在全球化市場競爭之下，許多企業與組織採用跨功能團隊以創造創新。多樣性專業的跨功能團隊可以提高創造力，然而這樣的特性，在互動當中也因此產生衝突。根據創意歷程，本研究提出了三個階段，(一)產生點子。(二)選擇、編輯與推銷點子。 (三)在相關的市場中獲取方針，並具體化點子。本研究開始先定義跨功能團隊在創意歷程的優勢，多元的觀點、解決複雜問題的能力、與減少不確定因素；然而，這樣的優勢，同時也造成了缺乏凝聚共識、溝通藩籬、與具體原型完成度的問題。本研究因此進一步探討與比較數個團隊歷程型態並發現情境法所具備的多元觀點、敘事描述、與假定和假設可以促進跨功能團隊的三大優勢。更進一步來討論，由於情境法具備之整合知識能力、共同的語言、與草稿和故事版，同時也可以抑制跨功能團隊的三大劣勢。

本研究共有六項研究，並以實驗法來驗證所提出的六大假設。本研究共有二十六組，每組各有一個設計師，一個工程師，一個行銷人員。在創意歷程當中，實驗組將採用情境法的指示，而對照組將沒有特定的指示。研究一以測量各組多元化觀點之能力；研究二以自我與同儕評論訊息分化與整合之能力，研究三以測量各組整合與分化之能力；研究四以自我與同儕評論團隊溝通之能力，研究五以自我與專家評論市場不確定因素之能力；研究六以專家與公眾評論原形的完整性。結果顯示六項研究實驗組均有顯著優於控制組的表現，六項研究也均支持所提出的六項假設。

總括而言，本研究確認了跨功能團隊的優勢與劣勢，並提出如何以情境法促進跨功能團隊在創造力之貢獻。本研究所設計的實驗驗證了六項假設，確認了情境法在跨功能團隊創意歷程當中之促進優勢與抑制其劣勢上的貢獻，與跨功能團隊促進創新的功能。本研究也進一步討論研究結果及應用價值，並提供未來研究的方向。

In competitive globalized market, many enterprises and organizations adopt cross-functional teams to create innovation. Cross function teams (CFT) benefit the diversity in professions then enhance creativity, however suffer also conflicts during interactions. Based on the process of creativity, the present study examined three different stages in creativity process, which are 1) creating ideas, 2) selecting, editing, and promoting ideas, and 3) gaining orientation on the relevant market and specifying ideas. The study started by identifying the advantages of CFT in three stages respectively, which are providing diverse perspective, solving complex problem, and reducing uncertain elements. However, CFT bring in the challenges as low cohesion, communication barriers, and problem with completion of prototype in these stages respectively. The research then reviewed and compared several group processing types and found that scenario method can contribute most to enhance the three advantages of CFT by encouraging multiple perspectives, narrative description and assumption and hypothesis. Moreover, the scenario method can also decrease the three disadvantages abovementioned of CFT by promoting integrate knowledge, common language, and sketch and story board.

The research conducted 6 studies using experiments to validate 6 proposed hypotheses. There are 26 groups, and each group consisted of one designer, an engineer, and a marketer. The experimental groups were instructed by using scenario method with the comparison of control groups without particular instruction of group processing. The dependent measures in study 1 is diverse perspectives; self and peer assessment of information differentiation and integration for study 2; integrative complexity for study 3; self and peer assessment of communication of team members for study 4; self and expert assessment of market turbulence for study 5; and expert and public assessment of the completion of prototype for study 6. The results of the 6 studies showed significant outperformance of experimental groups than their counterpart of control groups. All the results support proposed hypotheses.

