如今儼然已成為數位化、科技化與智慧化的時代，隨著網路應用的普及，以及資訊科技的快速進步，不管是大型企業或是新創公司都面臨著數位轉型的考驗。當企業在資源與能力有限的情況下，跨界與政府、其他組織與合作夥伴協力合作，能夠協助企業發展，創造更多價值。同時，為了鼓勵企業轉型與創新，臺北市政府於 2016 年開始推動臺北智慧城市計畫，希望將臺北市打造成智慧城市，也協助企業進行謀合，以智慧方案解決城市需求。而根據「2019 IMD 全球智慧城市指數」報告指出，在 102 座城市中，臺北市脫穎而出，列為全球第 7 名，在科技服務表現亮眼，不僅深受市民肯定，也對企業的發展與轉型有顯著的影響與幫助。因此，本研究欲透過個案研究之方法，探討企業如何在既有能力與資源之下，運用現有的能力、資源與關係維持企業的營運，同時跨界與政府、合作夥伴共同合作以發展企業的未來能力，實現數位創新，達成企業真正的目的與願景，最後在商業生態系統中扮演的關鍵角色為何，並分析個案公司之間的相似與相異處。
本研究以臺北智慧城市之三項專案空氣盒子、WeMo Scooter 威摩科技與 UnaBiz 優納比為個案對象，三家個案公司在不同的現有能力與限制問題下，實現了各不相同的數位創新，最後在商業生態系統中也都各自扮演著不同的角色。本研究以 PPP 模式（Public-Private-Partnership，公私夥伴關係）依序透過私營、公共與合作夥伴模式三層次漸進探討，並歸納出一套「實現數位創新跨界靈巧能力流程圖」作為其他企業實現數位創新時之參考依據。

Nowadays, it has become an era of digitalization, technology and intelligence. With the popularization of network applications and the rapid progress of information technology, both large enterprises and startups are facing the challenge of digital transformation. When enterprises have limited resources and capabilities, boundary spanning with governments, other organizations, and partners can help enterprises develop and create more values. At the same time, in order to encourage enterprise transformation and innovation, the Taipei City Government began to promote the Taipei Smart City project in 2016, hoping to turn Taipei into a smart city, and also assist companies in collaborating to solve urban needs with smart solutions. According to the "IMD Smart City Index 2019" report, among the 102 cities, Taipei City stands out as the seventh in the world. Its outstanding performance in technology services is not only well recognized by the public, but also has a significant impact and help on the development and transformation of the enterprise. Therefore, this study intends to explore how enterprises can use existing capabilities, resources and relationships to maintain the operation of the enterprise through method of Case Study. Moreover, cross-border cooperation with the government and partners to develop the enterprise’s future capabilities, to achieve digital innovation, and realize the purpose and vision of the company. Finally, play a key role in the business ecosystem. Then, summarize and analyze the similarities and differences between the three cases.

In this research, three projects in Taipei Smart City, WeMo Scooter, and UnaBiz were selected as case objects. The three case companies achieved different digital innovations under different existing capabilities and limitations. Finally, they also play different roles in the business ecosystem. In this study, the PPP model (Public-Private-Partnership) is used to explore the three levels of private, public, and partnership models in sequence, and sorts out the "The Flowcharts for the spanning ambidextrous capability of achieving digital innovation" for other enterprises to realize digital innovation as a reference.

中文文獻
1. 郭國泰、司徒達賢、於卓民，2008，商業生態系統之變遷：以軟體產業為例，創新與管理，6(1)，1-28。

2. 黃秋霞，2016，淺談量化與質性研究的反思，臺灣教育評論月刊，5(9)，149-154。

3. 方世杰、李慶芳，2016，公私部門夥伴關係之特質、整合型研究架構與研究方向。
英文文獻
1. Aarts, H. and Van den Bos, K. (2011). On the Foundations of Beliefs in Free Will: Intentional Binding and Unconscious Priming in Self-Agency, Vol. 22, No. 4, 532-537.

2. Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, Vol. 43, No. 1, 39–58.

3. Afuah, A. (2003). Innovation Management.

4. Cheng, Y.T. & Van De Ven, A.H. (1996). Learning the innovation journey: Order out of chaos?. Organization Science, 7: 593-614.

5. Christensen, Clayton M. and Joseph L. Bower (1996). Customer Power, Strategic Investment and the Failure of Leading Firms. Strategic Management Journal, 197-218.

6. Danneels, Erwin (2002). The Dynamics of Product Innovation and Firm Competencies. Strategic Management Journal, 1095-1121.

7. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, 532-550.

8. Epstein, C. F. (1989). Workplace Boundaries: Conceptions and Creations. Social Research, 56(3), 571–590.

9. Gallagher, S. (2000). Philosophical conceptions of the self: implications for cognitive science.

10. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society : outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

11. Henk A., Ruud C. and Hans M. (2009). Priming and Authorship Ascription: When Nonconscious Goals Turn Into Conscious Experiences of Self-Agency, Vol. 96, No. 5, 967–979.

12. Iansiti, M. and Levien, R. (2004a). Strategy as Ecology, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82, No. 3, 68-78.

13. Iansiti, M. and Levien, R. (2004b). The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

14. innovation. Information and Organization, Vol. 28, No. 2, 104-106.

15. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. Vol. 57, No. 4, 1413-1415.

16. Kostoff, RN (1999). Science and technology innovation. Vol. 19, No. 10, 593-604.

17. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.

18. Mahoney J. T., Mcgahan A., Pitelis C. (2009). The Interdependence of Private and Public Interests. Organization Science 20(6), 1034-1052.

19. Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71, No. 3, 75-86.

20. Moore, J. F. (1996). The Death of Competition: Leadership & Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems, New York: Harper Business.

21. Nambisan, S. (2018). Architecture vs. ecosystem perspectives: Reflections on digital.

22. Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A., and Song, M. (2017). Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 1, 223–238.

23. Natalie S., Harold B. and Gu¨nther K. (2006). Joint action: bodies and minds moving together, Vol.10 No.2.

24. Neuman W. L. (2010). Social Research Methods Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.

25. Paulsen N. and Hernes T. (2003). Managing Boundaries in Organizations: Multiple Perspectives.

26. Peter F. Drucker (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

27. Gerald A. Mcdermott, Rafael A. Corredoira and Gregory Kruse (2009). Public-Private Institutions as Catalysts of Upgrading in Emerging Market Societies. The Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 52, No. 6, 1270-1296.

28. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations.

29. Schumpeter J. A. (1934). The theory economic of development.

30. Swanson, E. B. (1994). Information systems innovation among organizations. Management Sci. Vol. 40, No. 9, 1069–1092.

31. Tansley, A. G. (1935). The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts and Terms. Ecology. Vol. 16, No. 2, 284-307.

32. Teece, David J. (2006). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Haas School of Business Working Paper.

33. Yoo, Y. (2010). Computing in everyday life: A call for research on experiential computing. MIS Quart. Vol. 34, No. 2, 213–231.

34. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson O. & Lyytinen K. (2010). The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research. Vol. 21, No.4, 724–735. 
網頁部分
1. LASS 社群網站：https://lass-net.org/2016/06/airbox/

2. UnaBiz 優納比官方網站：https://www.unabiz.com/

3. WeMo Scooter 威摩科技官方網站：https://www.wemoscooter.com/

4. 中央研究院官方網站：https://www.iis.sinica.edu.tw/pages/cclljj/interests_zh.html

5. 研之有物專訪報導：https://research.sinica.edu.tw/pm25-air-box-new/

6. 訊舟科技官方網站：https://www.edimax.com/edimax/post/post/data/edimax/tw/about_us/

7. 華碩雲端官方網站：https://www.asuscloud.com/about.html

8. 瑞昱半導體官方網站：https://www.realtek.com/zh-tw/about-realtek/snapshot