隨著數位時代的發展，資訊科技已成為生活中不可或缺的部分，但對於非營利組織而言卻是項挑戰，許多非營利組織面臨無資源、人力及行銷宣傳的問題，而無法因應網路時代的演進，更需要憑藉外界的幫助。而群眾募資平台的出現成為了一種社會創新的工具，群眾募資應用於社會公益，不僅提供非營利團體募集金錢途徑，更容易匯集群眾力量推動社會問題的解決。
一直以來公益是重要討論的議題，然而在管理實務中，運用賦權理論多維度觀察社會公益領域是較少被探討的，本研究以質化研究為研究方法，以個案研究作為研究思路，探索多個案公司如何藉由社會性群募平台賦予非營利組織不同層面能力與權力，直接與社會互動並能夠參與經濟、文化等相關活動。
本研究以群募平台「度度客」、「紅龜」，以及「flyingV」為主要研究對象，詳細分析多個案公司實踐利社會行為，與其在創立初期解決資源限制的手段，並透過賦權理論探討社會性群眾募資平台達成社會包容；本研究進行個案分析建立一套「社會性群募平台賦權機制」，藉此提供給實行社會責任之企業及非營利組織，作為結合資訊科技與社會公益的策略參考。

With the development of the digital age, information technology has become an indispensable part of life. But for non-profit organizations, this is a challenge, because many of these organizations face insufficient resources, manpower, and marketing capabilities. The crowdfunding platform applied to social benefit not only provides non-profit organizations with a way to raise money, but also makes it easier to gather the power of the masses to promote the solution of social problems.
Although social benefit has always been an important topic, in management practice, the multi-dimensional observation of the field of social benefit with empowerment theory is rarely discussed. This study uses qualitative research as a research method to explore three case companies using crowdfunding platforms to empower non-profit organizations with different dimensions. They can directly interact with the society and participate in related activities, thereby bringing overall inclusion to the society.
In this study, we used social beneficial crowdfunding platforms dodoker, Red Turtle and flyingV as case objects. Using multi case to analyze the prosocial behaviors and methods to solve resource constraints. Ultimately, we show how social beneficial crowdfunding platforms can empower non-profit organizations form three dimensions of empowerment process (resource, psychological, and structural empowerment) to achieve social inclusion, so as to provide a reference for social enterprises and non-profit organizations.

中文部分
1. 陳向明，2002，社會科學質的硏究. 五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
2. 蔡淳涵，2015，資訊科技與社會影響力之研究-以愛樂活為例，國立台灣科技大學，碩士論文。
英文部分
1. Adamson, D. (2010). Community empowerment. International Journal of Sociology Social Policy.
2. Andrade, A. D. & Doolin, B. J. M. Q. (2016). Information and communication technology and the social inclusion of refugees. 40(2), 405-416.
3. Baker, T., Miner, A. S. & Eesley, D. T. (2003). Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process. Research policy, 32(2), 255-276.
4. Baker, T. & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative science quarterly, 50(3), 329-366.
5. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American psychologist, 44(9), 1175.
6. Battilana, J. & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of management journal, 53(6), 1419-1440.
7. Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T. & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government information quarterly, 27(3), 264-271.
8. Bowen, D. E. & Lawler, E. E. (1995). Empowering service employees. MIT Sloan Management Review, 36(4), 73.
9. Chou, T.C., Wu, S.H., Chen, J.R. & Huang, C.-H. (2020). Exploring dominant business logic transformation practices: a routine enactment perspective. Technology Analysis Strategic Management, 1-14.
10. Dey, P. & Steyaert, C. (2010). The politics of narrating social entrepreneurship. Journal of enterprising communities: people places in the global economy, 40(1), 85-108.
11. Doherty, B., Haugh, H. & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International journal of management reviews, 16(4), 417-436.
12. Donaldson, T. (2003). Editor's comments: Taking ethics seriously—A mission now more possible. In: Academy of Management Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510.
13. Eaves, Y. D. (2001). A synthesis technique for grounded theory data analysis. Journal of advanced nursing, 35(5), 654-663.
14. Eisenberg, N. & Fabes, R. A. (1992). Emotion, regulation, and the development of social competence.
15. Eisenberg, N. & Mussen, P. H. (1989). The roots of prosocial behavior in children: Cambridge University Press.
16. Endsley, M. R. (1988). Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). Paper presented at the Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 national aerospace and electronics conference.
17. Friedmann, J. (1992). Empowerment: The politics of alternative development: Blackwell.
18. Greenwood, R. & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of management journal, 49(1), 27-48.
19. Hardy, C. & Leiba-O'Sullivan, S. (1998). The power behind empowerment: Implications for research and practice. Human relations, 51(4), 451-483.
20. Herriott, R. E. & Firestone, W. A. (1983). Multisite qualitative policy research: Optimizing description and generalizability. Educational researcher, 12(2), 14-19.
21. Kenny, K., Haugh, H. & Fotaki, M. (2020). Organizational form and pro-social fantasy in social enterprise creation. Journal of human relations, 73(1), 94-123.
22. Kieffer, C. H. (1984). Citizen empowerment: A developmental perspective. Prevention in human services, 3(2-3), 9-36.
23. Lévi-Strauss , C. (1966). The savage mind: University of Chicago Press.
24. Lanzara, G. F. (1999). Between transient constructs and persistent structures: designing systems in action. Journal of the Strategic Information Systems, 8(4), 331-349.
25. Lee, M. & Battilana, J. (2013). How the zebra got its stripes: Imprinting of individuals and hybrid social ventures. Harvard Business School Organizational Behavior Unit Working Paper(14-005).
26. Leong, C. M. L., Pan, S. L., Ractham, P. & Kaewkitipong, L. (2015). ICT-enabled community empowerment in crisis response: Social media in Thailand flooding 2011. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 16(3), 1.
27. Maier, S. F. & Seligman, M. E. (1976). Learned helplessness: theory and evidence. Journal of experimental psychology: general, 105(1), 3.
28. Mair, J., Mayer, J. & Lutz, E. (2015). Navigating institutional plurality: Organizational governance in hybrid organizations. Organization Studies, 36(6), 713-739.
29. Newman, W. L. (2003). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Boston. MA: Pearson Education Inc.
30. Nicholls, A. (2008). Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change: OUP Oxford.
31. Pache, A.-C. & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of management journal, 56(4), 972-1001.
32. Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation: Sage.
33. Perkins, D. D. & Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Empowerment theory, research, and application. American journal of community psychology, 23(5), 569-579.
34. Phipps, L. (2000). New communications technologies-A conduit for social inclusion. Information, Communication
35. Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American journal of community psychology, 15(2), 121-148.
36. Rawal, N. (2008). Social inclusion and exclusion: A review. Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 2, 161-180.
37. Schneider, A. (2006). Appropriation as practice: art and identity in Argentina: Springer.
38. Selwyn, N. (2002). 'E-stablishing'an inclusive society? Technology, social exclusion and UK government policy making. Journal of social Policy, 31, 1.
39. Smith, B. R., Knapp, J., Barr, T. F., Stevens, C. E. & Cannatelli, B. L. (2010). Social enterprises and the timing of conception: Organizational identity tension, management, and marketing. Journal of Nonprofit Public Sector Marketing, 22(2), 108-134.
40. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of management journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
41. Spreitzer, G. M. & Doneson, D. (2005). Musings on the past and future of employee empowerment. Handbook of organizational development, 4, 5-10.
42. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of qualitative research, 17(1), 273-285.
43. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative Research: analysis types and software tools.
44. Thomas, K. W. & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of management review, 15(4), 666-681.
45. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W. & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: Foundations, research, and theoretical elaboration: Oxford University Press.
46. Van den Eynde, J. & Veno, A. (1999). Coping with disastrous events: An empowerment model of community healing. Response to disaster: Psychosocial, community, ecological approaches, 167-192.
47. Von Hippel, E. (2009). Democratizing innovation: the evolving phenomenon of user innovation. International Journal of Innovation Science.
48. Walker, R. (1985). Applied qualitative research: Gower Pub Co.
49. Wallerstein, N. & Bernstein, E. (1988). Empowerment education: Freire's ideas adapted to health education. Health education quarterly, 15(4), 379-394.
50. Walsham, G. (2006). Doing interpretive research. European journal of information systems, 15(3), 320-330.
51. Wandersman, A. & Florin, P. (2000). Citizen participation and community organizations. In Handbook of community psychology (pp. 247-272): Springer.
52. Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide: MIT press.
53. Weaver, G. R. (2001). Ethics programs in global businesses: Culture's role in managing ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(1), 3-15.
54. Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation: Sage.
55. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods: SAGE Publications.
56. Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between individual and psychological conceptions. American journal of community psychology, 18(1), 169-177.
網站部分
1. 度度客區塊鏈群眾募資官方網站：https://www.dodoker.com/
2. 紅龜官方網站：https://www.redturtle.cc/
3. flyingV群眾募資平台官方網站：https://www.flyingv.cc/
4. 台灣群眾集資報告：https://annual-report.crowdwatch.tw/2015#intro-section