學習常被假設為策略成因之一，公司針對“新技術”去學習與調適的差異化能力，被學者視為影響公司競爭力的關鍵體質。“技術學習”（technological learning）向來被視為凡是有助於一個公司加強和擴大其知識和技術基礎的活動皆屬之。而在動盪且競爭的技術環境下，技術學習是公司策略的關鍵要素和應予注意的焦點。
正因為技術學習是組織學習（organizational learning）的子集合，且一個優於競爭者去學習的組織長期下來必定成功。如果我們認同組織學習是一種連續的過程，且組織與環境互動時，會遭遇許多問題並採行處理問題之行動，其中涉及人與人之互動或個人與組織之互動，而組織藉由觀察先前行動之結果的回饋所作檢討，可再改正更適當的行動，如此不斷累積即產生了學習。由此引發本研究探討其間關係之興趣與動機。
本研究以「組織學習理論」、「技術學習理論」及「技術能力組成構面」為理論基礎，推論建立下列構念關係之觀念架構，即技術學習的廣度（包含內部學習四項及外部學習四項變數）與技術學習深度兩項自變數對技術能力應變數的關係及影響。
論文以台灣的資訊軟體產業為研究對象，經由問卷調查從軟體協會找出451家會員廠商進行實證，並用統計分析檢定假設，研究結果發現「技術學習廣度」與「技術學習深度」二者對「技術能力」提昇皆有顯著影響，且因廣度與深度二者彼此間亦顯著地會相互影響，因此二者各種型式之搭配對技術能力之提昇則較無明顯差異。

Since the Asian Finance Storm in 1997, it’s effect that the economic development model focusing on production in the past is inapplicable. The competitivity of American companies which tries to make progress in software R＆D, information service and creativity is getting better than that of Janpan companies which major in physical hardware. With the advance in software industry in Taiwan, the annual gross sales of those companies is doubled every five years from 1990.
The main topic of this paper is to find out the element of information service company development. And it’s deduced to for purposes as following
1. Explain the individual domains of internal and external activities in technology learning and the existed interactive attributes. Assist organization to verse in technology-related knowledge.
2. Research the content and measurement of the organizational technology capability
3. Explain the relationship among technology learning and technology capability with physical research result.
4. Consolidate the logical relationship among technology learning and technology capability, and offer suggests of organization-related strategical decision.
The research structure and hypotheses of this paper are mainly based on the literatures briefed as following:
1. Learning and Organization Learning
(1) Learning means that individuals acquire inside and outside knowledge form experience of life and adjust themselves to outside environment. Bower & Hilgard (1981) emphasize that learning is behavioral and potential transformation resulting from duplicate experience in some situation, but the individual talent and temporary phenomena are excluded from measurement. Thus “ lasted progress of transformation” is an essential condition.
(2) Argyris & Schon (1978) and Fiol & Lyles (1985) categoryize organiztion learning into two distinct : Low-level organiztion learning and Hign-level organiztion learning
Low-level organiztion learning : repetitive and regular activities which is explained and controlled easily in progress under existed organiztional structure and rules.
High-level organiztion learning : Activities that transform the whole organizational rules and norms.
2. Technology Learning
Special resource and internal capability are the advantage of company’s competivity. The company’s resource which is valued, scarce, hard to imitate and replaced source of competitive advantage
Bierly & Chakrabarti (1996) emphasize that the engrossing “technology capabilty” and “organization capability” are not overtaked easily in long term. So they define the technology learning as the acquirement and progress of explicit and tacit knowledge which is helpful in R&D of new products or improvement of the existed products.
