傳統品管圈與PDCA研究多聚焦流程架構與導入成效，較少將PDCA視為可量化管理的作業時程；相對地，專案管理領域之WBS、CPM/PERT等方法多用於產品開發、營建或新製程導入，較少回應品管圈「多人兼職、工期不確定」的實務特性。本研究以半導體封測廠品管圈為場域，結合能力成熟度觀點，嘗試將品管圈活動轉化為可量化管理的時程資料，以支援進度控管與資源調度。
本研究蒐集文件與成果報告並訪談中央管理委員會、直屬主管、產線教練與圈長，釐清組織分工、能力分級與推行困境。依個案公司PDCA流程拆解P1至A2共14項作業，建立工作分解結構(WBS)並界定作業相依關係，設計時程資料收集表，區分會議時數與會後作業時數，連續追蹤5個團隊、13週PDCA循環，統整各作業之計畫預定、實際投入與參與情形。
分析結果顯示，整體工時主要集中於Plan階段之問題定義與分析作業，以及Do階段之對策驗證，且多呈現「會後作業投入大於會中討論」的投入結構；P1主題選定、P2問題定義與量化、P3問題發生點釐清與P7真因判定之投入時數偏高，顯示其高度依賴資料蒐集、分析能力與跨單位協作，亦較易形成工時波動與進度落差來源。以時數差辨識之高變動作業包含D1、P2、P1與P4，建議優先透過作業拆分、資源配置、里程碑控時與標準化作法降低跨圈別工時差距並提升時程穩定性。
建立作業時程基準後，考量品管圈各PDCA子作業易受資料收集難度、驗證次數與圈員熟練度影響而產生較大工期波動，因此本研究以PERT時程估算方法，評估作業之以最樂觀(a)、最可能(m)與最悲觀(b)時間，據以量化人力配置與作業條件差異對完工時數的影響。估算結果品管圈專案期望總工期約33小時、總標準差約3.4小時，並推得95%合理工時範圍約26～40小時，可作為承諾時程之建議區間。另就開會作業而言，估算期望開會作業工期為 約 6 小時、總標準差為 約 0.7 小時，其合理範圍約為 5～7 小時，故可作為各組品管圈開會作業工時之管理基準。相較於假設工期確定的CPM，PERT較能貼近品管圈改善專案之不確定情境，適合作為建立基準時程與後續案例時程管理之主要方法；當實際工時長期偏離合理區間時，建議主管依量化結果辨識能力落差、支援資源不足或特定作業卡關原因，並結合圈員成熟度設定差異化的承諾時程與輔導需求，以提升時程規劃之可行性與執行穩定性。

CPM/PERT are typically applied to product development or construction rather than continuous-improvement activities with part-time participation and uncertain durations. This study investigates a semiconductor assembly-and-test company and integrates a capability maturity perspective to convert QCC activities into measurable scheduling data for progress control and resource coordination.
Based on documents and interviews with the steering committee, managers, coaches, and circle leaders, fourteen PDCA tasks (P1–A2) were defined to build a WBS and specify task precedence. A time-recording form was developed to separate meeting hours from post-meeting work hours; PERT estimation indicates expected meeting effort of ~6 hours (SD ~0.7 hours) with a 95% reasonable range of ~5–7 hours as a planning baseline. Five QCC teams were tracked weekly across a full 13-week PDCA cycle.
Results show a consistent “post-meeting work > meeting discussion” pattern. Effort concentrates in Plan-stage problem definition/analysis and Do-stage countermeasure verification. P1, P2, P3, and P7 require higher effort and are more prone to slippage due to dependence on data, analytical capability, and cross-functional coordination. Using cross-team time ranges as variability indicators, D1, P2, P1, and P4 were identified as high-variability tasks, implying priorities for task decomposition, milestone control, resource allocation, and standardization. Applying PERT three-point estimation yields an expected total duration of ~1,985 minutes (~33 hours), a total standard deviation of ~203 minutes (~3.4 hours), and a 95% reasonable completion range of ~26–40 hours, supporting capability-adjusted commitment schedules and coaching plans.

一、 外文部分(依作者姓名開頭字母排列)
1. Campion, M. A., Cheraskin, L., & Stevens, M. J. (1994). Career-related antecedents and outcomes of job rotation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1518–1542. https://doi.org/10.2307/256797
2. Cole, R. E. (1979). Work, Mobility, and Participation: A Comparative Study of American and Japanese Industry. University of California Press.
3. Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis.
4. Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1980). A Five-Stage Model of the Mental Activities Involved in Directed Skill Acquisition. University of California, Berkeley.
5. Dooley, R. (1945). Training Within Industry: Report. War Manpower Commission, Training Within Industry Service.
6. Doran, G. T. (1981). “There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives.” Management Review, 70(11), 35–36.
7. Eraut, M. (2004). “Informal learning in the workplace.” Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247–273.
8. Gatchalian, M. M. (1997). “A complete systems approach to quality improvement in manufacturing.” International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 14(6), 571–585.
9. Gupta, G., & Ahmadi, E. (2024). (Ultra)wide-bandgap semiconductors for electric vehicles. MRS Bulletin, 49, 730–737.
10. Hall, D. M., & Whyte, J. (2022). Teaching generative construction scheduling. Automation in Construction.
11. Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. McGraw-Hill.
12. International Organization for Standardization (2015). ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems – Requirements. Geneva: ISO.
13. Ishikawa, K. (1976). Guide to Quality Control. Tokyo: Asian Productivity Organization.
14. Ishikawa, K. (1985). What Is Total Quality Control? The Japanese Way. Prentice Hall.
15. Juran, J. M. (1992). Juran on Quality by Design.
16. Joseph J. M., Cecil R. P., and Edward W. D. (1995). Project Management with CPM, PERT, and Precedence Diagramming.
17. Kelley, J. E., & Walker, M. R. (1959). Critical-Path Planning and Scheduling. Proceedings of the Eastern Joint Computer Conference, 160–173.
18. Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, 12th Edition, Wiley.
19. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall.
20. Koneru, K. (2018). Understanding and Managing Quality Circles: A Theoretical Perspective. SSRN Working Paper.
21. Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill.
22. Lillrank, P. (1995). “The transfer of management innovations from Japan.” Organization Studies, 16(6), 971–989.
23. Lombardo, M. M., & Eichinger, R. W. (1996). The Career Architect Development Planner. Lominger.
24. Malcolm, D. G., Roseboom, J. H., Clark, C. E., & Fazar, W. (1959). Application of a Technique for Research and Development Program Evaluation. Operations Research, 7(5), 646–669.
25. McCall, M. W. (1988). Developing Executives Through Work Experience. Lexington Books.
26. McCall,　M. W. (2010). Recasting leadership development. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(1), 3–19.
27. Moder, J. J., & Phillips, C. R. (1970). Project Management with CPM and PERT. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
28. Project Management Institute (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge(PMBOK Guide), 6th Edition, PMI.
29. Sulaeman, S., Misaran, M. S., Farm, Y. Y., & Chua, B. L. (2024). Quality Control Circles Technique for Reducing Fine Bored Parts Rejects After Tool Change. Proceeding of the International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research for Sustainable Innovation, 1, 239–248.
30. Sze, S. M., & Ng, K. K. (2006). Physics of semiconductor devices, 3rd Edition, Wiley.
31. Suryono, Y. B., & Hasbullah, H. (2020). Analysis of new production line project improvement through critical path method (CPM), design structure matrix (DSM) and program evaluation and review (PERT). Journal of Industrial Engineering & Management Research, 1(4), 9–17
32. Watz, C. (2019). Heat Experiences for Development (White paper). Center for Creative Leadership.
二、 中文部分(依作者姓名筆劃排列)
1. 林孟瑋(2002)。〈品管圈活動關鍵成功因素之研究：以台灣地區團結圈活動為例〉。國立中興大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
2. 陳火順(1999)。〈台灣品管圈推動之回顧與展望〉。《品質月刊》，35(4)，12–20。
3. 張怡君(2010)。〈品管圈活性化之研究─以製造業 E 公司為例〉。國立雲林科技大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文。
4. 湯鈞堯(2018)。〈以人因工程改善手法結合品管圈品管圈活動進行作業環境改善—以基本金屬製造業 C 廠為例〉。國立雲林科技大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文。
5. 楊志良(2001)。〈國際品管圈大會(IC品管圈)與台灣企業參與發展〉。《品質月刊》，27(3)，45–53。
6. 蘇冠榮〈研發專案成功因子之規劃與執行〉。國立成功大學工學院工程管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。

三、 網路部分
1. SIA Semiconductor Industry Association https://www.semiconductors.org/semiconductors-101/what-is-a-semiconductor/ 。最後瀏覽日:2026年1月7日。