隨著時代的進步，資訊科技與網際網路逐漸的蓬勃發展，使得組織之間的競爭更加激烈，因此，組織如何成為一個靈巧的IT組織，來靈活應對環境的變化以及追求組織的競爭優勢是目前重要的議題。
回顧靈巧組織的文獻，本研究主要是採用IT邏輯，是延伸組織性的邏輯為組織回應所處環境與策略應用所設計與管理IT活動之原則的概念而來。根據大量的文獻與個案研究法，本研究目的主要為探討組織的IT邏輯、IT創新以及靈巧組織之間的關係。
本究以長春石化集團為研究個案對象，分析其IT邏輯在不同階段（E化、M化、U化）是如何影響IT結構（包含資源與規則），並且使組織達到IT創新。根據蒐集的資料，隱含槓桿作用與控制兩股力量，並且在槓桿作用與控制的平衡機制運作下，呈現IT創新的靈巧組織能力。研究貢獻為靈巧組織、IT邏輯以及IT創新在資訊管理上的社會觀點文獻發展，並且這種議題可做為未來研究方向進行討論。

Along with the development of information technology (IT) and the Internet, the industrial competition has become more severe for all firms. Accordingly, how to become an ambidextrous IT organization in responding to environmental change agilely and pursuing organization's competitive advantage is now of critical importance.
To study organization ambidexterity, this dissertation employs the concept of IT logic which is extended from the theory of ‘organizational logic’ and refers to the principles of design, organizing and management for IT activities to respond to their environment and policy application. Based on the extensive literature and case study method, this dissertation aims to explore the links between organizational IT logic, ambidextrous IT organization and IT innovation.
The Chuang Chun Plastics Co. has been selected as the focal organization of this dissertation. The data analysis focuses on how IT logics in the different phases (E-Phase, M-Phase, U-Phase) impacts of IT structure (both the resources and the rules) and in turn resulting the organizational IT innovation. Based on the collected data, two forces including leveraging and control along with the mechanism of balancing between leveraging and control shape the capability of organizational ambidexterity for IT innovation. The findings contribute to the literature on ambidexterity development, IT logic, IT innovation, and the social perspective of information management. The implications and future research directions are also discussed.

中文部分：
1.安東尼•吉登斯，1998，《社會的構成》，生活•讀書•新知三聯書店。
2.安東尼•吉登斯，2003，《社會學方法的新規則》，社會科學文獻出版社。
3.宋剛，唐薔，陳銳，紀陽，2008，複雜性科學視野下的科技創新[J]. 科學對社會的影響，（2），28-33。
4.林顯東，2009，數位物流革命－長春石化集團的E化、M化、U化，臺北：宏典文化。
5.許殷宏，1998，紀登斯(A. Giddens)「結構化理論」對教育社會學研究的啟示，國立臺灣師範大學教育學系，教育研究集刊，199801(40期)。
6.郭育成，2008，健康服務產業創新服務之研究－以健檢中心為例，國立政治大學經營管理碩士學程(EMBA)論文。
7.斯特恩，魯濱孫，《企業創新力》，新華出版社，2005年：17，37，64。
8.蔣麗君，2009，資訊科技能力對組織靈活度之影響初探，《研習論壇月刊》，107，14-20。
9.鄧宜菁，2004，高科技公司法務與研發部門之互動行為與協調模式－以台灣IC設計公司之智慧財產權管理為例，國立政治大學科技管理研究所論文。
10.賴光祺，2007，高度現代性之下的主體構成——紀登斯(Anthony Giddens)思想在教育上的推演，國立政治大學教育研究所論文。
11.簡俊成，2007，探索與利用之間的平衡---雙元或中斷均衡模式，企業管理系所國科會計畫，計畫編號：NSC96-2416-H218-002-SSS。
英文部分：
1.Adler, P., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10 , 43-68.
2.Anthony Giddens, (1973). The class structure of the advanced societies. 密西根大學出版
3.Anthony Giddens, (1995). A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, vol.: Property, Property and the State, London, Macmillan, 2ed.p.4; p.2.
4.Bartlett, CA, & Ghoshal, S. (1989). Managing across borders: The transnational solution . Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
5.Benner, M.J., & Tushman M.L. (2002). Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4): 676-706.
6.Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009). A dialectic perspective on inn ovation: conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2(3) .
7.Brown, C.V. & Magill, S.L., (1994). Alignment of the IS function with the enterprise: Towards a model of antecedents. MIS Quarterly, 18(4): 371-403.
8.Cox, J. Robert; Willard, Charles Arthurs, (1983). Advances in Argumentation Theory and Research. Southern Illinois University Press.
9.Dixon, P.J. & John, D.A., (1989). Technology issues facing corporate management in the 1990s. MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 247-255.
10.Duncan, R. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation . Killman, RH, LR Pondy, and D. Sleven (eds.) The Management of Organization. New York: North Holland. 167-188.
11.Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building Theories from Case Study Research”, Academy of Management Revuew. (14:4), pp:532-550
12.Elenkov, D. S., Judge, W., and Wright, P. (2005), "Strategic Leadership and Executive Innovation Influence: An International Multi-Cluster Comparative Study," Strategic Management Journal, 26, 665-682.
13.Ghemawat, P., & Ricart I Costa, J. (1993). The organizational tension between static and dynamicefficiency. Strategic Management Journal, 14, special winter issue: 59-73.
14.Gibson, CB, & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47 , 209-226.
