台灣農業面臨到人口老化及勞動力短缺的問題，再加上環境變遷的不確定性和自 由貿易造成的關稅劣勢，都為我國農業帶來挑戰。鑑於此一狀況，農業夥伴紛紛投入 數位科技，希冀透過數位科技強化對於農業產物的控制。然而儘管數位科技的重要性 已被農業認可，但如何採用數位科技進行產業轉型仍是一大難題。
本研究以個案研究的方法，以動態能力的觀點，探討農企業如何運用內部資源產 生差異化，以及探討農企業透過制度的改變，發展成新型態的組織結構與邏輯為本研 究主要觀察重點。
本研究透過凱馨實業股份有限公司為例探討對象於變動的環境中進行轉型，依照 動態能力進行內外部的資源整合與運用，並透過改變以往常規的模式調整策略，形塑 出一個新制度，以因應環境變動下帶來的挑戰，藉此提供企業轉型的參考依據。

Taiwan's agriculture faces challenges due to an aging population, labor shortages, environmental uncertainties, and tariff disadvantages resulting from free trade. In response to these challenges, agricultural partners are increasingly investing in digital technologies, aiming to enhance control over agricultural products. Despite the recognized importance of digital technologies in agriculture, the process of adopting these technologies for industrial transformation remains a significant challenge.
This study adopts a case study approach, utilizing the perspective of dynamic capabilities to explore how agricultural enterprises can differentiate themselves through the utilization of internal resources. Additionally, it examines how agricultural enterprises can restructure organizational structures through institutional changes.
Using Kai Shing Food Co., Ltd. as a case study, this research investigates the company's transformation in a changing environment. By integrating and utilizing both internal and external resources in line with dynamic capabilities, and by adjusting strategies through altering conventional models, the company shapes a new institutional framework to address the challenges posed by environmental changes. This study aims to provide a reference for enterprise transformation in response to these challenges.

網路資料:
行政院農業委員會農業試驗所。(2019)。智慧農業創造優質從農環境 塑造農業新典 範。 https://www.intelligentagri.com.tw/xmdoc/cont?xsmsid=0M068492401417538149&sid=0 M077360693586016950
行政院農業委員會農業試驗所。(2023)。智農是什麼? https://www.intelligentagri.com.tw/xmdoc/cont?xsmsid=0J164373919378174143
中文文獻:
楊智凱, 施瑩艷, & 楊舒涵. (2016). 以智慧科技邁向臺灣農業 4.0 時代. 農政與農情.
英文文獻:
Ambrosini, V., Bowman, C., & Collier, N. (2009). Dynamic capabilities: An exploration of how firms renew their resource base. British journal of management, 20, S9-S24.
Aoki, M. (1990). Toward an economic model of the Japanese firm. Journal of economic literature, 28(1), 1-27.
Argyres, N. S. (1995). Technology strategy, governance structure and interdivisional coordination. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 28(3), 337-358.
Arrow, K. J. (1964). Control in large organizations. Management science, 10(3), 397-408.
Ashforth, B. E., & Fried, Y. (1988). The mindlessness of organizational behaviors. Human Relations, 41(4), 305-329.
Bathelt, H., & Glückler, J. (2014). Institutional change in economic geography. Progress in human geography, 38(3), 340-363.
Bathelt, H., & Glückler, J. (2017). Toward a relational economic geography. In Economy (pp.73-100). Routledge.
Beese, J., Haki, K., Schilling, R., Kraus, M., Aier, S., & Winter, R. (2023). Strategic alignment of enterprise architecture management–how portfolios of control mechanisms track a decade of enterprise transformation at Commerzbank. European Journal of Information Systems, 32(1), 92-105.
Bishop, P., & Wiseman, N. (1999). External ownership and innovation in the United Kingdom. Applied Economics, 31(4), 443-450.
Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R. (1948). Formal Organizations (San Francisco: Chandler, 1962). BlauFormal Organizations1962.
Bolfe, É. L., Jorge, L. A. d. C., Sanches, I. D. A., Luchiari Júnior, A., da Costa, C. C., Victoria, D. d. C., Inamasu, R. Y., Grego, C. R., Ferreira, V. R., & Ramirez, A. R. (2020). Precision and digital agriculture: Adoption of technologies and perception of Brazilian farmers. Agriculture, 10(12), 653.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice: Stanford university press. In: Stanford, California.
Boyer, R. (2005). Coherence, diversity, and the evolution of capitalisms—the institutional complementarity hypothesis. Evolutionary and institutional economics review, 2, 43-80.
Butler, T. (1999). Shaping information and communication technologies infrastructures in the newspaper industry: cases on the role of IT competencies. ICIS 1999 Proceedings, 34.
Choudhury, V., & Sabherwal, R. (2003). Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects. Information systems research, 14(3), 291-314.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
Cram, W. A., Brohman, K., & Gallupe, R. B. (2016). Information systems control: A review and framework for emerging information systems processes. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(4), 2.
Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2010). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications. Routledge.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic management journal, 21(10‐11), 1105-1121.
Fayol, H. (2016). General and industrial management. Ravenio Books.
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization science, 11(6), 611-629.
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative science quarterly, 48(1), 94-118.
Gersick, C. J., & Hackman, J. R. (1990). Habitual routines in task-performing groups.Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 47(1), 65-97.
Giddens, A. (1984a). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Univ of California Press.
Giddens, A. (1984b). The constitution of society. Cambridge. Polity, 284.
