進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-1502201718240100
論文名稱(中文) 服務商品之商業創新模式研究
論文名稱(英文) Research Business Innovation Model of Service Commodity
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 Industries Design
學年度 102
學期 2
出版年 103
研究生(中文) 王泓斌
研究生(英文) Hung-Bin Wang
學號 PA8971022
學位類別 博士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 122頁
口試委員 指導教授-陸定邦
指導教授-孔憲法
口試委員-陳連福
口試委員-陳重任
口試委員-楊佳翰
口試委員-張育銘
口試委員-林天助
中文關鍵字 數位學習產業  服務創新  商業模式  混和輔導模式 
英文關鍵字 Digital learning industry  Service innovation  Business model  Hybrid tutoring mode 
學科別分類
中文摘要 近年來,數位學習的工具發展趨於成熟,數位學習更擁有不受時間與空間的限制、降低學習的時間成本、教材活潑多元化等特點,因此數位學習已變成使用者採取課後補救教學的選項之一。希望把以升學為導向的數位學習服務加值,透過創新商業模式將數位學習串接實體輔導機制,有效提高使用者的學習動機與學習成效,並藉由服務創新提高數位學習服務的差異化,因此如何滿足消費者對購買數位學習產品後的使用期待,是本研究所要探討的研究重點。
國高中生升學階段的數位學習課程,因使用者一般均屬於被動性的學習階段,因此使用者容易因學習動機不高、自我要求不足,而放棄使用數位學習工具; 其次在數位學習經常被質疑教材的完整性、沒有實體的輔導機制、學習互動性不佳等問題,導致使用者可能學習成效不彰; 另在銷售面上,目前數位學習教材是採取一次購足的銷售策略,因此提供使用者多年期的使用期限,導致高總價的數位學習商品,會讓使用者產生套牢或綁定現象,造成學習的轉換成本過高問題。
本研究採取使用者問卷調查、深度訪談等方式,透過商業模式的個案分析,將數位學習創建成一個更具競爭力的創新商業模式。目前的數位學習產品都是以單軌方式進行商品銷售,也就是由業務人員或店面所進行的行銷模式,後續只能由使用者自主性的進行數位學習,但這樣的商業模式讓使用者對數位學習的成效產生質疑,並認為缺乏實體學習的導師機制,是推廣數位學習的瓶頸問題。
本研究擬將探討如何降低推廣數位學習的障礙,提高學生對數位學習的接受度,並建構出創新的數位學習模式,透過該獨特的創新商業模式,解決長期以來使用者對數位學習的不信任感;並獲取使用者較高的學習效率,以達到本研究所提出創新數位學習模式之研究目的。
本研究創辦第一志願升學中心,將實體輔導服務與數位學習整合,以三年期間驗證本研究所提出的創新商業模式,是在提高消費者的購買願意與使用動機之可行性,經過三年的實際營運觀察,本研究的第一志願升學中心在商業模式營運、與銷售營收的結果,都比一般傳統的數位學習業務單位具有更高的營運效益,故透過實體通路結合專屬課輔團隊的創新商業模式,可以讓數位學習發揮更高的銷售成效與市場接受度。
透過本次的研究與實證,可以發現虛實整合的創新服務對數位學習的使用者相當重要,尤其是國高中生。本研究針對數位學習所提出的雙軌道創新商業模式,將高度客製化的創新服務導入數位學習過程之中,並以完善的導師機制與實體輔導環境做為數位學習的配套服務。本研究發現該創新的商業模式對國高中生是一種全新的補救教學選擇,同時對現有的數位學習市場更是一股驅動創新的研究結果。
英文摘要 The development of full-fledged e-learning tools in recent years has highlighted its benefits—no time or space limitations, reduced learning time and cost, and the availability of interactive and diverse materials, making it a suitable option for after-school remedial learning. The question that arises is how can value be added to entrance-examination-oriented services? An innovative business model that connects e-learning with physical learning support mechanisms could effectively improve user-learning motivation and performance as well as service innovations that could further differentiate e-learning providers. With this in mind, this study examines the methods needed to help meet consumer expectations after e-learning product purchases.
Secondary school students preparing for entrance examinations are generally passive learners, meaning that they may be less motivated to learn through e-learning courses (ELC), resulting in an abandonment of e-learning tools. Furthermore, the integrity of e-learning materials has often been questioned regarding the lack of physical learning support mechanisms and poor learning interaction, both of which may contribute to learners’ poor performance. In addition, current e-learning materials often follow a one-time, buy-all sales strategy that provides users with an extended period, which means that the e-learning products are highly priced. Moreover, the consequence of this sales strategy is that users are tied to the purchased products, as switching costs are high.
Based on the results of a user survey, in-depth user interviews, and a business-model-based case analysis, this study designs an innovative competitive e-learning business model. Current e-learning products are most often sold using a monorail approach such as by direct marketing or through stores, after which the users are left to their own devices. However, users question the effectiveness this e-learning business model, as it is believed that the lack of the mentor mechanisms found in physical learning is a problem for e-learning promotion.
The study explored method to reduce barrier to e-learning, improve student acceptance, and build innovative e-learning model for a unique business mode that addressed user’s long-standing distrust of the technology and achieved a better learning efficiency, in order to achieve the purpose of research.
The Top1 Study Center developed in this study integrates physical learning support services with e-learning. The proposed innovative business model was tested for three years to verify whether it was able to increase the consumer’s intention to purchase and motivation to use. Over the three years of observation, the Top1 Study Center produced better results for the business-model-based operations and sales revenues and showed greater operational efficiency compared with traditional e-learning business units. Therefore, it was proven that an innovative business model that combines physical channels with dedicated learning support teams can boost the effectiveness of e-learning sales and market acceptance.
Through the research and its evidence, it was found that innovative integrated virtual and physical service proved to be essential for e-learning users, especially the high school students. In the study, a dual-track innovative business model was proposed for e-learning. The highly customized and innovative service was introduced into the e-learning process, and a perfect mentoring mechanism with physical counseling environment were the supporting services. The study found that the innovative business model could be a new remedial teaching option for high school students and was a driving force for innovation based on the result of research on the existing e-learning market.
論文目次 Abstract------------------------------------------Ⅰ
Table of Contents---------------------------------Ⅴ
List of Tables------------------------------------Ⅷ
List of Figures-----------------------------------Ⅸ
Chapter 1 Introduction-----------------------------1
1-1 Background ------------------------------------1
1-2 Research Motivation ---------------------------4
1-3 Research Purpose ------------------------------6
1-4 Scope and Research Questions-------------------7
1-5 Research Framework ----------------------------8
Chapter 2 Literature Review------------------------9
2-1 Digital Learning (e-Learning) Industry---------9
2-2 e-Learning Mode-------------------------------12
2-3 Remedial Instruction--------------------------16
2-4 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) ------------17
2-5 Business Model--------------------------------20
2-6 Case Study------------------------------------23
2-7 Summary---------------------------------------25
Chapter 3 Research Design and Methodology---------27
3-1 In-Depth Interview----------------------------29
3-2 Questionnaire Design -------------------------32
3-3 Empirical Research ---------------------------37
Chapter 4 Results and Analyses--------------------40
4-1 In-Depth Interviewees Results and Analyses ---40
4-2 Questionnaire Results and Analyses------------45
4-2-1 Acceptance y of Using e-Learning -----------45
4-2-2 e-Learning Evaluation ----------------------46
4-2-3 User Feedback of e-Learning ----------------48
4-3 Discussion------------------------------------52
Chapter 5 New Business Model ---------------------57
5-1 Startup Innovative e-Learning Study Center ---58
5-1-1 Top1 Study Center --------------------------58
5-1-2 e-Learning Course System -------------------61
5-1-3 Customized Tutoring Service ----------------65
5-2 New Business Model Analyses ------------------68
Chapter 6 Validation -----------------------------72
6-1 Business Operation Outcome -------------------74
6-2 Business Operating Revenue -------------------75
6-3 Discussion -----------------------------------77
Chapter 7 Conclusion and Suggestions--------------79
7-1 Conclusion------------------------------------79
7-2 Suggestion for Future Studies ----------------80
Reference-----------------------------------------83
Appendices----------------------------------------88
Appendix 1 – Questionnaire Survey (Student) ------89
Appendix 2 – In-depth Interview (Salesperson) ----95
Appendix 3 – Depth Interview Recorded-------------97
參考文獻 1.Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2.Adams, D. A., R. R. Nelson, & P. A. Todd. (1992). Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication. MIS Quarterly 16, no.2: 227-247.
3.Agarwal, R. & J. Prasad. (1997). The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies. Decision Science 28, no.3: 557-582.
4.Afuah & Tucci (2001). Internet Business Models and Strategies: Text and Case, New York: McGraw Hill.
5.Chin, W. W. & P. A. Todd. (1995). On the Use, Usefulness, and Ease of Use of Structural Equation Modeling in MIS Research: A Note of Caution. MIS Quarterly 19, no.2: 237-246.
6.Croft B. (1996). Ten Reasons to Use Intranet for Training. Personnel Journal, 75(7), pp. 28.
7.Chen, L. D., M. L. Gillenson, & D. L. Sherrell. (2002). Enticing Online Consumers: An Extended Technology Acceptance Perspective. Information and Management 39, no.8: 705-719.
8.Carrillo, C. I. P. D. (2004). Intelligent Agents to Improve Adaptivity in a Web-based Learning Environment. Doctoral, University of Girona.
9.Chen, Mei-Fang. (2004). A Study on the Willingness and Barriers of Teachers at Primary School Level by Participating e-Learning in Kaohsiung County, Graduate Institute of Adult Education Master Thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University
10.Casadesus-Masanell, R. & Ricart, J. E. (2011). How to design a winning business model, Harvard Business Review, 89 (1-2), 100-107.
11.Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 319-340.
12.Davis, F.D. & Venkatesh, V. (1996). A Critical Assessment of Potential Measurement Biases in the Technology Acceptance Model: Three Experiments, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 45, pp.19-45.
13.Driscoll & Margaret (1998). How to plot web based training. Training and Development, Vol.52, Iss. 11, pp.46.
14.Fishbein, M. & I. Ajzen (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.Frezza, Bill (1998). It's time to examine your company's e-business model. Internet week, Issue 720, p42.
16.Govindasamy, T. (2002). Successful Implementation of E-learning Pedagogical Considerations. Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 287–299.
17.Hong, Rong-Zhao (2005). E-learning development and application. Taiwan Education Review, Vol. 631, 2-10.
18.Jackson, M. & A. Watts, (2002), The Evolution of Social and Economic Networks, Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 106, pp. 265295.
19.Johnson, M. W. et al., (2008). Reinventing Your Business Model. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.
20.Konczal, E. F. (1975). Models are for managers, not mathematicians. Journal of Systems Management, 26(1), pp.12-15.
21.Kilby, T.(1999). WBT Advantages & Disadvantages. Retrieved from http://www.filename.com/wbt/pages/process.htm,
22.Linda L. Esterson(2001). E-Training takes over workplace education. Baltimore Business Journal, 12.
23.Liu, I., M. C. Chen, Y. S. Sun, D. Wible & C. H. Kuo (2010). Extending the TAM Model to Explore the Factors that Affect Intention to Use an Online Learning Community. Computers & Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp.600-610.
24.Rappa, M. (1999). “Topic 5. Business Models on the web”, Managing the digital enterprise, http://digitalenterprise.org/models/models.html
25.Merriam, S. B.(1988). Case study research in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Jossey-Bass.
26.Mahadevan, B. (2000). Business Models for Internet-Based E-Commerce: An Anatomy, California management Review, 42, 4, Summer, pp.55-69.
27.Milton Zall (2001). Web-based training: A viable option? , Area Development Site & Facility Planning. Easton, Sept..
28.Moon, J. W. & Y. G. Kim. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web Context.” Information and Management 38, no.4: 217-230.
29.MacGregor, C. & T. Whittingham (2001). E-learning for Industry: The Competitive Advantage, in Proceedings of Vocational Education and Training Research Conference, Deakin University, Geelong, July.
30.Magretta, Joan (2002). Why Business Models Matter, Harvard Business Review, May, pp.86-92.
31.Negroponte, N. (1991). Products and Services for Computer Networks. Scientific American 265 (3): 76–83.
32.O'Leary, Mick, (2000). Distance Learning and Libraries, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 94-966.
33.Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., & Tucci, C. L. (2005). Clarifying Business Models: Origins, Present, and Future of the Concept. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 15, pp.1-43.
34.Ong, C. S., J. Y. Lai & Y. S. Wang (2004). Factors Affecting Engineers' Acceptance of Asynchronous E-learning Systems in High-tech Companies. Information & Management, Vol. 41, No. 6, pp. 795-804.
35.Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers, Wiley.
36.Rubin, Allen & Earl Babbie (1993). Research Methods for Social Work, Brooks/ Cole Publishing Company, Pacific Grove, California.
37.Rimm, S. B. (1997). Underachievement syndrome: A national epidemic. In N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 416-434). Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
38.Rosenberg, M.J. (2001). 「E-learning---Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age」, Vol. 53, No. 27, pp.141-146. New York, McGram-Hill, c2001.
39.Saltzberg, S., Polyson S.,(1995). Distributed Learning on the World Wide Web, Syllabus, Vol.9, No.1, pp.10-12.
40.Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1), 85-92.
41.Stauffer, David (2001). Business the Cisco way : secrets of the company that makes the Internet, Capstone.
42.Saade, R. & B. Bahli (2005). The Impact of Cognitive Absorption on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use in On-line Learning: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Information & Management, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 317-327.
43.Timmers, Paul (1998). “Business Models for Electronic Markets”, EM — Electronic Markets, Vol.8 No.2, p.4
44.Tapscott, D., Ticoll, D., & Alex Lowy (2000). Digital Capital: Harnessing the Power of Business Webs, Harvard Business Review Press.
45.Tsai, Peng-Hen (2002). A Study of Sixth Grade Elementary Student Learning Cube and Awl with Network Digital School, Graduate Institute of Mathematics and Science Education Master Thesis, National Pingtung University of Education.
46.Urdan, Trace A & Cornelia C. Weggen (2000). Corporate E-learning: Exploring a New Frontier, San Francisco, CA:WR Hambrecht+Co., pp.8-9.
47.Waller, V., & Wilson, J, (2001). A definition for e-learning, The ODL QC Newsletter, pp.12.
48.Xu, D. & H. Wang (2006). Intelligent Agent Supported Personalization for Virtual Learning Environments. Decision Support Systems, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 825-843.
49.Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: Recent developments and future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), pp.1019-1042.
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2018-01-01起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-01-01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