資訊產品利潤越來越低，企業必需面臨市場高度競爭，企業唯有及時提供更好品質與價廉的新產品才較有機會獲得優勢與競爭對手競技，企業積極找尋解決困境的方案以增加競爭優勢：縮短產品開發時程、提昇產品設計品質、並提供較優惠的產品是新產品開發績效的三項重要指標。為了達成此三項績效指標，企業必需思考與上下游廠商和客戶合作，形成一虛擬團隊協同合作，來提昇企業競爭優勢。供應鍊協同合作包含客戶協同合作、供應廠商協同合作、虛擬團隊協同合作與e化產品資料管理系統協同合作的組成運作，可以提昇新產品開發績效。本研究目的有三項：
1.找出新產品開發績效的影響因素。
2.證實供應鍊協同合作對新產品開發績效有正面的影響。
3.進而找出改善現有開發C流程的改善方案。

本研究方法採用個案研究，以新產品開發專案資料的搜集與研究分析為主軸，再加上研究高階管理層峰與專案執行人員的深入訪談為輔，以獲得信度與效度較高的資料。E-company積極找尋解困方案，並執行供應鍊協同合作，而得以為本研究之研究個案公司。本研究將其新產品開發績效與執行供應鍊協同合作做一研究分析，共搜集30個新產品專案與24場深入訪談，經t檢定與ANOVA分析，再加上深入訪談的佐證，發現執行供應鍊協同合作後，新產品開發績效的三項指標都有顯著正面的影響。從資料分析與研究中，也找出影響新產品開發績效的影響因素與新產品開發C流程的改善方案，本研究的三項目的皆獲得解答。影響新產品開發績效的影響因素非常多，本研究發現，在執行完善的供應鍊協同合作以後，影響新產品開發績效的影響因素可控制並歸納為以下三項：
1.產品規格
2.企業的核心技術
3.創新

本研究對新產品開發績效與影響因素做一新方向，並有系統的評估與研究，整合供應鍊上下游伙伴協同合作，組成新產品開發的虛擬團隊，此為一創新的論點，可解決目前新產品開發流程的瓶頸，新產品開發績效中，尚有許多的困境與議題值得企業與學者深入探討研究，以獲得更佳的優勢與競爭力。本研究提供一可行的解決方案，做一拋磚引玉的思考方向，讓企業可以作為擺脫困境，增加競爭優勢的新方向。最後，本研究除結論外，亦提出對新產品開發績效管理上新的思考方向與建議，以作為未來的研究發展參考。

Since IT products are not profitable as they were, reduction of product life cycles and better quality with lower price product will have higher chance of success in the market place (Jayaram, 1998).  Firms need to find the solutions to integrate with whole supply chain collaboration to have the better competition.  There are three research objectives in this study. 
1.	To find the affected factor for the NPD performance in IT environment.
2.	To expose there is a positive influence on NPD performance for supply chain collaboration.
3.	To disclose the contribution on the NPD C-Process for supply chain collaboration.
Case study was selected to be the research method in this research.  The data collection consists of internal project data of NPD and in-depth interviews.  In this research, it assumes to find the influence for supply chain collaboration on the NPD performance.  Supply chain collaboration includes customer collaboration, supplier collaboration, virtual team collaboration and e-PDM system.  Three performance indicators for NPD are time-to-market, design quality and cost.  There are thirty NPD projects have been selected as the unit of analysis.  Twenty-four top management and key executive persons were invited for the in-depth interview.  The project data is also examined by T-test and ANOVA analysis.  They are approved to have significant influence for implementation of supply chain collaboration.  The new affected factor of NPD performance will be controlled to be the following three issues after well implementation of supply chain collaboration. There are product specifications, firm’s core-technology and innovation.

This study is a first step in a new direction toward systematic assessment for NPD performance.  This study is one of the first empirical investigations to study the supply chain collaboration including customers, vendors and virtual team collaboration and e-PDM system for NPD.  It is approved that supply chain collaborations have a positive influence on the NPD performance.  Furthermore, the improvement method of NPD C-process was found in the end of this study.  Three objectives of this research have been achieved.  There are still many areas need extra attention and discussion in order to keep firm’s competency and make them successful in the future.  This study provides the insights of critical success factors in managing NPD projects, which will result in an improved knowledge of global collaboration.  This study is particularly important because it will provide insights for firms to have the feasible solutions for NPD bottlenecks.  Firms have a new direction of resolution to face the challenge in order to manage the global collaboration teams for NPD.  It also supports to fulfill the customers’ demand and succeed in the market.

LIST OF FIGURES	IV
LIST OF TABLES	V
1.	INTRODUCTION	1
1.1	Research Background	1
1.2	The Problem Statement	2
1.3	Research Objective	4
1.4	Scope of the Research	5
1.5	Organization of the Study	6
2.	REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE	8
2.1	New Product Development (NPD) Process	8
2.2	Product Data Management (PDM)	12
2.2.1	The Definition of PDM	12
2.2.2	The Significant of PDM	13
2.2.3	The Benefit of PDM	13
2.2.4	Collaborative Product Commerce (CPC)	15
2.2.5	Web-based PDM (e-PDM)	17
2.3	Virtual Team	19
2.3.1	The Successful Factors of Virtual Team	20
2.3.2	The Multi-Culture of Virtual Team	21
2.3.3	The Trust of Virtual Team	23
2.3.4	The IT Management for Virtual Team	25
2.3.5	The Organization Management for Virtual Team	26
2.4	Supply Chain Collaboration	27
2.4.1	Supply Chain Collaboration	27
2.4.2	Supply Chain collaboration for NPD	28
2.5	Literature Review Conclusion	29
3.	METHODOLOGY	30
3.1	Research Concept	30
3.2	The Hypothesis of Research	32
3.2.1	Supply Chain Collaboration	32
3.2.1.1	Customer Collaboration Practices	33
3.2.1.2	Supplier Collaboration Practices	33
3.2.1.3	Virtual Team Collaboration Practices	33
3.2.2	IT Management System – e-PDM system	34
3.2.3	Research Hypothesis	34
3.3	Research Method and Data Collection	37
3.3.1	Research Case Selection	38
3.3.2	Research Data Collection	38
3.3.2.1	In-Depth Interview	38
3.3.2.2	Outline of Interview	39
3.3.2.3	Project Profiles	41
3.3.2.4	Project Data Collection	42
4.	CASE STUDY COMPANY INTRODUCTION	43
4.1	The Background for Case Study Company	43
4.2	Original NPD Introduction	45
4.2.1	The Bottleneck for Original NPD Process	45
4.2.2	Original Product Development Model	45
4.2.2.1	NPD C-Process	45
4.2.2.2	The Collaboration of Business Process	46
4.2.2.3	Current IT Management System	49
4.3	New NPD Collaboration and e-PDM System	51
4.3.1	e-PDM System Implementation	51
4.3.1.1	Product Design Guiding System (Create Future Roadmap) ：	51
4.3.1.2	Virtual Team Collaboration Management System	51
4.3.1.3	Tooling Center Information Management System	52
4.3.1.4	Product Design Management System	52
4.3.2	New Supply Chain Collaboration	53
4.3.2.1	New Collaboration of Business Process	54
4.3.2.2	Supply Chain Collaboration and e-PDM System	55
5.	DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDING	57
5.1	Customer Collaboration Practice Analysis	57
5.1.1	Performance Analysis for Customer Collaboration Practice	57
5.1.2	Performance Analysis with e-PDM System for Customer Collaboration	60
5.2	Supplier Collaboration Practice Analysis	65
5.2.1	Performance Analysis for Supplier Collaboration	65
5.2.2	Performance Analysis with e-PDM System for Supplier Collaboration	68
5.3	Virtual Team Collaboration Practice Analysis	73
5.3.1	Performance Analysis for Virtual Team	73
5.3.2	Performance Analysis with e-PDM System for Virtual Team Collaboration	75
5.4	e-PDM System Practice Analysis	80
5.4.1	Performance Analysis for e-PDM System	80
5.5	Conclusion of Data Analysis	84
6.	CONCLUSION	85
6.1	Major Finding	86
6.1.1	Affected Factor of NPD Performance	86
6.1.1.1	The NPD Performance of Time-to-Market	86
6.1.1.2	The NPD Performance of Design Quality	87
6.1.1.3	The NPD Performance of Cost	88
6.1.2	New Affected Factor in NPD Process	89
6.1.2.1	Product Specification	89
6.1.2.2	Firm’s Core-Technology	89
6.1.2.3	Innovation	89
6.1.3	e-PDM System Variable	91
6.2	The Advantage and Contribution	92
6.2.1	The NPD Process Improvement	92
6.2.2	The Contributions and Advantages	93
6.2.3	The Benefit for the System	96
6.3	Research Limitation	98
6.4	Future Study	99
6.4.1	Supply Chain Collaboration	99
6.4.2	Affected factor for NPD integration mechanisms	99
6.5	Conclusion	100
REFERENCES	101
APPENDIX A	108
List of Figures
FIGURE 1: ORGANIZATION FLOW OF STUDY....................................................................................................7
FIGURE 2: NPD PROCESS ......................................................................................................................... 11
FIGURE 3: PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CONCURRENT PROCESS (KELLY, 2001) ..................................................15
FIGURE 4: CPC SCOPE (KELLY, 2001)........................................................................................................16
FIGURE 5: INCREMENTAL APPROACH TO PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT DEPLOYMENT (BAILEY & VERDUIN, 2000) ....17
FIGURE 6: THE INFLUENCE OF PRODUCT DESIGN COST IN THE PRODUCT COST OF GOOD SOLD (CHANG, M.J., 2003)
.....................................................................................................................................................18
FIGURE 7: THE PRINCIPLE OF VIRTUAL TEAM (LIPNACK & STAMPS,1997) .......................................................21
FIGURE 8: THE RESEARCH CONCEPT OF SUPPLY CHAIN COLLABORATION IN NPD ...........................................32
FIGURE 9: RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS FRAMEWORK .........................................................................................36
FIGURE 10: DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK................................................................................................37
FIGURE 11: C-PROCESS CHART..................................................................................................................46
FIGURE 12: THE ORIGINAL BUSINESS COLLABORATION PROCESS FOR E-COMPANY..........................................47
FIGURE 13: ORIGINAL MANUFACTURE COLLABORATION PROCESS FLOW OF E-COMPANY ..................................48
FIGURE 14: E-COMPANY COLLABORATION DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN.......................................................52
FIGURE 15: BARE-BONE SYSTEM OPM COLLABORATION QUICK RESPONSE PLATFORM .....................................53
FIGURE 16: NPD BUSINESS COLLABORATION ANALYSIS................................................................................54
FIGURE 17: NPD COLLABORATION PROCESS FLOW .....................................................................................55
FIGURE 18: NEW NPD PROCESS CONCEPT FOR FUTURE RESEARCH.............................................................90
FIGURE 19: E-PDM SYSTEM SUPPORTS SUPPLY CHAIN COLLABORATION ON NPD PERFORMANCE...................91
List of Tables
TABLE 1: CHARACTERISTICS BETWEEN HIGH-TRUST AND LOW-TRUST TEAMS..................................................25
TABLE 2: E-COMPANY BACKGROUND............................................................................................................44
TABLE 3: ORIGINAL BUSINESS PROCESS FLOW DESCRIPTION ........................................................................49
TABLE 4: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR ALL PRODUCT LINES: CUSTOMER COLLABORATION .................58
TABLE 5: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR OVERALL PRODUCT LINES: CUSTOMER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM
SYSTEM..........................................................................................................................................60
TABLE 6: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR DESKTOP PC PRODUCT LINES: CUSTOMER COLLABORATION AND
E-PDM SYSTEM..............................................................................................................................62
TABLE 7: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR LCD PC: CUSTOMER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM..62
TABLE 8: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR SERVER: CUSTOMER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM...63
TABLE 9: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR MEDIA CENTER: CUSTOMER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM
.....................................................................................................................................................63
TABLE 10: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR ALL PRODUCT LINES: SUPPLIER COLLABORATION .................66
TABLE 11: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR OVERALL PRODUCT LINES: SUPPLIER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM
SYSTEM..........................................................................................................................................68
TABLE 12: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR DESKTOP: SUPPLIER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM.70
TABLE 13: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR LCD PC: SUPPLIER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM..70
TABLE 14: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR SERVER: SUPPLIER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM...71
TABLE 15: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR MEDIA CENTER: SUPPLIER COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM
.....................................................................................................................................................71
TABLE 16: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR OVERALL PRODUCTS LINES: VIRTUAL TEAM COLLABORATION73
TABLE 17: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR OVERALL: VIRTUAL TEAM COLLABORATION AND E-PDM SYSTEM
.....................................................................................................................................................75
TABLE 18: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR DESKTOP PC: VIRTUAL TEAM AND E-PDM SYSTEM .............77
TABLE 19: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR LCD PC: VIRTUAL TEAM AND E-PDM SYSTEM....................77
TABLE 20: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR SERVER: VIRTUAL TEAM AND E-PDM SYSTEM.....................78
TABLE 21: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR MEDIA CENTER: VIRTUAL TEAM AND E-PDM SYSTEM...........78
TABLE 22: PROJECT PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR OVERALL PRODUCT LINE: E-PDM SYSTEM .........................81
TABLE 23: THE INFLUENCE RESULT FOR RESEARCH HYPOTHESES..................................................................84
TABLE 24: NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IMPROVEMENT ...............................................................93
TABLE 25: THE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR SUPPLY CHAIN PARTNERS .....................................................................95
TABLE 26: SUPPLY CHAIN COLLABORATION BENEFITS DETAILS.......................................................................96

1.	Atkins, D. and Cogburn, D. (2001). Crafting Virtual collaborations: Cross-National (U.S. and South Africa) Learning Teams.
2.	Alexander. S., (2000). Virtual Teams going Global, InfoWorld, 22(46): P55-56.
3.	Atuahene-Gima, K. (1995). An exploratory analysis of the impact of market orientation on new product performance: A contingency approach. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12, 2750293.
4.	Bailey, M.W. and Verduin, W.H. (2000). An Intelligent System for the Optimal Design of Highly Engineered Products.
5.	Baker, G. (2002). Information Resources Management Journal, Vol.15, I. 4; 79, 15pgs.
6.	Bakos, J. Y. (1991). Information links and electronic marketplaces: The role of interorganizational information systems in vertical markets. Journal of Management Information Systems, 8(2). 31-52.
7.	Balakrishnan, A. and Geunes, J. (2004). Collaboration and Coordination in Supply Chain Management and E-Commerce, Production and Operations Management. Muncie: Spring 2004.Vol.13, no.1; 1, 2 pgs.
8.	Bissoonauth, B. (2002). Virtual Project Work: Investigating Critical Success Factors of Virtual Project Performance. 6-49.
9.	Bonaccorsi, A. and Lipparini, A. (1994). Strategic Partnerships in new product development: An Italian Case Study.  Journal of Product Innovation Management.  11, 134 – 145.
10.	Booz, Allen and Hamilton (1982). “New Product Management for 1980’s”, New York; Booz, Allen and Hamilton Inc.
11.	Boyaci, T., G. Gallego (2004). Supply Chain Coordination in a Market with Customer Service Competition. Production and Operations Management 13(1) 3-22.
12.	Byrne, J.A. (Feb 8, 1993), The virtual corporation, Business week, No.3304, 98-103
13.	Cascio, W. F. (2000), managing a virtual workplace, Academy of management Executive, 14(3). P.81-90.
14.	Calantone, R.J. and Di Benedetto, C.A. (1988). An integrative model of the NPD process: An empirical validation, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 5(3), 201-215.
15.	Chang, C.Y. and Yu, P.L. (2001), Made by Taiwan: Booming in information technology era, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore.
16.	Chang, M.J. (2003), Developing an Agent-Based PDM/ERP Collaboration System, 26-32. 
17.	Clark, K.M., & Fujimoto, T. (1991). Product Development Performance, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
18.	Cooper, R.G. (1994). Perspective: Third-Generation New Product Processes, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol.11, pp.3-14, 1994.
19.	Cooper, R.G. (2001). Winning at new products: Accelerating the process from idea to launch, third edition. Persus Publishing, MA.
20.	Cope, J. (2000). Catepillar to launch satellite video conferencing system. Computerworld, September 25, 88.
21.	Dessert, T. (2001). Haute Innovations International Virtual Teams Case Scenario. SMSU, April 4, 2001.
22.	Elkins, T. (2000). Virtual Teams Connect and Collaborate. IIE Solutions; Apr 2000; 32, 4; ABI/INFORM Global pg. 26.
23.	Ferranti, M. (1997). Automaker aims for company-wide collaborative standards. Computerworld, December 11, 14-15. 
24.	Gartner Group. (2001). Videoconferencing can help enterprises cut travel. Gartner Group Research Note, October 9. 
25.	Gatignon, H., and Xuereb, J.-m. (1997). Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance.  Journal of Marketing Research, 34(February), 77-90.
26.	Goldman, James E. (1998). Applied Data Communications. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
27.	Goodbody, J. (2005). Critical success factors for global virtual teams; [1] Strategic Communication Management. Chicago: Feb/Mar 2005.Vol.9, Iss. 2; 18, 4 pgs 
28.	Grenier, R. and Metes, G. (1995). Going virtual: Moving your organization into the 21st century. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: prentice-Hall, Inc.
29.	Griffin, A. and Hauser, J.R. (1992). Patterns of communication among marketing, engineering and manufacturing - A comparison between two new product teams, Management Science, 38(3), 360-373.
30.	Griffin, A. and Hauser, J.R. (1993). The voice of customer, Marketing Science, 12, pp.1-27.
31.	Grossman, M. (2004). The Role of Trust and Collaboration in the Internet-enabled Supply Chain. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge. Hollywood: Sep 2004.Vol.5, Iss. 1/2;  pg. 391, 6 pgs)  
32.	Gupta, A.K., and Wilemon, D. L. (1990). Accelerating the development of technology-based new products. California Management Review (Winter), 24-44.
33.	Handfield, R.B., and Ghosh, S. (1994). Creating a quality culture through organizational change: A case analysis. Journal of International Marketing, 2(3), 7-36.
34.	Hansen, F. (1999). Mastering virtual Teams, Compensation and Benefits Review, 31(5): 75, 1999 Sep/Oct, p.3.
35.	Harland, C.M. (1996). Supply chain management relationships, chains and networks, British Journal of Management, March, Vol. 7 pp.S63-80
36.	Hof, R. D. (1992). Suddenly, Hewlett Packard is doing everything right.  Business Week(March 23), 88-89.
37.	Hofstede, G. (2001). Wired International Teams Experiments, In Strategic Decision Making by Multi-Cultural Virtual Teams.
38.	Horvath, L. (2001). Collaboration: the key to value creation in supply chain management, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 6 No. 5, 205-7.
39.	Huang, W.W., Wei, K., Watson, R.T. and Tan, B. (2002). Supporting virtual team-building with a GSS: An empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems, forthcoming.
40.	Imai, K., Ikujiro, N., and Takeuchi, H. (1985). Managing the new product development process: How Japanese companies learn and unlearn.  In R. H. Hayes, K. Clark, and A. Lorenz (Eds.), the Uneasy Alliance: Managing the Productivity-Technology Dilemma (pp.337-375).  Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
41.	Ishikura, Y. (1985). Global new product development: The case of plain paper copiers.  Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard Business School.Jarvenpaa, S., Knoll, K., and Leidner, D. (1998). Is Anybody Out There? The Development and Implications of Trust in Global Virtual Teams, journal of management Information systems, 14, 29-64.Jarvenpaa, S., and Leidner, D. (1998). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication and Organization Science: A Joint Issue, 3.Jayaram, M.J. (1998). The Impact of Supply Chain Integration Mechanisms on Success in New Product Development Projects, Michigan State University.Johnston, H. R. and Vitale, M. R. (1988). Creating competitive advantage with inter-organizational systems. MlS Quarterly, 153-165.
46.	Kahn, K.B. and McDonough, E.F. (1997). An empirical study of relationships among co-location, integration, performance, and satisfaction, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(3), 161-178.
47.	Kayworth, T. and Leidner, D. (2000). The Global Virtual Manager: A Perspective for Success, European Management Journal, 18 (2): 183-194. 
48.	Kelly, D. S. (2001). Web-Centric Product Data Management, Volume 18-1, November, 2001 
49.	Kersten, G.E. and Noronha, S.J. (1999). WWW-based negotiation support: Design, implementation and use. Decision Support Systems, 25(2),135-154.
50.	Kessler, E. H., and Chakrabarti, A. K. (1996). Innovation speed: A conceptual model of context, antecedents, and outcomes.  Academy of Management Review. 21(4), 1143 – 1191.
51.	Khaitan, A., (1999). Virtual Communities. University of Michigan.
52.	Kimble, C., Li, F. and Barlow, A., (2000). Effective Virtual Teams through Communities of Practice, Management Science Research Paper No.2000/09.
53.	Kirchmeyer, C. and A. Cohen, (1992). Multicultural Groups: Their Performance and Reactions with Constructive Conflict. Group and Organizational Management 17(2), p 153-170. 
54.	Knoll, K., and Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995). Learning Virtual Team Collaboration, Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences Conference Proceedings, Hawaii, 4, 1995, 91-101.
55.	Kumar, K. and Van Fenam, P. C. (2001). Virtual Teams in Multinational Organizations.
56.	Lambert, D.M. and Pohlen, T.L. (2001). Supply chain metrics, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, 1-19.
57.	Lipnack, J., and Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual Teams: Reaching Across Space, Time, and organizations with technology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
58.	Lipnack, J. and Stamps, J., (1999). Virtual Teams: The new way to work, Strategy & Leadership. Chicago:.Vol.27, Iss. 1;  14, 5 pgs, 
59.	Lu, L. Y.Y. (2003). New Product Development in Taiwan’s IT Industry: The Cooperation between R&D and Marketing, Institute of Business and Management College of Management, National Chiao Tung University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Business and Management December 2003, 5-12.
60.	Lurey, J.S. (1998). A Study of Best Practices in Designing and Supporting Effective Virtual Teams, Doctor of Philosophy, professional Psychology, L.A. Campus of California School. 
61.	Malhotra, A., Majchrak, A. (2005). Virtual Workspace Technologies, MIT Sloan Management Review. Cambridge: Winter 2005.Vol.46, Iss. 2; 11
62.	Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust, Academy of Management Review 20(3), p 709-734.
63.	McGrath, M.E. (1996). Setting the PACE in product development, revised edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, MA, Chap. 3.
64.	McMahan K.L. (1998). Effective Communication and Information Sharing in Virtual Teams, August, 1998.
65.	Moenaert, R.K., Souder, W.E., De Meyer, A. and Deschoolmeester, D. (1994). R&D-marketing cooperation mechanisms, communication flows, and innovation success, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(1), 31-45.
66.	Mowshowitz, A. (1997). “Virtual Organization” Communication ACM, 40(9): 30-37.
67.	Neter, J., Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J. and Wasserman W. (1994). Applied Linear Statistical Models, 4th ed., Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
68.	O’Hara-Devereaux, M. and Johansen, R. (1994). Global Work: Bridging Distance, Culture, and Time, Jossey-Bass.
69.	Olson E.M., Walker Jr. O.C., Ruekert R.W. and Bonner, J.M. (2001). Patterns of cooperation during new product development among marketing, operations and R&D: Implication for project performance, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(4), 258-271.
70.	Port, S., 1997, PDM Solution: Work Manager of Concrete; Ericsson Diax A/S Denmark〉, 1997, CIMdata,123-130。
71.	Porter, M.E. (1986). Competition in Global Industries: A Conceptual Framework in M.E. porter ed. Competition in Global Industries Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 16-60.
72.	Potter, R.E., Balthazard, P.A. and Cooke, RA. (2000). Virtual team interaction: assessment, consequences, and management. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 6(7/8),131-137.
73.	Raghu, T S., Ramesh, R. Chang, Ai-Mei and Whinston, A.B. (2001). Collaborative decision making: A connective paradigm for dialectical support. Information Systems Research, 12(4), 363-383.
74.	Raghuram, S. Garud, R, Wisenfeld, b, Gupta, V. (2001). “ Factors contributing to virtual work adjustment” Journal of Management, 27: 383-405.
75.	Raia, E. (1991). Taking time out of product design. Purschasing, 110 (6 April 4), 36-39.
76.	Sahay, B.S., 2003, Supply chain collaboration: The key to value creation work Study, London:2003.Vol.52,Iss.2/3; 76,8pgs 
77.	Simatupang, T.M. and Sridharan, R. (2002). The collaborative supply chain, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 15-30.
78.	Smith, P.G., and Reinersten, D.G.(1991).  Developing Product in Half the time.  New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
79.	Smith P.G., and Reinertsen, D.G. (1998). Developing Products in Half the Time: New Rules, New Tools; Wiley, J. and Sons , 1998, 298 pages (0471292524).
80.	Snow, C.C., S.A. Snell & s.c. Davision. (1996). Use transnational teams to globalize your company.  Organization Dynamics, 24(4), 50-67.
81.	Song, X.M. and Montoya Weiss, M.M. (1998). Critical Development Activities for Really New Versus Incremental Products, Journal of Product Innovation Management 15, 124-135.
82.	Song, X.M., Montoya-Weiss, M.M. and Schmidt, J.B., (1997). Antecedents and consequences of cross-functional cooperation, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(1), 35-47.
83.	Song, X.M., Thieme, R.J. and Xie, J. (1998). The impact of cross-functional joint involvement across development stages: An exploratory study, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(4), 289-303.
84.	Souder, W.E., Sherman, J.D. and Davies-Cooper, R., 1998, “Environmental uncertainty, organizational integration, and new product development effectiveness: A test of contingency theory”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15, 520-533,
85.	Spekman, R. E., Salmond, D.J. and Lambe, C. J. (1997). Consensus and collaboration: norm-regulated behaviour in industrial marketing relationships, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31, No. 11/12, 832 – 856.
86.	Stewart, G. (1995). "Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals keys to supply chain excellence", Logistics Information Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, 38-44.
87.	Stewart, G. (1997). "Supply-chain operations reference model (SCOR): the first cross-industry framework for integrated supply chain management", Logistics Information Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, 62-7.
88.	Suh, K.S. (1999). Impact of communication medium on task performance and satisfaction: An examination of media-richness theory. Information and Management, 35(5), 295-312.
89.	Subramaniam, M. (1998).  Leveraging knowledge across boraders for global new product development capability, Boston University.
90.	Swink, M. L., Sandvik, C.J., and Mabert, V. A. (1996).  Customizing concurrent engineering processes: Five case studies.  Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13, 229-244.
91.	Takeuchi, H., and Nonaka, I. (1986).  The new product development game.  Harvard business Review, 64(1), 137-146.
92.	Teresko, J. (1991). Hewlett-Packard keeps reinventing itself.  Industry Week. 240(16 Aug), 44-52.
93.	Townsend, A.M., DeMarie, S.M. & Hendrickson, A.R. (1998).  Virtual teams: Technology and workplace of the future.  Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 17-29.
94.	Trygg, L. (1993).  Concurrent engineering practices in selected Swedish companies: A Movement or an activity of the few? Journal of Product Innovation Management. 10, 403-415.
95.	Ulrich, K.T., and Eppinger, S.D. (1995). Product design and development. McGraw-Hill, Inc., NewYork, Chap. 2, 15-17.
96.	Valentino, D., and Christ, W. (1989). Teaming up for market: Cheaper, better, faster.  Management review.  78(11 November), 46-49.
97.	Vuotto, F. (2004). Information Competence as Value-Added Product: Applying the business Model to Academe, Reference Services Review, V. 32, Iss. 3 ,Summer 2004.
98.	Von Zedtwitz, M. and Gassmann, O. (2002). “Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: four different patterns of managing research and development”, Research Policy, 31, 569-588, 2002.
99.	Watson, W.E., Kumar, K., and Micaelsen, L.K. (1993). Cultural Diversity’s Impact on Interaction Process and Performance, Academy of Management Journal 36(3), P 590-602.
100.	Weisband, S.P. (1992). Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer mediated and face-to-face decision making groups, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53: 352-380.
101.	Whipple, J.M. and Frankel, R. (2000). Strategic alliance success factors, The Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 36 No. 3, 21-8. 
102.	Yeh, S.H. (2002). Exploring the Critical Success Factors on the Implementation of PDM- AN Empirical Study on T Company, Graduate School of Management, Tatung University, 2002, 7-38
103.	Yin, R.K. (1994).  Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd ed.) London: Sage Publications.
104.	Yip, G.S. (1995) Total Global Strategy Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall
105.	Zipser, A. (1992).  Chipping away at Intel – the super semiconductor maker loses its monopoly.  Barrons, 72 (12 March 23), 16-17.