本研究從使用者參與及資訊系統成功模式二個領域進行文獻探討，以DeLone and McLean(2003)資訊系統成功模式為基礎，整合使用者參與的概念，對個案進行深入訪談，期望能找出電子化工作流程系統使用和滿意度瓶頸之原因及改善建議。
目前在實證研究上較缺乏使用者參與對於電子化工作流程系統使用之影響。本研究採用實證問卷調查法，樣本取自158位曾使用過電子化工作流程系統的企業員工，以偏最小平方(Partial Least Squares,PLS)進行假說檢定之研究。研究結果顯示(1)使用者參與對於電子化工作流程系統之系統品質、資訊品質、服務品質有顯著正向影響；(2)電子化工作流程系統之系統品質、資訊品質、服務品質及使用對使用者滿意度有顯著正向影響；(3)電子化工作流程系統之資訊品質對使用有顯著正向影響。
深入訪談後發現，個案系統發展瓶頸，源於(1)公司未有標準化作業流程；(2)把不適當的流程當正常流程；(3)現有流程電子化，未做適時流程改善。為解決此瓶頸，本研究建議需求訪談時應就不合理的流程予以刪除，改用新的方式進行，在時程有限的情形下，做正確的決策就更顯重要。期望本研究結果將有助於企業推動電子化工作流程系統，並作為提升工作效率的參考依據。

This research practices the literature review in two areas: user participation and information system success model. By integrating the concept of user participation and adopting in-depth interview for the study case based on the model proposed by DeLone and McLean(2003), it aims to identify the causes and propose the recommendations for the bottlenecks of usability and user satisfaction of electronic workflow system.
At present, there is a lack of empirical research corresponding to the impact of user participation on the electronic workflow system. The research adopts the empirical questionnaire survey method for the samples, the 158 employees who have operated the system, and processes the hypothesis testing with the partial least squares (PLS). The research results indicate that (1) the impact of user participation on the system quality, information quality, and service quality of the system is significant and positive, (2) the impacts of the system quality, information quality, service quality, and usability of the system on the user satisfaction are significant and positive, and (3) the impact of information quality of the system on the usability is significant and positive.
After the in-depth interviews, the bottleneck of system development for the study case is caused by (1) there is no standardized operating procedure in the study case, (2) improper processes are applied to normal procedures, and (3) there is no appropriate improvement for the digitization of existing procedures. In order to resolve the bottleneck, the research recommends that the study case should apply appropriate procedures instead of unreasonable ones during the stage of needs assessment. Therefore, it is more important to make right decision within limited duration. The research results are expected to provide benefits for enterprises to promote the electronic workflow system, and the recommendations are proposed for their reference to enhance working efficiency.

主目錄	V
表目錄	VII
圖目錄	VIII
第壹章	緒論	1
第一節	研究背景	1
第二節	研究動機	2
第三節	研究目的	3
第四節	研究流程	3
第貳章	文獻探討	6
第一節	使用者參與	6
第二節	電子化工作流程管理系統	11
第三節	資訊系統成功模式	18
第四節	資訊系統成功模式相關的實證研究	25
第參章	研究方法與設計	27
第一節	研究架構	27
第二節	研究設計與研究流程	29
第三節	研究對象與問卷設計	30
第四節	資料分析方法	33
第肆章	研究結果與分析	35
第一節	樣本結構與特徵	35
第二節	信效度分析	37
第三節	結構模型分析	41
第伍章	研究討論	43
第一節	研究討論	43
第二節	深入訪談與其他發現	48
第陸章	研究結論與建議	56
第一節	研究結論	56
第二節	管理意涵	57
第三節	研究建議與限制	59
參考文獻	61
附錄一 研究問卷	67

表目錄
表2-1 使用者參與的相關研究	8
表2-2 電子化工作流程系統效益	15
表2-3 電子表單管理系統各環節效益	17
表3-1 問卷設計參考來源	30
表4-1 人口統計之樣本結構分佈概況	35
表4-2 研究各構面信度分折與收斂效度	38
表4-3 研究各構面區別效度分析	40
表4-4 假說檢定結果	42
表5-1 員工對電子化工作流程系統使用之分析	46
表5-2 員工對電子化工作流程系統滿意度之分析	48
表5-3 受訪者彙整表	49
表5-4 問卷不支持分析結果彙整表	50
 
圖目錄

圖1-1 研究流程圖	4
圖2-1 一般工作流程管理系統產品之架構	13
圖2-2 資訊系統成功模型	19
圖2-3 修正資訊系統成功模型	19
圖3-1 研究架構圖	28
圖3-2 研究流程圖	29
圖4-1 結構模式分析結果	42

參考文獻
一、	中文文獻
[1] 	王俊傑，2008，教師使用網路教學系統行為之研究，國立成功大學資訊管理研究所。
[2] 	李莉鈺，2011，『癌症醫療品質管理考核資訊系統之評估模式』，臺北醫學大學醫學資訊研究所學位論文。
[3] 	尚孝純，2005，『比較使用者在ERP系統與BPM系統導入扮演的角色』，電子商務學報，第7卷，第4期，333～350頁。
[4] 	張卉婕，2010，人力資源資訊系統使用滿意度及效益分析-以某人力資源資訊系統為例，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士在職專班。
[5] 	曾繁絹、李宗翰，2008，圖書館電子資源整合查詢系統評估之研究，圖書資訊學刊，第六卷，第一和二期，111-142頁。
[6] 	游麗惠，2006，醫院資訊系統評估模式建構之研究，中台醫護技術學院醫護管理研究所。
[7] 	蔡宗宏、許芳銘、池文海，2006，『以 d&m 資訊系統成功模型為基礎發展知識管理系統成功模型之研究』，資管評論第十四期，86～88頁。
[8] 	蕭文龍，2014，統計分析入門與應用:SPSS中文版+ PLS-SEM (SmartPLS)，台北市:碁峰。
[9] 	簡尚文，2002，電子流程管理的定義，鼎新企業通37期，台中市。
[10] 	蘇漢良，2001，『工作流程管理系統之設計與建構』，國立臺灣大學土木工程學系碩士論文。
二、	英文文獻
[11] 	Aladwani, A. M., Rai, A., and Ramaprasad, A. 2000. “Formal participation and performance of the system development group: The role of group heterogeneity and group-based rewards,” ACM SIGMIS Database, 31(4), pp. 25-40.
[12] 	Allen, R. 2001. “Workflow: An introduction,” Workflow Handbook.
[13] 	Anderson, J. C., and Gerbing, D. W. 1988. “Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach,” Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), pp. 411-423.
[14] 	Balaban, I., Mu, E., and Divjak, B. 2013. “Development of an electronic Portfolio system success model: An information systems approach,” Computers & Education, 60(1), pp. 396-411.
[15] 	Barki, H., and Hartwick, J. 1989. “Rethinking the concept of user involvement,” MIS Quarterly, 13(1), pp. 53-63.
[16] 	Barki, H., and Hartwick, J. 1994. “Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude,” MIS Quarterly, 18(1), pp. 59-82.
[17] 	Baroudi, J. J., Olson, M. H., and Ives, B. 1986. “An empirical study of the impact of user involvement on system usage and information satisfaction,” Communications of the ACM, 29(3), pp. 232-238.
[18] 	Basu, A., and Kumar, A. 2002. “Research commentary: Workflow management issues in e-business,” Information Systems Research, 13(1), pp. 1-14.
[19] 	Bharat, A. 2000. “Terminology and Glossary,” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 23(3), pp.401-406.
[20] 	Bostrom, R. P., and Heinen, J. S. 1977. “MIS problems and failures: A socio-technical perspective, part II: The application of socio-technical theory,” MIS Quarterly, 1(4), pp.11-28.
[21] 	Chin, W. W. 1998. “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling,” Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), pp. 295-336.
[22] 	Cooper, R. B., and Zmud, R. W. 1990. “Information technology implementation research: A technological diffusion approach,” Management Science, 36(2), pp.123-139.
[23] 	Davis, F. 1989. “Perceived usefulness: perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319-340.
[24] 	Davis, F. 1989. “Perceived usefulness: perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319-340.
[25] 	DeLone, W. H., and McLean, E. R. 1992. “Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable,” Information Systems Research, 3(1), pp. 60-95.
[26] 	Delone, W. H., and McLean, E. R. 2003. “The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), pp. 9-30.
[27] 	Doll, W. J., Xia, W and Torkzadeh, G. 1994. “A confirmatory factor analysis of the end- user computing satisfaction instrument,” MIS Quarterly, 18(4), pp. 453-461.
[28] 	Dwivedi, Y. K., Kapoor, K. K., Williams, M. D., and Williams, J. 2013. “RFID systems in libraries: An empirical examination of factors affecting system use and user satisfaction,” International Journal of Information Management, 33(2), pp. 367-377.
[29] 	Efron, B. 1979. “Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife,” The Annals of Statistics, 7(1), pp. 1-26.
[30] 	Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. 1981. “Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), pp. 382-388.
[31] 	Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. 2011. “PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), pp. 139-152.
[32] 	Hollingsworth, D., and Hampshire, U. 1995. “Workflow management coalition: The workflow reference model,” Document Number TC00-1003, pp. 19.
[33] 	Ives, B., and Olson, M. 1981. “Manager or technician? the nature of the information systems manager's job,” MIS Quarterly, 5(4), pp. 49-63.
[34] 	Ives, Blake, Olson, Margrethe H. and Baroudi, Jack J. 1983. “The measurement of user information satisfaction,” Communication of the ACM, 26(10), pp. 785.
[35] 	Lynch, T., and Gregor, S. 2004. “User participation in decision support systems development: Influencing system outcomes,” European Journal of Information Systems, 13(4), pp. 286-301.
[36] 	McGregor, C. 2002. “The impact of business performance monitoring on wfmc standards,” Workflow Handbook, 2, pp. 51-64.
[37] 	Melchor, M. Q., and Julián, C. P. 2008. “The impact of the human element in the information systems quality for decision making and user satisfaction,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(2), pp. 44-52.
[38] 	Nunally, J. C., and Bernstein, I. H. 1978. “Psychometric theory,” McGraw-Hill, New York. 
[39] 	Petter, S., DeLone, W. and McLean, E. 2008. “Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships,” European Journal of Information Systems, 17(3), pp. 236-263.
[40] 	Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C. 2006. “Information system success: Individual and organizational determinants,” Management Science, 52(12), pp. 1849-1864.
[41] 	Seddon, P. B. 1997. “A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success,” Information Systems Research, 8(3), pp. 240.
[42] 	Swanson, E. B. 1974. “Management information systems: Appreciation and involvement,” Management Science, 21(2), pp. 178-188.
[43] 	Thong, J. Y. 2001. “Resource constraints and information systems implementation in singaporean small businesses,” Omega, 29(2), pp. 143-156.
[44] 	Urbach, N., and Ahlemann, F. 2010. “Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares,” Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), pp. 5-40.
[45] 	Zhang, J., Pantula, S. G., and Boos, D. D. 1991. “Robust methods for testing the pattern of a single covariance matrix,” Biometrika, 78(4), pp. 787-79.