所有組織或企業皆由人所組成，其運行和發展仿若一個生機體，因此，就如任何人事物一般，都在生命週期的結構中運行，也都會經歷誕生、成長、壯大、衰退等生命階段。如何長期保有創新動力，維持企業的競爭力，轉化衰退危機，甚至成為成長動機，是企業亟待發現並發展出的成長動能。
衡諸內外部環境，為推動成熟型企業更新，帶來新動力，推動組織創新是必行之道。但如何透過適當理論與實務，在既有資源下，順利轉型為學習型組織，再將成功經驗從總公司推廣至各地，甚至觸達全部據點，使具歷史性的公司跳脫停滯不變、看似穩健的經營方式，一步一步，由點而線成面建立全新商業模式，是本研究要深入探討的核心精神所在。研究中依時間及目標不同，分三階段以行動研究方式進行之。
本研究個案正聲廣播公司是一家營運了64年的廣播媒體，總公司位於台北，設有台中、雲林、嘉義、高雄、宜蘭、台東等分台，在電視媒體尚未興起時，主導台灣流行音樂文化發展，1950至1960年代所舉辦之歌唱比賽、歌唱訓練班，孕育出楊燕、姚蘇蓉、吳靜嫻、鄧麗君、紀露霞、邱蘭芬、王慧蓮等國台語知名歌手，然而，隨著電視興起、廣播頻道自1994年後大量開放，以及網路等新興媒體成為資訊傳遞寵兒，個案公司在經歷了企業的成長期後，面臨內部自然停滯及外部激烈競爭的莫大挑戰。
歸納本研究探討出之學習型組織發展架構，係圍繞五項修練研擬各項執行發展架構，輔以變革管理和轉換型領導要素，建置出可行之發展架構。也發現推動學習型組織之關鍵因素為領導者、執行藍圖和執行時間表。另也得知發展學習型組織之具體作法包含五項修練、變革管理和轉換型領導。
有意義的學習，可以使組織成員在工作中活出生命的意義；學習型組織的建構永無終點，最後一時期的結束，就是另一個迴路第一時期的起點。因此本研究可隨個案公司不斷創新的作法，設計學習內容，使學習型組織不間斷的運作。也可做為其他企業推動學習型組織之參考，惟為因應各組織間之不同，推動前可先個別進行評估規劃，以特別設計之權變的學習型組織轉變模式為藍圖，依序推動實施。

Composed of people, all organizations and enterprises are operating and developing in a similar way as an organic mechanism, which experiences a life cycle that go through birth, growth, expansion and decay. However, every enterprise could avoid the decay by developing a sustainable growth strategy. The key element of the strategy is to stay innovative, which ensures enterprise’s competitiveness, prevents recession, and provides impetus for new growth.
Considering the internal and external environment, to re-image a matured company and to inject innovative ideas it is imperative to make significant organizational changes. The major focus of this thesis is to explore how a company, through theory and practice, can transform itself into a Learning Organization, using the limited existing resources, and then applies successful experience from the headquarter to affiliated companies. This kind of organizational transformation will allow a historical company to move out of stagnant development into a new forward looking business model. Using the Action Research method, the study is divided into three phases according to time periods and goals.
The case study company Cheng-Sheng Broadcasting Corporation, CSBC, headquartered in Taipei, is a company that has been operating for 64 years with affiliate stations in Taichung, Yunlin, Chiayi, Kaohsiung, Yilan, Taitung. Back at the time when TV media was at initial stage, CSBC played a key role in the development of Taiwan's pop music. It was the singing contest and singing classes organized by CSBC from the 1950s to 1960s that turned singers such as Yan, Yang; Su-Rong, Yao; Jing-Xian, Wu; Li-Jun, Deng; Lou-Xia, Ji; Lan-Fen, Qiu, and Hui-Lian, Wang into household names. However, with the rise of television and the surging of radio stations since 1994, as well as the domination of Internet and other new media, the case study company was met with unprecedented challenge brought up by stagnant business growth and fierce competition.
The study concludes that the structure of the learning organization is centered on the fifth discipline and is supported by the change management and the transformational leadership. The paper also learns that the factors of leader, execution plan and timetable all together play a key part in pushing forward the learning organization. Another finding is that learning organizations do practice fifth discipline, change management and the transformational leadership.
A meaningful learning can endow the life meaning to the members of the organization. Constructing the learning organization is a continuous course. An ending of a phase is followed by an outset of a new page. In response to different scenarios, this research not only provides diverse innovative approaches to sustaining learning organization operation, but also can be a reference for other enterprises to promote learning organization. However, given the difference between companies, it’s important that individual evaluation be made accordingly before unfolding the process. An adjusted transformation process towards learning organization can be adopted as a role model before it can be implemented in order of priority.

中文部分
1. 王文科、吳清山、徐宗林、郭秋勳、陳奎熹、陳聰文、黃政傑、黃德祥、詹棟樑、雷國鼎等共同編著，「教育概論」，臺北，五年圖書，民國八十四年。
2. 王佳玉，「轉換型領導與領導效能關聯之研究─以台北市政府為個案分析」，國立政治大學公共行政系碩士論文，第18、33頁，民國八十八年。
3. 吳定、鄭勝分、李盈盈，組織發展應用技術，第8~9頁，臺北，智勝文化，民國九十四年。
4. 吳明清，「教育研究-基本觀念與方法分析」，臺北，五南圖書，民國八十年。
5. 李庚霈，就業安全理論與實務，第382~383、389頁，臺北，揚智文化，民國九十三年。
6. 李祖壽，「怎樣實施行動研究法」，台灣省國民學校教師研習會出版，民國七十二年。
7. 周惠莉，「五大人格特質、性別角色與轉換型領導關聯性之研究」，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，第13頁，民國九十二年。
8. 彼得•聖吉著，郭進隆譯：第五項修練－學習型組織的藝術與實務，臺北，天下文化出版，民國九十八年。
9. 彼得•聖吉著，楊振富譯：第五項修練 IV－學習型學校（上），臺北，天下文化出版，民國九十一年。
10. 彼得•聖吉著，楊振富譯：第五項修練 IV－學習型學校（下），臺北，天下文化出版，民國九十一年。
11. 林建宏，「轉換型領導方式對提升警察組織士氣之研究」，國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系在職專班碩士論文，第31頁，民國九十二年。
12. 陳伯璋，「教育研究方法新取向」，臺北，南宏圖書，民國七十九年。
13. 陳美岑譯，Dean Tjosvold and Mary M.Tjosvold著，領導心理學，臺北，商周出版，第55、63~64頁，民國八十九年。
14. 陳梅生，「教育研究法」，臺北，臺灣省國民學校教師研習會，民國六十八年。
15. 陳惠邦，「教育行動研究」，臺北，師大書苑，民國八十七年。
16. 陳譓森，「轉換型領導對警政服務品質之影響研究」，國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文，第60、100頁，民國八十五年。
17. 彭懷真，「激勵與輔導」，第67頁，臺北，希代出版，民國八十九年。
18. 黃富順，「學習型組織的緣起、意義、特性與實施」，成人教育，第五十三期，第8~17頁，民國八十九年。
19. 蔡清田，「教育行動研究」，臺北，五南圖書，民國九十七年。
20. 魏惠娟，「邁向學習型組織的教育行政領導」，教育政策論壇，第一卷，第一期，第135~172頁，民國八十七年。
21. 蘇永富，「轉換型領導、組織承諾與組織公民行為關係之研究－以派外人員為例」，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，第5頁，民國九十年。

外文部分
1. Bass, B. M. and B.J. Avolio, Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership, Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp.2-3(1994).
2. Bass, B. M., Leadership and performance beyond expectation, Free Press, New York, pp.99(1985).
3. Bass, B.M., “From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision,” Organizational Dynamics(Winter), Vol.18, No.3, pp.19-31(1990).
4. Bassey, M, Creating education through research. Kirklington Press, New York(1995)
5. Bennet, J.K. and M.J. O'Brien,“The building blocks of the learning organization,” Training, Vol.31, No.6, pp.41-49(1994).
6. Burns, J. M., Leadership, Harper & Row New York,(1978).
7. Carr, W., and S. Kemmis,, Becoming critical: Education, knowledge, and action research., PA: The Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis Inc, Philadelphia (1986).
8. Corey, S.M., Action Research to Improve School Practice. Teachers College Press, New York(1953).
9. Daft, R.L., Organizational Theory and Design, Cengage South-Western6/E, Cincinnati,(1997).
10. Elliott, J. Action research for educational change, Milton and Philadelphia: Open University Press, New York,(1991).
11. Galer, G. and van der Heijden, K.,“The Learning Organization: How Planners Create Organizational Learning,” J. Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, Vol.10, No.6, pp.5-12(1992).
12. Jashapara, A.,“The Competitive Learning Organization: A Quest for Holy Grail,” J. Management History, Vol.31, No.8, pp.5-15(1993).
13. Jones, G.R. , Organizational Theory, Design, and Change, 6/E, Prentice Hall Press, Upper Saddle River(2009).
14. Kemmis, S. andMcTaggart, R, The Action Research Planner 3/E., Deakin University Press, Geelong (1988).
15. Kotter, J.P.,“Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp.59-67(1995).
16. Kovach, J. W.,“Invest in learning,” Executive Excellence, Vol.14, No.2, pp.11(1997).
17. Kruger, W.,“Implementation: the core task of change management,” CEMS Business Review, Vol. 1, pp.77-96(1996)
18. Leavitt, H. J. Applied organizational change in industry: structural, technological and humanistic approaches in Handbook of organizations, in J.G. March(ed.), Handbook of organizations, Rand McNally, Chicago, pp.1144-1170(1965).
19. Lewin, K, Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics,Harper, New York(1948).
20. Lewin, K, Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics,
21. Lewin, K., Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers, Harper & Row, New York,(1951).
22. Luthans, D., J. Rubach, and P. Marsnik,“Going Beyond Total Quality: The Characteristics, Techniques, and Measures of Learning Organization,” The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol.3, No.1, pp.24-44(1995).
23. Marquardt, M.J., Building the Learning Organization: A Systems Approach to Quantum Improvement and Global Success, McGraw-Hill, New York,(1996).
24. Marsh, C, Key concepts for understanding curriculum. Falmer, New York(1992).
25. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J. & Smith, C.A. Commitment to organizations and occupations: extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. J. Applied Psychology, Vol.78, No.4, pp.538-51(1993).
26. Patterson, L. and P. Shannon, Reflection, inquiry, and action, In L. Patterson, C. Santa, K. Short, and K. Smith （Eds.）, Teachers are researchers: Reflection and action., DE: International Reading Association, Newark(1993).
27. Pedler, M., J. Burgoyne, and T. Boydell, The Learning Company. A Strategy for Sustainable Development, McGraw-Hill, London,(1991).
28. Robins, A., J. Rountree, and N. Rountree,“Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion,” Computer Science Education, Vol.13, No.2, pp.137-172(2003).
29. Schon, D.A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Basic Books, New York,(1984).
30. Stringer, E.T. (1996). Action research: A handbook for practitioners, CA: Sage, Thousand Oaks,(1996).
31. Swieringa, J. and A. Wierdsma, Becoming a Learning Organization. Beyond the Learning Curve, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Amsterdam,(1992).
32. Van De Ven, A.H. and M.S. Poole, “Explaining development and change in organizations,” Academy of management review, Vol.20, No.3, pp.510~540(1995).
33. Wick, C. W., and L.S. Leon,“From ideas to action: Creating a learning organization,” Human Resource Management, Vol.34, No.2, pp.299-311(1995).