身處在現今瞬息萬變的時代之中，環境變得深不可測，一切求新求變，如果組織在創新上沒有快速進化，就會輕易地被其他競爭者超越。創新領導，並不只是領導者自身變得更有創意，而是作為一名領導者能夠知道該如何引導下屬發想，有效激發組織內的創意潛能。本個案描述傳統的石化產業-長春集團，資訊中心在現職為常務董事林顯東的領導之下，嶄新的資訊科技應用形成了長春石化內部重要的實驗科技創新文化，打破外界對於傳統產業資訊科技落後的刻版印象，成為傳統產業推行資訊科技的典範。

長春石化的資訊中心，並沒有讓創新淪為口號，在充滿實驗精神的公司文化影響下，加上領導者充分給予支持，孕育出產出創意的環境。管理者獨特的領導風格，充分展現管理者的管理智慧精神，將長春打造成一個學習型組織，讓資訊同仁樂於學習新的技術以及創新發展，在每一次的即興創新實驗中，提升專業知識以及技術，形成強大的專業資訊團隊，為集團提升成效，成為集團成長的核心貢獻者，為長春集團帶來獨步業界的IT革命。

本研究以哈佛個案研究之方式進行，藉由個案內容可用於討論左右開弓、實驗主導邏輯、IT領導與即興創作以及制度興業等相關議題。透過此案例的探討，可以了解長春石化是如何一邊維持現有系統的維護，同時持續進行創新，靈巧運用原本兩個具有衝突性的概念，達成左右開弓；在組織文化的影響下，形成實驗主導邏輯；以及了解為什麼長春的資訊部門能夠在IT領域的發展遙遙領先國內許多企業，背後的關鍵因素就是因為領導者的支持與授權，充分展現了IT領導與即興創作以及制度興業，創造出超越常規的創新思維。

Living in an era of rapid changes, the environment has become unfathomable. If the organization did not catch rapid innovation, it will be surpassed easily by other competitors. Innovative leadership does not just mean that the leader becomes more creative, as well as a leader will know how to guide the subordinates to think and stimulate the creative potential within the organization effectively. The case describes the traditional petrochemical industry - Chang Chun Group (CCP). A brand new application of IT has formed an important innovative experiment culture of CCP. Breaking the stereotype about that traditional industries was backward in IT behind. Becoming a paragon of traditional industries in promoting IT.

IT department of CCP, which is under the influence of enterprise culture with an experimental spirit, and the full support given by leaders, giving birth to creative environment. The unique leadership style of the manager, demonstrating the wisdom of the management from leader. Building a learning organization for CCP, which enables employees to be willing to learn new technologies. They will enhance their expertise in every improvisation experiment, then becoming a strong professional IT team to promote the effectiveness for the CCP. IT team became a core contributor to the growth of the CCP. Bring the unparalleled IT revolution of industry.

This case is adapted Harvard Case Study research method to discuss the following issue: Ambidexterity, Experimental Dominant Logic, IT Leadership and Improvisation and Institutional Entrepreneurship. Through the discussion of this case, we can understand how CCP maintains the existing system while continuing to innovate. Utilizing the two conflicting concepts to reach the goal dexterously. Under the influence of the organizational culture, the Experimental Dominant Logic is formed. Understanding why IT department of CCP far surpasses many domestic IT companies in the IT field. The key reason is the support and empowerment of the leaders. Showing IT leadership and improvisation, and Institutional Entrepreneurship. Creating an innovative thinking beyond convention.

