在全球電子產業朝向高精密化、高效能運算、AI 伺服器與先進封裝應用發展的背景下，台灣 PCB 產業面臨製程複雜度提升、品質追蹤需求增加、客戶回應速度加快，以及 ESG、資安與合規要求提高等挑戰。數位轉型已不再只是導入自動化設備或資訊系統，而是企業提升營運效率、品質穩定性與組織管理能力的重要途徑。因此，本研究以台灣 PCB 產業中具代表性之個案公司 U 為研究對象，探討其推動智慧製造與數位轉型之背景、歷程、影響因素與組織落地情形。
本研究採用單一個案研究法，以半結構式訪談作為主要資料來源，訪談對象包含兩位主管與三位員工，並輔以企業公開資料與產業資料作為背景補充。在分析架構上，本研究結合動態能力理論與 TOE 架構，以感知能力、捕捉能力與轉型能力作為數位轉型歷程之分析主軸，並從技術、組織與環境三個構面，探討影響個案公司數位轉型推動與落地的因素。
研究結果發現，個案公司 U 推動數位轉型的主要動機來自內部營運痛點與外部環境壓力。公司已展現一定的感知能力與捕捉能力，能夠辨識資料取得困難、品質追蹤效率不足、客訴處理時間較長及客戶要求提高等問題，並透過自動化導入、AI 應用、系統整合與資源配置加以回應。然而，技術導入後能否被流程吸收、被員工理解並進一步制度化，仍是後續深化轉型的關鍵。整體而言，個案公司 U 目前已具備一定的數位基礎，並正處於由「技術導入」走向「組織內化」的階段；後續應強化流程調整、人才培養、跨部門協作與回饋機制，使既有技術成果真正轉化為日常營運中的穩定管理能力。

Against the backdrop of the global electronics industry moving toward higher precision, high-performance computing, AI servers, and advanced packaging applications, Taiwan’s PCB industry is facing challenges such as increasing process complexity, growing demand for quality traceability, faster customer response requirements, and rising ESG, cybersecurity, and compliance expectations. Digital transformation is no longer merely about introducing automated equipment or information systems; rather, it has become an important means for firms to enhance operational efficiency, quality stability, and organizational management capabilities. Therefore, this study takes Company U, a representative firm in Taiwan’s PCB industry, as the research subject to examine the background, process, influencing factors, and organizational implementation of its smart manufacturing and digital transformation initiatives.
This study adopts a single-case study approach, using semi-structured interviews as the primary source of data. The interviewees include two managers and three employees, supplemented by publicly available corporate information and industry data as background references. In terms of analytical framework, this study integrates dynamic capabilities theory and the TOE framework. It uses sensing, seizing, and transforming capabilities as the main analytical dimensions of the digital transformation process, while examining the technological, organizational, and environmental factors that influence the promotion and implementation of digital transformation in the case company.The findings indicate that the main motivations for Company U’s digital transformation come from both internal operational pain points and external and seizing capabilities, as it is able to identify issues such as difficulty in data access, insufficient efficiency in quality tracking, long customer complaint handling times, and increasing customer requirements. It has responded to these issues through automation adoption, AI applications, system integration, and resource allocation. However, whether the introduced technologies can be absorbed into workflows, understood by employees, and further institutionalized remains the key to deepening future transformation. Overall, Company U has established a certain digital foundation and is currently moving from “technology implementation” toward “organizational internalization.” Going forward, the company should strengthen process adjustment, talent development, cross-departmental collaboration, and feedback mechanisms, so that existing technological outcomes can be effectively transformed into stable management capabilities in daily operations.

個案 U 公司。（2024）。2023 年度股東會年報。https://www.unimicron.com/money08.html
個案 U 公司。（2024）。2023 年永續報告書（ESG Report）。https://www.unimicron.com/esg/ch/ebook_list.html
朱子呈。（2026，1月26日）。AI 伺服器帶動 PCB 高值化，TPCA 估 2026 產值上看 1,052 億美元。經濟日報。https://money.udn.com/money/story/5612/9289354
台灣電路板協會。（2023，9月26日）。台 PCB 板廠市占全球第一，前十大廠包辦五家。https://www.tpca.org.tw/Message/Print/15498
台灣電路板協會。（2024，11月18日）。AI 伺服器和車用電子助攻，預估 2024年陸資 PCB 將成長至 267.9 億美元。
https://www.tpca.org.tw/Message/MessageView?id=26309&mid=283
台灣電路板協會。（2025，3月5日）。TPCA：2025 台商 PCB 產業產值年續增 4.6%，由 LEO 及 AI 需求領跑。
https://www.tpca.org.tw/message/MessageView?id=26838&mid=112
Baker, J. (2012). The technology–organization–environment framework. In Y. K. Dwivedi, M. R. Wade, & S. L. Schneberger (Eds.), Information systems theory: Explaining and predicting our digital society (Vol. 1, pp. 231–245). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6108-2_12
Davis, J., Edgar, T., Porter, J., Bernaden, J., & Sarli, M. (2012). Smart manufacturing, manufacturing intelligence and demand-dynamic performance. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 47, 145–156. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0098135412002219
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781405164054.ch21
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2247
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., & Helbig, J. (2013). Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative Industrie 4.0: Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. acatech– National Academy of Science and Engineering.
https://en.acatech.de/publication/recommendations-for-implementing-the-strategic-initiative-industrie-4-0-final-report-of-the-industrie-4-0-working-group/
Kane, G. C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A. N., Kiron, D., & Buckley, N. (2015). Strategy, not technology, drives digital transformation: Becoming a digitally mature enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University Press. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/projects/strategy-drives-digital-transformation/
Kusiak, A. (2018). Smart manufacturing. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1–2), 508–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1351644
Schumacher, A., Erol, S., & Sihn, W. (2016). A maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Procedia CIRP, 52, 161–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.07.040
Senna, P. P., Barros, A. C., Roca, J. B., & Azevedo, A. L. (2023). Development of a digital maturity model for Industry 4.0 based on the technology-organization-environment framework. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 185, 109645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2023.109645
Tabrizi, B., Lam, E., Girard, K., & Irvin, V. (2019). Digital transformation is not about technology. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/03/digital-transformation-is-not-about-technology
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of sustainable enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
https://sms.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)1 8:7%3C509::AID-SMJ882%3E3.0.CO;2-Z
Tornatzky, L. G., Fleischer, M., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (1990). The processes of t echnological innovation. Lexington Books.
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963868717302196
Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., & McAfee, A. (2014). Leading digital: Turning technology into business transformation. Harvard Business Review Press. https://books.google.com.tw/books/about/Leading_Digital.html?id=Fh9eBAAA QBAJ&redir_esc=y
Yin, R. K. (2018). 個案研究：設計與方法（周海濤、史少杰譯；第 5 版）。https://www.scribd.com/document/645046187
Zhou, K., Liu, T., & Zhou, L. (2015). Industry 4.0: Towards future industrial opportunities and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2015 12th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery (FSKD). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7382284