企業推展跨境數位服務時，最難的往往不是把系統帶出去，而是讓流程在異地被接納。 母國被視為效率的設計，到了異國可能被解讀成風險。企業因􏰀落入一種反常的張力: 越強調自動化，越容易引發不安;越加入互動，又可能被另一端市場視為不穩。本研究 以再脈絡視角提出研究問題:當原地邏輯與移地邏輯彼􏰀牴觸時，數位信貸服務應如何 調整，才能在跨境情境中被採用?研究以臺灣數位信貸服務導入越南的經驗為案例，沿 顧客旅程檢視三個階段——認知與決策、申貸與撥款、還款與催收——對照制度假設與 使用者在地行為之間的差距。研究發現顯示，衝突不是單一環節失靈，而是三段旅程的 連動牴觸，例如臺灣多以制度資訊、品牌背書與自助流程建立信任，越南則先靠人際引 介與場景互動取得安心。理論貢獻在於將「邏輯相斥」置於再脈絡研究的核心命題:制 度移轉的關鍵不在語言或介面，而在信任判定規則能否相容。本文指出，信任是在地關 係與場景中被反覆驗算的結果;因􏰀，跨境移轉必須先定位邏輯衝突點，才能解釋同一 套流程何以在一地被視為可靠、在另一地卻被解讀成風險。實務上，本文提出三項方向: 以旅程節點進行邏輯診斷，找出資訊、資金與責任在何處被誤讀;調整轉移策略，使通 路與前線承接信任，而非只靠品牌背書;將流程回饋與例外處理納入設計，讓使用者在 關鍵時刻清楚掌握狀態並獲得回應，降低疑慮並提升持續使用。最終，跨境數位服務的 成敗，不取決於功能多寡，而取決於制度能否在異地被信任。

When firms scale digital services across borders, the hardest task is rarely exporting the system; it is securing local acceptance of the process. Designs celebrated as “efficient” at home may be interpreted as “risky” abroad. This creates a practical paradox: greater automation can heighten user anxiety, yet added interaction can be read in other markets as a sign of instability. Building on a recontextualization perspective, we ask: When home-country logics and host-country logics clash, how should a digital lending service be adjusted to be adopted in a foreign setting? We examine the transfer of a Taiwanese digital consumer-loan service into Vietnam. Using a customer-journey lens, we compare three stages—awareness and decision, application and disbursement, and repayment and collection—to surface gaps between institutional assumptions embedded in the service and users’ situated ways of judging trust and risk. Our findings suggest that adoption failures do not stem from a single breakdown; they arise from interlocking clashes across the journey. For example, Taiwanese users typically anchor trust in institutional information, brand backing, and self-service completion, whereas Vietnamese users first seek assurance through interpersonal referral and situated, face-to-face engagement. Our theoretical contribution is to place “logic incompatibility” at the center of recontextualization research. Successful transfer hinges less on translating language or refining interfaces than on aligning the rules by which trust is evaluated. Trust, we show, is not an inherent property of the system; it is repeatedly tested within local relationships and settings. Consequently, cross-border transfer requires diagnosing where logics collide to explain why the same process appears reliable in one context yet is construed as risky in another. Practically, we offer three design directions: diagnose mis-readings at specific journey points (information, money movement, and responsibility); shift transfer strategy so channels and frontline actors carry trust rather than relying solely on brand reputation; and embed feedback and exception handling so users can verify status and receive timely responses at critical moments. Ultimately, cross-border digital services succeed not by adding features, but by becoming trustable where they land.

一、中文文獻
林雅萍，2022，「融合邏輯：創新再脈絡的轉譯過程」，《中山管理評論》，第5期，第30卷，頁899-946。
何明豐與林博文，2015，「移地邏輯：進入新興市場的服務模式演進」，《中山管理評論》，第23卷，第1期，頁91-135。
李貴惠、于卓民與司徒達賢，2009，多國公司執行區域策略對子公司的影響：貢獻型子公司組織角色的改變，《管理評論》，2卷28期：1-24。
羅顯辰、許文靜、吳清炎與胡美智，2018，臺灣中小企業進入新興市場之服務模式初探：以印尼為例，《產業與管理論壇》，20卷3期：56-77。
蕭瑞麟，2020，(第五版)《不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辨脈絡》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。
蕭瑞麟、林雅萍，2024，「在地轉譯：創新再脈絡的在地調適樣貌」，《組織與管理》，第17卷，第1期，頁53-104。
蕭瑞麟、廖啟旭與陳蕙芬，2011，「越淮為枳：從實務觀點分析跨情境資訊科技移轉」，《資訊管理學報》，第18卷，第2期，頁131-160。
二、英文文獻
Aggerholm, H. K., Asmuß, B., & Thomsen, C. 2012. The role of recontextualization in the multivocal, ambiguous process of strategizing. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(4): 413-428.
Ansari, S., Reinecke, J., & Spaan, A. 2014. How are practices made to vary? Managing practice adaptation in a multinational corporation. Organization Studies, 35(9): 1313-1341.
