軟體開發專案為了追求專業分工，或發展自己的核心技術能力，常常會將原本連續的軟體開發生命週期做權責上的分割，此種情況可能發生在企業內部的專案小組之間或者跨企業的協同開發專案，因此專案小組會時常面臨不連續或不完整的專案涵蓋範圍。在此情境之下，有許多的因素將會影響軟體開發專案的績效及品質，除了人力素質及系統複雜度等專案客觀條件之外，其中最直接受到不連續與不完整的專案涵蓋範圍影響的，當是知識移轉難度的增加，斷續的專案涵蓋帶來的是小組之間的溝通成本、資訊分享時的信任程度、專案小組的自主性與協調調度問題。
本研究即是在上述的研究動機下，欲探討不同的專案涵蓋範圍與知識移轉難度影響因子之間的關係與影響程度，以及專案涵蓋範圍與知識移轉難度是否共同的或分別的影響軟體開發專案的開發績效。本研究採用ISBSG軟體開發專案資料集，將資料集內的歷史專案資料依本研究需要進行統整，並利用結構方程方法來瞭解涵蓋範圍完整度與知識移轉難度影響因子對專案績效的影響。
由本研究的實證結果發現，階段涵蓋完整程度對於專案績效有正向的影響關係，另外本研究以互動品質做為中間變數，發現互動品質會受到專案的複雜度(專案應用類型數目、顧客方所涉及的事業單位數目)的影響而使品質降低，另外互動品質對於專案績效、系統開發的生產力則有正向的影響關係。由以上結果可知軟體開發專案在專案規劃的初期，應該按步實施選定的軟體開發方法的步驟，避免省略其中的細項過程，並著手控制專案的複雜程度，使專案應用類型數目以及專案所支援顧客方事業單位數維持在合理的範圍之內。

In order to develop Software engineering projects core ability, or to work in coordination with specialized fields, we may divide the continuous software developing process into separated groups of works. These works may be shared between projects inside an organization, or between several organizations.
In this kind of situation, software engineering projects need to face segmented or incomplete activity scopes. It may make uncertainty arise in software engineering projects, and the most serious factor of uncertainty is the knowledge transfer difficulty brought from the segmented activity scopes. It makes project groups spent more energy on dealing with the extra communication, coordination and the trustfulness of sharing information.
This study focus on software engineering activity scope and factors of knowledge transfer impact, and then discuss how they affect software projects performance. This study use the ISBSG software engineering dataset, and use SEM ( Structural Equation Modeling) methodology to construct the model to verify the relationship among software engineering activity scopes, knowledge transfer impact factors and project performance.
The major finding of this study includes: software engineering activity scopes has a positive effect on project performance. This study uses interaction quality as mediator, and finds that the complexity of the project decreases the quality of interaction. In the other hand, the interaction quality enhances the software engineering project performance and productivity.
According to these findings, this study suggests software projects should follow the software engineering process, and keep it complete and continuous. Avoid skipping any engineering stages. Members of the project also need to control the project complexity, and make the number of system application types and associated user business units reasonable and controllable.

一、中文部份
[1]林信惠、黃明祥、王文良，2002，軟體專案管理，智勝文化事業有限公司。
[2]陳湘揚、林錦揚、陳國益、陳富國、顧鴻國、王邦傑、孫冠宏，2004，軟體工程—物件導向程式設計與UML系統分析實作，博碩文化股份有限公司。
[3]陳玄玲，2007，軟體工程，第八版，開發圖書。
[4]吳明隆，2007，結構方程模式—AMOS的操作與應用，五南圖書。
[5]吳明隆，2005， SPSS與統用分析，五南圖書。
[6]黃俊英，2003，多變量分析，華泰文化事業公司，第七版。
[7]柯怡華，2004，影響跨團隊知識移轉之研究－以資訊系統開發為例，中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[8]許健輝，2001，知識模糊性與知識接收可能性在知識移轉過程中所扮演角色之探討，國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士班碩士學位論文。
[9]康義賢，2003，廠商間知識移轉型式選擇之影響因素，國立成功大學工程管理學系在職專班碩士論文。
[10]林毅倫，2005，知識管理機制、工作行為特質與知識移轉成效之研究，中國文化大學國際企業管理研究所碩士論文。
[11]游雅祺，2001，技術知識特性、知識整合機制與知識移轉績效關係之研究，國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
[12]李庭毓，2000，在不同的專案特性下控制機制對專案績效之影響，靜宜大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
[13]林澤民，2004，專案成員之多樣化對軟體專案團隊績效之影響，國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[14]吳玉玲，2004，專案管理關鍵因素與組織因素對軟體專案績效之影響-以台北市政府為例，元智大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[15]洪昆裕，2004，從知識管理能力觀點探討軟體專案績效之研究，銘傳大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
[16]楊宗鑫，2005，廠商特性、專案特徵、互動機制、專案績效關聯性研究-以產研技術移轉專案為例，國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
[17]鄺懋功，1999，網路經濟下人力資源及知識管理運用，中華人力資源會訊第88期，頁7-10