15.Gobeli, David H, (1994). Innovation Strategies Technological I , Engineering Management Joural,vol.6,iss1.
16.Hage, J.(1980). Theories of organizational. New York: Wiley.
17.Han, Q., W.B. Rossow, J. Chou, and R.M. Welch, (1998): Global variations of column droplet concentration in low-level clouds.Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 1419-1422.
18.Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49: 149-164.
19.He, Z.L., & Wong, P.K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15: 481-494.
20.Hoffman, R. C., and Hegarty, W. H. (1993), "Top Management Influence on Innovations: Effects of Executive Characteristics and Social Culture," Journal of Management, 19, 549.
21.Hofweber, T. Logic and Ontology//Zalta, Edward N. (2004). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
22.Holmqvist, M. (2004). Experimental learning processes of exploitation and exploration. Anempirical study of product development. Organization Science, 15(1): 70-81.
23.Jansen, JJP, Tempelaar, MP, Van den Bosch, FA, & Volberda, HW (2009). Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science, 20 , 797-811.
24.Jasperson, J., Carter, P. E., and Zmud, R. W. (2005), "A Comprehensive Conceptualization of Post-Adoptive Behaviors Associated with Information Technology Enabled Work Systems," MIS Quarterly, 29, 525-557.
25.Kimberly, J. R., and Evanisko, M. J. (1981), "Organizational Innovation: The Influence of Individual, Organizational, and Contextual Factors on Hospital Adoption of Technological and Administrative Innovations," Academy of Management Journal, 24, 689-713.
26.Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and sustaining the sources of innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
27.Levinthal, D.A., & March, J.G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14:95-112.
28.Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning, Annual Review of Sociology, 14:319-340.
29.Lyon, D.W., Lumkin, G.T., & Dess, G.G. (2000). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision making process. Journal of Management, 26(5), 1055–1085.
30.Lyytinen, K., and Rose, G. M. (2003), "The Disruptive Nature of Information Technology Innovations: The Case of Internet Computing in Systems Development Organizations," MIS Quarterly, 27, 557-595.
31.March, J. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science,2(1):71-87.
32.Marquish, D. G. (1982), The Anatomy of Successful Innovation, Winthrop Publishers, Cambridge.
33.Massey, A. P., Montoya-Weiss, M. M., and Brown, S. A. (2001), "Reaping the Benefits of Innovative It: The Long and Winding Road," IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48, 348.
34.Miller, D. (1996). Configurations revisited. Strategic Management Journal, 17(7), 505–512.
35.Minichiello ,V. (1995), Aroni,R., Timewell, E.and Alexander, L. In-depth Interviewing, Second Edition. South Melbourne, Longman.
36.M. L. Tushman and P. Anderson, (1986). "Technological discontinuties and organizational environments", Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 439-65.
37.Nadkarni, S. & Perez, P.D. (2007). Prior conditions and early international commitment: The mediating role of domestic mindset. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(1), 160–176.
38.Oldham, G.R., & Cummings, A.(1996), “Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work”, Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 39, No.3, p. 607-634.
39.Purser, R. E. & Pasmore, W. A. (1992). “Organizing for Learning”. Organizational change and development. London JAI Press Inc.
40.Prahalad, C.K. & Bettis, R.A. (1986). The dominant logic: Anew linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(6), 485–501.
41.Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34 , 375-409.
42.Rander, R. (1975). A behavioral model of cost reduction. Bell Journal of Economics, 6: 196-215.
43.Richard Henry Popkin; Avrum Stroll, (1993). Philosophy Made Simple. Random House Digital, Inc. 1 July : 238 [5 March 2012].
44.Roepke, R., Agarwal, R., and Ferratt, T. W. (2000), "Aligning the It Human Resource with Business Vision: The Leadership Initiative at 3m," MIS Quarterly, 24, 327-353.
45.Rogers, E. M., and Shoemaker, F. (1971), Communication of Innovations, New York: Free Press.
46.Sambamurthy, V. & Zmud, R.W., (1999). Arrangements for information technology governance: A theory of multiple contingencies. MIS Quarterly, 23(2): 261-290.
47.Sambamurthy, V. & Zmud, R.W., (2000). Research commentary:The organizing logic for an enterprise's IT activities in the digitalera-A prognosis of practice and a call for research. InformationSystems Research, 11(2): 105-114.
48.Schumpeter, J. A. (1934), The theory of economic development. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
49.Siggielkov, N. (2001). Misperceiving interactions among complements and substitutes: Organizational consequences. Management Science, 48(7), 900–916.
50.Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
51.Thompson C.B. & Walker, B.L., (1998), “Basics of Research (Part 12): Qualitative Research”, Air medical journal, Vol.17, Iss.2, pp.65-70.
52.Tushman, M.L., & O’Reilly, C.A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4): 8-30.
53.Van Den Bosch, F.A.J., & Van Wijk, R. A. (1999). Transition processes towards the N-form corporation: Strategic implications for knowledge flows. In M.A. Hitt, P.G. Clifford, R.D. Nixon, & K.P. Coyne (eds.), Dynamic strategic resources: Development, diffusion and integration. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
54.Williams, M. (1997), Social Surveys: Design to Analysis. In: T. May(Ed.) Social Research Issues, Methods and Process, Buckingham, Open University Press.
55.Winter, S.G., & Szulanski, G. (2001). Replication as Strategy. Organization Science, 12(6):730-734.
56.Yin, R. K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications.