團隊溝通平台從爆發時期進入成熟發展階段，在眾多已開發上市的平台中，如何讓中小型團隊，甚至是大企業成為其高黏著度的使用者，仰賴於平台是否能夠給予使用者良好的介面互動體驗。本研究目的為針對不同的訊息功能介面應用於團隊溝通平台進行探討，解析使用者於操作時的主觀感受及看法，並進一步評估其如何造成使用者對於平台之使用性與滿意度產生感官的變化與影響。盼能收斂出訊息功能介面的設計改善方案，以創造更符合溝通需求的使用者經驗介面。

本研究包含兩個實驗階段：(1)前導性實驗：初步針對現有三款具代表性的團隊溝通平台進行功能以及使用性探討，並瞭解其功能介面的差異對於使用者操作時的影響；(2)驗證實驗：基於前導性實驗結果，將改善訊息功能介面作為主要深入探討的方向，並請受測者進行實驗任務操作，且以時間績效與量表結果對應用於團隊溝通平台之設計變項進行使用性評估。

驗證實驗以2 (標籤分類與否) x 3 (回覆型式)混合雙因子進行實驗設計，「標籤分類與否」採兩個層級：(1)有標籤分類、(2)無標籤分類，而「回覆型式」分為三個層級：(1)串聯式回覆、(2)獨立式回覆、(3)並排式回覆。

研究結果顯示：(1)回覆型式能直接影響使用者操作時間的績效，且同時為造成其對於系統及介面的使用性及滿意度感受差異的關鍵；(2)串連式回覆與獨立式回覆在時間績效表現與使用性評價上皆優於並排式回覆；(3)標籤分類對任務操作時間績效的影響程度大，但無法影響使用者對使用性與滿意度的判斷；(4)標籤分類雖有助於提升檔案訊息的搜尋效率，但分類卻可能產生不便。

Currently, the development of team communication platforms are from the rapid growth stage to the mature stage. Among lots of platforms listed on the market today, how to make small to medium enterprises and even large enterprises become its high viscosity users depends on whether the platform is able to provide a good user interface experience. The purpose of this study is to explore the different types of the information function interface used in the team communication platforms, and to analyze the user's subjective feelings and views in the task operation. How the interface affect usability and overall operation experience of the platform are also evaluated. Finally, it is hoped to sum up the design solutions of the message function interface improvement, and to create a user experience interface that is more in line with the communication needs.

The experiment in this study contains two phases: (1) Pre-test: It is to conduct preliminarily research pertinent to the function and usability of the existing three representative team communication platforms, and understand the impact of the differences in the functional interface on the user's task operation; (2) Verification experiment: Based on the results from the pre-test, the improvement of the message function interface is regarded as the main direction of the research. The participants were asked to operate the experimental tasks, then record their task performance and Likert scale results to help evaluate usability regarding the design variables of the team communication platform.

The verification experiment is designed based on a 2 (tag classification) by 3 (comment style) two-factor mixed design. The tag classifications are divided into two levels: (1) Ｗith tag classifications, and (2) Without tag classifications; The comment styles are divided into three levels: (1) The threaded comments, (2) The standalone comments, and (3) The side by side comments.

The generated results indicate that: (1) The comment style can directly affect the performance of the user's operating time, and is also the key to cause the difference regarding the system and interface usability and user satisfaction; (2) Threaded comments and standalone comments are superior to side by side comments in evaluation of user task performance and interface usability; (3) Tag classification has great influence on the user task performance, but it did not affect the users’ judgments on usability and satisfaction; (4) Tag classification can help improve the search efficiency of archival information, but in the case of classification may cause inconvenient.

英文文獻
(1) Anders, A. (2016). Team Communication Platforms and Emergent Social Collaboration Practices, International Journal of Business Communication 2016, 53(2), 224-261.
(2) Belbin, M. (1981). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. R&D Management, 12(3), 147-148.
(3) Chandler, F. G. (1995). Fundamentals of Business Communication. Chicago: Irwin Press.
(4) Cramption, C. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequence for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371.
(5) Culnan, M. J. & Marks, M. L. (1987). Information technologies. In Jablin, F. M., Putnam, L. L., Roberts, K. H. & Poter, L. W. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication, 420-443. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
(6) Dennis, A. R. & Valacich, J. S. (1999). Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of media synchronicity. Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Science, 1-10.
(7) Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
(8) Fischer, G. (2003). Design Social Networks in Support of Social Creativity, ECSCW 03’.
(9) Fulk, J., Schmitz, J. & Steinfield, C. W. (1990). A social influence model of technology use. In Fulk, J. & Steinfield, C. W. (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology, 117-140, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
(10) Goldhaber, G. M. (1979). Information Strategies: New Pathways to Corporate Power. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
(11) Glauser, B. (1984). A Phonology of Present-day Speech in Grassington .North York: Shire.
(12) Hassenzahl, M & Tractinsky, N. (2006). User experience - a research agenda, Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(2), 91-97.
(13) Heckner, M., Heilemann M., & Wolff, C. (2009). Personal information management vs. resource sharing: Towards a model of information behaviour in social tagging systems. International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), San Jose, CA, USA.
(14) Hightower, R. T., Sayeed, L., Warkentin, M. E. & McHaney, R. (1997). Information exchange in virtual work group. In Igbaria, M. & Tan, M. (Eds.). The Virtual Workplace, Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
(15) Johansson, C., Dittrich, Y. & Juustila, A. (1999). Software engineering across boundaries: Student project in distributed collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(4), 286-296.
(16) Jones, G. R. & George, J. M. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of management Review, 23(3), 531-546.
(17) Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: John Willy & Sons, Inc.
(18) Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The Wisdom of Team: Creating the High-performance Organization. New York: Harper Collins.
(19) Kotler, P. (2003) Marketing management, 11th edition, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
(20) Krone, K. J., Jablin, F. M., & Putnam, L. L. (1987). Communication theory and organizational communication: Multiple perspectives. In F. M. Jablin, et al. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication (pp. 18-40). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
(21) Lea, M. & Spears, R. (1992). Paralanguage and social perception in computer- medicated communication. Journal of Organizational Computing, 2, 321-342.
(22) Lea, M. & Spears, R. (1995). Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer network. In Wood, J. T. & Duck, S. (Eds.), Understudied relationships: Off the beaten track. 197-233, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
(23) Lindlof, T. R. and Shatzer, J. (1998). Media ethnography in virtual space: Strategies, limits, and possibilities. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(2), 170-189.
(24) Lipnack, J. & Stamps, J. (1999). Virtual teams: the new way to work. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 90-95.
(25) Majchrak, A., Rice. R., Malhotra, A., King, N. & Ba, S. (2001). Computer-mediated inter-organizational knowledge-sharing: Insights from a virtual team innovating using a collaboration tool. Information Resources Management Journal, 13(1), 44-53.
(26) Malhotra, A., Majchrak, A., Carman, R. & Lott, V. (2001). Radical innovation without collocation: A case study at Boeing Rocketdyne. MIS Quarterly, 25(2), 229-249.
(27) McDonough, E., Kahn, K. & Barczak, G. (2001). An investigation of the use of global, virtual and collocated new product project teams. The Journal pf Product Innovation Management, 18(2), 110-120.
(28) Moulton, W. (2007). Emotions of normal people. England: Cooper Press.
(29) Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
(30) Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner and A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (p. 7-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
(31) Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
(32) Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R. & George, J. F. (1991). Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34(7), 40-61.
(33) Pace, R. W. & Faules, D. F. (1994). Organizational Communication Third edition. NJ: Prentice Hall.
(34) Postmes, T., Spears, R. & Lea, M. (2000). The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 341-371.
(35) Preece, J. (1998). A guide to usability: Human factors in computing. Wokingham, England: Addison-Wesley.
(36) Rheingold, H. (1994). The virtual community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier, London: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
(37) Rice, R. E. & Case, D. (1983). Electronic message systems in the university: A description of use and utility. Journal of Communication, 33(1), 131-152.
(38) Roto, V. (2007, April). User experience from product creation perspective. In Towards a UX Manifesto workshop, 31-34.
(39) Salancik, G. R. & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224-253.
(40) Sarker, S. & Sahay, S. (2002). Information systems development by US-Norwegian virtual teams: Implications of time and space. Proceeding of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1-10.
(41) Saunders, C. S. (2000). Virtual teams: the puzzle. In Zmud, R. W. (Eds.), Framing the domain of IT management: Projecting the future through the past. Cincinnati, OH: Pinnaflex.
(42) Shneiderman, B. (1997). Designing the User Interface. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman.
(43) Shneiderman, B. (2009). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction (5th ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
(44) Short, J. A., Williams, E. & Christie, B. (1976). The psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.
(45) Sisler, P. & Titta, C. (2001). User Experience Design for Working Web Sites and Applications, Proceedings of the Society for Technical Communication, 2001.
(46) Stough, S., Eom, S. & Buckenmyer, J. (2000). Virtual teaming: a strategy for moving your organization into the new millennium. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 100(8), 370-378.
(47) Strohmaier, M. (2009). Why do users tag? Detecting user motivation in tagging systems. Retrieved December 7, 2009, from http://mstrohm. wordpress.com/2009/04/05/why-do-users-tag-detecting-usermotivation-in-tagging-systems/
(48) Suchan, J. & Hayzak, G. (2001). The communication characteristics of virtual teams: A case study, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 44(3), 174-186.
(49) Terdiman, D. (2005). Folksonomies tap people power. Wired News. Retrieved February 10, 2009, from http://www.wired.com/news/ technology/1,66456-0.html
(50) Tidwell, J. (2012). Designing Interfaces, Second Edition─Patterns for Effective Interaction Design. O’Reilly Media, Inc.
(51) Townsend, A. M., DeMarie, S. M. & Hendrickson, A. R. (1998). Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 17-29.
(52) Trevino, L. K., Lengel, R. H. & Daft, R. L. (1987). Media symbolism, media richness and media choice in organizations. Communication Research, 14(5), 553-574.
(53) Trevino, L. K., Lengel, R. H., Bodensteiner, W., Gerloff, E. & Muir, N. K. (1990). The richness imperative and cognitive style: The role of individual differences in media choice behavior. Management Communication Quarterly, 4(2), 176-197.
(54) Walther, J. B. & D’addario, K. P. (2001). The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer-mediated communication. Social Science Computer Review, 19(3), 324-347.
(55) Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and hyper-personal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.
(56) Walther, J. B. (1997). Group and interpersonal effects in international computer- mediated collaboration. Human Communication Research, 23(3), 342-369.
(57) Zollers, A. (2007). Emerging motivations for tagging: Expression, performance and activism. Workshop on Tagging and Metadata for Social Information Organization, WWW2007, Banff, Alberta, Canada. Retrieved February 10, 2009 from http://www.ibiblio.org/www_ tagging/2007/paper_55.pdf

