產學合作(University-industry collaboration)一直是產業界與學術界的重要議題，其重要性在於透過跨界資源的結合與運用以共創價值。然而，既有研究似乎著重於資源之間的整合或結合，而忽略資源整合前須進行動員之前提。因此，本研究以資源動員(Resource mobilization)觀點，透過質性單一個案研究，深入探討產學合作脈絡下，跨越產業界與學術界之資源動員如何在新產品開發歷程中開展。
奠基於組織間網絡資源的概念並整合現有關於資源動員的文獻，以形成探究產學合作脈絡中動員議題之理論視角。基於理論抽樣原則，以台灣石化產業的C公司與工業技術研究院轄下的學術研究單位I所進行的產學合作新產品開發專案為研究個案。藉由與產學合作雙方關鍵人員的十次深度訪談及參考次級資料，並以理論觀點的比較與詮釋來發展個案。
本研究有兩點發現：首先，資源在互動歷程中，不僅會改變參與互動中資源的動員性，同時也會改變與這些資源連結的其他資源之動員性。再者，當一項新資源加入互動或某項資源退出互動，會讓互動中之資源連結關係產生緊張(亦可視為資源之間的拉扯)，這是跨界資源重新配置或調整的驅動力。這些發現深化既有對於資源互動(4R模型) 的觀點，也擴充關於資源動員的有限知識。

Taiwan's petrochemical industry has been expanded by the amount to create Taiwan's economic miracle in the past. As the standard of living enhance, the growing petrochemical industry pollution burden on the environment also increase. Hence, citizens in Taiwan think not only the way to reduce the pollution, but also the transformation of petrochemical industry. With the guidewire of Guoguang Petrochemical, Ministry of Economic Affairs vigorously promote high-value petrochemical industry. With the view of establishing the high-value petrochemical industry promoting platform, integrate the needs of middle and lower reaches of the petrochemical industry vertically, and connect the power of university-industry collaboration horizontally.
To focus on the power of university-industry collaboration, Company C which is a leading enterprise in the domestic petrochemical industry face high-value petrochemical transformation wave and more actively look for development projects. In addition, Research unit I is one of the Institute under the Industrial Technology Research Institute and it is the academic representative in this case. Due to the long-term experience of cooperation between Company C and Research unit I, in the context of high-value petrochemical industry, promote the university-industry collaboration of new product development projects.
With the perspective of resource mobilization, conduct a qualitative single case study to understand the context of the university-industry collaboration. The aim of this research is to know how to mobilize industry representative and academic representative, and to explore the interaction and adjustment in university-industry collaboration in a dynamic industry environment background.

一、中文部分
1.PMI國際專案管理學會(2008)，PMBOK指南：2008， 臺北市: PMI國際專案管理學會。
2.任賢旺、黃憲仁 (2012)，確保新產品開發成功，臺北市: 憲業企管顧問有限公司。
3.司徒達賢(1996)，策略管理，臺北市:智勝文化事業有限公司。
4.吳清山、林天祐(2004)，產學合作，臺北市:教育資料與研究。
5.周文賢、林嘉力(2001)，新產品開發與管理，臺北市:華泰文化。
6.宋忠霖(2002)，「產學合作設計專案之研究」，國立雲林科技大學工業設計研究所碩士論文。
7.小島敏彥(2002)，新產品開發管理：企業革新的生存之道，臺北市: 中衛發展中心。
8.康自立(1995)，大學與產業界的合作，大學教育學術研討會大學自主與社會責任研討會，臺北市。
9.張宇樑、吳樎椒(2007)，研究設計-質化、量化及混合方法取向，臺北市: 學富文化。
10.徐作聖(1999)，全球化科技政策與企業經營，臺北市:華泰文化事業。
11.曾信超、王文賢(1993)，研究機構技術移轉之探討—以工研院為例，促進產業升級學術研討會，高雄市。
12.曾銘深(1999)，「OECD 國家推動產學合作之作法」，經濟情勢暨評論，第三期，頁80-98。
13.曾鑫城(1990)，「影響大學與民間企業技術合作績效之關鍵因素研究-以資訊電子業為例」，國立政治大學管理研究所碩士論文。
14.李振登(2004)，新產品開發，臺北市: 偉明。
15.林清和(1994)，「產學合作之特色」，技職雙月刊。
16.王慶富(1996)，專案管理，臺北市: 聯經出版事業公司。
17.王釿鋊、許湘琴、向玉玲(2013)，石化產業國際化與高值化，臺北市: 財團法人中技社。
18.管孟忠、林崇仁(2009)，Project Plus專案管理資訊系統專題實作，臺北市: 馬仕得管理顧問。
19.許君平(2004)，「新產品開發流程」，國立中央大學機械工程研究所碩士論文。
20.鄧成連(1999)，設計管理: 產品設計之組織、溝通與運作，臺北市: 亞太。
21.黃啟昌(2005)，「新產品開發決策模式之研究-以南部某家傳統製造業為例.」國立成功大學工程管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。
22.黃進為(2007)，轉變中的台灣石化工業，臺北市: 秀威資訊科技。

二、英文部分
1. Alchian, A. A., & Demsetz, H. (1972), Production, information costs, and economic organization, The American economic review, 62(5), 777-795.
