Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/157719
|
| Title: | 知識誤差：由情境實踐解析數位服務中的創新落差
Misaligned Knowing: Diagnosing Innovation Gaps in Digital Services through Situated Practice |
| Authors: | 黃朝毅
Huang, Chao-Yi |
| Contributors: | 蕭瑞麟
Hsiao, Ruey-Lin
黃朝毅
Huang, Chao-Yi |
| Keywords: | 實踐知識
情境實踐
數位金融
數位轉型
服務創新
Knowing-in-practice
Situated-practice
Digital finance
Digital transformation
Service innovation |
| Date: | 2025 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-07-01 14:31:58 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究剖析金融業數位轉型過程中的創新落差問題。儘管系統開發團隊投注大量資源設計多樣化的技術功能，使用者卻鮮少實際採用。許多精心規劃的服務創新方案，也常在實施過程中遭遇阻力。這些現象並非單純源自顧客抗拒或學習不足，而是反映出一種更深層的知識誤差：來自實踐現場的理解方式，未能被設計者所掌握。開發者與設計者往往依循制度規格與功能邏輯，打造理想化的產品與服務，卻忽略前線人員在實際服務過程中所面對的挑戰。這樣的盲點，導致前線人員的情境實踐難以納入設計考量，進而使系統設計無法貼合顧客需求，服務創新難以在現場落地，顧客體驗自然無法優化。本研究即以「知識誤差」為切入點，從情境實踐視角診斷創新落差的成因。研究焦點放在這些被系統忽視、卻持續在現場產生作用的實踐知識，如何在制度缺口中被實作出來，並成為創新應對的資源。本研究以證券投資平台為個案，透過投資旅程的分析，指出投資專員在實務操作中展現的情境實踐。透過三組典型場景案例：休眠帳戶的活化、成長型投資的協助與槓桿型投資的服務。說明前線專員如何即時回應顧客的困境，並於制約中產生有效的應對方案。理論上，本研究則主張「知識誤差」並非源自資訊不足，而是源於未能理解第一線的實踐知識如何運作。這些知識非預設於標準程序之中，而是在制度限制、顧客痛點與服務彈性交會的條件下形成。情境實踐於此不僅是行動，更是設計與使用之間的中介場域。透過此視角，研究補充服務創新文獻中對中介角色與在地知識的低估，進一步指出，忽略實踐知識的所產生的誤差可能成為創新失效的根源。實務上，本研究提出三項建議：首先，系統開發流程應納入投資專員的實作經驗，避免僅由制度邏輯主導設計迭代；其次，服務創新應從流程導向轉向情境設計，進而發展出更細緻的服務腳本；最後，應強化服務設計對顧客現場經驗的回應能力，方能提升顧客體驗。本研究主張，設計應從「功能堆疊」轉向「知識對位」，重新定位第一線的行動知識作為創新的形成來源。唯有讓設計回到實踐現場，重新吸納這些在地智慧，數位系統方能跳脫落差，對準服務現場，實現以顧客為中心的創新目標。
This study examines the persistent innovation gap in digital transformation within the financial services sector, drawing on a case study of a securities investment platform in Taiwan. Despite heavy investment in system development and feature design, many technological functions remain underused. Service innovations often falter not due to user resistance or inadequate digital skills, but because of a deeper epistemic misalignment. System designers frequently rely on institutional logic and abstract procedures, failing to account for the situated knowledge of frontline investment advisors. This incongruence produces what the study terms a “misaligned knowing”—a disconnect between formal system design and the real-world constraints under which services are delivered. Focusing on three service scenarios—reactivating dormant accounts, assisting growth-oriented investors, and managing leveraged portfolios—the research highlights how frontline actors improvise context-sensitive solutions that system logic does not anticipate. These practices reflect locally generated knowledge that emerges not from codified procedures but from navigating tensions between customer needs and institutional limits. Theoretically, the study reframes innovation failure as the consequence of neglecting how practical knowledge is formed and applied. This form of knowing is not pre-scripted, but enacted through problem-solving in live service encounters. Situated practice, in this sense, becomes a mediating arena that connects design intentions with service realities, allowing innovation to take shape within rather than apart from constraint. The study puts forward three recommendations for service innovation. First, system development should incorporate the lived experience of frontline staff rather than be solely driven by top-down logic. Second, service design must move beyond process formalisation to embrace context-sensitive scripting. Third, organisations should enhance system responsiveness to customers’ lived experiences, not just their functional requirements. Ultimately, the study calls for a shift from function-driven design to knowledge alignment—positioning frontline knowledge not as peripheral but as a central resource for innovation. By reconnecting design with the reality of practice, digital transformation can move beyond the innovation gap and deliver meaningful, customer-centred value. |
| Reference: | 中文文獻
朱彩馨、李慶芳、許致嘉，2014，「知易行難：以施行理論觀點探索數位學習導入失敗」中山管理評論，第四期，第22卷，857-900頁。
朱彩馨，2015，「溫故不知新：半新科技的意會調適」，中山管理評論，第一期，第23卷，137-183頁。
蕭瑞麟，2020，(第五版)《不用數字的研究：質性研究的思辨脈絡》，台北：五南學術原創專書系列。
英文文獻
Argyris, C. 2006. Reinforcing organizational defensive routines: An unintended human resources activity. Human Resource Management, 25: 541-555.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. 1978. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Burt, R. S. 2004. Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2): 349-399.
Chikudate, N. 2002. Collective myopia and disciplinary power behind the scenes of ethical practices: diagnostic theory on Japanese organisation. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3): 289-307.
Christensen, C. M., Baumann, H., Ruggles, R., & Sadtler, T. M. 2006. Disruptive innovation for social change. Harvard Business Review, 84(12): 94-101.
Davidson, E. J. 2002. Technology frames and framing: A socio-cognitive investigation of requirements determination. MIS Quarterly, 26(4): 329-358.
Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. 2011. Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5): 1240-1253.
Følstad, A., & Kvale, K. 2018. Applying Transactional NPS for Customer Journey Insight: Case Experiences and Lessons Learned. Services Marketing Quarterly, 39(3): 208-224.
Gavetti, G., & Menon, A. 2016. How to avoid strategy myopia. Sloan Management Review, 57(3): 69–77.
Gherardi, S. 2010. Telemedicine: A practice-based approach to technology. Human Relations, 63(4): 501-524.
Gopal, A., & Prasad, P. 2000. Understanding GDSS in symbolic context: Shifiting the focus from technology to interaction. MIS Quarterly, 24(3): 509-546.
Griffith, T. L. 1996. Cognitive Elements in the Implementation of New Technology: Can Less Information Provide More Benifits? MIS Quarterly, 20(1): 99-110.
Hsiao, R., Tsai, D. H., & Lee, C. F. 2003. Knowing in situated practice: knowledge transferring systems in the workplace. Organisation Studies: under review.
Knudsen, T., & Srikanth, K. 2014. Coordinated exploration: Organizing joint search by multiple specialists to overcome mutual confusion and joint myopia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(3): 409-441.
Kumar, A., & Operti, E. 2023. Missed chances and unfulfilled hopes: Why do firms make errors in evaluating technological opportunities? Strategic Management Journal, 44(13): 3067-3097.
Leonardi, P. M. 2011. Innovation blindness: Culture, frames, and cross-boundary problem construction in the development of new technology concepts. Organization Science, 22(2): 347-369.
Levinthal, D., & Posen, H. E. 2007. Myopia of selection: Does organizational adaptation limit the efficacy of population selection? Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(4): 586-620.
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. 1993. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95-112.
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. 1988. Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319-340.
Levitt, T. 1960. Marketing myopia. Harvard Business Review, 38: 45–56.
Lin, A., & Silva, L. 2005. The social and political construction of technological frames. European Journal of Information Systems, 14: 49-59.
Lind, M. R., & Zmud, R. W. 1991. The influence of a convergence in understanding between technology providers and users on information technology innovativeness. Organization Science, 2(2): 195-217.
March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2: 71-87.
Miller, K. D. 2002. Knowledge inventories and managerial myopia. Strategic Management Journal, 23(8): 689.
Möller, K., Rajala, R., & Westerlund, M. 2008. Service innovation myopia? A new recipe for client-provider value creation. California Management Review, 50(3): 31-48.
Nicolini, D. 2011. Practice as the site of knowing: Insights from the field of telemedicine. Organization Science, 22(3): 602-620.
Opper, S., & Burt, R. S. 2021. Social network and temporal myopia. Academy of Management Journal, 64(3): 741-771.
Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations Organization Science, 11(4): 404–428.
Orlikowski, W. J. 2002. Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing. Organization Science, 13(3): 249-273.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. 1994. Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM transactions on information systems, 12(2): 174-207.
Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. 2000. The knowing-doing gap : how smart companies turn knowledge into action. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
Prasad, P. 1993. Symbolic processes in the implementation of technological change: a Symbolic interactionist study of work computerization. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1400-1429.
Schön, D. A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
Seidel, V. P., Hannigan, T. R., & Phillips, N. 2018. Rumor Communities, Social Media, and Forthcoming Innovations: The Shaping of Technological Frames in Product Market Evolution. Academy of Management Review, 45(2): 304-324.
Sharma, S., Singh, J., & Kumar, M. 2024. ‘Invented‐on‐the‐fly’ mobile application for disaster response: Construction of technological frames and impact. Information Systems Journal, 34(3): 567–595.
Srivastava, S. C., & Shainesh, G. 2015. Bridging the service divide throuh digitally enabled service innovation: Evidence from Indian healthcare service providers. MIS Quarterly, 39(1): 245-A219.
Tsang, E. W. K. 2002. Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in a transition economy: Learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic Management Journal, 23(9): 835.
Tyre, M. J., & von Hippel, E. 1997. The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations. Organization Science, 8(1): 71–83.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. 2004. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1): 1-17.
Wong, M. M. L. 2005. Organizational learning via expatriate managers: Collective myopia as blocking mechanism. Organization Studies, 26(3): 325-350. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
112364119 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112364119 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 411901.pdf | | 6344Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