中文文獻
(1) 余美貞(1999)。電子郵件使用後對組織溝通之探討研究。國立東華大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
(2) 吳姝倩(1996)。電腦中介傳播人際情感親密關係之研究─探訪電子佈告欄 (BBS) 中的「虛擬人際關係」。國立政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
(3) 快樂工作人雜誌《Cheers》(2014年5月1日)。臉書和LINE這樣用─業績、效率三級跳。
(4) 李元墩(1999)。組織溝通研究之回顧與展望。長榮管理學院學報，59，41-50。
(5) 李元墩(2004)。有效的溝通技巧。研習論壇月刊，45，13-25。
(6) 李文鵰、張仁家(2009)。教育行政溝通。全國教師在職進修資訊網教師專業發展電子報，8。
(7) 李佳穎(2008)。網路書店使用者介面之資訊呈現與商品圖片型式對使用者體驗感受之影響。國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文。
(8) 沈耿立(譯) (2013)。你是哪種鳥？DISC四型人格分析，讓你發現自己真正的職場優勢！(原作者：Rosenberg, M. & Silvert, D.)。臺北市：商周出版。
(9) 柳林緯(1996)。組織中電腦中介傳播系統使用之研究─以電子郵件為例。國立交通大學傳播所碩士論文。
(10) 徐佳士(1987)。大眾傳播理論。台北：中正書局。
(11) 秦夢群(2004)。教育行政─理論部分。台北市：五南。
(12) 許宏賓(2010)。網路虛擬實境中的設計溝通行為研究。國立交通大學建築研究所碩士論文。
(13) 陳啟榮(2011)。行政溝通的藝術與技巧。人事月刊，52(3)，1-15。
(14) 商業週刊(2016年3月24日)。Line辦公落伍！全球九萬家公司用它，商業週刊，1480。
(15) 張慶勳(2006)。學校組織行為。台北市：五南。
(16) 黃宗顯(2006)。教育行政溝通。載於謝文全主編《教育行政學:理論與案例》，327-362。台北市：五南。
(17) 黃慧雯(2000)。高雄報社記者組織內部溝通媒介之運用─從媒介豐富度和社會性影響模式理論看起。國立中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文。
(18) 鄧成連(1999)。設計管理：產品設計之組織、溝通與運作。台北：亞太圖書。
(19) 鄭彩鳳(1998)。學校行政─理論與實務。高雄市：麗文。
(20) 鄭瑞城(1980)。組織傳播。台北：三民書局。
(21) 謝文全(1985)。教育行政─理論與實務。台北：文景。
(22) 謝文全(2007)。教育行政學。台北市：高等教育。
(23) 顏國洲(2004)。虛擬團隊信任關係形成之研究─以明基手機研發團隊為例。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。

網路文獻
(1) Gartner. (2015). Understand Employee Work Patterns to Make Best Use of Enterprise Mobile Messaging. From Gartner: https://www.gartner.com/doc/3171518/understand-employee-work-patterns-make
(2) Gould, D. (1999). Virtual teams. Online available at: http://www.seanet.com/~daveg/vrteams.htm.
(3) Lepofsky, A. (2017). Slack Adds Threaded Conversations. From
https://www.constellationr.com/blog-news/slack-adds-threaded-conversations
(4) Paluch K. (2006). What Is User Experience Design, Montparnas. Retrieved from http://www.montparnas.com/articles/what-is-user-experience-design 
(5) PGi. (2015). 2015 PGi Global Telework Survey-Trends around the world shaping the future of work. From
http://img03.en25.com/Web/PremiereGlobalServices/%7B7e70c99d-24b4-43c3-96f9-4c3a24698cf4%7D_2015_PGi_Global_Telework_Survey.pdf
(6) Trant, J. & Wyman, B. (2006). Investigating social tagging and folksonomy in art museums with steve.museum. From
http://www.archimuse.com/research/www2006-tagging-steve.pdf
(7) T客邦(2017)。以聊天為導向的團隊協作工具：LINE、Slack、Teams各有哪些本事幫團隊解決難題。擷取自：
http://www.techbang.com/posts/50079-chat-oriented-team-collaboration-tools-line-slack-what-teams-have-the-ability-to-help-the-team-solve-the-problem
(8) 奧革設計(2016)。淺談列表介面設計。取自：
https://ogdesign.tw/post/56eea7f4219aa47369f92972