Ansari, S. M., Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. 2010. Made to Fit: How practices vary as they diffuse. Academy of Management Review, 35(1): 67-92.
Berchtold, S., Pircher, R., & Stadler, C. 2010. Global integration versus local adaptation: A case study of Austrian MNCs in Eastern Europe. European Journal of International Management, 4.
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. 2014. Multiple insitutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3): 364-381.
Boone, C., Özcan, S., & Li, J. 2022. How are competing logics combined in managerial teams? The impact of branch founding team hybridity on the growth of Islamic Bank Branches in Turkey, 2002–19. Journal of Management Studies, 59(6): 1460-1492.
Boxenbaum, E., & Battilana, J. 2005. Importation as innovation: Transposing managerial practices across fields. Strategic Organization, 3(4): 355-383.
Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Recontextualization, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29(4): 593-616.
Dalpiaz, E., Rindova, V., & Ravasi, D. 2016. Combining logics to transform organizational agency: Blending industry and art at Alessi. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(3): 347-392.
Elsbach, K. D. 1994. Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(1): 57-88.
Frenkel, M. 2005. The politics of translation: How state-level political relations affect the cross-national travel of management ideas. Organization, 12(2): 275-301.
Geertz, C. 1983. Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. New York: Basic Books.
Gertsen, M. C., & Zølner, M. 2012. Recontextualization of the corporate values of a Danish MNC in a subsidiary in Bangalore. Group & Organization Management, 37(1): 101-132.
Glaser, B. C., & Strauss, A. L. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Jensen, R., & Szulanski, G. 2004. Stickiness and the adaptation of organizational practices in cross-border knowledge transfers. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6): 508-523.
Kimmitt, J., Kibler, E., Schildt, H., & Oinas, P. 2024. Place in entrepreneurial storytelling: A study of cultural entrepreneurship in a deprived context. Journal of Management Studies, 61(3): 1036-1073.
Lam, A. 1997. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: Problem of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18(6): 973-996.
Landau, C., Karna, A., & Sailer, M. 2016. Business model adaptation for emerging markets: A case study of a German automobile manufacturer in India. R&D Management, 46(3): 480-503.
Lawrence, T. B. 2017. High-stakes institutional translation: Establishing North America’s first government-sanctioned supervised injection site. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5): 1771-1800.
Leung, F. F., Tse, C. H., & Yim, C. K. 2019. Engaging customer cocreation in new product development through foreign subsidiaries: Influences of multinational corporations’ global integration and local adaptation mechanisms. Journal of International Marketing, 28(2): 59-80.
Li, H., Chang, Y., Wang, X., & Zhang, N. 2024. Institutional complexity and corporate environmental investments: Evidence from China's Mixed-Ownership Reform of State-Owned Enterprises. Management and Organization Review, 20(5): 716-747.
Lounsbury, M., & Glynn, M. A. 2001. Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7): 545–564.
Malhotra, N., Zietsma, C., Morris, T., & Smets, M. 2021. Handling resistance to change when societal and workplace logics conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(2): 475-520.
Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R., & Narula, R. 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2): 235-252.
Peltokorpi, V., & Vaara, E. 2012. Language policies and practices in wholly owned foreign subsidiaries: A recontextualization perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(9): 808-833.
Purdy, J. M., & Gray, B. 2009. Conflicting logics, mechanisms of diffusion and multilevel dynamics in emerging institutional fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2): 355-380.
Shams, F., & Huisman, J. 2014. The role of institutional dual embeddedness in the strategic local adaptation of international branch campuses: Evidence from Malaysia and Singapore. Studies in Higher Education.
Smets, M., Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G. T., & Spee, P. 2015. Reinsurance trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing conflicting-yet-complimentary logics in practice. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3): 932-970.
Suddaby, R., & Royston, G. 2005. Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1): 35-67.
Thomas, P. 2003. The recontextualization of management: A discourse-based approach to analysing the development of management thinking. Journal of Management Studies, 40(4): 775-801.
Thornton, P. H. 2002. The rise of the corporation in a craft Industry: Conflict and conformity in institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1): 81-101.
Tracey, P., Dalpiaz, E., & Phillips, N. 2018. Fish out of water: Translation, legitimation, and new venture creation. Academy of Management Journal, 61(5): 1627-1666.
Värlander, S., Hinds, P., Thomason, B., Pearce, B. M., & Altman, H. 2015. Enacting a constellation of logics: How transferred practices are recontextualized in a global organization. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2(1): 79-107.
Yanow, D. 2004. Translating local knowledge at organizational peripheries. British Journal of Management, 15(1): 9-25.
Yin, R. K. 1994. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yu, J., & Zaheer, S. 2010. Building a process model of local adaptation of practices: A study of Six Sigma implementation in Korean and US firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(3): 475-499.
Zott, C., & Huy, Q. N. 2007. How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1): 70-105.