進行風險管理是每個專案開發中重要的任務之一，尤其是大型專案中，複雜的系統與環境，組織的資源用在哪些解決方案上來對抗風險是需要慎重考慮的。而組織資源是有限的，專案參與者對於風險的看法不同，影響著如何去運用這些資源。而透過風險解決的方法，可以瞭解團隊在對於風險解決的資源是如何分配的，因此除了瞭解參與人員不同的風險看法之外，也應注意風險是如何被解決的。因此本研究中有兩個主要的研究問題：在一個資訊系統開發專案中，(1)參與者定義的風險有何不同，(2)每個階段會有哪些風險及採取哪些方法來對抗風險。
本研究訪談12位專案中參與者，包含8個專案管理者、4個專案分析師，我們使用內容分析方法，並以社會科技理論以及系統開發生命週期為基礎，進行資料分析。我們統計並整理了受訪者在各階段所提到的風險與解決方法，發現參與者會因為本身所屬單位、職責，而影響他們對於風險的看法。且在解決方法的運用上，也不僅限於使用相同類別的解決方法。
本研究讓專案管理者以不同的面向思考風險受到重視的原因，並了解自身與他人的優勢與劣勢，使制定決策時有更多的考量跟依據。在資源分配上，也能在眾多參與者的需求中取得最佳平衡點。而透過了解各單位的優勢劣勢所在，也能產生更多的合作方式，使專案更加順利進行。

Under the limited resources, the resource allocation is a critical issue for the project management. However, the project managers, business managers, IT stuff or users may have conflicts about resource allocation. From their difference or conflicts aspects, risk management is important for large scale and complex project development as the functions across various organizations. Moreover, assessment of risk solutions also reflects how organization allocates resources to maintain or reduce risks. Based on the previous mention, it is important to understand the risk identification and the solutions which are proposed by the participants who were in the difference positions. In this study, there are two research questions. First, what are the risks identified by difference participants? Second, what are solutions proposed for controlling the risks identified in the system development process?
There are 12 participants collected for this study, included 8 project managers, 4 analysts, and we employed content analysis. The result shows that various risks are identified by different stakeholders, because of their position and responsibility in this project. Across different views, they proposed the solutions to accomplish their group goals and to manage the risks. Based on our findings, we suggest that managers may not understand the risks management from project managers’ or key members’ views.

目錄
1	緒論	1
2	文獻探討	3
2.1	風險管理(Risk Management)	3
2.1.1	風險鑑定	3
2.1.2	風險解決方案	5
2.2	系統開發生命週期（System Development Life Cycle，SDLC）	6
3	研究方法	7
3.1	樣本資料	7
3.2	研究流程	8
3.3	內容分析	8
3.4	信度與效度衡量	9
4	資料分析	13
4.1	專案風險分析	14
4.1.1	整體專案的風險分析	14
4.1.2	開發商面臨的風險分析	20
4.1.3	發包商面臨的風險分析	26
4.2	專案風險與解決方法分析	32
4.2.1	整體專案的風險與解決方法分析	32
4.2.2	開發商面臨的風險與解決方法分析	36
4.2.3	發包商面臨的風險與解決方法分析	39
5	結論	43
5.1	研究問題與發現	43
5.2	研究限制	44
5.3	研究貢獻	44
參考文獻	46
附錄一	48
附錄二	51
附錄三	52

表目錄
表3-1、受訪單位與對象	7
表4-1、專案內之風險因素所占比例	13
表4-2、整體專案之風險因素與解決方法對應表	35
表4-3、開發商之風險因素與解決方法對應表	38
表4-4、發包商之風險因素與解決方法對應表	42

圖目錄
圖4-1、整體專案之風險圖	19
圖4-2、開發商之風險圖	25
圖4-3、發包商之風險圖	31

1.	余玉眉、田聖芳、蔣欣欣 等，《質性研究─田野研究法於護理學之應用》，台北市：巨流，ISBN:957-9464-78-2，1991。
2.	Addison, T., ”E-commerce project development risks: evidence from a Delphi survey,” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 23, pp. 25–40, 2003.
3.	Alter, S and Ginzberg, M., “Managing Uncertainty in MIS Implementation,” Sloan Management Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 23–31, 1978.
4.	Barki, H., Rivard, S., Talbot, J., “Toward an assessment of software development risk,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 203, 1993.
5.	Boehm, B.W., “Software Risk Management: Principles and Practices,” IEEE Software, vol. 8, no.1, Jan. 1991.
6.	Bryson, J. M., Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational Achievement. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
7.	Dey, P. K., Kinch, J. and Ogunlana, S. O., “Managing risk in software development projects: a case study,” Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 107, no: 2, pp. 284–303, 2007. 
8.	Du, S., Keil, M., Mathiassen, L., Shen, Y., and Tiwana, A., “Attention-shaping tools, expertise, and perceived control in IT project risk assessment,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 43, no. 1, pp.269–283, Feb. 2007.
9.	Fairley, R. E., Willshire, M. J., “Why the Vasa Sank: 10 Problems and Some Antidotes for Software Projects,” IEEE Software, vol. 20, no. 2, pp.18–25 Mar/Apr.2003.
10.	Herbsleb, J. D., “Global Software Engineering: The Future of Socio-technical Coordination” Future of Software Engineering, Washington, DC, USA. 2007, pp. 188-198.
11.	Keil, M., Cule, P. E., Lyytinen, L., and Schmidt, R. C., “A Framework for Identifying Softwar Project Risks”, Communications of the ACM, vol. 41, no. 11,pp. 76-83, Nov.1998.
12.	Leavitt, H. J., “Applied Organization Change in Industry: Structural, Technical, and Human Approaches,” New Perspectives in Organizational Research, Wiley, Chichester, 1964, 55–71
13.	Lyytinen, L., Mathiassen, L., Ropponen, J., “Attention Shaping and Software Risk— A Categorical Analysis of Four Classical Risk Management Approaches,” Information Systems Research, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 233-255, Sep.1998.
14.	Marakas, G. M., Systems Analysis & Design: An Active Approach, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
15.	McFarlan, F. W., “Portfolio Approach to Information Systems,” J. Systems Management, pp.12-19 Jan.1982.
16.	Neuendorf, K. A., The Content Analysis Guidebook. New York: SAGE Publications, 2002.
17.	Ragunath, P. K., Velmourougan, S., Davachelvan, P., Kayalvizhi, S., & Ravimohan, R. “Evolving a new model (SDLC Model-2010) for software development life cycle (SDLC),” International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 112-119, 2010.
18.	Ropponen, J. Lyytinen, K., “Components of software development risk: how to address them? A project manager survey,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 26, no. 2, pp.98-112, Feb.2000.
19.	Schmidt, R., Lyytinen, K. Keil, M. Cule, P., ”Identifying Software Project Risks: An International Delphi Study,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 5-36, Spring.2001.
20.	Smith, A., Stirling , A., Berkhout, F., “The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions,” Research Policy, vol. 34, pp. 1491–1510, 2005.
21.	Tesch, D., Kloppenborg, T. J., Frolick, M. N., “It Project Risk Factors: The Project Management Professionals Perspective,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 61, June.2007.