不連續創新政策社會化兩難困境之實證研究-以本國數位匯流政策體制面議題為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：28

、訪客IP：18.119.117.79

姓名

許婉琪(Wan-Chi Hsu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

企業管理學系

論文名稱

不連續創新政策社會化兩難困境之實證研究-以本國數位匯流政策體制面議題為例
(Dilemmas Concerning the Socialization of Discontinuous Innovation Policies: A Case Study of Digital Convergence Policies in Taiwan)

相關論文

★ 醫院特質、智慧資本對醫院經營績效影響之研究	★ 重大災難對台北國際觀光旅館經營績效的影響
★ 創業家失敗復原歷程之研究	★ 社會爆紅現象之動態模擬分析-以K-POP為例之探索性研究
★ 創造力攸關之內外在環境特質與創造力投資策略之關係-學童與廠商跨領域之比較研究	★ 創造力競爭環境,個人內在動機與創造力工作環境關係之探討--學童與廠商跨領域之比較
★ 電子商務產業新創事業創業策略之研究–組織意會觀點之應用	★ 不同形式之產品線延伸以及所有權狀態對品牌評價的影響
★ 台灣地區學童消費型態研究--以城鄉差異與家庭溝通模式觀點探討	★ 生物技術產業新創事業創業策略之研究-組織意會活動與實質選擇權觀點之應用
★ 商店選擇對商品價值認知與惠顧傾向影響之探討	★ 「形塑環境」及「社會網絡」之意會活動對「實質選擇權徵兆」的影響—以大學校園創業團隊為例
★ 「建構身份」、「形塑環境」及「似合理性」對實質選擇權徵兆之影響 —以大學校園創業團隊為例	★ 「形塑環境」、「現行性」及「倡導力」對「實質選擇權徵兆」的影響—以大學校園創業團隊為例
★ 「建構身份」、「源自回顧」及「萃取線索」對「實質選擇權徵兆」的影響--以大學校園創業團隊為例	★ 從台灣智慧型手機設計代工個案探討其競爭優勢

