2015年，當時臺灣治安仍算平穩，重大治安案件除臺北市北投文化國小女童受害、八仙樂園塵爆意外及臺東縣大學生遭挾持外，鮮少發生重大治安案件，唯獨於當年9月20日，發生多年未出現的傳統型擄人勒贖案，香港富商黃Ｏ坤被擄且要求以虛擬比特幣贖人，案件發生時，震驚港、臺警方及社會。除了案件發生驚動社會外，新型態的犯罪手法也讓警方為之震懾，為應對犯罪集團的演變，警方除了在既有的專業知識上，勢必要有適當的組織變革去應對，因此個案中刑事案件組織上的設計、分工及效能在擄人勒贖案及重大刑案上是否符合期待及需求，爾後再遇到類似案件時，可否適用或有何需要改進之處，是本研究所探討的重點。
本研究以黃Ｏ坤遭擄人勒贖案為探討中心，透過相關資料蒐集及深入訪談的方式，討論刑事人員組織上設計及分工，並且瞭解管理者的行為模式及管理歷程所造成之影響，期望未來給予更多刑事人員遇到相關重大刑案時參考之用。
研究結果發現：
(一) 管理者在組織的設計上扮演者舉足輕重的腳色，管理者除了在刑事案件專業知識上對於組織效能有影響外，其管理動機與人格特質對於組織效能有明顯的影響力。
(二) 公共組織的組織效能好壞與否，關鍵在於管理者的組織分工及與執行者的溝通協調能力，在面對各項困難及挑戰時，也較易達成共識。
(三) 一般我們都著重在於組織管理者的專業能力、管理者間的橫向溝通、管理者與執行者間的關係，但執行者間的工作默契與磨合度亦是組織分工上需要著墨的議題。
(四) 組織設計中的決定權力授權不足及分散，是影響組織效能的主要因素，第一線管理者常因授權不足，無法在最短時間內下決策，導致組織效能低落。

In 2015, Taiwan is seen as a secure country. But there is still some events shock the society, such as the explosion at Formosa Fun Coast water park , a student was murdered at Wenhua Elementary School and one armed fugitive takes three students hostage in Taitung. The most highprofile crime is a Hong Kong tycoon be kidnapped and held hostage from September 20 to October 27 by a gang who demanded almost £6 million ransom paid in bitcoin(hereinafter called the ‘The Hong Kong tycoon case ’). The Hong Kong tycoon case shocked the society and the police in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Not only because the kidnapping has not appeared for many years, but also because the new type of crime. The police should enrich professional competence and have the proper organizational change to deal this new kind of crime. In this research, we reflect on the organizational design, division and effectiveness of police in criminal cases, to see whether this kind of organization meets expectations and needs. When it comes to similar cases, can it be applied or needs some improvement.
This research takes The Hong Kong tycoon case as main discussion, through the way of collecting relevant materials and in-depth interviews, discussing the organizational design and division in criminal investigation police, exploring the impact of managers' behavior patterns and management processes, wish to be a reference to the criminal investigation police while they encounter the similar cases in the future.
The study found：
(一) The manager plays a pivotal role in the design of the organization, not only his professional ability affects the organizational effectiveness, but also his management motivation and personality traits his great influence.
(二) Whether the organizational effectiveness of public organizations is good or not depends on the division of labor of managers and the ability to communicate and coordinate with executives. In the face of difficulties and challenges, it is easier to reach a consensus.
(三) Generally, we focus on the professional competence of the organization manager, the horizontal communication between managers, and the relationship between managers and executives. However, the chemistry and mutual understanding between the executives is also a big issue in the organization of division of labor.
(四) The insufficient and decentralized of decision authority in organizational design is the main factor affecting organizational effectiveness. Lack of authorization from the managers led to can't make decisions in the shortest time, also resulting in low organizational effectiveness.

一、中文部分
1. 呂育誠.(2017). 地方政府績效管理作為之研究：以臺北市政府策略地圖為例. 國土及公共治理季刊,80-93.
2. 吳瓊恩.(2001). 當前台灣公共行政的政治系絡. 中國行政評論,10(2),1-36.
3. 吳瓊恩.(2001). 行政學。台北：三民.
4. 吳璧如.(1990). 國民小學組織文化與組織效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文.
5. 林海清.(1994). 高中教師激勵模式與其工作滿意服務士氣教學效能之研究. 國立政治大學博士論文.
6. 孫本初.(2001). 公共管理,三版. 臺北：智勝出版社.
7. 張同廟, 陳昭雄.(2007). 組織溝通、工作滿意、組織承諾與工作績效之關係模式研究─以我國大學校院學生社團幹部為例. 弘光學報52期,145-174.
8. 張潤書.(1998). 新世紀的行政理論與實務--張潤書教授榮退紀念論文集.
9. 張淼江.(2003). 兩岸員工工作價值觀、工作滿意與工作績效關係之研究-以定期貨運運送業為例. 國立成功大學交通管理科學研究所,未出版,台南.
10. 張笠雲.(1986). 組織社會學. 台北：三民書局.
11. 許晴晏.(2016). 主從關係對工作滿意度之影響-以員工獎懲制度態度為調節變項 淡江大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文.
12. 彭安麗.(1997). 後官僚體制組織結構的轉變. 私立東海大學碩士論文.
13. 彭文賢.(1992). 行政生態學.台北：三民書局.
14. 楊永年.(2010). 組織發展之理論與實務. 國家文官學院 T&D飛訊第97期,1-25.
15. 詹靜芬.(1995). 「專業職位－行政職位」之關係與組織結構設計. 行政學報,26,109-132.
16. 劉奕宏, 蕭武桐.(2014). 提升公務人員公共服務動機策略之芻議-激勵理論與公共管理技術的運用. 國家文官學院 T&D飛訊第197期,1-21.
17. 陳彰儀.(2016). 團隊領導與效能. 國家文官學院 T&D飛訊第216期,1-16.
18. 陳添壽. 經濟倫理之意涵：兼論警察在自由市場中的角色. 通識教育與警察倫理學術研討會論文集,89-104.
19. 陳明璋.(1982). 組織效能及其決定因素關係之研究. 政大學報,45期,117-149.
20. 謝慶鎰.(2003). 組織政治知覺對組織承諾、工作績效、組織公民行為的影響-公民營企業成員的比較分析. 國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄.
21. 內政部警政署警.(2010). 警察人員與特定對象接觸交往規定.
22. 內政部警政署. 104年警政工作年報.

二、英文部分
1. Adam Smith.(1776). “Of the Division of Labour”, The Wealth of Nations, pp.30-35.
2. Barnard, K.H.(1948). New records and descriptions of new species of parasitic Copepoda from South Africa. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (12),pp.242-254.
3. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J.(1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman & Associates, Personnel Selection in Organization (pp. 71-98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Burns, T.,& Stalker, G.(1961). The management of innovation.
5. Campbell, J. P.(1990). “Modeling the performance prediction problem inindustrial and organization psychology,” in M. D. Dunnette & L. M.Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organization psychology (2nd ed.), Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press,1,pp. 687-732.
6. Daft, Richard. L.(2001). Organization Theory and Design.
7. Drucker, Peter F.(1954). The practice of management. Harper Business.
8. Hammer, M. and J. Champy.(1993). Reengineering the Corporation. Harper Business.
9. Hodge & Johnson.(1970). Management and organizational behavior : a multidimensional approach.
10. Hoy & Miskel.(1987). Educational Administration: Theory research, and practice (3th ed.), New York: Random House.
11. Jones, Todd Dewett, Gareth R.(2001). The role of information technology in the organization: a review, model, and assessment.
12. Keely.(1984). Impartiality and Participant-Interest Theories of Organization Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly,29,pp. 1-12.
13. Mintzberg, H.(1981）. Organization Design. Fashion or Fit. In: Harvard Business Review,59(1),pp.13-33.
14. Morgan, Gareth.(1986). Images of Organization, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
15. Rainey, Hal G.(1997). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations.
16. Rosenbloom, David H.(1993). Prescriptive Public Administrative Theory As a Product Dominance. Administrative Theory & Praxis,15(2),pp.1-10.
17. Seashore, S. E., & Yuchtman, E. (1967). Factorial analysis of organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(3),pp.377-395.
18. Simon, H. A.(1976). Administrative Behavior.pp.119.
19. Steers, Richard M.(1977). Organizational effectiveness: a behavioral view.
20. Zammuto, Raymond F.(1982). Assessing Organizational Effectiveness: Systems Change, Adaptation, and Strategy.

三、網路部分
1. 內政部警政署 全球資訊服務網https://www.npa.gov.tw/NPAGip/wSite/mp?mp=1
2. 新北市政府警察局 資訊服務網https://www.police.ntpc.gov.tw/mp-1.html
3. 警政統計查詢網. https://ba.npa.gov.tw/npa/stmain.jsp?sys=100