa Clara, CA.
    Runco, M. A. and Chand, I., (1994), “Problem Finding, Evaluative Thinking, and Creativity”, in Runco, M. A. (eds), Problem Finding, Problem Solving, and Creativity, NJ: Ablex Norwood, 40-76.
    Runco, M. A. and L. Vega, (1990), “Evaluating the Creativity of Children's Ideas”, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 439-452.
    Runco, M. A. and Smith, W. R., (1992), “Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Evaluations of Creative Ideas”, Personality and Individual Differences, 13(3), 295-302.
    Runco, M. A. and Vega, L., (1990), “Evaluating the Creativity of Children's Ideas”, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(5), 439-452.
    Sasser, E. L. and Russell, J. T., (1972), “The Fallacy of News Judgement,” Journalism Quarterly, 49, 280-284.
    Schumpeter, J.A., (1950), Capitialism, Socialism and Domocracy. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.
    Schwab, D. P., (2005), Research Methods for Organizational Studies, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Adams, J. S., (1980), “Interorganizational Process and Organizational Boundary Spanning Activities”, in Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. L. (eds.), Research in Organization Behavior, 2, 321-355.
    Sharma, A., (1999), “Central Dilemmas of Managing Innovation in Large Firms”, California Management Review, 41(3), 146-163.
    Shoemaker, P. J. and Reese, S. D., (1991), Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. New York: Longman.
    Simonton, D. K., (1976), “Biographical Determinants of Achieved Eminence: A Multivariate Approach to the Cox Data”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(2), 218-226.
    Simonton, D. K., (1977), “Creativity Productivity, Age, and Stress: A Biographical Time-Series Analysis of 10 Classical Composers”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(11), 791-804.
    Simonton, D. K., (1977), “Eminence, Creativity, and Geographical Marginality: A Recursive Structural Equation Model”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(11), 805-816.
    Simonton, D. K., (1979), “Multiple Discovery and Invention: Zeitgeist, Genius, or Chance”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(9), 1603-1616.
    Simonton, D. K., (1981), “The Library Laboratory: Archival Data in Personality and Social Psychology”, Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(3), 217-243.
    Simonton, D. K., (1985), “Quality, Quantity, and Age: The Careers of Ten Distinguished Psychologists”, International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 21(4), 241-254.
    Simonton, D. K., (1991), “Emergence and Realization of Genius: The Lives and Workd of 120 Classical Composers”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(5), 829-840.
    Simonton, D. K., (1992), “Leaders of American Psychology, 1879-1967: Career Development, Creative Output, and Professional Achievement”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(1), 5-17.
    Allen, T. J. and Cohen, S., (1969), “Information Flow in R&D Laboratories”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 14(1), 12-19.
    Simonton, D. K., (1992), “The Social Context of Career Success and Course for 2,026 Scientists and Inventors”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(3), 452-563.
    Description: 博士
    國立政治大學
    科技管理研究所
    89359503
    98
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0893595031
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[科技管理研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML323View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback