本研究企望了解汽車產業零件供應商導入新產品研發、品質管理制度後，能否改善其在國內之經營體制、提高其西進大陸之競爭力。並探討導入過程有那些重要關鍵因素。以實務方法研究下述四項主要議題：1.協力廠新產品研發主管權力愈高對導入新產品研發制度績效的影響。2.協力廠新產品品保主管權力愈高對導入新產品研發制度績效的影響。3.協力廠不同組織作業架構對導入新產品研發制度績效的影響。4.協力廠不同知識管理文化對導入新產品研發制度績效的影響。本研究係採問卷調查方法，進行量化之調查研究，以台灣區裕隆汽車協力會中，第一批導入ANPQP新產品研發系統之50家協力廠主管為問卷調查對象。採取普查方式進行，共發出150份問卷，期間共回收131份，回收比率為87.3%，經扣除1份資料填答不完整不予採用之外，有效回收問卷共130份。研究分析顯示，裕隆汽車協力廠商在新產品研發過程中，如果研發主管、品保主管之權力愈高、則研發流程績效會愈高。且研發流程績效會因知識管理文化、組織作業架構之不同而有差異。研究結果彙整如下：1.裕隆汽車協力廠經營者很重視研發工作。當其授予研發主管的權力愈高時，公司內部研發部門可獲得愈多的資源建立其核心競爭力，愈能提高其新產品研發流程的績效。2.協力廠經營者也會重視品保工作。當其授予品保主管的權力愈高時，品保主管愈有能力建構新產品研發流程的各種品質管制工作，降低各種品質不良及失敗成本，進而提高新產品研發流程的績效。3.協力廠內部各主管會重視與同仁、部屬密切溝通的知識管理模式，彼此會主動的表達工作上的困難與需求，互相協助解決工作上的問題。透過建立公司之知識管理文化來提高其新產品研發流程的績效。4.協力廠內部各主管會建立以研發團隊共同解決工作問題的管理模式。運用其內部相關組織作業架構的團隊活動來提高其新產品研發流程的績效。
關鍵字：研發、權力、知識管理、績效、組織文化

This research hopes to understand that the part supplier of motor industry channels into the R& D and quality system of new products. After the management system, whether could improve its management system at home, improve the competitiveness when it enter to China. And explore that have those important key factors to channel into the course. Study four following main topics with the practice method: 1.Pull together to be in charge of R&D manager’s power of new products of the part supplier to be the higher on the influence of performance to channelling into the R&D system of new products. 2.Pull together to be in charge of quality manager’s power of new products of the part supplier to be the higher on the influence of performance to channelling into the R&D system of new products. 3.Pull together with the part supplier different organization operation structure on the influence of performance to channelling into the R&D system of new products. 4.Pull together with the part supplier different knowledge management culture on the influence of performance to channelling into the R&D system of new products. The study adopts the questionnaire investigation method, carries the investigations of quantization, and pulls together in the meeting by the supplier of Yulon Motor of Taiwan district. The first batch is channeled into ANPQP 50 systematic in R&D of new products to pull together the millowner is in charge of for the research object. These job executive and high-order executive, who are responsible for R&D of products, or quality and guarantee actually in the factory, questionnaire respondents, and take the general survey way to go on. The study sends out 150 questionnaires, and retrieves 131 during this time including 1 material because of its incomplete answer. The study has obviated the incomplete questionnaire. The retrieve rate is 87.3%. The valid questionnaires are amount to 130. Research and analyse show in the the supplier of Yulon Motor of Taiwan district pulls together in the course of R&D of new products, R&D manager and quality manager have higher power, the R &D procedure performance will produce higher executive. And researching and developing the procedure performance will have difference of showing because management cultures of knowledge, organization operation structure are different. The result of study is gathered together whole as follow: 1.The boss of supplier of Yulon Motor of Taiwan district pays attention to the R&D very much. When it authorizes the higher power to R&D manager, the R&D department inside the company can get more resources and set up its core competitiveness, heal the performance that can improve its procedure of R&D of new products. 2.The boss of supplier can pay attention to quality too. When it authorizes the higher power to quality manager, the quality manager's power the higher, sample and assuare that the quality manager has the ability to build various kinds of quality control constructing of the procedure of R&D of new products, reduce various kinds of quality problem and fail cost , improve the procedure performance of R&D of new products. 3.The executive of supplier of Yulon Motor of Taiwan district will pay attention to with the colleague, knowledge management style that communicate closely subordinate to a ministry, expression difficulty and demand at work that will be initiative each other, help to solve the problem that at work each other. Improving its Performance of procedure of R&D of new products through the knowledge management culture of setting up. 4.The executive of supplier will set up the management style of solving the working problem together with the R&D group of the professional technique. Use the group activity of it’s inside relevant organization operation structure to improve the performance of its procedure of R&D of new products.
Key word：R&D, The power , Knowledge management , Performance , Organization culture

目 錄	
目 錄	vi
圖 目 錄	viii
表 目 錄	ix
第壹章  緒論	1
第一節 研究背景	1
第二節 研究動機	3
第三節 研究目的	3
第貳章  文獻探討	5
第一節 品質認證	5
第二節 組織作業架構	8
第三節 新產品研發績效	10
第四節 新產品研發、品保主管權力高低	14
第五節 知識管理文化	17
第参章  研究設計	21
第一節 研究架構與假說	21
第二節 抽樣設計	28
第三節 問卷設計	30
第四節 資料分析方法	31
第四章  研究資料分析	33
第一節 基本資料統計分析	33
第二節 研發主管權力與研發績效關係之分析	38
第三節 品保主管權力與研發績效關係之分析	42
第四節 知識管理文化與研發績效關係之分析	45
第五節 組織作業架構與研發績效關係之分析	52
第五章  結論與建議	59
第一節 結論	59
第二節 研究建議	61
第三節 研究限制	62
參考文獻	64
一、中文部分	64
二、英文部分	66
附錄一：ANPQP 1~5各階段職掌圖	71
附錄二：問卷	79

圖 目 錄
圖1-1  研究流程	4
圖3-1  研究架構	21

表 目 錄	
表2-1 知識管理文化相關文獻	17
表2-1 知識管理文化相關文獻(續1)	18
表2-1 知識管理文化相關文獻(續2)	19
表3-1 新產品研發主管、品保主管權力高低問卷設計	23
表3-2 知識管理文化問卷設計	25
表3-3 組織作業架構問卷設計	26
表3-4 新產品研發績效問卷設計	27
表3-5 公司及個人屬性問項分類	27
表3-6 協力廠基本資料	28
表3-6 協力廠基本資料(續1)	29
表3-7 問卷設計	30
表4-1 問卷樣本結構表	33
表4-1 問卷樣本結構表(續1)	34
表4-1 問卷樣本結構表(續2)	35
表4-2 各構面之Cronbach's α係數	37
表4-3 研發主管權力高低之的基本分析	38
表4-4 研發主管權力高低之衡量題項主成分分析結果	39
表4-5 研發流程技術引進後績效之基本分析	40
表4-6 研發流程技術引進後績效之衡量題項主成分分析結果	41
表4-7 研發流程績效與研發主管權力高低之迴歸分析表	42
表4-8 品保主管權力高低之基本分析	43
表4-9 品保主管權力高低之衡量題項主成分分析結果	44
表4-10 研發流程績效與品保主管權力高低之迴歸分析表	45
表4-11 知識管理文化之基本分析	46
表4-12 知識管理文化之因素負荷表	47
表4-13 知識管理文化集群分析結果	48
表4-14 研發流程績效與知識管理文化之變異數分析表	50
表4-15 研發流程績效與知識管理文化各集群之差異性檢定表	50
表4-16 組織作業架構之基本分析	52
表4-17 流程作業指標之衡量題項主成分分析結果	53
表4-18 初期作業指標之衡量題項主成分分析結果	54
表4-19 組織作業架構集群分析結果	54
表4-20 研發流程績效與組織作業架構之變異數分析表	56
表4-21 研發流程績效與組織作業架構各集群之差異性檢定表	57

參考文獻
一、中文部分
1.方世杰、方世榮，2002，知識管理：觀念架構的建立，商管科技學刊，1(3)，355-374。
2.台灣區車輛工業同業公會，2003年，台灣車輛產業概況，車輛工業月刊 114期。
3.李宏學，2004，汽車製造商與零件供應商互動模式之建構研究─以兩岸中衛體系為研究對象，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
4.李海輝，1999，權力運作對組織承諾之影響研究，國立成功大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
5.吳蕙玄，2004，知識管理制度與文化：與策略面及績效面連結之模式建構與實證研究，義守大學業管理研究所碩士論文。
6.吳家娜，1998，企業組織價值觀對製造策略競爭要項之影響研究，成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
7.吳淑鈴，2001，企業特性、人力資源管理措施與知識導向文化關係之研究，中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
8.郭進隆譯，彼得‧聖吉，2003，第五項修練，天下文化。
9.林彥旭，2004，新產品開發主管之權力比重、同步工程及資訊科技應用對新產品開發績效影響之研究─以國內扣件產業為例，國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
10.洪碧溎，2003，筆記型電腦業新產品導入績效衡量機制與評估系統，清華大學工業工程研究所碩士論文。
11.陳順宇，2000，多變量分析，台北，華泰書局。
12.張存金、盧淵源，2001，研發團對結構特性及整合機制與研發績效關係之研究-因徑分析模式，企業管理學報， 97-134。
13.劉美慧，1999，不同創新類型下新產品發展階段跨部門互動之探討，國立中央大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
14.劉權瑩，1999，資訊服務業知識管理之研究：以台灣HP 與台灣IBM 為例，政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
15.劉嘉偉，1988，新產品發展活動中行銷與工業設計部門互動程度與部門互動程度績效之相關性研究，政治大學科技管理研究所未出版碩士論。
16.黎士群，1998，組織公平、信任與知識分享行為之關係性研究─以Unix 系統管理人員為例，銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
17.賴士葆，1990，技術創新特性與新產品發展績效相關之研究，管理評論，102-114。
18.鍾宜璋，2000，汽車銷售業電子商務策略研究─以高都汽車為例，中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。





二、英文部分
1.Barczak, G., 1995. New Product Strategy, Structure, Process, and Performance in the Telecommunications Industry, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12(2): 224– 234.
2.Barkan, P., 1992. Productivity in The Process of Product Development an Engineering Perspective, In: Susman, G. (Ed.), Integrating Design for Manufacturing for Competitive Advantage. New York, Oxford University Press, 56–68. 
3.Brown, J. S. & P. Duguid, 1998. Organizing Knowledge, California Management Review, 40(3), 90-111.
4.Charles, W. L. & R. Gareth, 2004. Strategic Management Theory, New York: Houghton Mifflin.
5.─────────────  2004. Strategic Management Theory an Integrated Approach, 6rd ed., New York: Houghton Mifflin.
6.Cohen, D., 1998. Toward a Knowledge Context: Repot on the First Annual UC Berkeley Forum on Knowledge and the Firm, California Management Review, 40(3), 22-39.
7.Cooper, R. G. & E. J. Kleinschmidt, 1996. Winning Business in Product Development: The Critical Success Factors, Research Technology Management, 10(4), 18 - 29.
8.Daft, R. L. & R. H. Lengel, 1986. Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design, Management Science, 32(5), 554–571. 
9.Davenport, T. H., 1997. Ten Principles of Knowledge Management and Four Case Studies, Knowledge and Process Management, 4(3), 187-208.
10.Gaynor, G. H., 2002. Innovation by Design:What is Takes to Keep Your Company on The Cutting Edge, New York: Amacom.
11.Gupta, A. K. & D. L. Wilemon, 1990. Accelerating the Development of Technology-Based New Products, California Management Review, 32(2), 24–44. 
12.Hargadon, A. B., 1998. Firms as Knowledge Brokers: Lessons in Pursuing Continuoys Innovation, California Management Review, 40(3), 209-227.
13.Hayes, R. H., S. C. Wheelwright, & K. B. Clark, 1988. Dynamic Manufacturing, Free Press, New York, NY. Henke, J.W., Krachenberg, A.R. & Lyons, T.F.
14.Hull, F., P. Collins, & J. K. Liker, 1996. Composite Forms of Organizationas a Strategy for Concurrent Engineering Effectiveness, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 43(2), 133–142.
15.Jarvenpaa, S. L. & D. S. Staples, 2001. Exploring Perceptions of Organizational Ownership of Information and Expertise, Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 151-183.
16.Kim, W.C. & R. A. Mauborgne, 1997. Fair Process Managing in the Knowledge Economy, Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 65-75.
17.Kim, Y., B. Min, & J. Cha, 1999. The Roles of R&D Team Leaders in Korea:a Contigent Approach, R&D managemen, 29(2), 153 - 165.
18.Krogh, G., 1998. Care in Knowledge Creation, California Management Review, 40(3), 133-153.
19.Leenders, M.A.A.M. & B. Wierenga, 2002. The Effectiveness of Different Mechanisms for Integrating Marketing and R&D, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19, 305 - 317.
20.Maidique, M., 1980. Entrepreneurs, Champions, and Technological Innovation, Sloan Management Review, 21(2), 59–76.
21.Millson, M. R. & D. Wilemon, 2002. The Impact of Organizational Integration and Product Development Proficiency on Market Success, Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 1 - 23.
22.Nonaka, I. & N. Konno., 1998. The Concept of "Ba": Building a foundation for Knowledge Creation, California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54.
23.Nonaka, & Takuchi., 1995. The Knowledge-creating Company, NU: Oxford University Press.
24.Olson, E.M. & O.C. Walker, & R.W. Ruekert, 1995. Organizing for Effective New Product Development: The Moderating Role of Product Innovativeness, Journal of Marketing, January 59, 48-62.
25.Pawar, K.S., U. Menon, & J. C. Riedel, 1994. Time to Market, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 5(1), 14–22.
26.Pfeffer, J., 1992. Managing With Power, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
27.Robert S. & P. David, 2004. Strategy Maps：Converting Intangible Assets Into Tangible Outcomes , Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
28.Ruggles, Rudy., 1998. The State of Notion: Knowledge Management in Practice, California Management Review, 40(3), 80-89.
29.Sanderson, S., 1992. Design for Manufacturing in an Environment of Continuous Change, In: Susman, G. (Ed.), Integrating Design for Manufacturing for Competitive Advantage. , New York：Oxford University Press, 36–55.
30.Sandra Valle & Lucia Avella 2003. Cross-Functionality and Leadership of New Product Development team. , European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), 32 –48.
31.Scott, G. M., 1998. The New Age of New Product Development: Are We There Yet? R&D Management, 28(4), 225-235.
32.Song, X.M. & M. E. Parry, 1997. The Determinants of Japanese New Product Successes, Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 64 - 76.
33.Souder, W. E., J. D. Sherman, & R. D. Cooper, 1998. Environmental Uncertainty, Organizational Integration, and New Product Development Effectiveness: A Test of Contingency Theory , Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(6), 520 - 533.
34.Stoker, J. I., J. C. Looise, & O.A.M Fisscher, & R.D. de Jong, 2001. Leadership and Innovation : Relation Between Leadership, Individual, Characteristics and The Function of R& D Team, The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 12(7), 1141 -1151.
35.Tushman, Michael L. & O’Reilly, A. Charles, 1997. Winning Through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal.
36.Valle Sandra & Lucia Avella, 2003. Cross-Functionality and Leadership of New Product Development team, European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), 32 –50.
37.Wrapp, E., 1967. Good Managers Do not Make Policy Decision , Harvard Business Review, September- October, 91- 99.
38.Xenophon, A., A. Mark, & J. William, 2003. Integrated Product Development Practices and Competitive Capabilities: The Effects of Uncertainty, Equivocality, and Platform Strategy, Journal of Operations Management, 20, 331– 355.
39.Yukl, G., 1994. Leadership in Organizations, 3rd ed., Englewood Cliffs, NJ : PrenticeHall.