隨著知識資產成為組織競爭力的最重要來源，知識管理也已經成為管理科學最重要的研究議題之一，建構於不同理論基礎的知識管理模式紛紛被提出來。在本研究中，我們提出以生態學的理論觀點來分析組織知識管理的問題。生態學可以視為巨觀的生物學，它以宏觀、動態的角度去思考生態系統內的問題，因為其理論的嚴謹性，也常常被其他的領域所引用。
本研究首先分析、整理生態學理論觀點，並從中建立了生態理論模型—DICE模式，用以解釋族群在生態系統內的生態關係。DICE模式主要定義了四個階段的生態關係，分別是分佈（Distribution）、互動（Interaction）、競爭（Competition）、演化（Evolution）。其次，我們將組織視為一個知識生態系統，組織的不同知識能力則是生態系統內的知識族群，在組織內保持一種動態的平衡關係。我們並將DICE模式應用到組織的知識生態環境之中，組織內的知識管理問題則被定義成知識分佈、知識互動、知識競爭、知識演化四個生態構面，進而觀察以這四個知識生態構面對於組織的知識管理績效之間的影響關係。
為了驗證知識生態的理論，本研究首先進行了個案研究，探索個案公司中知識管理的推動現況，以實地的資料來詮釋知識生態的各個研究構面，並以個案研究的結果來修訂知識生態研究構面的操作型定義。其次，我們以問卷調查研究，對知識生態與組織知識管理績效之間的關係進行驗證。結果發現，知識管理資訊系統的應用會影響組織的知識生態發展，並進而影響到組織的知識管理推動績效。藉由生態學的理論基礎，本研究建立了組織的知識生態模型，提出生態觀點的創新模型來探索組織內知識管理的問題。我們期望能夠在學術研究上建立創新的知識管理研究架構，做為後續知識管理研究的參考，並為企業經營提供更為有效的知識管理策略建議。

Research in knowledge management has gained much attention in recent years. In the past, the process view that focuses on the creation, organization, sharing, and application of explicit and tacit knowledge has dominated knowledge management research. In this study, we propose an alternative view that examines the dynamic relationships of knowledge from an ecological perspective. The DICE model developed from relevant ecological concepts is proposed. The model consists of four major dimensions in measuring the status of organizational knowledge management: knowledge distribution, interaction, competition and evolution. These four elements interact with each other and evolve over time to form a knowledge ecology in an organization.
The DICE model is supported by a qualitative case study in this research. Evidence collected through interviews in a large semi-conductor packaging company indicate the existence of these dimensions. A quantitative survey was then conducted to examine the relationships between these knowledge ecology constructs and organizational performance. The results show that different knowledge ecology do affect knowledge management performance. Therefore, the DICE model can be used to measure the knowledge ecology of an organization and managers can use the model to assess their knowledge ecology and make improvement in order to enhance organizational performance.

第一章、導論 1
第一節、研究背景與動機 1
第二節、研究目的 4
第三節、研究流程 5
第四節、論文架構 7
第二章、文獻探討 8
第一節、知識管理研究的發展 8
第二節、生態學的發展 17
第三節、DICE模式 19
第四節、生態理論在管理研究上的應用 25
第三章、知識生態模型 31
第一節、知識生態的定義 31
第二節、知識生態的研究構面 38
第四章、知識生態的個案分析 46
第一節、個案研究策略 46
第二節、個案公司簡介 49
第三節、個案的知識生態分析 55
第五章、知識生態與績效之關係 68
第一節、研究架構與假說 68
第二節、變數操作型定義及問卷設計 76
第三節、資料收集方法 86
第六章、資料分析 87
第一節、資料蒐集結果 87
第二節、研究假說之驗證 97
第三節、DICE循環檢定 114
第七章、結論與建議 116
第一節、研究結論 116
第二節、研究貢獻 119
第三節、研究限制與未來研究方向 121
參考文獻 123
附錄一、研究問卷 132

[1] 林東清，「知識管理」，智勝出版，2003年。
[2] 孫儒泳、李博、諸葛陽、尚玉昌，「普通生態學」，藝軒圖書出版，2000年。
[3] 孫藹彬，「台灣資訊軟體產業發展之生態演進分析」，國立中央大學資管系博士論文，1998年。
[4] 周龍鴻著，「日月光知識管理」，收錄於蔡振昌主編，「全球華人知識管理推動實務」，中國生產力中心，2003年。
[5] Arthur Andersen Business Consulting著，劉京偉譯，「知識管理的第一本書」，商周出版社，2000年。
[6] Maxwell, J. A.著，高熏芳、林盈助、王向葵譯，「質化研究設計」，心理出版社，2001年。
[7] Agarwal, R., Sarkar, M., and Echambadi, R. “The Conditioning Effect of Time on Firm Survival: An Industry Life Cycle Approach,” Academy of Management Journal (45:5), 2002, pp. 971-994.
[8] Alavi, M., and Leidner, D. E. “Knowledge Management Systems: Issues, Challenges, and Benefits,” Communication of the AIS (1), 1999.
[9] Alavi, M., and Leidner, D. E. “Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues,” MIS Quarterly (25:1), 2001, pp. 107-136.
[10] Amburgey, T. L., and Rao, H. “Organisational Ecology: Past, Present and Future Directions,” Academy of Management Journal (39:5), 1996, pp. 1265-1286.
[11] Argote, L., McEvily, B., and Reagans, R. “Managing Knowledge in Organizations: An Integrative Framework and Review of Emerging Themes,” Management Science (49:4), 2003, pp. 571-582.
[12] Auyang, S. Y. Foundations of Complex-system Theories: in Economics, Evolutionary Biology and Statistical Physics, Cambridge University press, NY, 1998.
[13] Barnes, S. Knowledge Management Systems: Theory and Practice, International Thomson Business Press, 2002.
[14] Barnett, W.P. “The Organizational Ecology Of A Technological System,” Administrative Science Quarterly (35), 1990, pp. 31-60.
[15] Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychology Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (51:6), 1986, pp. 1173-1182.
[16] Barua, A., Kriebel, C. H., and Mukhopadhyay, T. “Information Systems and Business Value: An Analytic and Empirical Investigation,” Information Systems Research (6:1), 1995, pp. 1-24.
[17] Bartoli, J., and Botel, M. Reading/Learning Disability：An Ecological Approach, Teachers College Press, N.Y., 1988.
[18] Becerra-Fernandez, I. and Sabherwal, R. “Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contingency Perspective,” Journal of Management Information Systems (18:1), 2001, pp. 23-55.
[19] Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., and Mead, M. “The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems,” MIS Quarterly (11:3), 1987, pp. 363-386.
[20] Bharadwaj, A. S. “A Resource-based Perspective on Information Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation,” MIS Quarterly (24:1), 2000, pp. 169-196.
[21] Bieber, M., Engelbart, D., Furuta, R., Hiltz, S. R., Noll, J., Preece, J., Stohr, E. A, Turoff, M., and Walle, B. “Toward Virtual Community Knowledge Evolution,” Journal of Management Information Systems (18:4), 2002, pp. 11-35.
[22] Billinfer, A. S., and Smith, R. D. “Managing Organizational Knowledge as a Strategic Asset,” Journal of Knowledge Management (5:1), 2001, pp. 8-18.
[23] Blanchard, O. J., and Fischer, S. Lectures on Macroeconomics, MIT press, Cambridge, MA, 1989.
[24] Bronfenbrenner, U. The ecology of human development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1979.
[25] Boeker, W. “Organizational Strategy: An Ecological Perspective,” Academy of Management Journal (34:3), 1991, pp. 613-635.
[26] Boyton, A. C., Zmud, R. W., and Jacobs, G. C. “The Influence of IT Management Practice on IT use in Large Organization,” MIS Quarterly (18:3), 1994, pp. 299-318.
[27] Bruderer, E. and Singh, J. “Organizational Evolution, Learning, and Selection: A Genetic-Algorithm-Based Model,” Academy of Management Journal (39:5), 1996, pp.1322-1349.
[28] Burgelman, R.A. “Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Filed Research,” Organization Science (2:3), 1991, pp. 239-262.
[29] Campbell, D.T. "Variation and Selection Retention in Sociocultural Evolution," General Systems (14), 1969, pp. 69-85.
[30] Carroll, G. R. Ecological Models of Organizations, Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, 1988.
[31] Carroll, G. R., and Hannan, M. T. Organizations in Industry: Strategy, Structure, and Selection, Oxford University press, NY, 1995.
[32] Carpenter, M. A. “The Implications of Strategy and Social Context for the Relationship between Top Management Team Heterogeneity and Firm Performance,” Strategic Management Journal (23:3), 2002, pp. 275-284.
[33] Carte, T. C., and Rusell, C. J. “In Pursuit of Moderation: Nine Common Errors and Their Solutions,” MIS Quarterly (27:3), 2003, pp. 475-501.
[34] Chase, R. “The Knowledge-Based Organization: An International Survey,” Journal of Knowledge Management (1:1), 1997, pp. 38–49.
[35] Cohen, W. M., and Levinthal, D .A. “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly (35:1), 1990, pp. 128–152.
[36] Cummings, J. N. "Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge