進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-0102201511190300
論文名稱(中文) 創意專案關係人對早期職涯設計師之創意自主性研究–以台灣平面設計產業為例
論文名稱(英文) A Study of the Creative Project Stakeholders’ Influence on Early Career Designer’s Creative Autonomy-the Perspective of Taiwan Graphic Design Industry
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 創意產業設計研究所
系所名稱(英) Institute of Creative Industry Design
學年度 103
學期 1
出版年 104
研究生(中文) 羅紫君
研究生(英文) Tzu-Chun Lo
學號 PA6014060
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 118頁
口試委員 指導教授-仲曉玲
口試委員-張岑瑤
口試委員-王瑜琳
中文關鍵字 創意自主性  人才  專案管理  專案利害關係人  設計產業 
英文關鍵字 Creative autonomy  Talent  Project management  Project stakeholder  Design Industry 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本研究主旨為探討創意專案利害關係人對設計師創意自主性之影響。現今探討專案管理或專案利害關係人之文獻多以專案經理人為研究觀點,其研究著重於專案經理人該如何有效管理專案,然而卻鮮少從設計師觀點探討組織或是專案的運行。此外,早期的研究多為商業型專案因此多注重於產值或利潤等量化研究。然而因設計產業為創意密集之產業,對於一般商業型專案著重於量的研究結果早已不適用。

對於此研究缺口,本研究從設計師觀點以質性之方式探討設計專案中等創意議題。本研究透過首先透過文獻整理,梳理出自主性、創意專案管理等相關理論,再透過實證的方式探究,其方法包括下列三個步驟:(1)透過深度訪談設計師找出專案中各利害關係人並調查其專案之網絡關係;(2)藉由深度訪談設計師調查創意自主性之特性;(3)透過多重個案研究分析調查各專案利害關係人如何影響專案之進行與設計師創意自主性。此外,在三個研究過程中運用多重個案法及內容分析法探究。

本研究結果顯示設計師的創意自主性包含創意發想自主性及創意執行自主性。在創意發想自主性階段中,年輕設計師除了要考量客戶的需求外,更需將公司的風格定位一並納入考量。此外,當年輕設計師於設計初期的涉入程度越高時,設計師對該專案會抱有較高的認同感;當設計師擁有越高的認同感會使設計專案的進行上更為順利。在創意執行自主性的面向發現設計師的專業能力為取得創意執行自主性的關鍵的因素,此專業能力包含口語表達能力、市場意識、設計美感以及製程知識。
英文摘要 This study investigates the influence of project stakeholders on designers’ creative autonomy. Most research in the project management and stakeholder fields takes the perspective of the managers to explore how they can manage the project in an efficient way. However, real understanding of the views from designers in an organization and in project teams is lacking. Furthermore, the traditional research on business-oriented projects is more focused on the output side (profit, quantity) in a project, and fails to identify the characteristics of projects in the design industry. Since the design industry consists of creativity-oriented projects, it is hard to evaluate it in a quantitative way using traditional measuring approaches.

With this gap in mind, this research elaborates the creative issues in a design project in a qualitative way, from the designers’ point of view. Three steps were conducted using the following research design: (1) interviewing designers to identify stakeholders and map the project network; (2) interviewing designers to investigate the characteristics of creative autonomy; and (3) using a multiple case study to investigate how stakeholders influence project development and designer’s creative autonomy. In addition, the multiple case study method and content analysis are also used to conduct this three-step research process for analyzing the qualitative data.

The research findings reveal that designer’s creative autonomy includes ACD and ACE. In the dimension of ACD, the results show that young designers not only need to take into consideration the requirements of clients but also the identity of their organizations in the process of creativity development. Second, the more involvement young designers have, the greater the sense of identification with the design project that they have, which will make the design project smoother. In the aspect of ACE, designers’ expertise, including design verbal expression, marketing awareness, the sense of beauty, and manufacturing knowledge, is the stepping stone for gaining more ACE.
論文目次 Table of Contents

CHAPTER1: Introduction 1
1.1 Research Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Research Objectives and Questions 8

CHAPTER2: Literature Review 10
2.1 Issues with Talent of CCI 11
2.1.1 Evolution of the Definition of Talent: From Nature to Nurture 11
2.1.2 Creativity-based Talent is the Workforce in CCI not Skill-based Talent 13
2.1.3 Overlooked Talent in CCI 15
2.1.4 Summary 15
2.2 Significance of Creative Autonomy 17
2.2.1 The Complexity of Creativity: from Individual-center Approach to Confluence Approach 17
2.2.2 Nature of Work Autonomy: Work Method Autonomy, Work Scheduling Autonomy, and Work Criteria Autonomy 27
2.2.3 The Significance of Creative Autonomy in CCI: Beyond Work Autonomy 28
2.2.4 Summary 30
2.3 Characteristic of Project and Project Management 31
2.3.1 Evolution and Definition of Project: from Operation-oriented Works to Client-driven Business 31
2.3.2 The Uniqueness of Design Project: Unpredictable and Quality-driven 34
2.3.3 Design Project Management: Market Level, Firm Level, and Society Level 35
2.3.4 Summary 37
2.4 Characteristic of Stakeholders 38
2.4.1 Definition of Project Stakeholders: Macro-scope of Stakeholders 38
2.4.2 Identification of Project Stakeholders 39
2.4.3 Summary 39

CHAPTER3: Research Design and Methods 41
3.1 Research Framework 41
3.1.1 Research Concept 41
3.1.2 Research Process 43
3.2 Research Method 44
3.2.1 In-depth Interview 44
3.2.2 Case Study 45
3.3 Data Collection Method 46
3.3.1 Criteria of Case Selection 47
3.3.2 Sampling Method 49
3.4 Data Analysis Method 53
3.4.1 Content Analysis 53
3.4.2 Thematic Analysis 53
3.4.3 Thematic Networks 54
3.4.4 Indicators Used in Creativity and Work Autonomy 54
3.4.5 Reliability and Validity 56

CHAPTER4:Data Analysis 58
4.1 Case Introduction: 3 Design Firms Value Young Talent 58
4.1.1 Sampling from Industry 58
4.1.2 Sampling from Young Designer 59
4.1.3 Sampling from Cases 60
4.2 Stakeholders in Design Process: the commonality, Differences, and Changing Roles 67
4.2.1 Initiating and Planning Stage 69
4.2.2 Design Stage 70
4.2.3 Executive Stage 71
4.2.4 Controlling Stage 72
4.2.5 Closing Stage 73
4.2.6 Summary 73
4.3 Understanding Creative Autonomy: Process-oriented and Distinct from Work Autonomy 76
4.3.1 Sense-setting: Young Designer’s Perception of Creativity in Design Field 76
4.3.2 Young Designer’s Perception of Creative Autonomy: Autonomy of Creativity Development and Autonomy of Creativity Execution 77
4.3.3 Summary 79
4.4 Main Affective Factors on Creative Autonomy in Each Design Process 80
4.4.1 Initiating and Planning Stage 80
4.4.2 Design Stage 82
4.4.3 Executive Stage 84
4.4.4 Controlling Stage 86
4.4.5 Closing Stage 89
4.5 Factors Affecting Creative Autonomy 91
4.5.1 Category of Factors Affecting Creative Autonomy 91
4.5.2 Mechanism of Factor Affecting Creative Autonomy 94

Chapter 5:Discussions and Implication 96
5.1 Creativity-based Talent as Skill-based Talent 96
5.2 Positive Effects of Stakeholders 97
5.3 Flexible and Process-oriented Creative Autonomy 98
5.4 The Invisible Framework at Work 99
5.5 Implications for Theory 101
5.6 Implications for Practice 102

Chapter 6:Conclusion 104
6.1 Conclusion 104
6.1.1 Design Project Network 104
6.1.2 Young Designers’ Perspective of Creative Autonomy 106
6.1.3 Factors Affecting Designers’ Creative Autonomy 107
6.2 Research Limitation 109
6.3 Suggestion for Further Study 109

References 111
Appendix 1 Interviewees’ Background 115
Appendix 2 Interview Outline 116
參考文獻 References

Amabile, T. M. (Ed.). (1996). Creativity and Innovation in Organizations.
Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385-405.
Bailyn, L. (1985). Autonomy in the industrial R&D lab. Human Resource Management, 24(2), 129-146.
Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? British Medical Journal, 322, 1115-1117.
Bollingtoft. (2007). A critical realist approach to quality in observation studies. In J. P. U. Helle Neergaard (Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Entrepreneurship: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Breaugh, J. A. (1985). The measurement of work autonomy. Human Relations, 38, 551-570.
Clarke, V. a. B., V. (2013). Teaching thematic analysis: overcoming challenges and developing strategies for effective learning. The Psychologist, 26(2), 120-123.
Ed Michaels, H. H.-J., Beth Axelrod. (2001). The War for Talent.
Fredric D. Frank, R. P. F., Craig R. Taylor, Talent Keepers. (2004). The Race for Talent: Retaining and Engaging Workers in the 21st Century. Human Resource Planning, 27(3), 12.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, pp. 159-170.
Helena Lopes, T. C., Diniz Lopes. (2013). Work autonomy and employee involvement in the EU – A multi-level analysis. Paper presented at the EAEPE.
Horowitz, F. D., Rena, F. S., Dona J. M. (2009). The Development of Giftedness and Talent Across the Lifespan: American Psychological Association.
Hu, C. (2005). Designing Crossover Design Curriculum. Paper presented at The Perspective of Crossover Design in the Future International Symposium.
Jane Ritchie, J. L. (2003). Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Kuzel, A. J. (1999). Sampling in Qualitative Inquiry: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Mathison, S. (1988). Why Triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), pp. 13-17.
McKinsey&Company. (2010). Innovation and commercialization, 2010: McKinsey Global Survey results. Retrieved 11/19, 2013, from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/innovation/innovation_and_commercialization_2010_mckinsey_global_survey_results
Meiseberg, B. (2013). Trust the Artist vs. Trust the Tale – Performance Implications of Talent and Self-Marketing in Folk Music. Journal of Cultural Economics, 38(1), pp 9-42.
Michaels, E., Handfield- Jones, H., Axelrod, B. (2001). The war for talent [Press release]
Mozota, B. B. d. (2003). Design Management: Allworth Press,U.S.
Newman, J. C., & Breeder, K. M. (1992). Managing in the Environmental Era: Lesson from Environmental Leaders. The Columbia Journal of World Business.
Oakley, M. (1990). Design Management: A Handbook of Issues and Methods: Blackwell Pub.
Okpara, F. O. (2007). the value of creativity and innovation in entrepreneurship. Journal of Asia Entrepreneurship and Sustainability.
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: SAGE Publications, Inc; 3rd edition.
PMI. (2004). What is Project Management? , from http://www.pmi.org/About-Us/About-Us-What-is-Project-Management.aspx
Robbins, T. J. S. (2006). Organizational Behavior: Prentice Hall.
Schon Beechler, I. C. W. (2009). The global "war for talent". Journal of International Management, 15, 273-285.
Shalley, C. E. (1991). Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 179-185.
Simon, L. (2005). Managing creative projects: An empirical synthesis of activities. International Journal of Project Management, 24(2), 116-126.
Smolak, L. (1993). Adult Development. Englewood, Cliffs. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The Nature of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 87-98.
Sung, T.-J. H., Shu-Shiuan. (2012). Environmental Uncertainty, Robust Design Capability, and Business Performance of Design Firms. Journal of Design, 17, p41-p58.
Suojanen, W. W. (1976). Creativity, management, and the minds of man. Human Resource Management, 15(1), 19-27.
Turki, J. (2012). Thinking Styles In Light of Sternberg's Theory Prevailing Among the Students of Tafila Technical University and Its Relationship with Some Variables. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2.
Ulrich, D. (2007). The Talent Trifecta. Workforce.
UNCTAD. (2011). Creative Economy Report 2010.
Usmani, F. (2012). Identify Stakeholders in Project Management. from http://pmstudycircle.com/2012/06/identify-stakeholders-project-management/
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case Study Research: Design and Methods SAGE Publications, Inc; Fifth Edition edition.

中文文獻

天下雜誌(2012)。哈默爾:「管理2.0」留住好人才(http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5043211&page=1)。
文化部(2013)。2012 台灣文化創意產業年報。
行政院(2002)。挑戰二〇〇八:國家發展重點計畫。
何明泉、宋同正、陳國祥、黃東明(1997)。影響設計策略之要素分析研究。設計學報,2(1),頁79-92。
宋同正、何舒軒(2012)。設計公司之環境不確定、穩健性設計能力和經營績效。設計學報,17,頁41-58。
李怡君(2007)。影響廚藝創造力的個人與環境因素之研究。
李筑音(2013)。不當控制狂,部屬才能轉大將。Cheers快樂工作人雜誌,155期。
林忻(2010)。比賽爭議 設計產業困境多(http://castnet.nctu.edu.tw/castnet/article/2467)。
林緯倫(2006)。不同創造力運作與認知抑制、工作記憶廣度間關係之探討。台灣大學。
桂勤(1996)。從儒家傳統走向現代的反思-中日人才觀的比較研究。湖北教育出版社。
莊立民、廖曜生(2003)。組織創新影響因素之研究-命題之建立與實證研究。發表自人文、科技、e世代人力資源發展學術研討會。
陶蕃瀛(1999)。社會工作專業發展的分析與展望。社區發展季刊,88期。
黃宇平(2005)。設計專案管理導入資源規劃模型之效益值研究。碩士論文,國立成功大學。
黃美玲(2006)。社會新鮮人的工作滿足、工作投入與組織承諾關係之研究-以成大應屆畢業校友94級為例。高雄師範大學。
黃國煌(2012)。設計產業創新經營模式之探討:以某工業設計公司為例。碩士論文,台灣大學。
楊坤原(2001)。創造力的意義及其影響因素。科學教育,88,頁33-36。
經濟部(2009)。設計產業發展旗艦計畫 98—102年。
經濟部(2011)。2011~2013設計服務產業專業人才供需調查。
經濟部(2012)。2011 設計產業發展年報。
葉玉珠(2005)。影響國小學童科技創意發展的因素之量表發展。師大學報,50(2)。
劉世南(2011)。創意‧創新‧創業 智慧工程的理論與實踐,麗文文化。
劉東、陳曉萍、姚欣(2012)。從自主到創新:和諧式激情中介作用。中國管理新視野。
鄧成連(1999)。設計管理—產品設計之組織、溝通與應用。亞太出版社。
鄧成連(2012)。臺灣設計競爭力之研究. 人文與社會科學簡訊,13(3),頁167-174.
鍾子偉(2010)。哈佛商學院教我的成功關鍵 : 世界頂尖商學院的學習經驗. 商周出版。
嚴家炎(1997)。評五四、文革與傳統文化的論爭。二十一世紀,42期,頁129-136。
游萬來、楊敏英、羅士孟(2014)。台灣初任工業設計師的工作與適應情形研究。設計學報,19(1),頁43-66。
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2015-02-24起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2016-02-24起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw