自第三次工業革命以來，資訊科技（Information Technology）的蓬勃發展開創了數位化生產的時代並徹底改變社會之運作模式與人們的生活型態。身處此資訊時代下的企業深刻體會到資訊科技所帶來之深遠影響力，皆積極成立技術團隊以研發創新的科技應用。隨著工業4.0的到來與人工智慧的興起，企業更是全力投入其中，期望以最新穎、最具前瞻性之資訊科技技術奪取先機、領先群雄。然而，企業若只是盲目引入或急於使用時下最流行的資訊科技技術，最終將可能面臨該技術非但不能解決公司所面臨之問題亦不能替公司帶來任何效益的窘境，不僅徒勞無功還耗費時間與資本。
本研究以任務科技配適模型為研究基礎，觀察在資訊科技不斷推陳出新的時代背景下，企業如何根據自身之定位與發展現況，制定出符合企業當前需求與未來展望的階段性任務，並根據任務所具備之任務特徵，找到與之配適的資訊科技應用。若遇資源有限或找尋不到適合的資訊科技應用解時，本研究將觀察企業如何以資源拼湊的手法創造出貼合自身需求之創新資訊科技應用，並評估此應用是否能真正替企業帶來福祉。本研究探討的個案對象--長春石油化學股份有限公司，創立至今已有五十餘年，觀察其在資訊科技方面的發展歷史，創新的科技應用不勝枚舉，故本研究選出其發展至今所創建的其中五項別具特色之創新應用，探討其發展契機、過程與最終所帶來之成效，最終歸納出一套「創新資訊科技應用之發展歷程架構」，提供給企業參考。

The Third Industrial Revolution has triggered the flourish of Information Technology and brought the digital revolution of manufacturing. People's lifestyle has completely changed and so does the operation mechanism of society. Companies are all well aware of the importance of information technology and its far-reaching impact. Thus, people have actively introducing new technology into their organizations or building technical teams to develop innovative technology applications. As the advent of Industry 4.0 and the rise of artificial intelligence, companies are fully committed to it, and hoping to seize the opportunities and lead the pack with the most fashionable technologies. However, if the companies just blindly introduces the most popular and innovative technology application into the organizations without considering the purpose of using this technique, they may eventually find out that application cannot solve their own problems at all. What worse, developing the innovative application may waste lot of capital.
In this research, we use Task Technology Fit model to observe that in the context of the constantly change of the information technology, how companies can formulate appropriate tasks based on their own position and their future prospects. After that, companies then find the technical solution according to the characteristics of the task. If companies face the problem of limited resources or lack of suitable IT application, we will observe how they create innovative information technology applications by themselves to achieve the task with the perspective of Resource Bricolage theory. Finally, we will observe that how companies evaluate the benefits of the applications. The case object, Chang Chun Co., Ltd., has been established more than 50 years. Observing its evolution of information technology, innovative applications are too numerous to mention. In this research, we selected five unique and innovative applications created by Chang Chun Group themselves and described the development process of each application. Finally, our study came up with a "Innovative IT application's Enactment Process Structure" base on the same pattern of developing these five innovative IT applications, for those companies who want to use information technology to improve themselves or to keep growing up.

[1] T. Baker, A. S. Miner, and D. T. Eesley, “Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process,”Research pol-icy, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 255–276, 2003.
[2]T.BakerandR.E.Nelson,“Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage,”Administrative science quarterly, vol. 50,no. 3, pp. 329–366, 2005.
[3]C. Baldick,The concise Oxford dictionary of literary terms, p. 42. Oxford University Press, 1996.
[4]E. Broady,Colloquial French 2: the next step in language learning, p. 77. Rout-ledge, 2015.
[5]J. L. Campbell, “Mechanisms of evolutionary change in economic governance:interaction, interpretation and bricolage,”Evolutionary economics and path dependence, vol. 10, no. 32, 1997.
[6]C.U.Ciborra,“From thinking to tinkering: The grassroots of strategic information systems,”The Information Society, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 297–309, 1992.
[7]C. U. Ciborra, “The platform organization: Recombining strategies, structures, and surprises,”Organization science, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 103–118, 1996.
[8]P.A.Dacin, M.T.Dacin, and M.Matear, “Social entrepreneurship: Why we don’t need a new theory and how we move forward from here,”Academy of management perspectives, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 37–57, 2010.
[9]J. Derrida, “Structure, sign, and play in the discourse of the human sciences,”Writing and difference, vol. 278, 1978.
[10]M. T. Dishaw and D. M. Strong, “Extending the technology acceptance model with task–technology fit constructs,”Information & management, vol. 36, no. 1,pp. 9–21, 1999.[11]R. Garud and P. Karnøe, “Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and em-bedded agency in technology entrepreneurship,”Research policy, vol. 32, no. 2,pp. 277–300, 2003.
[12]D.Gefen, E.Karahanna, andD. W.Straub, “Trust and tamin online shopping: An integrated model,”MIS quarterly, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 51–90, 2003.
[13]D. L. Goodhue and R. L. Thompson, “Task-technology fit and individual performance,”MIS quarterly, pp. 213–236, 1995.
[14]E.Hatton,“Lévi-strauss’s bricolage and theorizing teachers’ work,”Anthropology& Education Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 74–96, 1989.
[15]K.Mathieson and M.Keil,“Beyond the interface: Ease of use and task/technology fit,”Information & Management, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 221–230, 1998.[16]A.S.Miner, P.Bassof, and C.Moorman,“Organizational improvisation and learning: A field study,”Administrative science quarterly, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 304–337,2001.
[17]G. F. Lanzara, “Between transient constructs and persistent structures: designing systems in action,”The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 8, no. 4,pp. 331–349, 1999.
[18]C. Lévi-Strausset al.,La pensée sauvage, vol. 289. Plon Paris, 1962.
[19]Z. Liao and R. Landry, “An empirical study on organizational acceptance of new information systems in a commercial bank environment,” inProceedings of he 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 7–pp,IEEE, 2000.
[20]C. Lvi-Strauss,The savage mind. University of Chicago Press, 1966.
[21]B. T. Pentland, “Use and productivity in personal computing: An empirical test,”inProceedings of the tenth international conference on Information Systems, pp. 211–222, MA Boston, 1989.
[22]G. Payne and J. Payne, Key concepts in social research. Sage, 2004.
[23]R. J. Sternberg, G. B. Forsythe, J. Hedlund, R. K. Wagner, J. A. Horvath, W. M.Williams, S. A. Snook, E. Grigorenko,et al.,Practical intelligence in everydaylife. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[24]K. E. Weick, “The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The mann gulch disaster,”Administrative science quarterly, pp. 628–652, 1993.
[25]R. K. Yin,Applications of case study research. sage, 2011.
[26]I. Zigurs and B. K. Buckland, “A theory of task/technology fit and group support systems effectiveness,”MIS quarterly, pp. 313–334, 1998.