在企業永續轉型與社會信任重建成為核心挑戰的當代情境中，人文價值雖頻繁出現在企業論述與政策倡議之中，實則在實際經營決策中仍難以內嵌於策略主體。過往文獻多將人文導向視為倫理補充或形象訴求，缺乏一套可操作、可分類、可推演的策略分析語言，使得企業即便具備價值意識，亦難將其制度化或轉化為長期競爭優勢。本研究即試圖回應此一結構性落差，提出一套人文價值可系統性進入策略設計之路徑，並建構 HBS-4 多層次人文導向策略分析架構以作為企業策略分類與演化的分析工具。
本研究以策略管理、組織治理與人文創新等相關理論為基礎，結合生成式 AI 協作的研究方式，透過分類對話、邏輯拆解與語意重構，逐步建構出由產品層次、廠商層次、集團層次與生態層次所組成的四層次分析模型。各層次對應不同治理範疇與價值主體，並展現人文導向策略於企業內部治理結構中之具體樣貌。研究者進一步以八個異質性實務個案進行分類與交叉驗證，檢視該架構之區辨性、適切性與分類正當性。
研究發現，不同層次之人文導向策略具有顯著差異：產品層次強調使用者參與與價值敘事的設計轉譯；廠商層次聚焦於制度化回應社會問題與資源配置正義；集團層次著眼於跨部門願景整合與策略性社會資源佈局；而生態層次則指向多邊共構、去商品化與價值網絡治理邏輯。除靜態分類外，研究亦觀察到企業於不同治理條件下進行策略跳轉（strategic level shift）的可能性，並藉由個案評估其所需組織條件與價值敘事轉化能力。
本研究不僅建構出一套可用於辨識、比較與引導人文導向策略之分析架構，亦透過 AI協作展現出知識生成的另類路徑，進一步為人文、策略與 AI 三者之間的耦合關係建立對話語言。研究成果預期可為企業發展價值導向策略、實現制度性轉型，以及學術界拓展策略理論於人文實踐領域中的理論進路提供具體基礎與分析工具。

In response to growing demands for corporate sustainability and social trust reconstruction, humanistic values have been increasingly advocated in business discourse. However, they often remain peripheral in strategic decision-making. Existing literature tends to treat humanistic orientation as ethical decoration or brand positioning, lacking a structured and actionable framework for integrating values into governance and strategy. Addressing this gap, this study proposes the HBS-4 framework—an analytical model enabling the classification, articulation, and progression of humanistic-oriented strategies across four business levels.
Grounded in theories of strategic management, organizational governance, and humanistic innovation, the research integrates generative AI collaboration as a method for semantic reflection and framework refinement. The HBS-4 framework identifies four levels—Product, Firm, Corporate Group, and Ecosystem—each with distinct value subjects, strategic logics, and operational scopes. The framework was validated through eight heterogeneous case studies, assessing its discriminatory power and practical applicability.
Findings reveal significant differences across levels: product-level initiatives emphasize user participation and narrative design; firm-level strategies focus on institutional responses to social issues; group-level approaches highlight visionary alignment and cross-unit resource allocation; ecosystem-level strategies foster multi-stakeholder collaboration and value de-commodification. The study also observes the potential for strategic "level shifts," where organizations transition from one level to another, requiring specific governance conditions and narrative capabilities.
This research contributes a structured language for identifying and comparing humanistic strategies and demonstrates a novel method of human–AI collaborative theory building. The HBS-4 framework offers practical insights for organizations seeking to integrate humanistic values into strategic planning and provides a conceptual foundation for advancing value-based strategic theory in the age of AI.

一、中文文獻
王翔泰、田燿瑄、高華成、郭怡汎、謝宜臻（2017）。華山1914文創產業園區ROT 案。國立政治大學科技管理與智慧財產研究所及台灣文創發展股份有限公司。
吳思華（1996, 2000）。策略九說：策略思考的本質。臉譜出版社。
吳思華（2022）。尋找創新典範3.0：人文創新H-EHA模式。遠流出版社。
吳思華、邱明慧（2023）。Coursera (A) 新數位學習生態系的誕生。政大商管個案中心（12-CC-05）。
沈菁菁（2023）。利益、善意、倡議：社會企業實踐包容創新的經營模式研究。國立政治大學商學院科技管理與智慧財產研究所碩士學位論文。
黃韵軒（2023）。無聲勝有聲：循環經濟下的場景創新策略 －以W春池計畫為例。國立政治大學商學院科技管理與智慧財產研究所碩士學位論文。
陳懿軒（2023）。共生到共創：區域生態系的調適歷程。國立政治大學商學院科技管理與智慧財產研究所碩士學位論文。
劉世慶、別蓮蒂（2024）。合樸農學市集──社群支持的競爭力。政大商管個案中心（05-IC-01）。
羅明琇、洪志豪（2020）。現實與理想的拔河？綠藤生機案例。政大商管個案中心（09-IC-02）。
蘇威傑（2024）。花王：共創 Kirei 美好永續生活。政大商管個案中心（13-IC-02）。

二、英文文獻
Baker, T., Miner, A., & Eesley, D. (2019). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Journal of Business Venturing, 34(4), 462–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.04.003
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440. https://www.jstor.org/stable/29780265
Binns, R. (2018). Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 149–159). PMLR. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/binns18a.html
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2017). Artificial intelligence, for real. Harvard Business Review. https://starlab-alliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/AI-Article.pdf
Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018). Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2133), 20180080. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0080
Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018). Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2133), 20180080. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0080
Chandler, J., & Chen, S. (2015). Prosumer motivations in service experiences. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 25(2), 220–239. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-09-2013-0195
Cho, C. H., Laine, M., Roberts, R. W., & Rodrigue, M. (2015). CSR disclosure: The more things change…. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 28(1), 14–35. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273307428_CSR_disclosure_The_more_things_change
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159234
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159839
Foss, N. J., & Saebi, T. (2018). Business models and business model innovation: Between wicked and paradigmatic problems. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.07.006
George, G., Baker, T., Tracey, P., & Joshi, H. (2019). Inclusion and innovation: A call to action. In A. Editor (Ed.), Inclusion and innovation (pp. 123–145). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786436016.00008
Gerwe, O., & Silva, R. (2020). Clarifying the sharing economy: Conceptualization, typology, antecedents, and effects. Academy of Management Perspectives, 34(1), 65–96. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2017.0010
Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M. B. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Perspectives, 17(2), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.2003.10025194
Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556659
Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 611–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2021). Humanizing strategy. Long Range Planning, 54(1), Article 102070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2021.102070
Palo, T., Mason, K., & Roscoe, P. (2018). Performing a myth to make a market: The construction of the “magical world” of Santa. Organization Studies, 41(1), 53–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618789192
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011, January–February). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–77. https://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-value
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20141992
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7
United Nations. (2015). The 17 goals. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/goals
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
Whittington, R. (2019). Opening strategy: Professional strategists and practice change, 1960 to today. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198738893.001.0001