本個案公司為跨國企業，是一家全球領先的科技服務公司，個案內容主要是探討臺灣總公司與印度分公司因跨國文化及不同組織之間溝通及衝突的解決。印度分公司因為請款系統的缺陷，致使請款作業無法順利進行。而印度設備部與印度財務部一同數次與資訊部門溝通，而資訊部門均因為系統限制之原因，說明無法改善。設備採購部因為請款系統的缺陷，無法在系統上進行請款作業與財務部協議，改用紙本請款。
經歷近二年的紙本作業，期間也因為人工處理大量的資料而有帳目混亂的狀況，供應商因為履次的收款困難而反映到總公司請求協助。由於人工紙本作業管理缺失，造成大量的逾期應付貨款，供應商信任降低，甚至影響供應鏈管理的穩定性。
總公司在面對印度廠區的資訊不透明，供應商追討逾期貨款的問題發生後，如何與印度採購部及財務部達成團隊共識，找到根本問題，提出短期解決方式並同時協調資訊部門修正系統缺陷長期解決痛點，對於己造成供應鏈信任問題，提出資訊通透的策略，加強資訊分享，增強互信基礎，為本研究探討之目的。
本研究利用哈佛個案研究的方式進行，探討不同功能部門間的溝通協調達到團隊共識及如何面對降低衝突發生及跨國文化的管理方式，最後執行供應商管理的資訊透明化以期對公司帶來正面的績效。

The case company is a multinational enterprise and a leading global technology service provider. The main focus of the case study is to investigate the communication and conflict resolution between the Taiwan headquarters and the Indian subsidiary due to cross-cultural and organizational differences. The Indian subsidiary faced difficulties in processing invoices due to defects in the billing system. The Indian equipment and finance departments had several discussions with the information department, which explained that the system could not be improved due to system limitations. As a result, the equipment procurement department was unable to process invoices through the system and instead resorted to paper-based invoicing in collaboration with the finance department.
After nearly two years of paper-based operations, there were problems with account confusion due to the manual processing of large amounts of data. Suppliers raised concerns about payment difficulties, which led to requests for assistance from the headquarters. The lack of manual paper-based management resulted in a large number of overdue payable accounts, reducing supplier trust and even affecting the stability of supply chain management.
When faced with the issue of opaque information at the Indian factory and supplier pursuit of overdue payments, the headquarters had to reach a team consensus with the Indian procurement and finance departments, identify the root cause, propose short-term solutions, and simultaneously coordinate with the information department to address the long-term issue of system defects. To address the trust issues caused by the supply chain, a transparent information-sharing strategy was proposed and a foundation of mutual trust was strengthened.
This study utilizes the Harvard case study method to explore how communication and coordination between different functional departments can achieve team consensus and how to manage cross-cultural differences to reduce conflicts. Ultimately, the study aims to achieve positive performance through the information transparency of supplier management.

中文部份
紀佳芬（2021）。臺灣科大人因工程教材。課堂講義。
張榮圳（2000）。供應鏈管理資訊分享模式之研究。國家圖書館。

英文部份
Altmäe, S., Türk, K., & Toomet, O. S. (2013). Thomas‐Kilmann's Conflict Management Modes and their relationship to Fiedler's Leadership Styles (basing on Estonian organizations). Baltic Journal of Management, 8(1), 45-65.
Blanchard, K. H. (2000). Situational Leadership II – Teaching Others. London: Ken Blanchard Companies.
Blanchard, K. H. (2020). The Essence of Situational Leadership II. CA: Ken Blanchard Companies.
Cho, B., Ryoo, S. Y., & Kim, K. K. (2017). Interorganizational dependence, information transparency in interorganizational information systems, and supply chain performance. European Journal of Information Systems, 26(2), 185-205.
Gangidi, P. (2019). A systematic approach to root cause analysis using 3× 5 why’s technique. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 10(1), 295-310.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results, HBR Boston, 78 (2): 78–90.——1998 ‘What makes a leader?. Harvard Business Review, 93-102.
Guideline, D. O. E. (1992). Root cause analysis guidance document. US Department of Energy: Washington.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of Organizational Behavior 3rd Edition– Utilizing Human Resources. New Jersey/Prentice Hall
Livingston, A. D., Jackson, G., & Priestley, K. (2001). Root causes analysis: Literature review. HSE Contract Research Report.
M Ndonye, D. (2022). Followership in Leadership Process and Organizational Performance: A Review of Literature. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 11(1), 26-43.
Thomas, K.W. & Kilmann, R.H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, Xicom, Tuxedo, New York, NY.
Todorova, G., Goh, K. T., & Weingart, L. R. (2022). The effects of conflict type and conflict expression intensity on conflict management. International Journal of Conflict Management, 33(2), 245-272.
White, S. K. (2022). What is root cause analysis? A proactive approach to change management. Cio.