台灣的金融機構規模過小，與競爭對手的金融產業規模差距越拉越大，所以金融業合併已成為產業常態。另一方，當電子交易比重逐漸放大，經營金融業等同於經營資訊產業，金融業也進入了IT軍備競賽時代。本個案描述凱基期貨總經理James，在凱基與台證合併卻發生系統整併如牛步般地前進，遲遲無法發揮整併綜效，整個公司的運作失去了往昔的敏捷性時，James佈一個跳脫IT框架的局(Case A)，聘用了一個IT專才的Steven，卻安排Steven以業務單位的角色來帶領電子商務部門。
Steven發現凱基一向注重追求制度化的資訊系統設計，雖在規模小時，尚可保有足夠的敏捷性來面對業務需求。反觀台證是強調的是配合業務的高敏捷性，但資訊系統的控制方式卻隱藏交易風險。當凱基併購台證規模擴大後，新凱基期貨的規模如果沿用原先的制度化系統設計，將無法滿足客戶要求，從而失去市場。新凱基期貨陷入了追求制度化與敏捷性的兩難。
Steven巧妙的運用香港機場的設計為例子，將機場通關設計對應成為IT架構理論，成功說服公司主管，通過重新設計電子商務部門的角色(Case B)，讓電子商務部門成為能夠左右開弓組織，以解決因業務與資訊不同的思維邏輯造成的追求制度化與敏捷性的兩難。本個案主要探討不同功能的組織必須適度的結合或轉變，企業才能適應環境的變遷而有所成長。本個案可用於討論資源整合、組織變革、管理控制系統、左右開弓等相關理論。
關鍵字：資源整合、組織變革、管理控制系統、左右開弓、購併、凱基

Since the limitation of scale of operation has led to the competition pressure in Taiwanese financial institutions, consolidation has become a popular strategy to survive in this industry. In addition, when the scale of e-trading is growing rapidly, the information capability is of critical importance as well. However, management may confront with the dilemma that different financial institutions have conflict IT logics in the consolidation process, which may lead to the inefficiency of information integration.
In May 2009, KGI merged TISC and has become the top two security company of Taiwan. However, KGI general manager, James, was confronted with the above-mentioned problem. James decided to think out of the box. An IT profession, Steven, was employed into KGI’s EC department, a business operation unit rather than IT department (Case A).
Steven found that KGI’s IT design logic emphasized on following the institutional rules, and has less transaction risk and low flexibility; in contrast, TISC’s IT design logic emphasized on agile responding to business needs, and has a higher hidden transaction risk and high flexibility. New KGI needed to solve the dilemma of pursuing institutionalization or agility. After a thoughtful consideration, by using the design of Hong Kong International Airport as a metaphor, Steven successfully convinced the management to redesign the electronic commerce department as an ambidextrous IT organization to solve the dilemma (Case B). By using this teaching case, several themes can be discussed including the resource integration in M&A process, the organizational changes issue, the design of management control systems and the design of ambidextrous organization.

Keywords: Resource Integration; Organizational Change; Management Control Systems; Ambidextrous Organization Design.

一、中文參考文獻
台灣期貨公會季刊：期貨人 2009∼2013
台灣期貨交易所：2010∼2013年國內外重要財經統計資料
台灣期貨交易所：期貨市場發展前景與趨勢(2007年5月5日)
司徒達賢，(1995)，策略管理，台北：遠流出版社。
行政院金融監督管理委員會-第19屆亞太財務經濟會計與管理會議：「選擇權與期貨產品發展之現況與展望」(2011年7月8日)
李禮仲，2006，金融控股公司間非合意併購問題法律之研究，月旦法學雜誌，128 期，頁37-52。
郭秋榮，2008，銀行併購風潮對台灣金融市場之影響，經濟研究，第八卷，頁159-191。
陳海鳴、余靜文，2000，企業文化與組織承諾的關聯性研究—被購併企業續留員工的觀點，管理與系統，第七卷第二期，頁249-270。
黃俊英、陳世穎，(2003)，市場基礎資產之角色：資源基礎理論觀點，運籌研究集刋，第三期，頁：43-60。
趙基楠(2005)，從日本NTT DoCoMo 公司探討雙面式組織之運作，政治大學企業管理研究所，碩士論文。
薛明玲、廖烈龍、林宜賢 (2006): 企業併購策略與最佳實務，資誠會計師事務所，(頁14)台北: 財團法人資誠教育基金會出版。
 
二、英文參考文獻
Ashforth, B. E. (2001) “Role Transitions in Organizational Life: An Identity-Based Perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ashforth, B. E., and Johnson, S. A.(2001) “Which Hat to Wear? The Relative Salience of Multiple Identities in Organizational Contexts”. In M. A. Hogg and D. J. Terry (Eds.), Social Identity Processes in Organizational Contexts, pp. 31–48. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Astley，W. G. & Van De Ven，A. H.（1983）. Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly，28，245-273.
Barney Jay B. (1991), Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage , Academy of　Management Executive, Vol 9, pp.49-61.
Birger Wernerfelt (1984), A Resource-based View of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 171-180.
Birkinshaw, J. & Mol, M.J.(2008). Management innovation. Academy of Management Review, Vol 33, No.4, 825-845.
Collis, D. J. and C.A. Montgomery, (1995) “Competing on Resource Strategy in the 1990s” Harvard business Review, Vol. 73, July-August, pp. 118-128.
Crossan, M.M. and Berdrow, I., (2003), “Organizational learning and strategic renewal”, Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1085-1105.
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147.
Ebaugh, H. R. F. (1988) Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Farjoun, M.(2010). Beyond dualism:stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, Vol 35, No.2, 202-225.
Feldman, M.S. & Pentland, B.T.（2003）. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94-118.
Floyd, S.W. and Lane, P.J. (2000), “Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal”, Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 154-177.
Grant, R. M., ”The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation,” California Management Review, Vol.33, Spring, 1991, pp.114-135.
Kark, R., and Shamir, B. (2002) “The Dual Effect of Transformational Leadership: Priming Relational and Collective Selves and Further Effects on Followers”. In B. J. Avolio and F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road ahead, pp. 67–91. Amsterdam: JAI Press.
Kodama, M. (2001) Customer Value Creation Business Through Learning Process With Customers: Case Studies Of Venture Businesses In Japan. Management Service Quality Vol. 11 No. 3 p 166.
Mohammed, S., and Ringseis, E. (2001), “Cognitive diversity and consensus in group decision making: The role of inputs, processes, and outcomes”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85(2), 310-335.
Simons, R., 1994. How new top managers use control systems as levers of strategic renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 15(3), 169-189.
Simons, R., 1995. Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control to Drive Strategic Renewal. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A., III. (1996),”Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change, “ California Management Review, 38(4), p8.
Tushman, M.L. & O’ Reilly III, C.A. (April 2004), ”The Ambidextrous Organization.” Harvard Business Review p 76.
 
三、網站部份
MBA智庫百科：http://wiki.mbalib.com
台灣證券交易所：http://www.tse.com.tw
台灣期貨交易所：http://www.taifex.com.tw