簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 張嘉文
Chang, Chia-Wen
論文名稱: 大型自動化專案風險掃描機制建構——以客戶 SOW/RFP 規範為基礎
Constructing a Front-end Risk Scanning Mechanism for Large-scale Automation Projects: Based on Client SOW/RFP Specifications
指導教授: 王惠嘉
Wang, Hei-Chia
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 管理學院 - 高階管理碩士在職專班(EMBA)
Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA)
論文出版年: 2026
畢業學年度: 115
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 149
中文關鍵詞: 大型自動化系統 、SOW 、RFP 、前端接單治理 、接單品質 、專案風險管理 、資源基礎理論
外文關鍵詞: Large-scale Automation Systems, Statement of Work (SOW), Request for Proposal (RFP), Front-end Order Governance, Order Quality, Project Risk Management, Resource-Based View
相關次數: 點閱:14  下載:0 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 近年受人工智慧(Artificial Intelligence, AI)、高效能運算(High Performance Computing, HPC)、先進封裝與智慧製造帶動,大型自動化系統需求持續增加;惟此類專案具高客製化、長交期與高資本投入等特性,執行階段常發生工期延遲、規格變更與驗收爭議。研究者於實務中發現,許多專案風險並非於執行階段才產生,而是於投標前即已隱藏於客戶之工作說明書(Statement of Work, SOW)、需求建議書(Request for Proposal, RFP)與採購規範文件之中。
    有鑑於此,本研究以大型自動化系統專案為研究對象,探討企業如何透過投標前 SOW/RFP 規範分析與前端接單治理能力,建立系統化之風險辨識與評估機制,以提升接單品質與專案獲利品質。
    本研究採單一個案研究法與專家訪談法,以 M 公司為研究個案,整合業務、專案管理、技術、法務與供應鏈等跨職能觀點,建構投標前風險分類架構與風險評分模型;理論上以資源基礎理論為主軸,輔以動態能力理論與企業風險管理觀點。
    研究發現,大型自動化專案之高風險條款多數可於 SOW/RFP 文件中被具體辨識,前端接單治理能力對企業之接單品質與專案獲利品質具關鍵影響(完整發現與管理意涵詳見第五章)。本研究可作為大型自動化系統整合企業建立投標前風險治理機制之管理參考,並補足前端接單治理領域之研究缺口。

    Driven by artificial intelligence, high performance computing, advanced packaging and smart manufacturing, demand for large-scale automation systems has expanded rapidly. Projects of this kind are highly customized, technically integrated, capital intensive and long in duration, and their execution is frequently disrupted by schedule delays, specification changes, acceptance disputes and cost overruns. This study argues that such risks are not created during execution: they are already embedded, before bidding, in the client's Statement of Work (SOW), Request for Proposal (RFP) and procurement specifications. Taking Company M, a listed Taiwanese automation system integrator, as a single case and drawing on cross-functional expert interviews, the study constructs a pre-bid risk scanning mechanism comprising high-risk clause identification, a seven-category risk taxonomy, a Risk Score model, a Bid/No-Bid governance framework and a red-yellow-green control mechanism. Applied to three de-identified projects, the model's risk gradings were directionally consistent with realized outcomes; reflection on the one case it under-scored led to the introduction of a Customer Governance Factor. Because the three cases were scored retrospectively, this exercise is a proof of concept for the model's operating logic rather than a test of predictive validity. The study argues that front-end order-taking governance, alongside order volume, may play an important role in the profitability quality of large project-based enterprises.

    摘要 I Abstract II 誌謝 VII 目 錄 IX 表目錄 XI 圖目錄 XII 符號 XIII 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的 3 第三節 研究範圍與限制 4 第四節 研究流程與論文架構 5 第二章 文獻探討 8 第一節 專案型企業之經營特性與風險管理現況 8 第二節 前端接單治理之理論基礎 10 第三節 前端接單治理相關研究與風險辨識方法 18 第四節 本研究之定位與文獻缺口 22 第三章 研究方法 25 第一節 研究取徑與方法選擇 25 第二節 個案企業選擇與資料蒐集 29 第三節 訪談對象與訪談設計 32 第四節 資料分析程序與研究嚴謹度 33 第五節 訪談發現與綜合分析 37 第六節 本章小結 49 第四章 個案分析與風險掃描模型建構(含實證) 51 第一節 大型自動化系統產業結構分析 51 第二節 大型自動化專案常見風險來源 58 第三節 SOW/RFP規範文件之實務特性 63 第四節 M 公司個案背景分析 67 第五節 投標前風險掃描模型建構 69 第六節 風險掃描模型之實證與應用 79 第七節 個案企業獲利品質趨勢之總體佐證 88 第五章 結論與建議 91 第一節 研究結論 91 第二節 理論貢獻 95 第三節 管理意涵與實務貢獻 96 第四節 研究限制 97 第五節 後續研究方向 98 參考文獻 100 一、英文文獻 100 二、中文文獻 104 三、產業資料來源 104 附錄一 半結構式訪談大綱 106 附錄二 訪談整理逐字稿 109 附錄三 個案企業專案風險管制表之結構與四級分類對應 132

