臺灣自2006年以降，強盜案、搶奪案、擄人勒贖案等重大暴力犯罪發生數已經陸續減少，取而代之的是詐欺案的興起，係為重要犯罪型態的分水嶺，然而在近年僅發生個位數的擄人勒贖案，竟於2015年9月20日再次發生，而被害人更是沒有臺灣戶籍的香港富商，犯罪手法精密如斯，從事先擄人的時間及路線規劃、逃逸途中變換車輛以混淆警方偵查、勒贖期間變更囚禁人質的處所以及利用電子郵件和比特幣等不同於以往之科技方式進行擄人勒贖，相比之下，警方僅能隨著犯罪手法的更新，精進本身偵查方式，盡可能追上新興犯罪模式。

由於過往科技尚不發達之際，犯罪手法通常相差無幾，警察偵查方式亦參考過往經驗即能有效破案，而且成效彰顯，然而在此犯罪模式日新月異之際，而科技又是瞬息萬變，拜網路發展迅速之賜，許多新興科技原本用來豐富生命、便利生活，卻遭有心人士運用於犯罪過程，此時過往經驗便不一定會管用。因此利用一成功案例進行細部解析，將成功要素輔以理論因子，令是類經驗得以傳承予其他同仁，期能讓所有同仁知其然、亦知其所以然也。

本研究利用哈佛個案的方式進行研究，藉由個案故事的內容探討敏捷團隊編組、資源拼湊、組織靈巧性以及跨界管理等理論議題。了解本個案中「0920」專案小組係如何選定、組成、分工，並如何在跨域、跨界中進行小組擴編，同時透過組織靈巧性，串聯專案勤務及一般事務，避免造成治安缺口，另方面在偵查期間藉由建立信任關係進行跨界溝通、協調，以達成共同目標，成功完成人質救援。

Since 2006, the serious violent crimes such as robbery, offense of abrupt taking, and kidnapping for ransom have decreased. Instead, theoffenses of fraudulence are increasing. We could say the year of 2006 was the watershed moment of Taiwan’s crime trends.However, a serious kidnapping for ransom case happened again on Sep 20, 2015.The victim was a wealthymerchant from Hong Kong, who doesn’t havehousehold registration in Taiwan.The modus operandiof this case is very sophisticated. The suspects calculated the timing and arranged the route of exiles in advance. They changed cars and shelters to confuse the law enforcement, and used email to contact victim’s family to pay them in Bitcoins, whichis different from the former case.Consequently, the law enforcements should advance skills as much as possible so that could keep up with the new types of modus operandi.
In the past,the modus operandi was almost the same and the police could take their experience to solve cases all the time.But now, the experiment did not work out as expected. With the speedy development and using of Internet that cause new industrial development and more convenient living. The Criminals could exploit loopholes in the new technology. Analyzing a successful case study to figure out the key factor of success and learn from it. May all colleagues can understand how and why.
Thisresearch method was adapted from Harvard Business Review to discuss the following issues: agile organizations, resources bricolage, organizations ambidexterity, boundary spanning. To recognize how is the leader select, comprise, and work together in the Task Force 0920.This research examines how managers act as a boundary spanner in two types of boundary-spanning relationships and how their boundary-spanning activities to expand the team and to avoid crime happens. Furthermore, during hostage rescue operations everyone build trust by boundary spanning to work towards the same goal that is successful hostage rescue.

1.Rigby, D. K., Sutherland, J., & Noble, A. (2018). “Agile at scale”, Harvard Business Review, 96(3), 88-96.
2.Levi-Strauss, C. (1966). The Savage Mind. University of Chicago Press.
3.Julian Birkinshaw& Cristina Gibson (2004), “Building ambidexterity into an organization,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer, 45, 47-55.
4.Duncan, R.B. (1976), “The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation”, The Management of Organization, 1(1), 167-188.
5.Zucker, L.G. (1986), “The production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920”, Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 53-111.
6.黃祺瑋(2016)，「治安史上大躍進-兩岸合辦擄人勒贖案」，《刑事雙月刊2016年4月第71期》。
7.蔡蒼柏(2019)，「第壹篇第六章 擄人勒贖」，《刑事偵防實務2019年4月》。
8.周刊王採訪中心(2015)，「馬英九女婿800億客戶失蹤前影像全曝光」，《周刊王2015年9月30日第77期》。
9.警察偵查犯罪手冊(民國100年公告)。
10.壹週刊調查組(2015)，「【週二搶先爆】妻稱遭綁　匪索贖六億美金　港百億富商在台失蹤內幕」《壹週刊2015年10月01日》。
11.陳詰昌(2018)，「比特幣交易、偵查技巧及案例說明」，《刑事雙月刊2019年6月第84期》。
12.陳意文（2009），「創新產品的資源拼湊與價值實現之研究：採新資源基礎觀點之定性與定量分析」，博士論文。
13.吳芮潔(2019)，「開啟Fandora盒子：玩轉IP商品化」，《國立臺灣科技大學管理學院MBA碩士班碩士學位論文》。
14.李柏諭(2015)，「伊甸基金會推動產業化的跨部門協力模式」，《文官制度季刊2015年4月第七卷第二期》。