隨著高齡化社會與少子化趨勢加劇，延退制度逐漸成為政府與企業因應勞動力不足的重要政策方向。然而，延退制度雖有助於延長勞動參與及累積人力資本，卻也可能在組織內部產生角色衝突、職涯停滯、知識傳承落差及績效制度失衡等問題，進而影響組織運作與員工心理狀態。因此，本研究以延退制度下之組織矛盾為研究核心，探討中高齡員工於延退制度下所衍生之組織管理問題，並進一步提出創新管理策略與決策排序架構。
本研究首先透過文獻分析與專家訪談，整理延退制度下之主要問題，並運用 RCA+（Root Cause Analysis Plus）進行根源衝突分析，以辨識延退制度下之核心組織矛盾。接續導入 TRIZ 理論之商業矛盾矩陣與創新原則，建立對應之創新管理策略。其後，透過 AHP（Analytic Hierarchy Process）進行權重分析，評估各根源衝突與管理策略之相對重要性，並進一步結合 MCDM（Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making）方法，建立管理策略之整體排序與短、中、長期推動建議。
研究結果顯示，延退制度下之核心問題主要包含知識傳承機制缺乏制度化設計、組織缺乏整體因應延退制度之管理策略、組織對高齡員工角色定位不明確，以及績效評估制度未因應延退制度調整等問題。其中，以建立退休前知識移轉與接班規劃機制、建立動態人力資源調整制度、建立高齡友善工作設計與彈性工時，以及建立延退前績效制度調整機制等策略，具有較高之優先推動性。
本研究除補充延退制度與中高齡勞動研究之理論觀點外，亦將 TRIZ 方法導入人力資源管理研究領域，並整合 RCA+、TRIZ、AHP 與 MCDM 建立系統化決策架構，可作為未來企業因應高齡化與延退制度之管理參考。

As population aging and declining birth rates continue to intensify,postponed retirement policies have gradually become an important strategy for governments and enterprises to address labor shortages. Although postponed retirement policies may help extend labor force participation and accumulate human capital, they may also generate organizational issues such as role conflicts, career stagnation, gaps in knowledge transfer, and imbalance in performance management systems, thereby affecting organizational operations and employees’ psychological conditions. Therefore, this study focuses on organizational contradictions arising under postponed retirement policies and explores the organizational management issues faced by middle-aged and older employees within such contexts. Furthermore, this study proposes innovative management strategies and a decision-making prioritization framework.
This study first employed literature review and expert interviews to identify the major issues associated with postponed retirement policies. RCA+ (Root Cause Analysis Plus) was then adopted to analyze root conflicts and identify the core organizational contradictions generated under postponed retirement systems. Subsequently, the business contradiction matrix and inventive principles of TRIZ theory were introduced to establish corresponding innovative management strategies. Thereafter, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was applied to evaluate the relative importance of root conflicts and management strategies. In addition, Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods were integrated to construct an overall prioritization framework and propose short-, medium-, and long-term implementation strategies.
The results indicate that the major issues under postponed retirement policies include the lack of institutionalized knowledge transfer mechanisms, the absence of comprehensive organizational strategies for postponed retirement, unclear role positioning for older employees, and performance evaluation systems that fail to adapt to postponed retirement policies. Among the proposed strategies, establishing pre-retirement knowledge transfer and succession planning mechanisms, developing dynamic human resource adjustment systems, implementing age-friendly job design and flexible working arrangements, and revising performance evaluation systems prior to postponed retirement were identified as the highest-priority strategies.
This study not only contributes to the theoretical perspectives on postponed retirement policies and middle-aged and older workforce research, but also introduces the TRIZ methodology into the field of human resource management research. By integrating RCA+, TRIZ, AHP, and MCDM into a systematic decision-making framework, this study provides practical managerial implications for enterprises responding to population aging and postponed retirement policies in the future.

中文文獻
1. 國家發展委員會。（2024）。《中華民國人口推估（2024年至2070年）》。
2. 中技社。（2022）。《人口結構老化對於我國產業與社會的影響和因應－延後退休年齡之機會與挑戰》。
3. 馬財專、余珮瑩。（2024）。〈國內中高齡者及高齡者就業法制與政策之探索〉。《社區發展季刊》，187，頁碼待補。
4. 104資訊科技股份有限公司。（2025）。〈企業人才永續的新思維：超高齡社會〉。
5. 法務部全國法規資料庫。（2024）。《勞動基準法》第 54 條。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawSingle.aspx?pcode=N0030001&flno=54
6. 勞動部。（2023）。《勞雇雙方協商延後退休年齡及退休後再僱用參考指引》。https://www.mol.gov.tw/1607/1632/1633/87498/
7. 勞動部。（2023）。《中高齡者及高齡者就業促進計畫（2023–2025 年，修正版）》。https://ws-45plus.wda.gov.tw/001/Upload/1/relfile/0/35870/6c2267c6-2b8e-4f8a-aee5-f0dcdb9085d9.pdf
8. 勞動部。（2024）。〈勞雇雙方得協商延後強制退休年齡，鼓勵勞工續留職場〉。https://www.mol.gov.tw/1607/1632/1633/70361/post
9. 勞動部。（2025）。〈缺工嗎？勞動部推 3 年計畫助企業進用壯世代生力軍！〉。https://www.mol.gov.tw/1607/1632/1640/59970/post
10. 劉昭雄。（2024）。〈勞基法新修！第 54 條修正重點：65 歲強制退休年齡可協商再延後〉。《SCS 人力資源》，2024(11)。https://www.scshr.com/newsletter_post/2024/11/23625/
11. 高旭繁。（2023）。〈平衡的藝術—家庭責任與工作需求之間的企業策略〉。勞動部 45+ 銀髮就業專欄。https://45plus.wda.gov.tw/News_Content2.aspx?n=42&s=6216
12. 賴志宗。（2024）。〈如何透過企業導師指導行為減緩中高齡員工的職涯停滯？專家解析關鍵三個重要因素〉。jteach 教師專業發展平台。https://cloud.jteach.com/archives/10184
13. 陸憊憊。（2019）。〈從社會繼續理論探討現今高齡人力資源再運用的策略〉。《福祉科技與服務管理學刊》，7(3)，236–251。https://doi.org/10.6283/JOCSG.2019.07.3.236
14. 陳偉星。（2015）。〈A TRIZ Approach to Human Resource Management〉。《國際系統創新期刊》，3(3)，13–25。https://doi.org/10.6977/IJoSI.201503_3(3).0002
英文文獻
1. Altshuller, G. S. (1984). Creativity as an exact science. Gordon and Breach.
2. Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., & Ulrich, D. (2001). The HR scorecard: Linking people, strategy, and performance. Harvard Business School Press.
3. Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181.
4. Chang, P. C., Geng, X., & Cai, Q. (2024). The impact of career plateaus on job performance: The roles of organizational justice and positive psychological capital. Behavioral Sciences, 14(2), 144. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14020144
5. Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700536001
6. Ference, T. P., Stoner, J. A. F., & Warren, E. K. (1977). Managing the career plateau. Academy of Management Review, 2(4), 602–612.
7. Frone, M. R. (2003). Work–family balance. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 143–162). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10474-007
8. Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 9–22.
9. Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work–family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 72–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.19379625
10. Hu, C., Zhang, S., Chen, Y.-Y., & Lambert Griggs, T. (2021). A meta-analytic study of subjective career plateaus. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 130, 103621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103621
11. Huaman-Ramirez, R., & Lahlouh, N. (2023). Understanding career plateaus and their relationship with coworker social support and organizational commitment. Public Organization Review, 23(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-022-00621-0
12. Hwang, C.-L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer.
13. Ilmarinen, J. (2006). Health in the world of work: Workplace health promotion as a tool for improving and extending work life (Reports of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 2006:62). Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.
14. Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. Wiley.
15. Kast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1972). General systems theory: Applications for organization and management. Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 447–465.
16. Mann, D. (2002a). Systematic win-win problem solving in a business environment. The TRIZ Journal.
17. Mann, D. (2002b). Hands-on systematic innovation. CREAX Press.
18. Mann, D. (2007). Hands on systematic innovation for business and management. IFR Press.
19. Mann, D. (2018). Hands-on systematic innovation for business and management. IFR Press.
20. OECD. (2019). Working better with age. https://www.oecd.org/els/emp/ageingandemploymentpolicies.htm
21. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill.
22. Saaty, T. L. (1994). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory. RWS Publications.
23. Saaty, T. L. (1994). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces, 24(6), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.24.6.19
24. Souchkov, V. (2005). Breakthrough thinking with TRIZ for business and management. ICG Training & Consulting.
25. Souchkov, V. (2007). Breakthrough thinking with TRIZ for business and management: An overview. ICG Training & Consulting.
26. Wind, Y., & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science, 26(7), 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.26.7.641
27. Yang, H. C., Wang, S. H., & Lin, K. C. (2019). Employer mentoring, psychological social support, career support, and career plateau among Taiwanese employees. Career Development International, 24(3), 246–263. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-10-2018-0230
28. Yang, W.-N., Wang, Y.-H., Doden, W., & Wang, P.-Y. (2025). Revisiting the relationship between career plateau and job performance: A social-cognitive perspective. Applied Psychology, 74(1), e70002. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.70002
29. Yang, Y. (2018). Career plateau: A review of 40 years of research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 107, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.05.001
30. Zahidi, F. (1986). The analytic hierarchy process—a survey of the method and its applications. Interfaces, 16(4), 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.16.4.96
31. Zook, C., & Allen, J. (2011). The great repeatable business model. Harvard Business Review.