二、英文部份

[1]Elias M. Awad , Hassan M. Ghaziri. 2004. “Knowledge Management”, 1st Edition, Person Education, Inc.
[2]Fleck, 1997,”Contingent Knowledge and Technology Development”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. 9(4),383-397.
[3]Hidding, G., and M. C. Shireen, 1998 “Anatomy of a learning organization turning knowledge into capital at Andersen organization turning knowledge into capital at Andersen Consulting”, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 5(1),pp.3-13.
[4]Kruchten, P. 2000, “The Ration Unified Process an Introduction”, 95(Second Edition), New York: Addision-Wesley.
[5]Kurtzberg, T. R. 2000, “Creative styles and teamwork: Effects of coordination and conflict on group outcomes,” Northwestern, PHD: Northwestern University.
[6]Ian Sommerville,2006,”Software Engineering”, 8Addison Wesley
[7]Boehm, B. W. 1988,”A spiral model of software development and enhancement”, IEEE Computer, Vol.21, No.5, pp.61-72.
[8]Gilbert, M. 1995. “Technological change as a knowledge transfer process.” PhD Thesis, Cranfield University.
[9]Myrna Gilbert and Martyn Cordey-Hayes,1996 “Understanding the process of knowledge transfer to achieve successful technological innovation” Technovation, vol16,No6,pp301-312
[10]Abran, A., & Moore, J. Eds. 2004,” Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge – SWEBOK”, Washington, IEEE Computer Society.
[11]Cleveland, H. 1985,” The Knowledge Dynamic. The Knowledge Executive”, NewYork: Human Valley Books.
[12]Drucker, P.F. , 1988, “The Coming of the New Organization”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66, No. 1, pp.45-55.
[13]Purse, R.E., and Pasmore, W.A., 1992, “Organizing for Learning. In Pasmore”, William A., and Woodman, Richard W.(ed).” Research in Organizational Change and Development”., London: JAI Press Inc,pp.37-38.
[14]Kogut, B. & Zander, U. 1992, “Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities,and replication of technology.” Organization Science, 3, pp. 383-397.
[15]Turban, E. 1992,” Expert Systems and Applied Artificial Intelligence.”Macmillan.
[16]Wiig, K.M. 1994,” Knowledge Management: The Central Management Focus for Imtelligent-Acting Organizations.”
[17]Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. 1995, “The Knowledge Creating Company.” NewYork, Oxford University Press.
[18]Beckman, T. , 1997,” A Methodology for Knowledge Management: Proceeding of the IASTED”, International Conference on AI and Soft Computing.
[19]Spek and Spijkervet 1997,“Knowledge management:Dealing inelligently with knowledge.”
[20]Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. 1998,” Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know.” Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
[21]Zack, M. H. 1999,” Developing a Knowledge Strategy.” California Management Review, 41, 125-145.
[22]Dixon, N. M. 2000,” Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know.” Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
[23]Polanyi, M. 1967,” The Tacit Dimension.” London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
[24]Hedlund, G. 1994 , “A Model of Knowledge Management and the N-Form Corporation.” Strategic Management Journal, 15, 73-90.
[25]Hidding, G., Shireen M. C, 1988 ,“Anatomy of a Learning Organization: Turning Knowledge into Capital at Organizational Culture”, Training and Development, Vol. 48, pp. 50-52,.
[26]Zand, E. 1981,” Information, organization, and power-effective management in the knowledge society”, New York: McGraw-Hill.
[27]Badaracco, J. 1991,” Alliances Speed Knowledge Transfer.” Planning Review,19, pp.10-16.
[28]Harem, T., Krogh, G. & Roos, J. 1996, “Knowledge-based Strategic Change: perspective on cooperation and competition. ” London: SAGE,pp.116-136.
[29]Teece, D. J. 1996,” Firm Organization, Industrial Structure, and Yechnological Innovation.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organizational, 31, pp.193-224.
[30]Simonin, B. L. 1999,”Ambiguity and The Process of KnowledgeTransfer and in Srategic Alliances.” Strategic Management Journal, 20, pp. 595–623.
[31]Mansfield, E. 1975, “International Technology Transfer: Forms,”Journal of American Economic Association, 68(2)
[32]Badaracco, J. 1991,”The Knowledge Link：How firms Compete through Strategic Alliance”, Boston, Mass：Harvard Business School.
[33]Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal 1990, “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective On Learning and Innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly,pp.128-152.
[34]Zander, U. and B. Kogut 1995, “Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test”, Organization Science, pp.76-92.
[35]Simon in, B. L. 1999, “Ambiguity And The Process Of Knowledge Transfer In Strategic Alliances”, Strategic Management Journal, pp.595-623.
[36]Zander, U. and B. Kogut 1993, “Knowledge Of The Firm And The Evolutionary Theory Of The Multinational Corporation”, Journal Of International Business Studies, pp.625-645.
[37]Spender, J. C. and R. M. Grant 1996, “Knowledge and The Firm: Overview”, Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue, pp.5-9.
[38]Lane, P. J. and M. Lubatkin 1998, “Relative Absorptive Capacity and Interorganizational Learning”, Strategic Manament Journal, pp.461-477.
[39]Winter, S. 1987, “Knowledge and Competence As Strategic Assets”, The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal, pp.159-184
[40]Szulanski, G. 1996, “Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments To The Transfer Of Best Practice Within The Firm”, Strategic Management Journal,pp.27-43.