事業部是一種依「政策集權化與管理分權化」的原理所建構的一種組織型態，一方面將企業的利潤責任予以分權化，使各事業部具有獨自的產品與市場，令其自主管理各該分部的經營活動，一方面需將其經營成效對最高管理當局負責；根據各事業部的經營損益情形，接受考評。每個事業部都有自主性的功能別結構，力求經營自主、自負盈虧。
學者對於事業部組織結構之部門劃分方式，主要還是著重在依地域別、產品別和客戶別，以及鮮少的程序別進行事業部劃分作業，當然，組織結構的調整仍必須追隨策略及環境。個案研究公司─台電公司，值此推行事業部組織變革之際，該如何由科層體制之組織，進行部門劃分，轉型為事業部制組織之組織結構，是研究者主要欲探討的，本研究發現。
一、台電以事業部組織型態運作，引進競爭觀念，較能逐步落實公司願景，成為具有卓越聲望之世界級電力事業集團。
二、台電公司事業部制部門劃分，係採產業鏈「產品流程」結合「營運流程」雙維，輔以現行組織架構之系統別，以建立事業部制組織結構。
三、台電公司推行組織結構變革為事業部，成功與否要因包括，對員工及工會的溝通，主管機關之法規鬆綁，以及事業部與總管理處間，還有各事業部間之權責釐清。

The divisional structure is a type of organizational configuration based on “centralization of policy and decentralization of management”. The divisions can control their operations and responsible for their profits with respectable products and markets. Besides, they are still answerable to a central authority that provides the overall strategy for the organization.
The departmentalization of divisional structure, usually organized by geography, product, customer and rarely by process, is premised on the change of strategies and environments. Taiwan Power Company is the main case to study that how it transforms from the bureaucracy to the divisional structure.
The research findings are as followed:
1. Taiwan Power Company, operating with the type of the divisional structure, can fulfill its vision with competitive concepts.
2. The departmentalization of Taiwan Power Company is based on the dimensions of product process and operation process plus the existing system design.
3. Whether the transformation of the organization configuration of Taiwan Power Company can be successful or not depends on communication with the employees and Taiwan Power Labor Union, streamline and relax of rules and regulations, clarification of the authorities and responsibilities among the divisions and the headquarter.

中文部分
1.王文科譯（1994），「質的教育研究法」，台北：師大書苑，譯自McMillan, James H. and Sally Schumancher (1989), Research in Education: A Conceptual Introduction, Illinois: Scott, Foresman & Co.（台灣科技大學 520.31/467-2）
2.古永嘉、楊雪蘭譯（2014），「企業研究方法」，台北：華泰書局，譯自Cooper, Donald R. and Pamela S. Schindler (v2013), Business Research Methods, 12th ed.
3.台灣電力公司企劃處（2013），「未來十年(103至112年)經營策略」。
4.吳秉恩（2003），「組織行為學」，台北：華泰書局出版，頁435-436。
5.徐宗國（1996），「質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例」，台北：巨流出版公司。
6.高敬文（1996），「質化研究方法論」，師大書苑。（台灣科技大學520.31/386）
7.唐明月（1994），「管理科學的本質」，松岡電腦公司。
8.許士軍（1990），「管理學」，東華書局。
9.陳詩豪（1999），「台灣經濟研究月刊」，第17卷第9期，頁32-38。
10.楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢和李亦園（1989），「社會及行為科學研究法」，東華書局。
11.鄭進源（1983），「事業部組織型態之研究」，政治大學公行所。
12.潘淑滿（2003），「質性研究-理論與應用」，心理出版社。

英文部分
1.Barth, Henrik (2003), “Fit among Competitive Strategy, Administrative Mechanisms, and Performance: A Comparative Study of Small Firms in Mature and New Industries,” Journal of Small Business Management, 41(2), 133-147.
2.Benbasat, Izak, David K. Goldstein, and Melissa Mead (1987), “The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information System,” MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 369-386.
3.Bossidy, Larry, and Ram Charan (2004), Confronting Reality: Doing What Matters to Get Things Right, NY: Crown Business.
4.Burke, W. Warner (2002), Organization change: Theory and practice, London, UK: Sage Publications, Inc.
5.Burton, Richard M., and Borge Obel (1995), Design Models for Hierarchical Organizations: Computation, Information, and Decentralization, Boston: Kluwer Academic
6.Chandler, Alfred Dupont (1990), Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise, Mass: MIT Press.
7.Clawson, Dan (1980), Bureaucracy and the Labor Process: The Transformation of U. S. Industry from 1860 to 1920, NY: Monthly Review Press.
8.Cooper, R. Donald and William Emory (1995), Business Research Method, Chicago: Irwin Co.
9.Cummings, Thomas G. and Edgar F. Huse (1989), Organization Development & Change, West Pub. Co.
10.Daft, Richard L. (1998), Organization Theory and Design, OH: South-Western.
11.Drucker, Peter F. (1954/1985), The Practice of Management, NY: Perennial Library.
12.Eccles, Robert G., Nitin Nohria and James D. Berkley (1992), Beyond the Hype: Rediscovering the Essence of Management. MA: Harvard Business School Press.
13.Galbraith, Jay R. (1994), Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations, Reading Mass: Addison-Wesley, Chapter.1.
14.Galbraith, John K. (1977), The Age of Uncertainty, NY: Houghton Mifflin.
15.Grandori, Anna (1999), Interfirm Networks: Organization and Industrial Competitiveness, London: Routledge.
16.Grandori, Anna (2001), Organization and Economic Behavior, London: Routledge.
17.Grant, Robert M. (2000), Contemporary Strategy Analysis, MA: Blackwell.
18.Gulick, L. (1992), Classics of Public Administration, 3rd ed., CA:Pacific Grove, 80-89.
19.Jim, Barry (2000), Organization and Management: A Critical Text. Australia: Business Press.
20.Kast, F. E and J. E. Rosenzweig (1979), Organization and Management: A System and Contingency Approach, NY: McGraw-Hill.
21.Koontz, Harold, Cyril O'Donnell, and Heinz Weihrich (1980), Management, NY: McGraw-Hill.
22.Mahoney, Daniel J. (2003), An Organizational, Social-psychological, and Ethical Analysis of School Administrators' Use of Deception, NY: E. Mellen Press.
23.Miller, W.L. and B. F. Crabtree (1992), Primary care research: A multimethod typology and qualitative road map, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
24.Mintzberg, Henry (1979), The structure of Organization, NJ: Prentice Hall, 215-297.
25.Mintzberg, Henry, (1983), Structure In Fives: Designing Effective Organizations, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.Oster, S. (1982), “Intraindustry Structure and the Ease of Strategic Change,” Review of economics and Statistics, 64, 376-384.
27.Patton, Michael Q. (1990), Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. CA: SAGE.
28.Pietersen, Willie (2002), Reinventing Strategy: Using Strategic Learning to Create and Sustain Breakthrough Performance. NY: John Wiley and Sons.
29.Pitts, Robert A. (1977), “Strategies and Structures for Diversification,” Academy of Management Journal, 20(2), 197-208.
30.Porter, Michael E. (1980), Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, NY: Free Press
31.Robbins, Stephen P. (1990), Organization Theory: Structure, Design, and Applications, NJ: Prentice Hall.
32.Scott, W. Richard (1992), Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open System. NY: Prentice Hall.
33.Scott, William G., Terence R. Mitchell, and Philip H. Birnbarum (1981), Organization Theory: A Structural and Behavioral Analysis, 3rd ed., RD: Irwin.
34.Seliznick, Philip (1948), “Foundations of the Theory of Organization,” American Sociological Review, 13, 25-35.
35.Taylor, Steven J. and Robert Bogdan (1984), Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: the Search for Meanings, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
36.Thompson, James D. (1967), Organizations in Action, NY: McGraw-Hill.
37.Twomey, Daniel F. (2002), “Organizational Competitiveness: Building Performance and Learning,” Competitiveness Review, 12(3), 1-12.
38.Ungson, Gerardo Rivera, Daniel N. Braunstein and Phillip D. Hall (1981), “Managerial Information Processing,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 116-134.
39.Walker, Arthur H. and Jay W. Lorsch (1968), “Organizational Choice: Product versus Function,” Harvard Business Review, 78-85.
40.Yin, R.K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.