流程改善能幫助組織提昇產品品質與組織競爭力，然而流程改善牽涉到組織變革、員工抗拒等內外在因素干擾，因此了解流程改善效益將有助於激勵管理者和專案成員的支持並全力投入流程改善活動。軟體能力成熟度整合模式(CMMI)已成為全球普及的流程改善模式，僅管目前已有一些針對流程改善效益的相關研究，但針對CMMII導入後的效益評估研究還是很少，且目前仍缺乏國內組織CMMI導入的效益資訊，使得國內軟體組織對於導入CMMI依然缺乏信心與動力。因此，本篇論文的主要目的在於探討國內組織導入CMMI後組織整體效益提昇程度，並進一步探究影響國內組織CMMI導入效益的因素。

本研究透過對國內已取得CMMI認證的組織進行流程改善效益問卷調查，從25份有效回收樣本的分析結果發現：國內組織導入CMMI確實能為組織帶來效益，此外組織特性中的管理者特質、組織成員溝通、組織創新文化、組織作業與流程以及內部資源投入對組織導入CMMI效益有顯著的影響效果，而組織特性中的組織結構、組織競爭力以及外部資源投入等對組織導入CMMI效益並無顯著的影響效果。綜合上述的研究發現，我們建議組織推行CMMI進行流程改善時，不應僅是追求更高的成熟度等級，亦應考慮組織特性中影響流程改善效益的各因素，以提昇推行流程改善的效率。

Software process improvement (SPI) is particularly important for organizations in improving their software quality and enhancing their competition in the business market. However, its performance can be influenced by both external and internal factors of an organization, such as organizational structure change and employee resistance. Hence, realizing SPI performance helps encourage project managers and team members to support SPI activities. Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) has been widely introduced into organizations worldwide in order to assist them both in implementing SPI and evaluating the maturity level of the software development processes. In spite of many existing studies on the SPI performance in the literature, there is still a widespread demand, especially in Taiwan, for evidence about the performance of SPI program based on CMMI. Thus, this paper aims to investigate the performance of CMMI adoption, in terms of six dimensions: customer, finance, quality, process, organization and employee, in Taiwanese enterprises that have obtained the CMMI certifications and further explore the factors that affect the performance of CMMI adoption.

Based on an empirical study on the performance assessment of the CMMI adoption from 25 Taiwanese enterprises that have been successfully appraised at CMMI maturity levels 2 and 3, the results showed that most assessment criteria within six performance dimensions revealed significant improvements in these enterprises. The results also indicated that the factors of manager attitude, team communication, innovation culture and operation process within organizational characteristics, and internal resource investment have significant effects on the performance of the CMMI adoption; whilst the organization structure, competitiveness and external resource investment did not have significant effects. Based on the above findings, we recommend that software organizations not only pursue higher capability levels of CMMI, but also consider those significant factors within organizational characteristics influencing the performance of the CMMI adoption in order to efficiently initiate the CMMI-based SPI program.

中文部分
[1]邱士榮，「高階經營團隊特質與策略科技聯盟之關係影響研究」，碩士論文，國立成功大學，民國八十九年。
[2]黃端祥，「台灣中小型軟體發展組織如何實施CMMI Level 2」，碩士論文，私立中原大學，民國九十三年。
[3]劉明德、林川雄、林傑斌，「SPSS12 統計建模與應用實務」，博碩文化，民國九十三年。
[4]紀國鐘等，「中華民國科學技術年鑑」，行政院國家科學委員會，民國九十三年。

英文部分
[5]Ashrafi. N. (2003). The impact of software process improvement on quality: in theory and practice. Information and Management 40(7), 677-690.
[6]Baddoo, N. & Hall, T. (2002). Motivators of software process improvement: an analysis of practitioners' views. Journal of Systems and Software 62(2), 85-96.
[7]Brodman, J.G & Johnson, D.L. (1995). Return on investment from software process improvement measured by U.S. industry. Crosstalk , 9(4), 23-29.
[8]Boehm, W. (1976). Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Computers 25 (12), 1226-1241.
[9]Claude, Y.L & Sylvie T. (1998). Addressing the people issues of process improvement activities at Oerlikon Aerospace. Software Pocess-Improvement and Practice, 4(4), 187-198.
[10]Crosby, P., (1996). Philip Crosby’s Reflections on Quality. McGraw-Hill.
[11]Damian, D., Zowghi, D., Vaidyanathasamy, L. & Pal, Y. (2002). An industrial experience in process improvement: An early assessment at the Australian Center for Unisys software. International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE'02), 111-123.
[12]Derniame, J.C., Kaba B.A. and Wastell D., “Software Process: Principle,Methodology, and Technology,” German, Springer.
[13]Dion, R. (1993). Process improvement and the corporate balance sheet. IEEE Software 10(4), 28-35.
[14]Dybå. T.J. (2002). Enabling Software Process Improvement: An Investigation of the Importance of Organizational Issues. Empirical Software Engineer 7(4), 387-390.
[15]Dybå. T.J. (2003). Factors of Software Process Improvement Success in Small and Large Organizations: An Empirical Study in the Scandinavian Context. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 28(5), 148-157.
[16]Dybå. T.J. (2005). An Empirical Investigation of the Key Factors for Success in Software Process Improvement. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31(5) , 410 – 424.
[17]Emam, K & Briand, L. (1997). Costs and benefits of software process improvement. Institute for Experimental Software Engineering (IESE) Report No 047.97/E.
[18]Emam, K., Goldenson, D., McCurley, J. & Herbsleb, J. (1998). Success or Failure? Modeling the likelihood of software process improvement. International Software Engineering Research Network technical report ISERN-98-15.
[19]Goldenson, D.R. & Gibson, D.L. (2003). Demonstrating the impact and benefits of CMMI : an update and preliminary results. Special Report, CMU/SEI-2003-SR-009
[20]Goldenson, D.R. & Herbsleb, J. (1995). After the Appraisal: A Systematic Survey of Process Improvement, its Benefits, and Factors that Influence Success. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-95-TR-009.
[21]Herbsleb J, Carlton A, Rozum J, Siegel J, Zubrow D.. (1994). Benefits of CMM-based software process improvement: initial returns. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-94-TR-013.
[22]Herbsleb, J. & Goldenson, D.R. (1996). A systematic survey of CMM experience and results. 18th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 323-330.
[23]Humphrey, W.S.,(1989) Managing the Software Process, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
[24]Hyde, K. & Wilson, D. (2004). Intangible benefits of CMM-based software process improvement. Software Process Improvement and Practice 9(4), 217-228.
[25]Jiang, J.J., Klein, G. Hwang, H.G. Huang, J & Hung, S.Y. (2004). An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance. Information & Management 41(3), 279-288.
[26]McGibbon, T. (1999). A business case for software process improvement revised. DoD Data Analysis Center for Software (DACS).
[27]Mehner, T., Messer, T., Paul, P., Paulisch, F, Schless, P. & Volker, A. (1998). Siemens process assessment and improvement approaches: experiences and benefits. 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 186-195.
[28]Ngwenyama, O. & Nielsen, P.A. (2003). Competing values in software process improvement: an assumption analysis of CMM from an organizational culture perspective. IEEE Transactions on engneering management, 50(1), 100-112.
[29]O'Hara, F. (2000). European experiences with software process improvement. Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering, 635-640.
[30]Pitterman, B. (2000). Telcordia Technologies: the journey to high maturity. IEEE Software 17(4), 89-96.
[31]Rainer, A., & Hall, T. (2002). Key success factors for implementing software process improvement: A maturity-based analysis. Journal of Systems and Software. 62(), 71-84.
[32]Roger S. P.（2001）Software Engineering ：A Practitioner’s Approach ，5thEdition, 20-23.
[33]SEI. (1993). Capability Maturity Model for software, V1.1, CMU/SEI-93-TR-24.
[34]SEI. (2002). Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD, V1.1, Staged). CMU/SEI-2002-TR-004.
[35]SEI. (2004). Process Maturity Profile. SCAMPI Appraisal Results, SEI, CMU.
[36]SEI. (2005).Process Maturity Profile. SCAMPI v1.1 Class A Appraisal Results.
[37]Siakas, K.V. (2002). What has culture to do with SPI?. Euromicro Conference, 2002. Proceedings. 28th. 376- 381.
[38]Smithson, S & Psoinos, A. (1997). The Impact of Emerging Information Technologies on the Empowered Organization. 30th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3, 7-20.
[39]The Standish Group, (2004) , Chaos, Standish Group Report.
[40]Thong, J.Y.( 1999). An integrated model of information systems adoption in small business. Journal of Management Information Systems 15(4), 187-214.
[41]Wang, E. & Tai, J. (2003).Factors affecting information systems planning effectiveness: organizational contexts and planning systems dimensions. Information and Management 40(4), 287 - 303.
[42]Wohlwend, H. & Rosenbaum, R. (1993). Software improvement in an international company. 15th international conference on Software Engineering, 212-220.
[43]Yamamura, G. (1999). Process improvement satisfies employees. IEEE Software 16(5), 83-85.
[44]Nathan, B. & Tracy, H. (2003).De-motivators for software process improvement: an analysis of practitioners' views. Journal of Systems and Software, 66 (1), 23-33.