To conclude, this study well identified the advantages and disadvantages of cross function teams and propose how scenario method can enhance the contribution of CFT in promoting creativity. The experiment study empirical verified six hypotheses derived by the propositions and confirm that scenario method can contribute to enhance the three advantages and decrease three disadvantages in the three stages of the group process of CFT thus ensure the function of CFT in promotion of innovation. The research discussed the implication of findings for application and proposals for further study.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Assist service sector technology development (ASSTD). (2010). Service innovation competition.
Ann Majchrzak, Philip H.B. (2011). More and Samer Faraj. Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams.
Ayers, D., Dahlstrom, R and Skinner, S.J. (1997). An exploratory investigation of organizational antecedents to new product success. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 107-116.
Aldridge, M. D., & Swarnidass, P. M. (1996). Cross-functional management of technology. Chicago: Irwin.
AitSahlia, F., Johnson, E., & Will, P. (1995). Is concurrent engineering always a sensible proposition? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 42:166-170.
Blanning RW. (1995). A decision support framework for scenario management. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on decision support systems, vol 2, Hong Kong, pp 657–660.
Boden, M. A. (1991). The creative mind: Myths & mechanisms. New York: Basic Books.
Becker HA. (1983). The role of gaming and simulation in scenario project. In: Stahl (ed). Operational gaming: an international approach. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, pp 187–202.
Brown S. (1968). Scenarios in system analysis. In: Quade ES, Boucher WE (eds). Systems analysis and policy planning: applications in defense. Elsevier, New York, pp 298–309.
Baker-Brown, G., Ballard, E. J., Bluck, S., deVries, B., Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The conceptual/ integrative complexity scoring manual. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 401¡V418). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Chiu, C-y, & Kwan, Y.-Y. (2010). Culture and creativity: A process model. Management & Organization Review, 6(3), 447-461.
Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organ. Sci. 15(5) 555–568.
Carroll JM. (1999). Five reasons for scenario-based design. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii international conference on systems sciences, Wailea, HI.
Donnellon, A. (1996). Team talk: The power of language in team dynamics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Dougherty, D. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organ. Sci. 3(2) 179–202.
Ford, RC. and Randolph, WA. (1992). "Cross-functional structures: a review and integration of, matrix organization and project management", Journal of Management, VoL 18, pp.267•94.
Garry D. Peterson, Graeme S. Cumming, and Stephen R. Carpenter. (2003). Scenario Planning: a tool for conservation in an uncertain world. Conservation Biology, Pages 358–366. Volume 17, No. 2, April (2003)
Glenn M. Parker. (2003). Cross-functional teams: working with allies, enemies, and other strangers.
Glenn M. Parker. (1994). "Cross-functional collaboration", Training and Development, October, pp.49-52.
Gloria Baker-Brown, Elizabeth J. Ballard, Susan Bluck, Brian de Vries, Peter Sued feld and Philip E. Tetlock. (1992). Coding Manual for Conceptual/Integrative Complexity.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5,444–454.
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict type sand dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 530-557.
Jackson, S.E., May, RE. and Whitney, K, (1995). "Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision making teams". In Guzzo, RA and Salas, E, (Eds), Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
J.D. Pincus. (1986). “Communication satisfaction, job satisfaction and job performance”, Human Communication Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 395- 419.
Keller RT. (2001). Cross-functional project groups in research and new product development: diversity, communications, job stress, and outcomes. Acad. Manage. J. 44:547–59.
Keller, R. T. (2001). Cross-functional Project Groups in Research and New Product Development: Diversity, Communications, Job Stress and Outcomes, Academy of Management Journal 44,547–55.
Kettley P and Hirsh W. (2000). Leaning from Cross-Functional Teamwork, Ies Report 356, Institute for Employment Studies.
Lovelace, K., D. L. Shapiro, L. R. Weingart. (2001). Maximizing cross functional
new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Acad. Management J. 44(4) 779–793.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Lin, Yi-Wen. (2009). Exploring a Measurement of Market Turbulence－A Study on Taiwan’s Financial Industries. Graduate Institute of Management Science.
Martelli, A. (2001). ‘Scenario building and scenario planning: state of the art and prospects of evolution’, Future Research Quarterly, published on the summer.
Matthias Jake, X. Tung Bui and John M. Carroll. (1998). Scenario Management: An Interdisciplinary Approach.
Notten, P.W.F., Rotmans, J., van Asselt, M.B.A. and Rothman, D.S. (2003). ‘An updated scenario methodology’, Futures, Vol. 35.
Northcraft, G.B., Polzer, J.T., Neal, MA. And Kramer, RM. (1995). "Diversity, social identity, and performance: emergent social dynamics in cross-functional teams", in Jackson, S.E. and Ruderman, MN. (Eds), Diversity in Work Teams, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp.17-46.
Pomerol, J.-C. (1997). Artificial intelligence and human decision making. European Journal of Operations Research 99, 3-25.
Robert W Olsen. (2007). The Art of Creative Thinking
Rosson and Carroll. (2002). Usability engineering: scenario-based development of human-computer interaction.
Richard Boyle. (1997). Team-Based Working. Committee for Management Research Discussion Paper 4.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sheila Simsarian Webber. (2002). Leadership and trust facilitating cross-functional team success. The Journal of Management Development; 2002; 21, 3/4; ABI/INFORM Global pg.20l.
Sarah Holland, Kevin Gaston and Jorge Gomes. (2000). Critical success functional for cross-functional teamwork in new product in new product development. IJMR September.
Smith, Preston G., and Donald G. (1991). Reinertsen. Developing Products in Half the Time, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Suedfeld, P., Tetlock, P.E., & Jhangiani, R. (2007). Assessing the sincerity of politicians: The case of President George W. Bush. Psicología Política, No 35, 2007, 69-79.
Talentre preneurship Innovation Collaboration(TiC100).(2011)
Taras Kowaliw, Alan Dorin and Jon Mc CORMACK. (2011). Promoting Creative Design in Interactive Evolutionary Computation. IEEE Transactions on transactions on evolutionary computation, author’s preprint.
Thieme, R.J., Song, X.M. and Shin, G.-C. (2003). Project management characteristics and new product survival, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20, 104–119.
Tomasello, M. (2001). Cultural transmission: A view from chimpanzees and human infants. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(2): 135–146.
Tzokas, N., Saren, M. and Brownlie, D. (1997). Generating marketing resources by means of R&D activities in high technology firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 26, 331-340.
T. Ikeda, A. Okumura, and K. Muraki. (1998). “Information Classification and Navigation Based on 5W1H of the Target Information,” Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
Tetlock, P. E., Armor, D., & Peterson, R. S. (1994). The slavery debate in antebellum
America: Cognitive style, value conflict, and the limits of compromise. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 115¡V126.
Tetlock, P. E., Peterson, R. S., & Berry, J. M. (1993). Flattering and unflattering
personality portraits of interactively simple and complex managers. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 64(3), 500¡V511.
Weisberg, R. W. (1988). "Problem solving and creativity.”In R. J. Sternberg (ed.), The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives: 148–176. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wright, G. and Cairns, G. and Goodwin, P. (2009). ’Teaching scenario planning: lessons from practice in academe and business.’ European journal of operational research., 194 (1). pp. 323-335.
Wright, G. and Goodwin, P. (2009). ’Decision making and planning under low levels of predictability: enhancing the scenario method.’ International journal of forecasting., 25 (4). pp. 813-825.
Whiten, A., Spiteri, A., Horner, V., Bonnie, K. E., Lambeth, S. P., Schapiro, S. J., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2007). Transmission of multiple traditions within and between chimpanzee groups. Current Biology, 17(12): 1038–1043.
Wiersema, MF. And Bantel, K.A. (1992). "Top management team demography and corporate strategic change", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35, pp.91•121.