| 研究生: |
彭志誠 Peng, Chih-Cheng |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
4C銷售策略應用在台達電智慧製造組織轉型案例研究 A Case Study of Applying 4C Sales Strategy to the Organizational Transformation of Delta Electronics toward Smart Manufacturing |
| 指導教授: |
巫立宇
Wu, L. W. |
| 口試委員: |
林智偉
Lin, Chih-Wei 林宜霓 Lin, Yi-Ni |
| 學位類別: |
碩士
Master |
| 系所名稱: |
商學院 - 經營管理碩士學程(EMBA) Executive Master of Business Administration(EMBA) |
| 論文出版年: | 2025 |
| 畢業學年度: | 114 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 56 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 4C 銷售策略 、智慧製造 、動態能力 、組織設計 、平台治理 、台達電子 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | 4C Sales Strategy, Smart Manufacturing, Dynamic Capabilities, Organization Design, Platform Governance, Delta Electronics |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:11 下載:0 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
面對全球製造業的數位化浪潮,台達電子自 2017 年起推動「智慧製造(Delta Smart Manufacturing, DSM)」計畫,致力於從自動化走向虛實整合。隨著 AOT (Advanced Operational Technology)成立、整合至 TDC (Technology Development Center),再到 2023 年形成 TIT (Technology Integration Team)組織,企業在組織結構、流程治理與文化溝通上皆面臨重大挑戰。研究者身為推動者之一,觀察到轉型過程中最大的阻力並非技術,而是「跨部門採納與認知落差」。
本研究以邱志聖(2020)之策略行銷 4C架構為理論基礎,將其「交換成本」概念轉化為組織內部的變革採納機制,並結合 Dynamic Capabilities 與 Organization Design 理論,採「行動研究法 (Action Research) + 個案研究法 (Case Study)」進行。研究資料來源包括 DSM/TIT 專案文件、BG/MFG 訪談紀錄、效益指標(KPI)與會議紀要。
主要發現: 4C 框架可有效解構組織轉型的採納阻力:C1 外顯單位效益成本 — 以 ROI 與 效益模型可視化成果;C2 資訊搜尋成本 — 透過 Showcase 與 Solution Library 促進知識循環;C3 道德風險成本 — 以 SLA 與即時驗證確保責任透明;C4 專屬陷入成本 — 藉 Open API 與 模組化設計維持彈性。這四構面與 TIT 的橫向平台治理形成互補,成功促進 DSM 落地。
本研究提出「4C–OD 整合模型」,證明 4C 不僅是外部行銷理論,更可作為企業內部的轉型採納架構。對 Delta 而言,TIT 已成為智慧製造的組織中樞,串聯 T1–T3 技術與 BG/MFG 營運。研究亦指出,成功轉型關鍵在於 C1 效益可視化、C2 知識透明化、C3 責任制度化、C4 架構模組化,藉此打造可持續的動態能力與平台治理機制。
In response to global digital-transformation trends, Delta Electronics launched the Delta Smart Manufacturing (DSM) program in 2017 to evolve from traditional automation toward a cyber-physical integration model. As AOT (Advanced Operational Technology) evolved into the TDC (Technology Development Center) and further into the TIT (Technology Integration Team) in 2023, Delta faced major challenges in organizational alignment, process governance, and cultural cohesion. The researcher, as a key change agent, observed that the primary barrier to transformation was not technology but cross-functional adoption and cognitive misalignment.
This study applies the 4C Sales Strategy framework (Chiou, 2010) as an analytical lens for internal transformation, redefining “exchange costs” as organizational adoption mechanisms. It integrates Dynamic Capabilities and Organization Design theories through a hybrid Action Research and Case Study approach. Data sources include TIT project reports, BG/MFG interviews, KPI dashboards, and DSM Forum records.
Key Findings: The 4C model effectively diagnoses transformation frictions: C1 makes ROI visible, C2 reduces information search costs via Showcases, C3 establishes transparent accountability through SLA and real-time verification, and C4 retains organizational flexibility through Open API and modularity. Together, these four dimensions complement TIT’s horizontal governance role, enhancing DSM implementation success.
A “4C–OD Integrated Model” is proposed, demonstrating that 4C is not merely a marketing concept but an internal transformation framework. For Delta, TIT acts as the organizational nervous system bridging T1–T3 technical verticals with BG/MFG operations. The findings highlight four success drivers: C1 visualization of effectiveness, C2 transparency of knowledge, C3 institutionalization of responsibility, and C4 modularization of architecture.
摘 要 2
Abstract 3
目 次 4
圖表目錄 5
第一章 緒 論 6
第一節 研究背景 6
第二節 研究動機與目的 7
第三節 研究對象與範圍 7
第四節 論文章節安排 8
第二章 文獻回顧 9
第一節 行銷的定義 9
第二節 4C 行銷策略 11
第三章 研究方法 18
第一節 研究架構 19
第二節 研究方法與步驟 22
第三節 研究對象與範圍 25
第四節 研究資料來源與分析方式 30
第五節 本章小結 34
第四章 案例分析 36
第一節 台達電子智慧製造(DSM)發展概況TIT 組織背景 36
第二節 4C 策略理論分析 40
第三節 本章小結 51
第五章 結論 52
參考文獻 56
1. 巫立宇、邱志聖(2021),銷售與顧客關係管理,台北市:新陸書局。
2. 邱志聖 (2020),策略行銷4C架構與企業採納邏輯研究 [The 4C Strategic Marketing Framework and Adoption Logic]. 國立政治大學商學研究所講義與專書資料.
3. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.
4. Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49.
5. Galunic, D. C., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2001). Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1229–1249
6. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7. Galbraith, J. R. (2014). Designing Organizations: Strategy, Structure, and Process at the Business Unit and Enterprise Levels (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
8. Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.). MIT Press.
9. Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32(5), 590–607.
10. Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
11. Porter, M. E., & Heppelmann, J. E. (2015). How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, 93(10), 96–114.
全文公開日期 2031/02/06