2. Anderson, J. C., Håkansson, H., & Johanson, J. (1994), Dyadic business relationships within a business network context, The Journal of Marketing, 1-15.
3. Araujo, L., & Brito, C. (1997), Agency and constitutional ordering in networks: A case study of the port wine industry, International Studies of Management & Organization, 27(4), 22-46.
4. Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005), Resolving the capability—rigidity paradox in new product innovation, Journal of marketing, 69(4), 61-83.
5. Axelsson, B. (1992), Corporate Strategy Models and Networks-Diverging Perspectives, reprinted in Engwall, Lars (ed.)“Four Decades of Uppsala Business Research”, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Oeconomaie Negotiorum, 44.
6. Baker, M. J., Black, C., & Hart, S. J. (1988), The competitiveness of British industry: what really makes the difference? European Journal of Marketing, 22(2), 70-85.
7. Baraldi, E., Gressetvold, E., & Harrison, D. (2012), Resource interaction in inter-organizational networks: Foundations, comparison, and a research agenda, Journal of Business Research, 65(2), 266-276.
8. Baraldi, E., & Strömsten, T. (2006), Embedding and utilizing low weight: Value creation and resource configurations in the networks around IKEA’s Lack table and Holmen’s newsprint, The IMP Journal, 1(1), 39-70.
9. Baraldi, E., & Strömsten, T. (2008), Configurations and control of resource interfaces in industrial networks, Advances in Business Marketing and Purchasing, 14, 251-316.
10. Barber, A. A. (1985), University-Industry Research Cooperation, Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, 17(2), 19-30.
11. Bart, C. K. (1999), Controlling new products: a contingency approach, International Journal of Technology Management, 18(5-8), 395-413.
12. Bloedon, R. V., & Stokes, D. R. (1994), Making university/industry collaborative research succeed, Research Technology Management, 37(2), 44.
13. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997), Qualitative research for education: Allyn & Bacon Boston.
14. Booz, Allen, & Hamilton. (1982), New products management for the 1980s: Booz, Allen & Hamilton.
15. Bruneel, J., d’Este, P., & Salter, A. (2010), Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration, Research policy, 39(7), 858-868.
16. Caldwell, N. D., Roehrich, J. K., & Davies, A. C. (2009), Procuring complex performance in construction: London Heathrow Terminal 5 and a Private Finance Initiative hospital, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 15(3), 178-186.
17. Cooper, R. G. (1990), Stage-gate systems: a new tool for managing new products, Business horizons, 33(3), 44-54.
18. Cooper, R. G. (1995), Developing new products on time, in time, Research Technology Management, 38(5), 49.
19. Crawford, C. M., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2008), New products management: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
20. Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. (2002), Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research, Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553-560.
21. Dyer, W. G., & Wilkins, A. L. (1991), Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory: A rejoinder to Eisenhardt, Academy of management review, 16(3), 613-619.
22. Easton, G. (1995), Case research as a methodology for industrial networks: a realist apologia. Paper presented at the IMP Conference (11th).
23. Easton, G., & Araujo, L. (1997), Interfirm responses to heterogeneity of demand over time.
24. Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2006), Factors affecting university–industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling, Research policy, 35(2), 309-323.
25. Ford, D., Håkansson, H., & Johanson, J. (1986), How do companies interact?
26. Ford, D., & Mouzas, S. (2008), Is there any hope? The idea of strategy in business networks, Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 16(1), 64-78.
27. Geisler, E., & Rubenstein, A. H. (1989), University—industry relations: a review of major issues Cooperative research and development: The industry—university—government relationship (pp. 43-62): Springer.
28. Gnyawali, D. R., & Madhavan, R. (2001), Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: A structural embeddedness perspective, Academy of management review, 26(3), 431-445.
29. Håkansson, H., & Ford, D. (2002), How should companies interact in business networks? Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 133-139.
30. Håkansson, H., Johanson, J., & Wootz, B. (1976), Influence tactics in buyer—seller processes, Industrial Marketing Management, 5(6), 319-332.
31. Håkansson, H., & Snehota, I. (1989), No business is an island: the network concept of business strategy, Scandinavian journal of management, 5(3), 187-200.
32. Håkansson, H., & Waluszewski, A. (2002a), Managing Technological Development. IKEA, the environment and technlogy.
33. Håkansson, H., & Waluszewski, A. (2002b), Path dependence: restricting or facilitating technical development? Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 561-570.
34. Halinen, A., Medlin, C., & Törnroos, J. (2012), Å (2012) Time and process in business network research, Ind Mark Manag, 41, 215-223.
35. Halinen, A., & Törnroos, J.-Å. (2005), Using case methods in the study of contemporary business networks, Journal of Business Research, 58(9), 1285-1297.
36. Hallen, L., Johanson, J., & Seyed-Mohamed, N. (1991), Interfirm adaptation in business relationships, The Journal of Marketing, 29-37.
37. Hanel, P., & St-Pierre, M. (2006), Industry–university collaboration by Canadian manufacturing firms*, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 485-499.
38. Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. (2010), The practice of qualitative research: Sage.
39. Hisrich, R. D., & Peters, M. P. (1978), Marketing a new product: its planning, development, and control: Addison-Wesley.
40. Hisrich, R. D., & Peters, M. P. (1986), Establishing a new business venture unit within a firm, Journal of Business Venturing, 1(3), 307-322.
41. Jahre, M. (2006), Resourcing in Business Logistics: The art of systematic combining: Copenhagen Business School Press.
42. Johnson, S. C., & Jones, C. (1957), How to organize for new products, Harvard Business Review, 35(3), 49-62.
43. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. (2003), Marketing Management, (international version): Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
44. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1954), Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis, Freedom and control in modern society, 18(1), 18-66.
45. Lee, J., & Win, H. (2004), Technology transfer between university research centers and industry in Singapore, Technovation, 24(5), 433-442.
46. Lehmann, D. R., & Winer, R. S. (1997), Product management: Irwin Chicago, IL.
47. Liew, M., Shahdan, T. T., & Lim, E. (2013), Enablers in Enhancing the Relevancy of University-Industry Collaboration, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1889-1896.
48. Locke, L. F., Spirduso, W. W., & Silverman, S. J. (2013), Proposals That Work: A Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals: A Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals: Sage Publications.
49. López‐Martínez, R., Medellin, E., Scanlon, A., & Solleiro, J. (1994), Motivations and obstacles to university industry cooperation (UIC): a Mexican case, R&D Management, 24(1), 017-030.
50. Luca, L. M. D., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2007), Market knowledge dimensions and cross-functional collaboration: Examining the different routes to product innovation performance, Journal of marketing, 71(1), 95-112.
51. Lundgren, A. (1992), Coordination and mobilisation processes in industrial networks, Industrial Networks: a new view of reality, B. Axelsson and G. Easton, Eds. London: Routledge.
52. Mahon, J. F., Heugens, P. P., & Lamertz, K. (2004), Social networks and non‐market strategy, Journal of Public Affairs, 4(2), 170-189.
53. Mattsson, L.-G., & Johanson, J. (1992), Network positions and strategic action: an analytical framework: Univ.
54. Melo Brito, C. (2001), Towards an institutional theory of the dynamics of industrial networks, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 16(3), 150-166.
55. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994), Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook: Sage.
56. Modig, N. (2007), The division of responsibility for project supply, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 13(2), 87-97.
57. Mora Valentin, E. M. (2000), University–industry cooperation: a framework of benefits and obstacles, Industry and Higher Education, 14(3), 165-172.
58. Mouzas, S., & Araujo, L. (2000), Implementing programmatic initiatives in manufacturer–retailer networks, Industrial Marketing Management, 29(4), 293-303.
59. Mouzas, S., & Naudé, P. (2007), Network mobilizer, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 22(1), 62-71.
60. Nikulainen, T., & Palmberg, C. (2010), Transferring science-based technologies to industry—Does nanotechnology make a difference? Technovation, 30(1), 3-11.
61. Oliver, N., Dostaler, I., & Dewberry, E. (2004), New product development benchmarks: The Japanese, North American, and UK consumer electronics industries, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 15(2), 249-265.
62. Othman, R., & Omar, A. F. (2012), University and industry collaboration: towards a successful and sustainable partnership, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 575-579.
63. Penrose, E. T. (1995), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm: Oxford University Press, USA.
64. Pentland, B. T. (1999), Building process theory with narrative: From description to explanation, Academy of management review, 24(4), 711-724.
65. Peter, L. S. a. H. I. F. (1982), University-industry Reaearch Relationaships.
66. Plewa, C., Korff, N., Johnson, C., Macpherson, G., Baaken, T., & Rampersad, G. C. (2013), The evolution of university–industry linkages—A framework, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 30(1), 21-44.
67. Ritvala, T., & Salmi, A. (2011), Network mobilizers and target firms: The case of saving the Baltic Sea, Industrial Marketing Management, 40(6), 887-898.
68. Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003), Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research: Sage.
69. Schimmoeller, L. (2010), SUCCESS FACTORS OF NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES, Advances in Production Engineering & Management, 5(1).
70. Seppänen, M., & Mäkinen, S. (2010), Resources in academic discourse: An empirical investigation of management journals, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 3(1), 116-137.
71. Smirnova, Y. V. (2014), Attitudes of companies in Kazakhstan towards knowledge collaboration with universities, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 639-644.
72. Snehota, I. (1990), Notes on a theory of business enterprise: Department of Business Administration.
73. Snehota, I., & Hakansson, H. (1995), Developing relationships in business networks: Routledge London.
74. Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1997), The determinants of Japanese new product successes, Journal of Marketing Research, 64-76.
75. Ulkuniemi, P., Araujo, L., & Tähtinen, J. (2015), Purchasing as market-shaping: the case of component-based software engineering, Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 54-62.
76. Yin, R. (1994), Case study research: Design and methods, Beverly Hills: CA: Sage publishing.
77. Zirger, B. J., & Hartley, J. L. (1996), The effect of acceleration techniques on product development time, Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 43(2), 143-152.

 
三、網站部分
1.台灣中油股份有限公司 (2015)，尋求石化新契機 中油舉辦「2015年石化市場之變革與展望」研討會，取自http://new.cpc.com.tw/mobile/news/news-more.aspx?id=442
2.經濟部工業局 (2012)， 經濟部工業局101年度專案計畫期末執行成果報告「石化產業高值化推動平台計畫」，取自http://www.moeaidb.gov.tw/external/ctlr?PRO=filepath.DownloadFile&f=executive&t=f&id=5973
3.MBA lib (2014)，資源，取自http://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/%E8%B5%84%E6%BA%90
4.台灣中油股份有限公司 (2016)，關於中油「業務簡介」，取自http://new.cpc.com.tw/about/?clsid=15
5.台灣中油股份有限公司煉製研究所 (2015)，單位簡介，取自http://new.cpc.com.tw/division/rmri/about.aspx
6.工業技術研究院 (2014)，關於工研院，取自https://www.itri.org.tw/chi/Content/Messagess/contents.aspx?SiteID=1&MmmID=620622503202760013
7.工研院研究倫理委員會(2014)，組織架構，取自http://itriirb.itri.org.tw/committee_intro/organization.aspx