    Ahmad, I., & Minkarah, I. (1988). Questionnaire survey on bidding in construction. Journal of Management in Engineering, 4(3), 229–243.
    Bakhshi, J., Matous, P., & Crawford, L. (2025). From control to adaptation: Mapping theoretical developments of project governance research. Project Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728251383503
    Barbosa, M. T. J., & Carvalho, M. M. (2024). Toward a multilevel framework of dynamic capabilities through the lens of project management, project portfolio management, and project-based organizations. Project Management Journal, 55(3), 247–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728231207028
    Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
    Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being “native”: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59–74.
    Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
    Bromiley, P., McShane, M., Nair, A., & Rustambekov, E. (2015). Enterprise risk management: Review, critique, and research directions. Long Range Planning, 48(4), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2014.07.005
    Chua, D. K. H., & Li, D. (2000). Key factors in bid reasoning model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(5), 349–357.
    Coghlan, D. (2007). Insider action research doctorates: Generating actionable knowledge. Higher Education, 54(2), 293–306.
    Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2004). Enterprise risk management—Integrated framework.
    Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
    Davies, A., & Hobday, M. (2005). The business of projects: Managing innovation in complex products and systems. Cambridge University Press.
    Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. McGraw-Hill.

    Egemen, M., & Mohamed, A. N. (2007). A framework for contractors to reach strategically correct bid/no bid and mark-up size decisions. Building and Environment, 42(3), 1373–1385.
    Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
    Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121.
    Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview. Project Management Journal, 45(2), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21409
    Gann, D. M., & Salter, A. J. (2000). Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: The construction of complex products and systems. Research Policy, 29(7–8), 955–972.
    Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.
    Hassan, F. U., & Le, T. (2020). Automated requirements identification from construction contract documents using natural language processing. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 12(2), Article 04520009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000379
    Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 997–1010. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.332
    Heo, C., Ahn, C. R., & Park, M. (2026). Tacit collusion by LLM agents in construction bidding: Evidence from a simulated bidding environment. Journal of Management in Engineering, 42(2). https://doi.org/10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-7144
    Hillson, D. (2002). Extending the risk process to manage opportunities. International Journal of Project Management, 20(3), 235–240.
    Hobday, M. (2000). The project-based organisation: An ideal form for managing complex products and systems? Research Policy, 29(7–8), 871–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00110-4
    Horvey, S. S., & Odei-Mensah, J. (2023). The measurements and performance of enterprise risk management: A comprehensive literature review. Journal of Risk Research, 26(7), 778–800. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2208138
    Hoyt, R. E., & Liebenberg, A. P. (2011). The value of enterprise risk management. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 78(4), 795–822.
    Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
    Kerzner, H. (2017). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (12th ed.). Wiley.
    Lee, J., Yi, J.-S., & Son, J. (2019). Development of automatic-extraction model of poisonous clauses in international construction contracts using rule-based NLP. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 33(3), Article 04019003. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000807
    Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
    Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.
    Project Management Institute. (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide) (7th ed.).
    Samset, K., & Volden, G. H. (2016). Front-end definition of projects: Ten paradoxes and some reflections regarding project management and project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 34(2), 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.014
    Schilke, O., Hu, S., & Helfat, C. E. (2018). Quo vadis, dynamic capabilities? A content-analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 390–439. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0014
    Stamatis, D. H. (2003). Failure mode and effect analysis: FMEA from theory to execution (2nd ed.). ASQ Quality Press.
    Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.
    Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
    Wanous, M., Boussabaine, A. H., & Lewis, J. (2000). To bid or not to bid: A parametric solution. Construction Management and Economics, 18(4), 457–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190050024879
    Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.
    Williams, T., & Samset, K. (2010). Issues in front-end decision making on projects. Project Management Journal, 41(2), 38–49.
    Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.
    Wong, S., Zheng, C., Su, X., & Tang, Y. (2024). Construction contract risk identification based on knowledge-augmented language models. Computers in Industry, 157, 104082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2024.104082
    Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
    Zheng, C., Wong, S., Su, X., Tang, Y., Nawaz, A., & Kassem, M. (2025). Automating construction contract review using knowledge graph-enhanced large language models. Automation in Construction, 175, 106179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2025.106179
    陳有慶(2013)。供應鏈風險評估模式建立之研究:以資訊電子產業為例[碩士論文,國立政治大學]。政大機構典藏。 https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/59301
    M 公司(2022–2025)。年度報告書。公開資訊觀測站。 https://mops.twse.com.tw
    M 公司(2022–2025)。合併財務報告暨會計師查核報告。公開資訊觀測站。 https://mops.twse.com.tw
    M 公司(2022–2025)。法人說明會簡報。公開資訊觀測站。 https://mops.twse.com.tw
    公開資訊觀測站(2022–2025)。重大訊息。 https://mops.twse.com.tw
    SEMI(2024–2025)。World Fab Forecast Report。
    工業技術研究院產業科技國際策略發展所(2024–2025)。半導體產業研究報告。

    QR CODE