從經濟起飛的年代開始至今，企業創業家在台灣經濟發展史上開創了璀璨的成績。唐太宗、房玄齡、魏徵一起討論就曾下過這樣的結論：「創業維艱，守成不易」。就此不難看出前一代的創業家創立的豐功偉業，若守成接班的議題沒有重視，到頭來也是一場空。二代大學校長陳來助也明確指出：「台灣企業接班問題，是國安問題」。原因就在於有近七成的企業打算在十年內完成接班，但卻只有6%的企業有完整的接班計畫，這樣的比例對於企業的永續經營有著多嚴重的狀況可想而知，富不過三代的企業比比皆是。但是以往每當談論接班者關於接班的議題，探討的可能是創業者如何培養接班人、好的接班人應該具備怎麼樣的特質或條件。關於接班者本身的部分總是在探討其關鍵成功因素來效仿、失敗因素來借鏡或者是討論進入組織與組織間成員的衝突管理，但卻鮮少從「價值共創」的思維來想像其實未必需要透過碰撞衝突的方式來互相磨合，亦可以藉由行動者共同決定價值的角度來達成所有利害關係人的良好互動。
本研究會利用質性研究方法中的個案研究法，透過探究華嶸集團接班者的接班歷程，企圖挖掘出接班者如何從價值共創跟服務主導邏輯的相關思維來連結組織內成員，配合利用創新用途理論將員工視為內部顧客達到價值共創，順利接班跟組織同仁達到互信、互利。
本研究根據華嶸集團的個案發現，接班者其實不一定要堅持傳統思維，非要有一個屬於自身的戰功來證明自己的能力與接班的意願，團隊的信任與持續向上前進的企業文化才是接班者的痛點，戰功與順利接班沒有必然的因果關係。不是有戰功所以順利接班，也許是因為已經接班了所以所有事情皆為戰功。

關鍵字：接班、價值共創、服務主導邏輯、質性研究

In the past, how entrepreneurs can train their successors and what kind of traits or qualifications do a good successor should have is the thing which we might be interested in when talking about a series of issues related to succession. The part on the successor itself always explores the key success factors (KSF) and key failure factors (KFF) for others to emulate or the conflict management with the members of the organization after entering the enterprise, but it is seldom imagined from the thinking of “value co-creation” that it may not be necessary to rub shoulders with each other by means of confliction and collision, but it may be possible to achieve good interaction among all stakeholder through the perspective of actors jointly determining values.

This research uses the method of case study under the qualitative research to explore the succession process of the successor of Huarong Group, trying to find out how did the successor achieve “value co-creation” and succeeds smoothly with the corporate colleagues through the thinking related “service-dominant Logic” and using “job-to-be-done theory to treat the employees as internal customer.

According to the case of Huarong Group, this research found that it is not necessarily like a traditionally confused mindset for successors to have achievements in advance to prove their ability and willingness, but the trust of the organization and the motivation of the enterprise culture to keep moving forward are the pain points for successors. It is not because there is an achievement to cause the succession is smooth but it is perhaps because the succession is smoothly to cause the output of the enterprise seems like their contribution.

Key words: Succession, Value Co-creation, Service-Dominant Logic, Qualitative Research Method.

英文文獻
AMA, A. (1960). Marketing definitions: A glossary of marketing terms. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Ballantyne, D., & Varey, R. J. (2006). Creating value-in-use through marketing interaction: the exchange logic of relating, communicating and knowing. Marketing theory, 6(3), 335-348.
Barnes, L. B., & Hershon, S. A. (1976). Transferring power in the family business. Harvard business review, 54(4), 105-114.
Baron, J., & Lachenauer, R. (2021). Harvard Business Review Family Business Handbook: How to Build and Sustain a Successful, Enduring Enterprise: Harvard Business Press.
Bettencourt, L. A., & Ulwick, A. W. (2008). The customer-centered innovation map. Harvard business review, 86(5), 109.
Brockhaus, R. H. (2004). Family business succession: Suggestions for future research. Family Business Review, 17(2), 165-177.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard business review, 86(6), 84.
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail: Harvard Business Review Press.
Christensen, C. M. (2013). The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail: Harvard Business Review Press.
Christensen, C. M., Dillon, K., Hall, T., & Duncan, D. S. (2016). Competing against luck: The story of innovation and customer choice. New York.
Christensen, C. M., Hall, T., Dillon, K., & Duncan, D. S. (2016). Know your customers’ jobs to be done. Harvard business review, 94(9), 54-62.
CONSTANTIN, J., & LUSCH, R. (1994). Understanding Resource. Paper presented at the Management, The Planning Forum, Oxford.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14(4), 532-550.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). Theoretical sampling. In Sociological methods (pp. 105-114): Routledge.
Grönroos, C., & Voima, P. (2013). Critical service logic: making sense of value creation and co-creation. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 41(2), 133-150.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity.
Kohtamäki, M., & Rajala, R. (2016). Theory and practice of value co-creation in B2B systems. In: Elsevier.
Levitt, T. (1962). Innovation in marketing, new perspectives for profit and growth (Vol. 1): McGraw-Hill.
Levitt, T. (2004). Marketing myopia. Harvard business review., 82(7/8), 138-149.
Lockamy, A., Carson, C. M., & Lohrke, F. T. (2016). An evaluation of key determinants preventing intra-family business succession. Journal of Family Business Management.
Longenecker, J. G., & Schoen, J. E. (1978). Management succession in the family business. Journal of Small Business Management (pre-1986), 16(000003), 1.
Lusch, R. F., Vargo, S. L., & O’brien, M. (2007). Competing through service: Insights from service-dominant logic. Journal of retailing, 83(1), 5-18.
Marcos-Cuevas, J., Nätti, S., Palo, T., & Baumann, J. (2016). Value co-creation practices and capabilities: Sustained purposeful engagement across B2B systems. Industrial Marketing Management, 56, 97-107.
Morris, M. H., Williams, R. O., Allen, J. A., & Avila, R. A. (1997). Correlates of success in family business transitions. Journal of business venturing, 12(5), 385-401.
Morris, M. H., Williams, R. W., & Nel, D. (1996). Factors influencing family business succession. International journal of entrepreneurial behavior & research.
Murray, B. (2003). The succession transition process: A longitudinal perspective. Family Business Review, 16(1), 17-33.
Myers, M. D. (2019). Qualitative research in business and management: Sage.
Ormston, R., Spencer, L., Barnard, M., & Snape, D. (2014). The foundations of qualitative research. Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers, 2(7), 52-55.
Pinho, N., Beirão, G., Patrício, L., & Fisk, R. P. (2014). Understanding value co-creation in complex services with many actors. Journal of Service Management.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance (0684841460). Retrieved from
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004a). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of interactive marketing, 18(3), 5-14.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004b). The future of competition: Co-creating unique value with customers: Harvard Business Press.
Pyromalis, V. D., Vozikis, G. S., Kalkanteras, T. A., Rogdaki, M. E., & Sigalas, G. P. (2008). An integrated framework for testing the success of the family business succession process according to gender specificity. Handbook of research on family business, 422.
Ramaswamy, V., & Gouillart, F. (2010). Building the co-creative enterprise. Harvard business review, 88(10), 100-109.
Sniukas, M., Lee, P., & Morasky, M. (2016). The art of opportunity: How to build growth and ventures through strategic innovation and visual thinking: John Wiley & Sons.
Ulwick, A. W. (2005). What customers want (Vol. 8): McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing New York, NY.
Ulwick, A. W. (2016). Jobs to be done: theory to practice: Idea Bite Press.
Van Alstyne, M. W., Parker, G. G., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Pipelines, platforms, and the new rules of strategy. Harvard business review, 94(4), 54-62.
Vargo, S. L., & Akaka, M. A. (2009). Service-dominant logic as a foundation for service science: clarifications. Service Science, 1(1), 32-41.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1-17. doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2006). Service-dominant logic: reactions, reflections and refinements. Marketing theory, 6(3), 281-288.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 36(1), 1-10.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 44(1), 5-23.
Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European management journal, 26(3), 145-152.
Wang, Y., & Shi, H. X. (2021). Particularistic and system trust in family businesses: The role of family influence. Journal of Small Business Management, 59(4), 700-734. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12533
 
中文文獻
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5): sage.
吳建明, & 連雅慧. (2012). 家族企業接班衍生組織變革、衝突與轉化之歷程研究. [Research on the Process of Organizational Change, Conflict and Transformation Led by Family Business Succession]. 管理學報, 29(3), 279-305. doi:10.6504/jom.2012.29.03.05
侯勝宗. (2012). 見所未見: 詮釋性個案研究方法探索. 組織與管理, 5(1), 111-153.
范惟翔, & 尤燈洲. (2017). 家族企業與二代傳承永續經營之研究－以S公司為例. [The Family Business and The Second Generation of Succeed Sustainable Operatings - the case study of S Company]. 專利與產學合作計畫報告, 3(1), 83-94. doi:10.6584/rpicp.3(1).13
徐慶雲. (1992). 家族企業的繼承問題: 國內家族企業繼承人的培育. National Taiwan University Graduate Institute of Business Administration,
葉匡時, & 操禮芹. (1996). 家族企業接班過程的網絡分析. 管理學報 (原管理科學學報), 13(2), 197-225.
虞邦祥, 林月雲, & 張小鳳. (2009). 傳承或變革：台灣企業接班歷程之質性研究. [Succeed or Change: The Succession Process in Taiwanese Enterprises: A Qualitative Research]. 組織與管理, 2(2), 109-153. doi:10.6792/om.200908.0109
劉韻僖. (2007). Family Control, CEO Power and CEO Succession in Taiwan's Public Companies. [台灣上市公司家族控制、ceo權力與ceo接班關係之研究]. 中山管理評論, 15(4S), 103-137. doi:10.6160/2007.12.10
蕭瑞麟. (2020). 不用數字的研究: 質性研究的思辯脈絡: 五南圖書出版股份有限公司.
簡春安, & 鄒平儀. (2004). 社會工作研究方法 (修訂版). 台北: 巨流.