English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 89683/119504 (75%)
Visitors : 23939887      Online Users : 125
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 資訊管理學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/112157
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/112157


    Title: 於區塊鏈數位生態系統的設計中透過賦權促進利害關係人的集體貢獻度
    Applying Empowerment Strategy to Facilitate Collective Commitment toward Shared Goal of Stakeholders within a Blockchain-based Digital Ecosystem Design
    Authors: 郭閎中
    Contributors: 苑守慈
    郭閎中
    Keywords: 區塊鏈
    數位生態系統
    賦權
    效能理論
    集體承諾
    Blockchain
    Digital ecosystem
    Empowerment
    Efficacy
    Collective commitment
    Date: 2017
    Issue Date: 2017-08-28 11:26:23 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 區塊鏈原為支援比特幣交易所提出的一項分散式演算法,然而,近期各個產業開始對其感到興趣,並在各領域催生出了許多破壞式創新的應用服務。然而其去中心化的特質,使得利害關係人的溝通和資源管理在區塊鏈生態系統中更具挑戰性,並且也興起了許多相關議題。
    本研究以賦權理論的觀點去檢視這些議題,並提出方法論來解決改善這些議題,期望能夠加速輔助創業家或服務設計者建立去中心化生態系統的過程,並且讓每位利害關係人認知整個生態系統的共同的目標,進一步的為之作出貢獻,達到能力和資源的綜效。
    Blockchain, a de-centralized infrastructure which can breed many kinds of disruptive applications, is a promising platform for next generation digital ecosystems. All applications built upon blockchain benefits multiple advantages, including transactions manageability, scalability, security, visibility, affordability, high availability, etc.
    However, stakeholder management in blockchain-based businesses will become a very challenging issue for entrepreneurs to deal with their de-centralize characteristics. Without the management and enforcement of a central party, creating collective efficacy and achieving collective commitment among all stakeholders will be crucial for these entrepreneurs.
    This research adopts the empowerment perspective to propose a method to solve this issue and facilitate the design of a blockchain ecosystem toward collective efficacy. The method can be divided into three parts. The first is to analyze and collect necessary data from the source of business logic in the context of blockchain smart contract. The second is to utilize these data and liquefy the resources available in the current ecosystem so that the stakeholders can empower each other without the support of central party. The third is to measure the degree of collective efficacy and collective commitment in the ecosystem design in order to identify the effectiveness of our empowerment method.
    Reference: Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, Self‐Efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned Behavior1. Journal of applied social psychology, 32(4), 665-683.
    Alsop, R., Bertelsen, M. F., & Holland, J. (2006). Empowerment in practice: From analysis to implementation. World Bank Publications.
    Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of occupational psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
    Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American psychologist, 37(2), 122.
    Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
    Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84(2), 191.
    Bandura A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman
    Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy.Current directions in psychological science, 9(3), 75-78.
    Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. Self-efficacy in changing societies, 15, 334.
    Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of personality. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 154-196.
    Bailey, D. (1992). Using participatory research in community consortia development and evaluation: Lessons from the beginning of a story. The American Sociologist, 23(4), 71-82.
    Buterin, V. (2014). A next-generation smart contract and decentralized application platform. white paper.
    Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of consumer research, 15(4), 473-481.
    Brito, J., & Castillo, A. (2013). Bitcoin: A primer for policymakers. Published by Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
    COOPER, C., GILBERT, D., & WANHILL, S. (1998). John FLETCHER a Rebecca SHEPHERD. Tourism: principles and practice, 2.
    Chou, C. Y., & Yuan, S. T. (2015). Service-driven social community and its relation to well-being. The Service Industries Journal, 35(7-8), 368-387.
    Eyben, R., Kabeer, N., & Cornwall, A. (2008). Conceptualising empowerment and the implications for pro-poor growth: a paper for the DAC Poverty Network.
    Grusky, O. (1966). Career mobility and organzational commitment.Administrative Science Quarterly, 488-503.
    Heinonen, K., Strandvik, T., & Voima, P. (2013). Customer dominant value formation in service. European Business Review, 25(2), 104-123.
    Jentzsch, C. Decentralized autonomous organization to automate governance.
    Kanter, R. M. (1968). Commitment and social organization: A study of commitment mechanisms in utopian communities. American sociological review, 499-517.
    Kabeer, N., United Nations, & United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. (1999). The conditions and consequences of choice: reflections on the measurement of women's empowerment (Vol. 108, pp. 1-58). Geneva: UNRISD.
    Khwaja, A. I. (2005). Measuring empowerment at the community level: An economist’s perspective. Measuring Empowerment: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives (W ashington DC, The W orld Bank), 267-284.
    Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. (1982). Organizational linkage: the psychology of commitment, absenteeism and turnover. New York, NY.: Academic Press. NHS Information centre (2008). Statistics/Data Collections-Prescriptions, available from www. ic. nhs. uk. Accessed, 10(3), 2008.
    Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of vocational behavior, 14(2), 224-247.
    Fecher, B. (2016). Blockchain for science and knowledge.
    Narayan-Parker, D. (Ed.). (2002). Empowerment and poverty reduction: A sourcebook. World Bank Publications.
    Page, N., & Czuba, C. E. (1999). Empowerment: What is it. Journal of extension, 37(5), 1-5.
    Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American journal of community psychology,15(2), 121-148.
    Rosenthal, E. C. (2006). The era of choice: the ability to choose and its transformation of contemporary life. Mit Press.
    Riggs, M. L., Warka, J., Babasa, B., Betancourt, R., & Hooker, S. (1994). Development and validation of self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scales for job-related applications. Educational and psychological measurement, 54(3), 793-802.
    Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918-924.
    Salancik, G. R. (1977). Commitment is too easy!. Organizational Dynamics,6(1), 62-80.
    Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy. " O'Reilly Media, Inc.".
    Strong, K. C., Ringer, R. C., & Taylor, S. A. (2001). THE* rules of stakeholder satisfaction (* Timeliness, honesty, empathy). Journal of Business Ethics, 32(3), 219-230.
    Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization science,4(4), 577-594.
    Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E., & Popper, M. (1998). Correlates of charismatic leader behavior in military units: Subordinates' attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors' appraisals of leader performance. Academy of management journal, 41(4), 387-409.
    Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological reports, 51(2), 663-671.
    Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
    Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). From goods to service (s): Divergences and convergences of logics. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3), 254-259.
    Wright, A., & De Filippi, P. (2015). Decentralized blockchain technology and the rise of lex cryptographia. Available at SSRN 2580664.
    Wiener, Y., & Gechman, A. S. (1977). Commitment: A behavioral approach to job involvement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 10(1), 47-52.
    Yusuf, M. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy, achievement motivation, and self-regulated learning strategies on students’ academic achievement.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2623-2626.
    Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn.Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 82-91.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    資訊管理學系
    104356024
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104356024
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[資訊管理學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    602401.pdf1700KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback