「人」是電子零組件業與電機機械業之核心。二產業雖以技術與資本密集著稱，其產出終究倚賴性別、國籍、年齡與職位各異之勞動者。在高工時且人力高度多元之職場中，DEI能否內化為企業文化而非僅止於書面政策，決定多元人力能否獲得公平對待與發展，並攸關產業之長期競爭力。惟既有台灣電子業之DEI研究，多以總體資料衡量薪資差距或以上市公司資料檢驗董事會多元，，少以以國標準化化準化對別別企業行逐項、、可跨企業比較之評比。有鑑於此，本研究以2024 GDEIB之四大群組、十五、類別與275、準化，針對中壢產業園區電子零組件業與電機機械業代表性企業之公開揭露資訊，依符合程度行逐五等級成熟度評定與跨產業比較。研究發現，企業之DEI成熟度普遍落於等級一與等級二之間，跨越等級三者僅屬單點突破。二產業呈現趨同而非分歧之樣態：均可分為領先、穩健與起步三層次，並共同呈現內重外輕、有願景而以結構，，且就已揭露董事行修內容之企業而言，，領導層欠缺DEI專屬培訓。企業對高工時、移工公平、職場健康與責任採購等核心勞動議題之回應，，多止於規遵循之之動動層次企企業間落差較之資源條件，更可由經營者承諾與制度化程度解釋。據此提出分階段改善建議，並建立依國標準化項企業評定之DEI成熟度紀錄，填補文獻缺口。 關;People are the core of the electronic components and electrical machinery industries. Though both are technology- and capital-intensive， their output ultimately rests on workers differing in gender， nationality， age， and rank. In workplaces marked by long working hours and a highly diverse workforce， whether DEI (Diversity， Equity， and Inclusion) is embedded in corporate culture rather than confined to written policy determines whether such a workforce is treated fairly and allowed to develop， and bears directly on the industries′ long-term competitiveness. Yet existing DEI research on Taiwan′s electronics industry has largely used aggregate data to measure wage gaps or listed-company data to examine board diversity， and few studies have applied a standardized international benchmark to assess individual firms item by item in a cross-firm comparable manner. This study therefore employs the 2024 GDEIB (Global Diversity， Equity & Inclusion Benchmarks)， comprising four groups， fifteen categories， and 275 benchmarks， to assess the publicly disclosed information of representative firms from the electronic components and electrical machinery industries in the Zhongli Industrial Park， assigning a five-level maturity rating by compliance percentage and conducting cross-industry comparison. The findings show that firms′ DEI maturity generally falls between Levels 1 and 2， with breakthroughs to Level 3 appearing only as isolated strengths. The two industries prove convergent rather than divergent: firms in both fall into leading， steady， and emerging tiers， and both display internal-heavy but external-light action， a vision-rich but structure-poor profile， and among firms disclosing their directors′ training content， an absence of dedicated DEI training for leadership. Their responses to core labor issues， namely long working hours， fair treatment of migrant workers， occupational health and safety， and responsible sourcing， remain largely passive and compliance-oriented. The gaps between firms are better explained by managerial commitment and institutionalization than by resource conditions. On this basis， the study offers phased recommendations and contributes an internationally benchmarked， firm-by-firm record of DEI maturity that fills a gap in the existing literature.
