隨著環境處於高度變動情況下，加上科技日新月異，越來越多企業著手利用最新科技來強化公司核心能力，其中又以結合企業流程與管理系統所建構出的服務平台機制最為常見。本研究以服務主導邏輯的理論概念出發，以單一個案研究法探索在服務平台的學習、體驗及參與的過程中，營運管理及使用單位等不同行動者的角色如何互動與整合，進而創造出雙方價值共創。本研究所探究之個案—市府轉運站，其有效地紓解台北車站客運區域之壅擠車流，帶領站內所有客運業者明顯地提高載客總量。本研究發現當服務平台提供良好的互動機制，將提高所有行動者參與互動與整合狀況。友善且整合的操作介面，讓行動者降低學習障礙，進而讓需求更明朗化；再者，轉運站能確實掌握外在環境的變動，以及客運業者和顧客的需求，引進新科技技術所建構的服務平台，開創多方行動者的共創機會，可說是本案得以成功的最關鍵因素。
本研究貢獻在於以實證方式指出服務平台是促使上述互動與整合的價值共創過程中的重要機制，加上透過微觀觀點的探討，可實際地暸解影響行動者參與互動的影響因素。本研究也發現，透過敏捷式開發可以增加各參與者的互動，協助進一步整合自身的資源與能力為彼此創造價值，因此敏捷式開發可。
關鍵字：服務主導邏輯、轉運站、價值共創、服務平台機制

With current high variation levels of manpower, logistic resources and the environment, coupled with the ever-changing trend of technology, more and more companies are taking advantage of the latest technology to strengthen their core competencies based on common platform mechanisms, which are built with a combination of business processes and management systems. Through the theoretical framework of Service- Dominant Logic (SDL) , this research explored how to create the value of both parties in the process of learning, experiencing and participating in the platform from the roles of different actors such as operational management and user units. The case studied by the Institute—the Taipei city hall bus station, not only effectively understands the excessive traffic concentration of the intercity passenger station in the Taipei station area, but also leads all passengers in the station to significantly increase the total passenger load. The study found that when the platform provides a well interaction mechanism, it will improve the interaction of all actors and interactions with actors, and be friendly and integrate the only user interface (UI), so that the actors can reduce learning disabilities and make the requirements clearer. The bus station can truly grasp the changes in the external environment, as well as the needs of passengers and customers, introducing a platform built by new technology, and creating opportunities for multi-actors to create values. This can be said to be the most critical factor in the success of this case.

The contribution of this research lies in empirically pointing out that the platform is an important mechanism in the value creation process that promotes the above interaction and integration. In addition, through the discussion of micro perspectives, it is possible to actually understand the influencing factors affecting the actors' participation in interaction. Moreover, this study also found that through agile development, we can increase the interaction of each participant, further integrate our own resources and capabilities, and create value for each other. Therefore, the concept of agile development can be used as a creative source of reference on co-create value of the other companies.

中文參考文獻
歐秉昌，2014，「我國BOT之個案研析-以台北市政府轉運站為例」，國立暨南國際大學碩士論文
張庭，2015，「探索服務系統觀點下的價值共創: 以高雄市交通系統為例」，國立成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文

英文參考文獻
Barney, J., & Felin, T. (2013). What are microfoundations? Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(2), 138-155.
Bendapudi, N., & Leone, R. P. (2003). Psychological implications of customer participation in co-production. Journal of marketing, 67(1), 14-28.
Bowman, C., & Ambrosini, V. (2000). Value creation versus value capture: towards a coherent definition of value in strategy. British journal of management, 11(1), 1-15.
Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. Journal of service research, 14(3), 252-271.
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies: WW Norton & Company.
Chandler, J. D., & Lusch, R. F. (2015). Service systems: a broadened framework and research agenda on value propositions, engagement, and service experience. Journal of service research, 18(1), 6-22.
Constantin, J. A., & Lusch, R. F. (1994). Understanding resource management: How to deploy your people, products, and processes for maximum productivity: Irwin Professional Pub.
Fisher, D., & Smith, S. (2011). Cocreation is chaotic: What it means for marketing when no one has control. Marketing theory, 11(3), 325-350.
Grönroos, C. (2011). Value co-creation in service logic: A critical analysis. Marketing theory, 11(3), 279-301.
Gummerus, J., & Pihlström, M. (2011). Context and mobile services' value-in-use. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(6), 521-533.
Kumar, V., & Pansari, A. (2016). Competitive advantage through engagement. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(4), 497-514.
Lemke, F., Clark, M., & Wilson, H. (2011). Customer experience quality: an exploration in business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 39(6), 846-869.
Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. In The Service-Dominant Logic of Marketing (pp. 21-46): Routledge.
Lusch, R. F., Vargo, S. L., & O’brien, M. (2007). Competing through service: Insights from service-dominant logic. Journal of retailing, 83(1), 5-18.
Merz, M. A., He, Y., & Vargo, S. L. (2009). The evolving brand logic: a service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 37(3), 328-344.
Myers, M. D. (2013). Qualitative research in business and management: Sage.
Pansari, A., & Kumar, V. (2017). Customer engagement: the construct, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 45(3), 294-311.
Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 36(1), 83-96.
Ranjan, K. R., & Read, S. (2016). Value co-creation: concept and measurement. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 44(3), 290-315.
Sandström, S., Edvardsson, B., Kristensson, P., & Magnusson, P. (2008). Value in use through service experience. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 18(2), 112-126.
Storbacka, K., Brodie, R. J., Böhmann, T., Maglio, P. P., & Nenonen, S. (2016). Actor engagement as a microfoundation for value co-creation. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3008-3017. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.034
Van Doorn, J., Lemon, K. N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P., & Verhoef, P. C. (2010). Customer engagement behavior: Theoretical foundations and research directions. Journal of service research, 13(3), 253-266.
Vargo, S. L., & Akaka, M. A. (2009). Service-dominant logic as a foundation for service science: clarifications. Service Science, 1(1), 32-41.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 36(1), 1-10.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 44(1), 5-23.
Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European management journal, 26(3), 145-152.
Yin, R. K. (1998). The abridged version of case study research: Design and method.