台灣八大地下管線所建置的工程牽動著民生需求，無非是公共服務和城市運作的關鍵要角，然而傳統地下管線工程公司面對的困境除了外部環境的勞動力缺乏、利潤逐年減少，以及2050淨零碳排等議題，內部的管理和工法的層面亦存在著缺乏數位思維、價值觀差異、技術障礙等諸多難題。由於目前尚無研究針對地下管線工程相關的升級轉型或競爭優勢做深入討論，本研究主張建立一套適用於地下管線工程提升競爭優勢的關鍵因素模式，藉由客戶的角度檢視並提供核心量能升級的方向，期望透過企業升級轉型、競爭力分析的文獻探討建立初步層級架構，再透過3份專家問卷調查取得關鍵客戶及業界具備高度競爭優勢之相關企業的共識，建立整體層級架構，再進一步利用15份AHP專家問卷調查客戶及潛在客戶之意見，予以掌握到地下管線工程競爭優勢的關鍵構面與關鍵因素。
本研究結果顯示，在4項關鍵構面的排序中，最重要的是「經營策略」，其次依序為「組織」、「人員」以及「技術」；而在10項關鍵因素中，排名前五的關鍵因素包含「企業文化」、「供應鏈協作」、「提升企業品牌形象」、「專業技能培訓」以及「獎懲制度」。隨著市場需求的演變，許多產業陸續轉型，提供客戶更全面更完善的服務，而地下管線工程亦需在此翻推進下找到能強化核心資源，取得競爭優勢的立基點，予以創造更多價值。

The construction works undertaken by the eight major underground pipelines in Taiwan are crucial components of public services and urban operations, directly impacting the daily needs of the population. However, traditional underground pipeline companies face numerous challenges in terms of management and construction method, including a lack of digital mindset, values differences, and technological barriers. This study advocates for the establishment of a critical factor model applicable to underground pipeline engineering to enhance competitive edge in various aspects. By examining from the customer's perspective and providing directions for upgrading core capabilities, the aim is to develop a preliminary hierarchical framework through literature exploration on corporate upgrading transformation and competitiveness analysis. This study employs 3 experts from customers and the enterprise who successfully achieved transformation to obtain consensus. This will help build an overall hierarchical structure. Further insight into the key dimensions and factors of underground pipeline engineering digital and transformation will be gained through 15 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) expert questionnaires involving customers and potential clients.
The result of this study indicates that among the four critical dimensions, Business Strategy is the most crucial, followed by Organization, Personnel, and Technology in sequential order. Regarding the ten key factors, the top five includes Corporate Culture, Supply Chain Collaboration, Enhancing Brand Image, Professional Skills Training, and Rewards and Penalties System. With the evolution of market demands, many industries are gradually undergoing transformations to provide customers with more comprehensive and improved services. Similarly, in the field of underground pipeline engineering, it is essential to identify a solid foundation that can enhance core resources, establish a competitive edge, and ultimately create additional value as the industry advances.

中文文獻
1. 林文寶、吳萬益(2002)，影響知識整合能力相關因素之研究：資源基礎論之觀點，交大管理學報，22 卷 1 期：51-88。
2. 張逸翔（2020），數位轉型之實務探討：驅動因子、關鍵要素，及績效評量，國立政治大學企業管理研究所(MBA學位學程)論文。
3. 洪略耀(2014)，企業持續性競爭優勢之關鍵成功因素探討-以智慧型手機為例，中國文化大學國際企業管理學系學位論文。
4. 洪千惠(2020)，企業數位轉型關鍵成功因素之研究，國立中正大學會計與資訊碩士在職專班論文。
5. 袁素萍（2003），企業轉型成功關鍵因素之研究，國立成功大學企業管理學系(EMBA)專班碩士論文。
6. 陳文欽等(2004)，從資源基礎理論探討醫療產業經營關鍵成功因素-策略矩陣分析法之運用，遠東學報第 21 卷第 3 期。
7. 許美雲(2006)，台灣農村酒莊經營關鍵成功因素之研究，亞洲大學經營管理研究所碩士論文。
8. 筒井信行、瀧澤正雄(1988)，成功的企業轉型--中小企業如何脫胎換骨，江金龍譯，尖端出版有限公司，1998年。
9. 褚志鵬(2009)，層級分析法(AHP)理論與實作，國立東華大學企業管理學系教學講義。
10. 劉偉平(2004)，台灣 IC 封裝測試業競爭策略分析-以 A 公司為例，交通大學管理學院高階主管管理碩士學程學位論文。
11. 劉百合（2018），台灣金融業數位轉型關鍵因素之探討，國立臺北科技大學管理學院經營管理EMBA專班論文。
12. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)，層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用(上)，中國統計學報，27 卷 6 期：5~22。

英文文獻
1. Aaker (1988), Identifying feelings elicited by advertising, Psychology & Marketing, Vol.5, pp. 1-16.
2. Barney, (1986), Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?, The Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656–665.
3. Barney (1991), Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management, 17, pp. 99-120.
4. Bruno & Leidecker (1984), Identifying and using critical success factors. Long Range Planning, 17, 23-32.
5. Davis & Thomas (1993), Direct Estimation of Synergy: A New Approach to the Diversity-Performance Debate, Management Science, 39 (11):1334-1346.
6. Farjoun (1994), Beyond Industry Boundaries: Human Expertise, Diversification and Resource-Related Industry Groups, Organization Science, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 185-199.
7. Fiol (1991), Managing Culture as a Competitive Resource: An Identity-Based view of Sustainable Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management, 17, 191-211.
8. Leonard-Barton (1992), Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development, Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111-125.
9. Hamel and Heene (1994), Competence Based Competition, John Wiley Press, New York.
10. Helfat (1994), Firm-Specificity in Corporate Applied R&D, Organization Science, 5(2):173-184.
11. Henderson & Cockburn (1994), Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, Special Issue: Competitive Organizational Behavior, pp. 63-84.
12. Hill and Jones (1998), Strategic Management, an Integrated Approach, 4th edition, USA, Houghton Mifflin Co.
13. Hofer and Schendel (1978), Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts, West Publishing Company, St. Paul.
14. Hoskisson (1999), Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of a pendulum, Journal of Management, 25(3), 417-456.
15. Mehra (1996), Resource and Market Based Determinants of Performance in the U.S. Banking Industry, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 307-322.
16. Mosakowski (1998), Entrepreneurial Resources, Organizational Choices, and Competitive Outcomes, Organization Science, Vol. 9, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 1998), pp. 625-643.
17. Morakanyane et al. (2020). Determining Digital Transformation Success Factors. Digital Transformation. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 4356-4365.
18. Porter (1980), Competitive Strategy, New York: The Free Press.
19. Porter (1991), Towards a Dynamic Theory of Strategy, Strategic Management Journal, 12, 95-117.
20. Saaty (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
21. Snow & Hrebiniak (1980), Strategy, Distinctive Competence, and Organizational Performance, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Jun., 1980), pp. 317-336.
22. Tomposon and Strickland (1981), Strategy and policy: Concepts and cases, Irwin-Dorsey.
23. Tyler (2001), The complementarity of cooperative and technological competencies: a resource based perspective, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, pp. 1-27.
24. Vincent (1993) , How eight firms transformed-with technology, Financial Executive, March/April 1993, PP.52~58.
25. Wernerfelt (1984), A Resource-Based View of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 171-180.
26. Wernerfelt (1989), From Critical Resources to Corporate Strategy, Journal of General Management, 14, 4-12.
27. Wernerfelt (1995), The Resource-Based View of the Firm: Ten Years After, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, No. 3. , pp. 171-174.