淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-2307201515052300
中文論文名稱 台灣地區採用SCRUM敏捷法之專案與專案成功之關聯
英文論文名稱 The Relationships of Adopting Scrum Projects and Their Success in Taiwan
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 資訊管理學系碩士在職專班
系所名稱(英) On-the-Job Graduate Program in Advanced Information Management
學年度 103
學期 2
出版年 104
研究生中文姓名 陳建仲
研究生英文姓名 Chien-Chung Chen
電子信箱 stanleyccc@gmail.com
學號 702630301
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2015-05-30
論文頁數 68頁
口試委員 指導教授-吳錦波
委員-林至中
委員-施盛寶
中文關鍵字 敏捷法  專案管理  SCRUM  控制理論  需求變更 
英文關鍵字 Agile Methodologies  Project Management  SCRUM  Control Theory  Requirements Change 
學科別分類
中文摘要 當今企業面臨市場快速更迭的競爭,產品的生命週期越來越短,快速因應市場需求推出產品成為創造利潤的要件,因此專案團隊要經常因應需求改變而調整專案的基準(範疇/時程/成本);而傳統專案管理的嚴謹流程在此情況下顯得過於繁複且缺乏彈性,導致各種管理議題發生。敏捷法於1990年自軟體開發領域採用以來,已發展出多種管理方法,其中SCRUM與XP的管理組合在實務上曾創造數倍於過去績效的記錄。
雖然敏捷法能提升專案效率,但較少文獻探討敏捷專案的管理情境,本研究藉由控制理論探討專案採用SCRUM敏捷法,對於個人參與敏捷專案之成就感,及不同控制機制下對於專案成功之影響。經線上問卷調查獲得有效問卷回覆230份,分析結果顯示採用SCRUM敏捷法能促進團隊的工作成就感,並促進專案成功;以及目標導向的產出控制對敏捷專案成功有顯著影響,但是主張自主管理的自我控制的影響則不顯著。本研究期望研究結果能增加敏捷專案管理領域之研究,並提供管理者於實施敏捷專案時採用合適的管理組合。
英文摘要 Nowadays, rapid change and keen competition of market demand make product lifecycle become shorter than ever before. Business organizations have to be responsive and develop new product to meet customers’ need, which have become a fact to get themselves profitable. Therefore, project team frequently need to adjust the project baseline (Scope/Time/Cost) under such circumstances. Rigorous processes like traditional project management obviously cause many issues due to their complexity and inflexibility. Agile methodologies have been adopted in software project since 1990, and have evolved into various form of agile approaches. For instance, the combination of SCRUM and XP in practice has hit the record and created several times in performance than that of traditional project management.
Although agile methodologies have several advantages over traditional ones, there is a lack of empirical research in the application of SCRUM approach. Thus, this research is to fill the gap by investigating the impacts of personal accomplishment、project changes and control mechanisms on project success.
This research adopted survey research method. Data were collected through online survey system. There were 230 valid questionnaires returned. The result shows that projects employed SCRUM approach were positively related to the improvement of project participants’ accomplishment. Moreover, rather than “self-control”, the goal-oriented “outcome control” was significantly related to project success while project requirement frequently change. These results could increase managerial understanding of agile project management and provide suggestions for agile project management
論文目次 目錄
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節 研究流程 4
第四節 研究範圍與限制 5
第五節 論文架構 6

第二章 文獻探討 8
第一節 控制理論在專案管理的運用 8
第二節 專案成功 14
第三節 敏捷法與SCRUM 15

第三章 研究方法 23
第一節 研究架構 23
第二節 構面操作性定義 24
第三節 研究假說 25
第四節 問卷設計與衡量 28
第五節 資料分析方法 29

第四章 研究結果與分析 32
第一節 敍述統計分析 32
第二節 測量模型之信度與效度檢定 37
第三節 結構模型檢定 42

第五章 結論 47
第一節 研究結論 47
第二節 管理實務面建議 49

參考文獻 52
附錄 58

表目錄
表 2 1、Outchi主張之控制策略 12
表 2 2、Kirsch主張之控制策略 13
表 2 3、專案管理方法採用策略 17
表 2 4、SCRUM團隊與利害關係人互動 21
表 4 1、敘述性統計 33
表 4 2、各構面的組成信度(CR)與平均變異抽取量(AVE) 39
表 4 3、相關矩陣與平均變異抽取量之平方根 40
表 4 4、形成式指標構面之變異數膨脹係數(VIF)數值 41
表 4 5、調節效果分析結果 45
表 4 6、假說驗證結果 46

圖目錄
圖 1.1、研究流程圖 5
圖 2.1、敏捷宣言 16
圖 2.2、SCRUM流程與角色 19
圖 3.1、研究架構 24
圖 4.1、結構模型分析結果 44






參考文獻 1.Anderson, D. J. (2003). Agile management for software engineering: Applying the theory of constraints for business results. Prentice Hall Professional.
2.Augustine, S. (2005). Managing agile projects. Prentice Hall PTR.
3.Baskerville, R., Levine, L., Pries-Heje, J., Ramesh, B., & Slaughter, S. (2002). Balancing quality and agility in Internet speed software development. ICIS 2002 Proceedings, 89.
4.Blankenship, J., Bussa, M., & Millett, S. (2011). Managing agile projects with scrum. In Pro Agile. NET Development with Scrum (pp. 13-27). Apress.
5.Cervone, H. F. (2011). Understanding agile project management methods using Scrum. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 27(1), 18-22.
6.Chin, W. W. (1998). Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling.
7.Choudhury, V., & Sabherwal, R. (2003). Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects. Information Systems Research, 14(3), 291-314.
8.Clinton, K. (2010). Agile Game Development with Scrum. Addison-Wesley.
9.Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of management, 23(3), 239-290.
10.Cohn, M., & Ford, D. (2003). Introducing an agile process to an organization. Computer, 36(6), 74-78.
11.Conboy, K. (2009). Agility from first principles: reconstructing the concept of agility in information systems development. Information Systems Research, 20(3), 329-354.
12.Derby, E., Larsen, D., & Schwaber, K. (2006). Agile retrospectives: Making good teams great (p. 23). Raleigh, NC: Pragmatic Bookshelf.
13.Eisenhardt, K. M. (1985). Control: Organizational and economic approaches. Management science, 31(2), 134-149.
14.Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 382-388.
15.Fowler, M., & Highsmith, J. (2001). The agile manifesto. Software Development, 9(8), 28-35.
16.Friedkin, N. E. (1983). Horizons of observability and limits of informal control in organizations. Social Forces, 62(1), 54-77.
17.Gerwin, D., & Moffat, L. (1997). Withdrawal of team autonomy during concurrent engineering. Management Science, 43(9), 1275-1287.
18.Gloger, B. (2009). The Scrum roles:3 Scrum roles plus 3 organizational roles.
19.Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
20.Henderson, J. C., & Lee, S. (1992). Managing I/S design teams: a control theories perspective. Management Science, 38(6), 757-777.
21.Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(1), 82-109.
22.Hensler, J., & Fassott, G. (2010). Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts, methods and applications in marketing and related fields.
23.Hoorn, J. F., Konijn, E. A., van Vliet, H., & van der Veer, G. (2007). Requirements change: Fears dictate the must haves; desires the won’t haves. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(3), 328-355.
24.Hossain, E., Babar, M. A., & Verner, J. (2009). How can agile practices minimize global software development co-ordination risks?. In Software Process Improvement (pp. 81-92). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
25.Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic management journal, 20(2), 195-204.
26.Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of consumer research, 30(2), 199-218.
27.Jaworski, B. J. (1988). Toward a theory of marketing control: environmental context, control types, and consequences. The Journal of Marketing, 23-39.
28.Kirsch, L. J. (1996). The management of complex tasks in organizations: Controlling the systems development process. Organization Science, 7(1), 1-21.
29.Kirsch, L. J., Sambamurthy, V., Ko, D. G., & Purvis, R. L. (2002). Controlling information systems development projects: The view from the client. Management Science, 48(4), 484-498.
30.Kirsch, L. S. (1997). Portfolios of control modes and IS project management. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 215-239.
31.Kuo, H. C., Li, Y., Wang, L., & Ding, C. (2006). Flexibility and performance of MNEs: Evidence from Taiwan. International Journal of Business, 11(4), 417-432.
32.Lee, G., & Xia, W. (2005). The ability of information systems development project teams to respond to business and technology changes: a study of flexibility measures. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 75-92.
33.Linberg, K. R. (1999). Software developer perceptions about software project failure: a case study. Journal of Systems and Software, 49(2), 177-192.
34.Maruping, L. M., Venkatesh, V., & Agarwal, R. (2009). A control theory perspective on agile methodology use and changing user requirements. Information Systems Research, 20(3), 377-399.
35.MacCormack, A., Verganti, R., & Iansiti, M. (2001). Developing products on “Internet time”: The anatomy of a flexible development process. Management science, 47(1), 133-150.
36.McHugh, O., Conboy, K., & Lang, M. (2012). Agile practices: The impact on trust in software project teams. Software, IEEE, 29(3), 71-76.
37.Manz, C. C., & Sims Jr, H. P. (1987). Leading workers to lead themselves: The external leadership of self-managing work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 106-129.
38.Nidumolu, S. R., & Subramani, M. R. (2003). The matrix of control: Combining process and structure approaches to managing software development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(3), 159-196.
39.Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychological theory.
40.Ouchi, W. G. (1992). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms (pp. 63-82). Springer US.
41.Ovesen, N., & Sommer, A. F. (2015). Scrum in the Traditional Development Organization: Adapting to the Legacy. In Modelling and Management of Engineering Processes (pp. 87-99). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
42.Paulk, M. C. (2013). A Scrum Adoption Survey. Software Quality Professional, 15(2).
43.Pichler, R. (2010). Agile product management with scrum: Creating products that customers love. Addison-Wesley Professional.
44.PMBoK, A. (2000). Guide to the project Management body of knowledge. Project Management Institute, Pennsylvania USA.
45.Procaccino, J. D., & Verner, J. M. (2006). Software project managers and project success: An exploratory study. Journal of Systems and Software, 79(11), 1541-1551.
46.Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, S. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta, Hamburg.
47.Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International journal of research in marketing, 19(4), 305-335.
48.Slocum, J. W., & Sims, H. P. (1980). A typology for integrating technology, organization, and job design. Human Relations, 33(3), 193-212.
49.Schwaber, K. (1997). Scrum development process. Business Object Design and Implementation, 117-134.
50.Subramaniam, L. V., Faruquie, T. A., Ikbal, S., Godbole, S., & Mohania, M. K. (2009, March). Business intelligence from voice of customer. In Data Engineering, 2009. ICDE'09. IEEE 25th International Conference on (pp. 1391-1402). IEEE.
51.TS Group. (2003). The CHAOS Report. The Standish Group International.
52.Weinberg, G. M. (1971). The psychology of computer programming (Vol. 932633420). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
53.Wysocki, R. K., & McGary, R. (2003). Effective project management: traditional, adaptive, extreme. John Wiley & Sons.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2015-07-27公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2015-07-27起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2486 或 來信