二十一世紀環境快速變遷，全球化競爭及生產基地優勢不斷移轉，台灣產業以創新為導向並往高附加價值領域發展。知識經濟並非專指半導體、生物基因等高科技為核心的經濟發展型態，亦應包括成熟科技與高科技均衡發展之產業結構，以運用新知識或管理方法的創新來帶動經營模式。
　　近年來，政府大力推動文化創意產業升級，獎勵創業，顯示設計產業在未來有很大的發展潛力，預估2005年工業設計需求市場將達新台幣171億元的規模，足見設計需求之重要性。以設計能力為基礎之創業模式，無疑有最佳創業之切入時機。本研究主要透過個案研究的方式，配合次級資料研究與問卷調查的方式進行，針對具有設計背景的創業者，研究其創業行為，剖析其創業成功之要素，從中彙整出設計背景創業的模式，供有意創業者參考，以提昇創業成功的機率、降低創業風險。
　　依本研究所提出之觀念性創業模式架構，分析個案及其相關變數，得到以下發現：
一、創業者因素：深受先前工作經驗影響；適合創業年齡多在32-38歲間；受惠於累積之人脈與人際關係幫助；人格特質中以企圖心與自我管理最為關鍵。
二、外在因素：環境變動對創業行為並無決定性影響；創業技術與客戶來源多源於先前服務組織。
三、內在因素：創業初期資本主要來自創業者個人；週轉金機制與建立財務制度對降低創業風險最有效；團隊合作與人才素質為創業成功主要因素；人的因素為設計創業之關鍵；人才完整性不足為團隊最常發生之問題；人力資源首重誠信與專業技能；專業互補性與人格特質為團隊組成中主要考量；管理技能首重研發，其次行銷管理；具描繪願景與理念能力對凝聚成員共識最有幫助；營造學習環境與發揮空間對留住員工助益最佳；內部組織因素中首重組織成員特性；行銷業務與財務調度為創業過程中最常發生之問題。
　　設計背景創業與其他領域創業研究差異處，亦即設計背景創業所具有之特殊關鍵部分，可作為區隔差異與創造競爭優勢的手段，計有：適合創業年齡多在32-38歲間、人格特質以自我管理最為關鍵、創業行為受環境變動影響較小、人力資源首重誠信等。

　　In the 21st century environment change swiftly one, globalization of competition and the ever transforming advantages of the production base, Taiwanese industries is innovation oriented while developing in the direction towards the field of high added value. Knowledge-Economy is not only referring to the high-end technology, such as semi-conductor and bio-genetic (industries), cored economic development model, but also includes the industrial structure of balanced development between the matured technology and high-end technology, so as to utilize the innovation in new knowledge or management methods to drive the management model.

　　During the recent years, the government has been heavily promoting the upgrade of cultural innovative industries, awarding the start-up of new businesses, exhibiting that the design industries have a great potential in the future, it is estimated that the market demand for industrial design will reach a scale of NT 171 million dollars by 2005, showing the importance of the demand of design. The entrepreneurship model based on designing capabilities, without doubt, has the best opportune moment of cutting-in. This research is conducted using, mainly, case study approach, along with secondary literature and questionnaire methods, studying the behavior of entrepreneurs with design backgrounds, analyzing the factors of their success ,and providing the synthesized models of entrepreneurship with design backgrounds to those interested in starting up a business, enhancing the probability of success while lowering the risk of doing so.

　　According to the conceptual frameworks of entrepreneurship model proposed in this research, concerned variables, in the studied cases are analyzed and the following findings are obtained:

1.Entrepreneurs Factors: Many entrepreneurs are deeply affected by previous work experiences; The most suitable age for starting up a business is between 32 and 38; Most entrepreneurs benefited from the help of accumulated interpersonal relationships and networks, and; Ambition and self management is the most important key characteristics of their personality.
2.External Factors: Changes of the surrounding has no determining effects on entrepreneurship behaviors; The technology and customer sources mostly originate from the organization that one previously served in.
3.Internal Factors: Capital in the initial stage mainly comes, personally, from the entrepreneur himself; Mechanism for logistic regression and establishment of financial system is most effective in lowering the risks of starting up a business; Team cooperation and the quality of human resource is the main factor of success; Human quality is the key in designer entrepreneurship; The insufficiency in the integrity of human resource is the most common problem in a start-up team; Trust and professional skills are the priorities in human resource management; professional complementarity and personality characteristics are the main considerations in the formation of a team; R&D is the priority in managerial skills, followed by marketing management; Being able to depict visions and ideas is most helpful in unifying opinions and form a common view; Constructing an environment for learning and individual performance is best at retaining employees; Member characteristic is the priority of internal organization factors; Sales affairs and financial management is the most common problem in the process of starting up a business.

　　The difference between the researches on entrepreneurship with a design background from that of other fields, is the specific key parts possessed by such entrepreneurships, which can be made as means of distinguishing differences and creating competitive advantages, including the following: the most suitable age for starting up a business is between 32 and 38, self management is the most important key characteristic of the personality, changes of the surrounding has no determining effects on entrepreneur behaviors, trust is the priority in human resource management.

中文部分
1.劉常勇（2002），創業管理的12堂課，天下遠見，台北。
2.阿瑪‧拜爾（Amar Bhide，2000）等著，李田樹譯，創業，天下遠見，台北。
3.彼得‧杜拉克（Peter Drucker，1985）著，王美音、楊子江譯，再創企業生機－彼得‧杜拉克談創新與創業，卓越文化，台北。
4.麥可‧波特（Michael Porter，2001），台灣KEEP WALKING 講座：「台灣該如何走出困境提昇競爭力？」專題演講，天下雜誌。
5.許士軍（1991），「卓越的台灣管理模式」，中華民國管理科學協會。
6.經濟部（2000），「台灣中小企業之現況與展望」，經濟部中小企業白皮書。
7.黃同圳、許宏明及李肇平（1995），「影響青年創業成功因素之研究」，青年輔導研究報告之九十九。
8.邱沁宜（2002），「國家設計中心，預定明年成立」，經濟日報，2002年02月07日，第6版。
9.張庭庭（2001），知識經濟帶動下創業模式之變革，行政院青年輔導委員會委託中華民國居家急小型企業協會執行研究。
10.吳怡靜譯（2001），「創新來自地方特色」－波特最新力作（史隆管理評論），天下雜誌。
11.司徒達賢（2001），策略管理新論--觀念架構與分析方法，智勝文化。
12.莊任暘（2000），「高科技創業成功因素研究」，國立台灣大學會計研究所碩士論文。
13.江正信（2000），「高階經營團隊與企業策略決策模式，組織學習傾向，創新能力及經營」，國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
14.汪青河（1991），「創業家創業行為與環境、個人特徵關係之研究」，國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
15.歐建益（2001），「創業家特質、動機與創業問題之研究」，國立臺灣大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
16.鄭蕙萍（1999），「創業家的個人背景，心理特質，創業驅動力對創業行為的影響 」，大同工學院事業經營研究所碩士論文。
17.蔡繡容（2001），「創業家之認知與行為意向之研究：計畫行為理論與社會認知理論之應用」，私立高雄第一科技大學金融營運系碩士班碩士論文。
18.劉橫智（2000），「華人研發創業者之創業生涯」， 國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
19.黃欽河（2001），「創業團隊領導者的技術能耐與新產品開發行為關係之研究—以龍園創新育成中心為例」，私立中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
20.郭洮村（1998），「工研院研發人員離職創業相關因素之研究」，私立中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
21.李慶順（2002），「影響研發機構技術人員創業行為相關因素之研究—以中科院為例」，私立中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
22.楊舜慧（2002），「產業融合與創業模式之探討」，國立中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文。
23.陳文龍（2001），「也談設計發展」，設計，Vol.99，頁108-109。
24.黃文靜（2002），「探索新世代之設計思維與技術發展--專訪丹麥設計大師Mr. Frederick Rickmann」，鞋技通訊，Vol.123，頁27-35。
Christoph Boninger（2003），「創意美學--形於產品，用於生活 德國西門子設計總監，IF獎評審團主席--Christoph Boninger演說精華錄」，電腦繪圖與設計雜誌，Vol.186，頁37-39。
25.呂文豪（1995），工業設計實物概念，三采文化，台北。
26.李欣長採訪整理（2003），「王文燦(明基電通全球營銷總理)--品牌老將教你品牌撇步」，數位時代，Vol.63，頁102-103。
27.吳韻儀（2003），「日本三菱汽車產品設計部總經理奧利佛．布雷(Olivier Boulay)--設計來自於享受生活、探索未來」，Cheers，Vol.37，頁48-51。
28.池惠婷、許瓊華（2003），「工業設計服務研究」，經濟部技術處發行，工研院經資中心出版，台北。
29.劉大和（2003），「文化創意產業界定及其意義」，臺灣經濟研究月刊，Vol.305，頁115-122。
30.趙江洪（2003），「設計未來的設計--從2001年漢城ICSID大會看工業設計發展趨勢」，機械工業，Vol.239，頁173-175。
31.李樂山（2003），「工業設計的三種價值觀念」，機械工業，Vol.239，頁159-161。
32.官政能（2002），「論工業設計之問題關係及其展望」，實踐學報，Vol.33，頁129-147。
33.林崇宏（2002），「論近代工業設計思想的演變」，工業設計，Vol.33，頁23-27。
34官政能（2002），「工業設計--對社會性與市場競爭力之思考」，設計，Vol.103，頁94-97。

英文部分

1.Anonymous（2002）, “ A cyclone in the vacuum-cleaner market”, Focus Japan, Tokyo,Vol.29,p12.
2.Bollinger, Lynn; Hope, Katherine; Utterback, James M,（1983）,“A Review of Literature and Hypotheses on New Technology-Based Firms.” Research Policy, Amsterdam; 12(1), pp.1-14.
3.Charlotte Druckman（2003）,“Vacuum pick”, Town and Country, New York,Vol.157,p64.
4.Christian, B. & P-A. Julien（2000）,“Defining the field of research in entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Review, 16, p.165-180.
5.Doutriaus（1992）, "Emerging High-Tech Firms : How Durable are their
Comparative Comparative Start up Advantage?”,Journal of Business Venturing,Vol.7, pp.303-322.
6.Emily Boyle（2003）,“ A study of entrepreneurial brand building in the manufacturing sector in the UK.”, The Journal of Product and Brand Management,Vol.12,p79.

7.Elron, E.,（1997）,“Top management teams within multinational corporations: effects of cultural heterogeneity”. Leadership Q .4(8), pp.393-413.
8.Gartner W. B.（1985）,“A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of Venture Creation”, Academy of Management Review,vol.10, no.4 ,pp696-706.
9.Gartner W.B.,T.R. Mitchell and K.H. Vesper（1989）,“A Taxonomy of New
Business Ventures”, Journal of Business Venturing，Vol.4,No.3,1989，
pp.169-186.
10.Ghosh, B. C. and W. Kwn（1996）,”An Analysis of Key Success Factors of SMWs:A comparative Study of Singapore / Malaysia and Asutralia /New Zealand,Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Nanyang Technological University.
11.Greenberg, D.B. & D.L. Sexton（1988）,“ An interactive model of new
venture initiation”, Journal of Small Business Management, 26（3）, p.1-7.
12.Holt, D. H.（1992）, Entrepreneurship : New Venture Creation, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.
13.Kamm J. B., Shuman, J. C., Seeger, J. A., & Nurick, A. J.（1990）, “Entrepreneurial teams in new venture creation: A research agenda.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14(4), pp7-17.
14.Kamm J.B. and Nurick, A.J,（1993）,“The stage of team venture formation: a decision model.”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 17(2). pp. 17-28.
15.Kamm, JB., And Shuman, J.C., Seeger, J.A. Nurick, A.J（1989）,“Are well- balance teams more successful? In R.H. Brockhaus et al.(eds.)” Frontiers of entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, MA: Babson College, pp.428-429.
16.Knight D, Pearce CL, Smith KG, Olean JD, Sims HP, Smith KA, Flood P, （1999）, “Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus.” Srategic Management Journal ,20(5), pp.445-465.
17.Lussier, R. N.（1995）,“Startup Business Advice from Business Owners to Would-be Entrepreneurs", S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, pp. 10-15.
18.Manzini,Ezio（2001）,“Design Systems：scenario building and solution providing in the network society”,Proceedings of ICSID 2001,Korea,p.2.
19.Michel, John G. and D. C. Hambrick（1992）,“Diversification Posture and Top Management Team Characteristics”, Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), pp. 9-38.
20.Murray, Alan I.（1989）,“Top Management Group Heterogeneity and Firm Performance,”Strategic Management Journal, 10, pp. 125-142.
21.Oliver, Amalya L. and Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 1998, “Three Levels of Networking for Sourcing Intellectual Capital in Biotechnology”, International Studies of Management & Organization, 27 (4): 76-103
22.Reynolds, P. D. and S. B. White.（1997）,“The entrepreneurial process:Economic growth, men, women and minorities”, London: Quorum Books,1997.
23.Roberts, Edward B. & Malonet, Denis E.（1996）,“Policies and structure for spinning off new companies from research and development organizations”, R&D Management ,Vol.26,pp.17-48.
24.Shame, W., Venture Management : The Business of the Inventor,Entrepreneur, Venture Capitalist, and Established Company, New York :The Free Press, 1974.
25.Shane.（2000）, “The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research Academy of Management”, The Academy of Management Review.
26.Sharma, P. and J. J. Chrisman （1999）,“Toward a Reconciliation of definitional issue in the field Of Corporate Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice” , pp11-27.
27.Sharma, P. and J. J. Chrisman（1988）,” The Entrepreneurship Life: How to gofor it and get it” , New York, Accountancy(UK) , Vo1. 102, No. 1134, pp. 56-78.
28.Shame, W.（1974）, “Venture Management : The Business of the Inventor”,Entrepreneur, Venture Capitalist, and Established Company, New York :The Free Press.
29Siropolis , N. C., Small Business Management : A Guide to Entrepreneurship, 7ed, Boston : Houghton Miffin company, 1989.
30.Timmons, J.A.（1999）, “New Venture Creation”, 5 ed., Singapore: McGraw-Hill,p. 37-40.
31.Williamson, Peter J., 1999, ‘Strategy as Options on the Future’, Sloan Management Review, (Spring): 117-126
32.Yusuf,A.（1995）,“ Critical Success Factor for small Business :perceptions of south pacific”,J. of small business management, PP.68-72.
33.Zenger, T. R. and B. S. Lawerence（1989）, “Organizational Demography: The Differential Effects of Age and Tenure Distribution on Technical Communication, ” Academy of Management Journal, 32, pp.353-376.