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

數位匯流發展是這個世代重大的創新，它已經成為現在資訊化社會的趨勢，並創造出一個新的數位生活的世代。數位匯流延伸出的應用服務已經改變人們的生活方式與品質，例如工作、教育、娛樂、醫療以及通訊傳播等，更是改變整個社會結構與發展。數位匯流的重要性，它在許多先進國家（即美國、歐洲、英國、大陸、日本）的國家層級政策中，數位匯流已成為重要的發展項目之一。換言之，這些國家都已經非常重視數位匯流的發展，因為這些發展的水準已經代表著這個國家人民的生活品質程度。這些生活要素的品質都是建立在一個完整的數位匯流環境平台上，所包括的數位匯流的發展政策、硬體建設以及相關法令，不論是那一項要素都是需要藉由政府的力量進行建設與發展；然而，當一項創新逐漸走向社會化時，除了它代表著人們的生活品質將更為提升；另一方面則是會影響到原本目標市場的既得利益者們的生存空間，因此他們之間開始互相對抗，進而產生許多爭議的現象。通常，這些爭議都會阻礙提升人們生活獲得更好品質的時機點，以及與其它國家產生更大的生活落差，甚至產生巨大的經濟損失。目前臺灣對於數位匯流發展的問題仍然未有重大的突破。
由於數位匯流發展政策與計畫是一個龐大且複雜的發展系統，國家的發展決策單位如何有效地管理這些發展項目，以及提高資訊與電信產業鏈的結構，讓整個國家的數位匯流發展朝向更高水準，這是一個非常關鍵的問題。這種國家層級的發展規劃主要由具有專業知識與豐富實務背景的產官學專家們組成決策團隊一同討論與擬訂其發展計畫。然而，不同決策者在不同位置會有不同的思考與判斷，在會議討論的過程中容易產生不同意見的爭議。為了有效地瞭解數位匯流創新產生的兩難與背後價值鏈產生的問題，同時有效地整合每位不同專家背景的經驗。本研究透過創新的社會化、不連續創新現象以及價值網與創新兩難的文獻進行探討，並歸納出本研究的理論不連續創新的社會體制理論。
本研究以臺灣數位匯流發展政策作為實證對象，並以專家訪談以及半結構化方式蒐集數位匯流相關的產官學方面專家的觀點，並透過各自不同位置與角度進行分析與探討，以瞭解各自利基點的因素，最後整合產官學三方觀點進行討論，透過相對比較分析的方式更清楚顯示三種不同角度的相同與異處，這種方式可以避免數位匯流這個研究議題僅有固定某個單方面位置/觀點的看法，進而讓決策者可以透過更全面地瞭解臺灣數位匯流發展的爭議情況，以及產生這些爭議情況的背後問題。最後討論出「社會身分的影響」與「社會體制的差異」的分析，並且從實證數據中得出三個專家群（即官方單位、學術單位以及產業單位），整體而言，產業與學術比官方更重視體制型創業與合作性競爭，也更重視共同標準、潛在規範與崁入式體制矛盾，在體制型創業上官方比產業學術更保守。而在共同標準、潛在規範與潛在技術相互競爭方面，產官學歧見頗深，再共同標準、崁入式體制矛盾方面，平衡數位落差與普及服務，官方反而最重視。整體而言，研究與理論結合度尚稱令人滿意，所建置的創新體制是交互生態演化的過程。
最後，依據本研究提出的不連續創新的社會體制理論，包含體制型創業、共同標準、崁入式體制矛盾、潛在規範、潛在技術相互競爭、合作性競爭與外生顛簸。我們了解到新社會是形成於交互生態演化的過程，新科技與新社會是演化出來的，所有理論必須同時存在，業者通常跑在最前面。當新科技發生時社會化兩難與歧見來自四面八方，主事者執行面必需有其輕重，政策也必須要提供小園地逐步建構完成，才能茁壯、成功，並依據相關結論進一步對實務界與政府相關部門提出具體建議。

摘要(英)

As a major innovation of the 21st century, digital convergence prevails within informatized societies and has been instrumental in ushering the digital era. Digital convergence has reshaped various aspects of human life such as employment, education, entertainment, healthcare, and communication, as well as the structure and development of wider society. Economic powers including the United States, European nations, United Kingdom, China, and Japan have promoted digital convergence as a national development policy because its development is associated with quality of life in these countries. Therefore, a well-established environment for digital convergence comprising relevant development policies, infrastructures, and laws and regulations must be developed by the government. Moreover, although the socialization of an innovation represents improved quality of life, it also poses a threat to the stakeholders of the original target market, causing intergroup conflict. Such conflict normally engenders barriers to the enhancement of quality of life, wider gaps from the quality of life of other countries, and substantial economic losses. Taiwan is yet to experience a major breakthrough in digital convergence.
Policies and programs concerning the development of digital convergence are enormous enterprises. It is crucial for the government to manage such enterprises effectively and strengthen the information and telecommunications industry chain, thereby furthering digital convergence on a national scale. Such a national initiative is typically formulated by a decision-making team composed of experts from business, governmental, and educational organizations; however, the opinions of these decision-makers tend to diverge because of differences in professional backgrounds. Therefore, this study aims to explicate the dilemmas concerning the development of digital convergence and issues associated with the underlying value chain, and synergize the views of specialists from different professions. A literature review is conducted on the socialization of innovations, discontinuous innovation, and dilemmas between value networks and innovation to propose a socio-institutional theory of discontinuous innovation.
Semistructured interviews are administered to experts from business, governmental, and educational organizations to explore and compile their opinions on policies for the development of digital convergence in Taiwan. The rationale behind each opinion is elucidated and analyzed from various perspectives to clarify similarities and dissimilarities among the opinions. The findings of this study are expected to further decision-makers’ understanding of diverging views on digital convergence development in Taiwan and of what causes such disagreement. Following the interview analysis, the influence of social identity and differences among social institutions are investigated. Empirical data analysis shows that for the policy on “promoting the convergence of televisions and communications”, low cohesion exists between experts from industry and government regarding launching mobile value-added services and facilitating the investment and development of digital convergence industries). Furthermore, low cohesion existed between experts from industry and academia regarding expediting the digitization of cable and terrestrial televisions and facilitating the investment and development of digital convergence industries. For the policy on “harmonizing laws and environments for digital convergence”), considerable differences in opinions were found between experts from industry and government and between those from industry and academia regarding altering regulations on telecommunications, radio, and television and completing the legal framework of digital convergence and passing laws on digital convergence. These findings are highly consistent with the socio-institutional theory of discontinuous innovation proposed in this study and actual related circumstances.
Finally, based on the aforementioned theory comprising institutional entrepreneurship, common standards, embedded institutional contradictions, potential specifications, potential technical competition, collaborative competition, and exogenous bumps, this study argues that new societies form as a result of interactions between ecological processes. Innovations and new societies cannot exist without relevant theories, and evolving new societies by introducing innovation is not feasible because the private sector remains ahead of the public sector in terms of innovation. Moreover, because disagreements over the socialization of innovations originate from a variety of domains, policymakers tend to combine conflicting views. However, to achieve success, policies on innovation socialization should be implemented in order of priority and in a progressive manner.

關鍵字(中)

★ 數位匯流
★ 創新社會化
★ 創新的兩難
★ 不連續創新現象
★ 不連續創新的社會體制理論

關鍵字(英)

★ digital convergence
★ socialization of innovations
★ innovation dilemma
★ discontinuous innovation
★ socio-institutional theory of discontinuous innovation

論文目次

摘要 I
ABSTRACT III
目錄 VI
表目錄 IX
圖目錄 X
第一章　緒論 1
1.1 研究動機與背景 1
1.2 研究問題 4
1.3研究目的 5
1.4 本論文章節架構 6
第二章研究背景 10
2.1 數位匯流的定義 10
2.2 主要國家數位匯流發展情況 11
2.2.1 美國數位匯流發展政策 12
2.2.2 歐洲數位匯流發展政策 13
2.2.3 日本數位匯流發展政策 14
2.2.4 南韓數位匯流發展政策 15
2.2.5 中國數位匯流發展政策 17
2.3 本國數位匯流發展政策與爭議 18
2.3.1 本國數位匯流發展政策 18
2.3.2 本國數位匯流發展爭議-公開報導內容分析 22
2.4 數位匯流延伸的匯流商機 28
2.4.1 第五代移動通信系統 29
2.4.2 物聯網 30
第三章文獻探討 33
3.1 創新的社會化 33
3.2 不連續創新現象 39
3.3 創新的擴散 43
3.2.1 創新的定義 44
3.2.2 擴散的定義 45
3.2.3 影響創新擴散的元素 50
3.4 科學革命的結構 55
3.5 價值網與創新的兩難 56
3.6 不連續創新的社會體制理論 59
第四章實證研究 67
4.1 研究方法 67
4.2 數位匯流發展方向與項目 68
4.3 從產業觀點分析數位匯流發展方向與項目 71
4.4 從官方觀點分析數位匯流發展方向與項目 80
4.5 從學術觀點分析數位匯流發展方向與項目 89
4.6 從整體觀點分析數位匯流發展方向與項目 98
4.7 討論與研究意涵 107
4.7.1 D1發展高速網路並建構新興視訊 108
4.7.2 D2推動電信電視與通訊傳播匯流 109
4.7.3 D3和匯流法規與環境 110
第五章結論 112
5.1 研究結論 112
5.1.1 不同的產官學身分影響不同的見解 112
5.1.2 找出政策内聚性差的項目加以分析 113
5.1.3 產業與學術比官方更重視體制型創業與合作性競爭 115
5.1.4 產業與學術比官方更重視共同標準、潛在規範與崁入式體制矛盾 116
5.1.5 產業界比官方與學術比更重視體制型創業與合作競爭 116
5.1.6 在共同標準、潛在規範與潛在技術相互競爭方面，產官學歧見頗深 119
5.2 對未來研究的建議與限制 125
5.3 對實務界的建議 127
5.4 對相關部門的建議 127
參考文獻 128
附錄 138
附錄A：臺灣數位匯流發展政策與方向 138
附錄B：數位匯流發展項目之專家問卷 176

參考文獻

一、中文部分
中華電信，2014，數位匯流，智慧城市2020，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22資料來源：http://www.cht.com.tw/enterprise/2020_digit-faq.html。
孔恩，2015年，科學革命的結構，台北：遠流出版社。
文崇一、楊國樞，2000，訪問調查法，社會及行為科學研究法下冊，台北：東
王文科，2001，教育研究法，台北：五南出版社。
王仕圖、吳慧敏，2003，深度訪談與案例演練，收錄於齊力、林本炫編（2003），質性研究方法與資料分析，第95-13頁, 嘉義：南華大學教育社會學研究所。
田政展，2015，數位匯流下產業分類型態與相應管制架構之轉變瀏覽日期：2017/01/20，資料來源：:http://www.nici.ey.gov.tw/DL.ashx?u...6e7c-4d4a-a4c5-859a5b9e22b9.pdf。
行政院，2010，數位匯流發展方案（2010-2015），瀏覽日期：2017/01/20，資料來源：http://www.ey.gov.tw/Upload/RelFile/26/75806/012916565471.pdf。
克雷頓．克里斯汀生，2007，創新的兩難。
吳世昌，2015，就法論法－廣電三法應符「數位」時代需求，產業特刊，中時電子報。http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20151005000080-260210
李京倫、何佩儒，2016，5G新戰場從手機擴及自動車、物聯網，聯合報，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://a.udn.com/focus/2016/02/23/18121/index.html。
李治安，關於數位匯流的基本管制問題，科技法學評估，第3卷，第163-201頁。
林文富、陳秀瑜，2015，立院修廣電三法：未來收看無線四台恐收錢，生活，三立新聞網。http://www.setn.com/News.aspx?NewsID=98366
林建甫，2016，電信三雄好股利，技術進步卻慢（聯合報），台經觀點，台灣經濟研究院，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://www.tier.org.tw/comment/pec1010.aspx?GUID=afb0c34b-735d-4f03-8c75-1303c1bbb21e。
科技報橘，2014，韓國砸 450 億台幣讓 5G 在 2017 年啟用，台灣政府說還要等 10 年，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：https://buzzorange.com/techorange/2014/01/24/the-emerging-technologies-shaping-future-5g-networks/。
翁書婷，2015，30個關鍵字讓你搞懂物聯網，數位時代，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://www.bnext.com.tw/article/view/id/34549。
張宏亮，1993，質的體育研究法—訪問法，中華體育，第7卷，第2期，第120-126頁。
郭芝榕，2016，全球10大創新物聯網企業Particle執行長訪台，宏碁、廣達、英業達都有興趣，數位時代，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://www.bnext.com.tw/article/view/id/38517。
陳瑞霖，2014，火紅的名詞物聯網到底是什麼？物聯網的歷史回顧，科技新報，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://technews.tw/2014/12/17/hot-topic-internet-of-thing/。
彭芸，2011，NCC與數位匯流-匯流政策芻議，風雲論壇。
翟本喬，2015，創新是一種態度，商周出版社。
樂羽佳，2015，5G是什麼？5G會有多厲害？天下雜誌，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5073006。
謝佳雯，2016，高通：物聯網5G崛起掀科技革命，聯合新聞網產經，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：http://udn.com/news/story/7240/1777884。
鍾曉君，2014，全球積極推進5G發展，台灣布局腳步迫在眉睫，產業情報研究所，瀏覽日期：2016/06/22，資料來源：https://mic.iii.org.tw/micnew/Industryobservation_MIC02views.aspx?sqno=95。
韓第，2016，第二曲線：英國管理大師韓第的16個思索，預見社會與個人新出路，台北：天下文化。
羅吉斯著，唐錦超譯，2006，創新的擴散. Diffusion of Innovations，台北：遠流出版事業。
二、英文部分
Baldwin, T. F.; McVoy, D. S.; Steinfield, C. 1996. Convergence: Integrating Media, Information & Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Barnett, W. 1990. The organizational ecology of a technological system. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 31-60.
Beal, G. M., & Rogers, E. M. 1960. Adoption of two farm practices in a central Iowa community.
Bright, Arthur, Jr 1949 The Electric-Lamp Industry Technological Change and Economical Development from 1800 to 1947. New York: MacMillan.
Brunsson, N.S. & Jacobsson, B. 2000. A world of standards. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Burgess, R. G. 1984. In the Field: An Introduction to Field Research. London. NY.
Callon, M. 1986. The case of the electric vehicle. In M. Callon, D.Law & A.Rip (Eds.) Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. London, MacMillan
Christensen, C. M. 1992. Exploring the Limits of the Technological S Curve. I: Component Technologies, Production and Operations Management 1(4): 334-357.
Christensen, C. M., Anthony, S. D., Roth, E. A., 2004, Seeing What′s Next: Using the Theories of Innovation to Predict Industry Change, Client Distribution Services.
Christensen, S., Karnøe, P., Pedersen, J.S. & Dobbin, F. 1997. Actors and institutions. American Behavioral Scientist, 40: 392-396.
Conot, R. E. 1979 A Streak of Luck. New York Seaview Books.
Constant, E. 1980. The origins of the turbojet revolution. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Crainer, S. Dearlove, D. 2013. Thinkers 50 Innovation: Breakthrough Thinking to Take Your Business to the Next Level Paperback. McGraw-Hill Education.
Curran, C. S. 2013. The Anticipation of Converging Industries, London: Springer-Verlag.
Dacin, M. T., Goldstein, J., & Scott, W. R. 2002. Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 45-57.
DiMaggio, P. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and culture: 3-22. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company.
Dutil, P. A.; Howard, C.; Langford, J.; Roy, J. 2007. Rethinking government-public relationships in a digital world: customers, clients, or citizens? Journal of Information Technology & Politics 4(1):77-90.
European Commission. 1997. Green Paper on the Convergence of the Telecommunications, media and information technology sectors, and the implications for regulation. Towards an Information Society Approach., COM (97) 623, European Commission, Brussels, URL http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/convergencegp/97623.html, Dec.3 Retrieved
European Commission. 2013. Media Policies. Digital Agenda for Europe, EU.
Executive Yuan, 2010. Digital Convergence Policy Initiative (2010-2015), R.O.C （Taiwan）.
Executive Yuan, 2012. Digital Convergence Policy Initiative （2010-2015） 2nd, R.O.C （Taiwan）.
Farrell, J., & Saloner, G. 1986. Installed base and compatibility: Innovation, product preannouncements and predation. American Economic Review, 76: 940-955.
Federal Communications Commission （FCC）. 2010. Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan, http://download.broadband.gov/plan/national-broadband-plan.pdf.
Ferguson, C.H. & Morris, C.R. 1993. Computer Wars. New York: Random House.
Fligstein, N. 1997. Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40: 397-405.
Fligstein, N. 1999. Social skill and the theory of fields. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley.
Foster, R. N. 1986. Innovation: The Attacker′s Advantage Hardcover. Summit Books.
Fransman, M. 2000. Convergence, the Internet and Multimedia: Implications for the Evolution of Industries and Technologies in Bohlin, E.; Brodin, K.; Lundgren, A. & Thorngren, B. (Eds.). Convergence in Communications and Beyond, North: Holland Amsterdam.
Garud, R. & Kumaraswamy, A. 1993. Changing competitive dynamics in network industries: An exploration of Sun Microsystems′ open systems strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 351-369.
Garud, R. and Kumaraswamy, A. 1995. Technological and organizational designs to achieve economies of substitution Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, pp. 93-110.
Garud, R., & Jain, S. 1996. The embeddedness of technological systems. In J. Baum & J. Dutton (Eds.), Advances in strategic management, 13: 389-408. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Garud, R., & Jain, S. 1996. The embeddedness of technological system. Advances in strategic management, 13, 389-408.
Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. 2003. Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research policy, 32(2), 277-300.
Garud, R., & Rappa, M. 1994. A socio-cognitive model of technology evolution. Organization Science, 5: 344-362.
Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. 2002. Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 196-214.
Garud, R.; Jain, S.; Kumaraswamy, A. 2002. Institutional Entrepreneurship in the Sponsorship of Common Technological Standards: The Case of Sun Microsystems and Java, The Academy of Management Journal 45(1): 196-214.
Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Gould, S. J. 1980. The panda’s thumb. New York: Viking Penguin
Government office for science, 2014. The internet of things: making the most of the second digital revolution, United Kingdom.
Greenwood, R.; Suddaby, R. 2006. Institutional Entrepreneurship in Mature Fields: The Big Five Accounting Firms, The Academy of Management Journal 49(1): 27-48.
Greenwood, R.; Suddaby, R.; Hinings, C. R. 2002. Theorizing Change: The Role of Professional Associations in the Transformation of Institutionalized Fields, The Academy of Management Journal 45(1): 58-80.
Hamel, G. & Prahalad, C.K. 1994. Competing for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Hand, C. 2016. The Second Curve: Thoughts on Reinventing Society. Random House UK.
Hargadon, A. B.; Douglas, Y. 2001. When Innovations Meet Institutions: Edison and the Design of the Electric Light, Administrative Science Quarterly 46(3): 476-501.
Hargadon, A., and Douglas, Y. 2001 ‘When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light’. Administrative Science Quarterly 46: 476–501.
Henderson, R.M. & Clark, K. 1990. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 9-30.
Hughes, T. 1983. Networks of power. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.
Israel, P. B., Nier, K. A. & Carlat, L, 1998 The Papers of Thomas A. Edison: The Wizard of Menlo Park， 1878. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Jain, S. 2001. A process framework of collective standards emergence Unpublished doctoral dissertation, NY: New York University.
Jepperson, R.L. 1991. Institutions, institutional effects and institutionalism. In W.W. Powell. & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis: 143-163. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, J. M. 2002. In-depth Interviewing. In Jaber F. G. & James A. H. (Eds.): Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, 103-119. London, Sage Publication.
Kaluza, B.; Blecker, T.; Bischof, C. 1999. Implications of digital convergence on strategic management, in Dahiya, S. B. (Eds.). The Current State of Economic Science. Spellbound Publications, 2223-2249.
Katz, E., Levin, M. L., & Hamilton, H. 1963. Traditions of research on the diffusion of innovation. American Sociological Review, 237-252.
Katz, M. L., & Shapiro, C. 1985. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American Economic Review, 75: 424-440.
Kim, D. 2011 New regulatory institution for the convergence of broadcasting and telecommunications: A Korean case, Government Information Quarterly 28(2): 155-163
Kim, S., Lee, H., Lee, M. H. 2010. Research in Convergence: A Literature Analysis, Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology 42(3): 191-205.
Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. The university of Chicago.
Langlois, R. N. & Robertson, P. L. 1992. Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries. Research Policy, 21: 297-313.
Lin, T. T. C. 2013. Convergence and regulation of multi-screen television: The Singapore experience, Telecommunications Policy 37(8): 673-685.
Liu, Y. L. 2013. Convergence in the digital age, Telecommunications Policy 37: 611-614.
Markides, C. C., & Geroski, P. A. 2004. Fast second: How smart companies bypass radical innovation to enter and dominate new markets (Vol. 325). John Wiley & Sons.
McGuire, P., M. Granovetter, and M. Schwartz 1993 “Thomas Edison and the social construction of the early electricity industry in America." In R. Swedberg (ed.), Explorations in Economic Sociology: 213-246. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Merton, R. K. 1973. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago press.
Mishler, E. G. 1986. Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative. MA: Cambridge. Harvard University Press.
Mithas, S.; Fafti, A.; Mitchell, W. 2013. How a firm’s competitive environment and digital strategic posture influence digital business strategy, MIS Quarterly 37(2): 511-536.
Munir, K. A. 2005. The Birth of the ′Kodak Moment′: Institutional Entrepreneurship and the Adoption of New Technologies, Organization Studies 26(11): 1665-1687.
National Communications Commission (NCC), 2004, Fundamental Communications, website: http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=P0010005
National Communications Commission (NCC), 2015, Introduction of The National Communications Commission, website: http://www.ncc.gov.tw/.
OECD, 1992. Telecommunications and Broadcasting: Convergence or Collision? Committee on Information Computer Communications Policy, Report No. 29, Organization for Economic Development, Paris.
OECD, 2004. The Implications of Convergence for Regulation of Electronic Communications.
Olson, M. 1965. The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Powell. W.W. & DiMaggio, P.J. 1991. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Rogers, E. M. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations: modifications of a model for telecommunications. In Die Diffusion von Innovationen in der Telekommunikation (pp. 25-38). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Rogers, E. M. 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, fifth edition, Free Pr.
Rubin, H. J.; Rubin S. I. 1995. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. London, Sage.
Sanchez, R. 1995. Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16: 135-159.
Schilling, M.A. 2000. Towards a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Academy of Management Review. 25: 312-334.
Scott, W.R. 1994. Institutional analysis: Variance and process theory approaches. In W.R. Scott. J.W. Meyer and associates (Eds) Institutional environments and organizations: Structural complexity and individualism: 81-99. San Francisco, CA: Sage
Selznick, P. 1957. Leadership in administration. New York: Harper and Row.
Shapiro, C. and Varian, H. R. 1999. "The Art of Standards Wars" California Management Review, 41(2): 9-32.
Shin, D. H. 2010. Convergence and divergence: Policy making about the convergence of technology in Korea, Government Information Quarterly 27(2): 147-160.
Silverberg, R 1967 Light for the World: Edison and the Power Industry Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. 1999. The institutionalization of institutional theory. Studying Organization. Theory & Method. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, 169-184.
Tushman, M.L., & Anderson, P. 1986. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 439-465.
Utschig, T. T., 2001, THE COMMUNICATIONREVOLUTION AND ITS EFFECTS ON 21ST CENTURY ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Frontiers in Education Conference 3: 19-23.
Utterback, J. & Abernathy, W. 1975. A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega, 33: 639-656.
Van den Belt, H. & Rip, A. 1987. The Nelson-Winter-Dosi model and synthetic dye chemistry. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: 135-158. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vasmatics, G. 2010. The revolution of communication and its effect on our life, Academicus International Scientific Journal 1: 100-108.
Yoffie, D. B. 1997. Introduction: CHESS and competing in the age of digital convergence, in Yoffie, D. B. (Eds.). Competing in the Age of Digital Convergence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1-35.

指導教授

蔡明宏(Ming-Hone Tsai)

審核日期

2017-5-8

推文