Glückler, J., & Lenz, R. (2016). How institutions moderate the effectiveness of regional policy: A framework and research agenda. Investigaciones Regionales-Journal of Regional Research(36), 255-277.
Gong, H., & Hassink, R. (2019). Co-evolution in contemporary economic geography: Towards a theoretical framework. Regional Studies, 53(9), 1344-1355.
Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (1995). Total quality management: Empirical, conceptual, and practical issues. Administrative science quarterly, 309-342.
Hair, J. F., Bush, R. P., & Ortinau, D. J. (2000). Marketing research: A practical approach for the new millennium. (No Title).
Hall, P. A., & Thelen, K. (2009). Institutional change in varieties of capitalism. Socio- economic review, 7(1), 7-34.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American sociological review, 149-164.
Hargrave, T. J., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2006). A collective action model of institutional innovation. Academy of management review, 31(4), 864-888.
Hedrick, T. E., Bickman, L., & Rog, D. J. (1993). Applied research design: A practical guide.Sage Publications.
Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., & Winter, S. G.(2009). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations.John Wiley & Sons.
Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of economic issues, 40(1), 1-25.
Jones, A., & Murphy, J. T. (2011). Theorizing practice in economic geography: Foundations, challenges, and possibilities. Progress in human geography, 35(3), 366-392.
Kirsch, L. S. (1997). Portfolios of control modes and IS project management. Information systems research, 8(3), 215-239.
Langlois, R. N. (1997). Cognition and capabilities: opportunities seized and missed in the history of the computer industry. Technological innovation: Oversights and foresights, 71-94.
Latour, B. (1984). The powers of association. The Sociological Review, 32(S1), 264-280.
Latour, B. (1986). The powers of association in John Law (ed.) power, action and belief. In: London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
M. Hodgson, G. (2003). The mystery of the routine: the Darwinian destiny of an evolutionary theory of economic change. Revue économique, 542(2), 355-384.
Martin, R., Moodysson, J., & Zukauskaite, E. (2011). Regional innovation policy beyond ‘best practice’: Lessons from Sweden. Journal of the knowledge economy, 2, 550-568.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge university press.
Nunn, N. (2012). Culture and the historical process. Economic History of Developing Regions, 27(sup-1), 108-126.
Ouchi, W. G. (1977). The relationship between organizational structure and organizational control. Administrative science quarterly, 95-113.
Page, S. E. (2006). Path dependence. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1(1), 87-115.
Pentland, B. T., & Feldman, M. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and corporate change, 14(5), 793-815.
Pereira, L. S. (2017). Water, agriculture and food: challenges and issues. Water Resources Management, 31(10), 2985-2999.
Perrow, C. (1977). The bureaucratic paradox: The efficient organization centralizes in order to decentralize. Organizational Dynamics, 5(4), 3-14.
Piccoli, G., & Ives, B. (2003). Trust and the unintended effects of behavior control in virtual teams. Mis Quarterly, 365-395.
Ryle, G., & Tanney, J. (2009). The concept of mind. Routledge.
Scott, W. R. (1995). Symbols and organizations: from Barnard to the institutionalists.Organization theory: from Chester Barnard to the present and beyond, 38-55.
Scott, W. R. (2005). Institutional theory: Contributing to a theoretical research program.Great minds in management: The process of theory development, 37(2), 460-484.
Searle, J. R. (1995). The construction of social reality. Simon and Schuster.
Sewell Jr, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American journal of sociology, 98(1), 1-29.
Sitkin, S. B., Cardinal, L. B., & Bijlsma-Frankema, K. M. (2010). Organizational control.Cambridge University Press.
Snell, S. A. (1992). Control theory in strategic human resource management: The mediating effect of administrative information. Academy of management journal, 35(2), 292-327.
Snell, S. A., & Youndt, M. A. (1995). Human resource management and firm performance: Testing a contingency model of executive controls. Journal of management, 21(4),711-737.
Stene, E. O. (1940). An approach to a science of administration. American Political Science Review, 34(6), 1124-1137.
Tannenbaum, A. S. (1962). Control in organizations: Individual adjustment and organizational performance. Administrative science quarterly, 236-257.
Tannenbaum, A. S. (1968). Control in organizations (Vol. 166). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Teece, D., & Pisano, G. (2003). The dynamic capabilities of firms. Springer.
Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research policy, 15(6), 285-305.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
Tellis, W. (1997). Introduction to case study. The qualitative report, 3(2), 1-14.
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill. ThompsonOrganizations in Action1967.
Tranfield, D., & Smith, S. (1998). The strategic regeneration of manufacturing by changing routines. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 18(2),114-129.
Wade, M., & Hulland, J. (2004). The resource-based view and information systems research: Review, extension, and suggestions for future research. Mis Quarterly, 107-142.
Walter, A., Finger, R., Huber, R., & Buchmann, N. (2017). Smart farming is key to developing sustainable agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(24), 6148-6150.
Weiss, H. M., & Ilgen, D. R. (1985). Routinized behavior in organizations. Journal of Behavioral Economics.
Wiener, M., Mähring, M., Remus, U., & Saunders, C. (2016). Control configuration and control enactment in information systems projects. Mis Quarterly, 40(3), 741-774.
Williams, C. (2007). Research methods. Journal of Business & Economics Research (JBER), 5(3).
Wolfert, S., Ge, L., Verdouw, C., & Bogaardt, M.-J. (2017). Big data in smart farming–a review. Agricultural systems, 153, 69-80.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). sage.
Zikos, D., & Thiel, A. (2013). Action research’s potential to foster institutional change for urban water management. Water, 5(2), 356-378.