3. The measurement of core capability and core rigidities
1. the knowledge and skill of employees
2. physical technique system
3. managemnet system
4. value
According the literatures mentioned above, this paper set up three main variables described as following :
1. The range of technology learning
(1) Internal learning
a. Individual learning
Individuals learn from their work groups, the other [parts of the organization, and the environment
b. Intrafuncional learning
Specialized work groups are formed to perform homogenous functional task and personal experience and knowledge is open shared, and new members to the group bring in valuable new information
c. Interfunctional learning
Work groups can also learn from the other parts of the organization by formal and informal communication
d. Multilevel learning
Knowledge flows from top management down to the lower levels of the organization and vise versa
(2) External learning
a. Customer learning
The complexity and evolving nature of customers’ needs necessitates continuous customer learning from the organization
b. Competitor learning
Organizations within an industry learn together, especially in new innovations
c. Network learning
Organizations learn from firms in related and supporting industries
d. Institutional learning
The institutional environment of firms constrains their strategic behavior and needs learning
2. The depth of technology learning
(1) Low-level learning
(2) High-level learning
3. Technology Capability
(1) the knowledge and skill of employees
include firm-specific techniques and scientific understanding
(2) physical technique system
include accumulating, codifying and structuring knowledge from employees,
(3) managemnet system
formal and informal approach of knowledge structuring
(4) value
the companies’ personality
The sample of the study is the 451 members of CISA (Information service industry association of ROC) , except the member specializing in human resource training, consulting service and magazine issue. There are 101 questionary returned
The sample companies are demonstrated as the following:
Company’s Age Sample Number Percentage Employee Number Sample number Percentage
~ 1 year 6 .0 ~ 10 4 4.0
1 ~ 3 years 16 15.8 10 ~ 29 15 14.8
4 ~ 6 years 13 12.8 30 ~ 49 14 13.9
7 ~ 9 years 12 11.9 50 ~ 99 19 18.8
10 ~ years 54 53.5 100 ~ 49 48.5
total 101 100.0 total 101 100.0
Number of staff inSoftware R&D department Sample number Percentage
~ 10 27 26.7
10 ~ 29 30 29.7
30 ~ 49 16 15.8
50 ~ 99 21 1.9
100 ~ 16 15.9
total 101 100.0
R&D Personnel
Sample number Percentage Licensed Staff number Sample number Percentage
~ 10 % 6 5.9 ~ 10 % 49 48.5
11 ~ 25 % 11 10.9 11 ~ 25 % 32 31.7
26 ~ 50 % 2 21.8 26 ~ 50 % 13 12.8
51 ~ 75 % 24 23.8 51 ~ 75 % 5 5.0
76 ~ 100 % 38 37.6 76 ~ 100 % 2 2.0
total 101 100.0 total 101 100.0
And the statistic of the variables are described as the following
Variables Mean Standard Deviation
Individual Learning 4.0792 0.8388
Intrafuctoinal Learning 3.9109 0.7085
InterfunctionalLearninig 3.9736 0.6955
Multilevel Learning 3.8185 0.7461
Customer Learning 4.0644 0.6988
Competitor Learning 3.9505 0.9631
Network Learning 3.8515 0.7796
Institutional Learning 3.6106 0.9334
The depth of Technology Learning 3.7673 0.7780
Physical techniqueSystem 3.9950 0.8170
Management system 3.5990 0.8603
Knowledge and skill of employees 3.4703 0.7265
Value 3.8942 0.7109
And the result of T test is listed as the following
Variables Overall learning(n=70) Bounded learning(n=31) T value T test
Individual Learning 4.4714 3.1935 9.922 ***
Intrafuctoinal Learning 4.2071 3.2419 8.103 ***
InterfunctionalLearninig 4.1857 3.4946 5.163 ***
Multilevel Learning 4.1000 3.1828 6.899 ***
Customer Learning 4.3357 3.4516 7.204 ***
Competitor Learning 4.3286 3.0968 7.325 ***
Network Learning 4.1786 3.1129 8.149 ***
Institutional Learning 3.7000 3.4086 1.455 NS
Variables High-level(n=60) Low-level(n=41) T value T test
The depth of Technology Learning 4.2917 3.000 14.220 ***
Variables Capable(n=76) Incapable(n=25) T value T test
Physical techniqueSystem 4.3092 3.0400 9.073 ***
Management system 3.8421 2.8600 5.670 ***
Knowledge and skill of employees 3.7138 2.7300 7.220 ***
Value 4.1187 3.2115 6.613 ***
*** present p < 0.001 NS present nonsignificant
From the experiment, this paper induce that:
1. there are two distinct model of the depth of the technology learning in software industry in Taiwan : Low-level Learning and High-level Learning, and the companies of high-level learning are better than those of low-level learning in improvement and innovation
2. There are two ranges of technonlogy learning : overall learning and bounded learning, and the technology capability of the overall learning companies is higher than that of the bounded learning companies distinctly.
3. the relationship among the range of technology learning and the depth of technology learning is interactive , close and positive correlation.
The statistic of the result of research is descrbed as the following
Hypotheses Result of experiment Explanation
There is significant difference between companies in different technology learning range Support There is significant difference
There is significant difference between companies of different technology learning depth Support There is significant difference
There is significant difference in mix of different technology learning range and technology learning depth Partly support There is significant difference