由於研發人員努力程度難以量化，且效益通常是在未來才會顯現，具有高度不確定性，造成績效衡量困難。因此，本研究將以誘因契約理論為準則，試圖找出合適的績效指標，並建構出有效的績效管理制度，以解決研發人員管理問題。採用問卷調查實證方式，以LCD面板產業為研究對象，問卷發放以研發專案為單位。針對44份有效回收樣本，以敘述統計、迴歸分析、t檢定等進行資料分析與假設檢定。實證結果顯示：
1. 任務互依性高低對個人與團隊績效衡量與研發績效間具干擾作用。
2. 各績效指標之理想誘因強度排序：(1)研發進度達成率，(2)工作產出品質，(3)研發人員創新能力，(4)研發預算控制度，與實際研發專案對各績效指標重視程度的配適度，無顯著影響。
3. 各績效指標實際採相對或絕對績效衡量標準與理論值愈配適時，有助於提升研發績效。其中，「研發進度達成率、研發預算控制度」採相對績效衡量；「工作產出品質」採相對或絕對績效衡量皆可；「研發人員創新能力」採絕對績效衡量。
4. 對研發人員實行員工入股，相對於未實行員工入股，則研發績效較佳。

The measurement of R&D employee’s performance is particularly difficult because of her or his effort levels may not be observable, success can be assessed only after long delays and project success is uncertain. Basing on incentive contract theory, this thesis devises an effective performance management system to resolve the R&D management problems.
Our empirical results are as follows：First, high and low task interdependence will moderate the relationship between individual-team performance measure and R&D performance. Second, the weights of these performance measures should be in the following decreasing order: (1) project on schedule, (2) output quality, (3) innovation ability, (4) budgets control. Third, the R&D performance will be better if R&D project adopts relative measure to assess the performance of the project on schedule and budget control; and absolute measure to assess the performance of the innovation ability of R&D staffs. Last, R&D performance would be higher if firms institute the employee stock ownership plans.

一、中文文獻
[1] TRI拓墣產業研究所（2007.07），中國TFT面板產業競爭力剖析。
[2] 羅武強（2007），「電子產業採購人員誘因薪資制度之研究」，國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
[3] 藍珮倫（2007），「績效評估制度對信用卡部門影響之探討」，國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
[4] 謝佩蓉（1996），「資訊研發人員誘因菥資制度之研究」，國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
二、英文文獻
[5] Ahn, J. H., Lee, D. J. and Lee, S. Y. (2006), “Balancing Business Performance and Knowledge Performance of New Product Development: Lessons from ITS Industry.” Long Range Planning, 39(5), 525-542
[6] Andres, H. P. and Zmud, R. W. (2002), “A Contingency Approach to Software Project Coordination.” Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(3), 41-70.
[7] Becker, M. C. (2004), “Organizational routines: a review of the literature.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 13, 643-678.
[8] Becker, M. C., Lazaric, N., Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (2005), “Applying organizational routines in understanding organizational change.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 14, 775-791.
[9] Becker, M. C. and Zirpoli, F. (2008), “Applying organizational routines in analyzing the behavior of organizations.” Journal of Economic Behavior& Organization, 66(1), 128-148.
[10] Bendoly, E., Bachrach, D. G., Wang, H., and Zhang, S. (2006), “ERP in the minds of supervisors; Joint roles of task interdependence and cultural norms.” International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26(5), 558-578.
[11] Bergen, M., Dutta, S. and Walker, O. (1992), “Agency Relationships in Marketing: A Review of the Implications and Applications of Agency and Related Theories.” Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 1-24.
[12] Besanko, D., Dranove, D., and Shanley, M. (2006), Economics of Strategy, 4th ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York.
[13] Bowon, K. and Heungshik, O. (2002), “An effective R&D performance measurement system: survey of Korean R&D researchers.” Omega, 30(1), 19-31.
[14] Brickley, J. A., Smith, C. W. Jr., and Zimmerman, J. L. (2006), Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture, 4th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
[15] Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M. and Pisano, G. P. (2001), “Disrupted routines: team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 685-716.
[16] Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003), “Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94-118.
[17] Ge’rard, B., Fathi, F. and Erol, T. (2001), “Firms’ human capital, R&D and performance: a study on French and Swedish firms.” Labour Economics, 8, 443-62.
[18] Griffin, A. and Page, A. L. (1996), “PDMA success measurement project: recommended measures for product development success and failure.” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13(6), 478-496.
[19] Gunasekaran, A., Williams, H. J. and McGaughey, R. E. (2005), “Performance measurement and costing system in new enterprise.” Technovation, 25(5), 523-533.
[20] Gundlach, M., Zivnuska, S. and Stoner, J. (2006), “Understanding the relationship between individualism-collectivism and team performance through an integration of social identity theory and the social relations model.” Human Relations, 59(12), 1603-1632.
[21] Hultink, E. J. and Robben, H. S. J. (1995), “Measuring new product success: The difference that time perspective makes.” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12(5), 392-405.
[22] Jensen, M. C., and Meckling, W. H. (1976), “Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure.” Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360.
[23] Lambert, R. A. (2001), “Contracting theory and accounting.” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32(1-3), 3.
[24] Lin, W. S. and Mei, K. C. (2006), “The Internal Performance Measure of Bank Lending-A Value-Creation Approach.” Benchmarking, 13(3), 272-289.
[25] Loch, C. H., Tapper, U. A. S. (2002), “Implementing a strategy-driven performance measurement system for an applied research group.” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(3), 185-198.
[26] Mankin, E. (2007), “Measuring Innovation Performance.” Research Technology Management, 50(6), 5-7.
[27] Milgrom, P., and Roberts, J. (1992), Economics, Organization and Management, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
[28] Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
[29] Orlikowski, W. J. (2000), “Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations.” Organization Science, 11, 404-428.
[30] Pentland, B. T. (2003), “Conceptualizing and measuring variety in the execution of organizational work processes.” Management Science, 49, 857-870.
[31] Robbins, S. P. (2005), Organizational Behavior, 11th ed., Prentice Hall International.
[32] Stewart, G. L. and Barrick M. R. (2000), “Team Structure and Performance: Assessing The Mediating Role of Intrateam Process and The Moderating Role of Task Type.” Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 135-148.
[33] Thompson, J. D. (1967), Organizations in Action, New York: McGraw-Hill.
[34] Wageman, R., and Gordon, F. M. (2005), “As the Twig Is Bent: How Group Values Shape Emergent Task Interdependence in Groups.” Organization Science Linthicum, 16(6), 687-702.
[35] Wayne, S. J., Bradway, L. K. and Liden, R. C. (1997), “Task interdependence as a moderator of the relation between group control and performance.” Human Relation, 50, 169-181.
[36] Zhang, Y. S., Zeng, D.M., Zhang L. F. and Lu, L. Y. (2007), “R&D team governance and R&D performance; Empirical evidence from Chinese software enterprises.” Journal of Technology Management in China, 2(1), 71-83.