一、中文參考文獻

1.陳意文（2009），「創新產品的資源拼湊與價值實現之研究：採新資源基礎觀點之定性與定量分析」，博士論文。國立政治大學：科學管理研究所，台北。
2.邱國碩 (2014)，「創業資源、創業階段與資源拼湊之研究：以微型創業為例」，碩士論文。淡江大學：資訊傳播學系，台北。
3.賴恆暉 (2014)，「長春石化的幸福通訊美學」，碩士論文。國立台灣科技大學：管理研究所，台北。
4.林顯東 (2009)，數位物流革命－長春石化集團的E化、M化、U化，台北：宏典文化。
5.林顯東 (2013)，長春石化先導型ERP，台北，宏典文化。
6.林顯東 (2015)，長春石化社群力APP之創新與應用，台北：宏典文化。
7.黃如玉 (2010)，「創新使用資訊科技的組織常規」，博士論文。國立台灣科技大學：管理研究所，台北。
8.陳翊宣 (2015)，「人性化資訊科技應用之研究－以長春石化為例」，碩士論文。國立台灣科技大學：資訊管理研究所，台北。
9.王樂知 (2016)，「探討企業經營模式轉型之即創歷程-以台灣大車隊為例」，碩士論文。國立台灣大學：國際企業研究所，台北。
10.涂敏芬 (2010)，「實踐策略，改變制度：工研院與創新前瞻機制的個案分析」，博士論文。國立清華大學：科學管理研究所，新竹。
11.涂敏芬 (2012)，「『有』中生『有』：工研院如何運用B.B.C.策略改造科專制度」，管理學報，29(3), 2012, 229-254頁，新竹。
12.湯明哲 (2002)，「主導邏輯也要改變」，《2002/06/01 遠見雜誌》，遠見雜誌，台北。
13.楊方儒 (2008)，「長春集團台灣第一神祕大亨 超越股王宏達電、聯發科」，《2008/06/05今週刊》，今週刊，台北。
14.熊毅晰 (2013)，「石化業愛迪生飢渴拚創新」，《2013/06/11天下雜誌524期》，天下雜誌，台北。
15.陳兆裕 (2016)，「台灣石化產業對經濟的貢獻」，《2016/09/06 科學發展 》，科學發展2016年9月，525期，48 ~ 54頁，台北。
16.楊瑪利、高宜凡 (2011)，「為石化業未來， 84歲林書鴻現身談策略」《2011/10/31 遠見雜誌》，遠見雜誌，台北。
17.江俞庭 (2016)，「長春集團低調打拼　堅持不上市、不借錢」，《2016/01/30 蘋果日報》，蘋果日報，台北。
18.楊方儒 (2008)，「長春經營有成的四大獨門心法」，《2008/06/05 今周刊》，今周刊 2008年6月號 122頁，台北。
19.游常山 (1998)，「帶員工像待家人」，《1998/09/01 天下雜誌》, 天下雜誌209期，台北。

二、英文參考文獻

1.Christine Moorman and Anne S. MinerSource (2013) ”Organizational Improvisation and Organizational Memory.” The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, No. 4 (Oct., 1998), pp. 698-723
2.Raffi Duymedjian and Charles-Clemens Rüling, ”Towards a Foundation of Bricolage in Organization and Management Theory.”
3.Tzu-Chuan Chou, Barney Tan, Shan L Pan and Ju-Yu Huang (2010), ”Enabling Agility through Routinized Improvisation in IT Deployment: The Case of Chang Chun Petrochemicals.” AIS Electronic Library (AISeL).
4.John R. Edwards (2013), “Critical Success Factors of IT Strategy.” Knowledge Driven Service Innovation and Management: IT Strategies for Business Alignment and Value Creation, Pages: 36.
5.Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009),” Exploitation-Exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation.” Organization Science, 20(4), 696–717. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
6.Rothaermel, F. T., & Alexandre, M. T. (2009) , ”Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: The moderating role of absorptive capacity.” Organization Science, 20(4), 759-780.
7.Marc Andreessen(2010), “Organizational Ambidexterity | Exploration and Exploitation.” from http://michaelrucker.com/workplace-wellness/leadership-qualities/organizational-ambidexterity-exploration-exploitation.
8.Julian Birkinshaw and Cristina Gibson(2004), “Building Ambidexterity Into an Organization.” From https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/building-ambidexterity-into-an-organization.
9.Fligstein, N. (1997). Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(4): 397-405.
10.Fligstein, N. (2001). Social skill and the theory of fields. Sociological Theory, 19(2): 105-125.
11.Fligstein, N. & Mara-Drita, I. (1996). How to make a market: Reflections on the attempt to create a single market in the European Union. American Journal of Sociology, 102(1): 1-33.
12.Hardy, C. (1994). Under-organized interorganizational domains: The case of refugee systems. Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 30: 278-296.
13.Hardy, C. & Maguire, S. (2008). Institutional entrepreneurship. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin, (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism: 198-217. London: Sage.
14.DiMaggio, P. J. & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2): 147-160.
15.DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment: 3-22. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
16.DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). Constructing on organizational field as a professional project:U.S. art museums, 1920-1940. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 267-292. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17.Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.),Handbook of Organizations: 163-178. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
18.Rindova, V., Barry, D., & Ketchen, D. J. 2009. Entrepreneuring as emancipation.
Academy of Management Review, 34(3): 477-491.

三、網站部分

1.長春集團官方網站http://www.ccp.com.tw/ccpweb.nsf/Profile?OpenAgent&ProfileName=Introduction
2.石化產業發展歷史脈絡
http://iht.nstm.gov.tw/form/index-1.asp?m=2&m1=3&m2=76&gp=21&id=6
3.CIO IT經理人
http://interview.cio.com.tw/home/ccp-lin-xian-dong
4.科技網
https://www.digitimes.com.tw/tech/dt/n/shwnws.asp?cnlid=13&cat=20&id=474188
5.iThome 電腦報周刊
https://www.ithome.com.tw/node/36774