臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來，台灣在國際的發明展上屢屢得到很好成績，可以說明台灣的發明人在創新發明上有一定品質，但是這些具有專利的得獎發明在商品化的過程中往往發展的不順遂，以往的專利發明商品化探討的是市場和技術方面居多，但是對於發明家一開始的發明創新構想是否真正滿足市場需求以及市場潛力卻甚少去探討，因此本研究想來探討設計思維與專利商品化之關係，是否這些發明的設計流程完整性有關。預期結果是希望產生出一個能普及的設計思維模式，讓發明家在研發創新產品時能有更周全的設計思維，能發明有市場價值的產品且能夠商品化，以及連繫設計領域和發明領域還有專利領域，讓彼此之間能夠跨領域的結合。本研究第一部分將透過內容分析法，從2008到2013，總共六年的德國紐倫堡國際發明展得到金、銀、銅獎和103年國家發明創作獎金、銀獎之創作去做專利篩選與評估，再來利用問卷訪談，寄送給13位選定的發明人，了解其參展的發明是否已商品化，且問發明相關問題，影響專利商品化之各種因素並評估設計思維與方法之相對重要性，並確認之後深度訪談名單，最後與四位發明人做半結構訪談，了解現今產業的趨勢和發明的困境有哪些以及政府該如何對於發明人有實質上的幫助，和如何有效的與產業結合，並且彙整之中的訪談內容和先前文獻分析得到的結果去製作設計思維成熟度量表。第二部分先請五位工業設計背景的學生們以工作坊的型式對六件不同層次的發明進行設計成熟度之評量，再來進行對外界設計師發放對六件不同層次的發明進行設計成熟度之評量的線上問卷，了解影響專利商品化之各種因素並評估設計思維與方法之相對重要性。此研究成果可以提供給一些發明人在商品化先前的評估，讓自己的專利發明更貼近使用者，以及連繫設計領域、發明領域和專利領域之間關係，另一方面，本研究可提供政府在制定輔導發明商品化政策之參考。

Taiwan has repeatedly gained excellent results in international invention exhibitions in recent years, which shows that Taiwan's inventors have good invention competences. However, the development process of these patented award-winning inventions into commercial products has not been smooth. In the past there were many investigations into the commercialization of patented inventions in terms of the market and technology, but very few of these investigations have looked into whether the inventors of these innovative ideas have really met market demand and potential. This study explores the relationship between design thinking and commercialization of patents, and whether this is further related to the complete innovation design process. It is hoped that the expected result of this study is to produce a universal design mindset, which allows inventors to have more comprehensive design thinking when developing innovative products, and relating these invented products to market value for commercialization. This issue is associated design and invention and also the patent domain, which allows for cross-disciplinary integration in knowledge. Content analysis, from 2008-2013, is used in the first section of this study, targeting the gold, silver and bronze awards gained by Taiwanese inventors during these six years at Germany’s Nuremberg International Invention Fair. Also included are the gold and silver awards at the 2014 National Invention and Innovation Exhibition. Through patent screening and assessment, 13 inventions were selected and went through an assessment of the maturity of design thinking, and questionnaires interviews were sent to those inventors to inquire whether the invention they exhibited has been commercialized. The questionnaire was related to the invention, as well as a variety of factors which affect patents and commercialization and the assessment of the relative importance of design thinking and methods. We also interviewed 4 inventors whose inventions have gained market success. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with those four inventors to understand: the current industry trends of invention; how the government can give substantial assistance to inventors; and how to effectively integrate new inventions with commercial industries. The interview results were aggregated with previous literature analyses to create the design thinking maturity scale. The second section of this study was conducted by recruiting five students that had a background in industrial design, and placing them in workshops to evaluate six inventions that were at different levels of design maturity. Meanwhile, a plurality of designers were then asked to complete an online questionnaire regarding the six inventions that were at different levels of design maturity in order to assess the relative importance of the various factors and the design thinking and methods that affect the patent and commercialization. This research study can provide inventors with some tips based on previous commercialization experiences, which helps as patents are used to move the inventions closer to the end user, as well as with the associated design domain, and the related areas of inventions and patents. The study also can be provided to the government as a reference guide in formulating policies related to invention commercialization.

第一章 緒論
1.1 研究動機
1.2 研究目的
1.3 研究架構
1.4 研究範圍界定與限制

第二章 相關文獻探討
2.1 發明展
2.2 發明人
2.3 專利
2.4 設計思維與方法
2.5 專利商品化

第三章 研究方法
3.1 研究執行流程
3.2 研究假設
3.3 研究對象選定
3.4 資料分析方法
3.4.1 質性研究方法及質性資料分析方法
3.4.2 量化研究方法及量化資料分析方法

第四章 訪談結果分析與討論
4.1 樣本篩選
4.1.1 樣本分析
4.2 調查訪談分析與結果
4.3 研究重點與參訪過程
4.3.1 調查前言
4.3.2 調查方式
4.3.3 小結
4.4 深度訪談個案內容
4.4.1 個案1：何姓發明人
4.4.2 個案2：許姓發明人
4.4.3 個案3：周姓發明人
4.4.4 個案4：劉姓發明人
4.4.5 小結
4.5 訪談個案內容編碼與分類
4.5.1 發明動機
4.5.2 發明流程思維
4.5.3 專利申請面向
4.5.4 商品化階段
4.5.5 創新發明環境面探討
4.6 小結

第五章 問卷調查分析與結果
5.1 問卷設計
5.2 問卷訪查對象
5.3 資料分析方法
5.4 問卷資料分析
5.5 小結

第六章 結論與建議
6.1 研究發現與結論
6.1.1 專利設計思維成熟度量表
6.1.2 成功發明人的特質
6.1.3 成功發明人的特質應用
6.1.4 發明界和設計界和專利界的跨領域結合
6.2 後續之研究方向與建議

中文書籍與文字

陳玉崗、涂茜涵、張永富(2011)。專利商品化價值評估因素之相對重要性研究。2011第三屆管理創新與行銷專案研討會，國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系，頁1243-1250。

劉江彬、盧文祥、王偉霖(2011)。我國智慧財產加值流通平臺建置策略之規劃。研考雙
月刊，第35卷第5期，頁72-92。

賴以軒、梁志彰(2009)。以美國專利侵權訴訟判決建構多元迴歸專利鑑價模式之研究。未出版之碩士論文，私立中華大學科技管理研究所。

詹志禹（2004）。台灣發明家的內在動機、思考取向及環境機會。教育與心理研究，第27卷第4期，頁775-806。

洪偉肯、黃天佑(2013)。設計為科技加值的途徑：以Dechnology專案為例。設計學報，第18卷第1期，頁41-64。

劉江彬、盧文祥、王偉霖(2011)。我國智慧財產加值流通平臺建置策略之規劃。研考雙月刊第35卷第5期，頁72-92。

賴以軒、李佩瑾(2008)。利用多元迴歸與因素分析法探討專利價值影響因素―以美國數州專利訴訟案件為例。未出版之碩士論文，私立中華大學科技管理研究所。

廖和信(2003)。專利就是科技競爭力(P154~P170)。天下文化。台北市。

李偉俊(2011)。臺灣發明家的習慣領域剖析之質性研究。習慣領域期刊，第2卷第2期，頁21-37

魏子軒(2010)。國研院儀科中心於紐倫堡國際發明展再創佳績。國研科技，January 2010 No.25 Narl quarterly 頁125。


蔡錫錚、李建寬、葉則亮、張佩芬(2007)。新手設計行為與思考模式探討(國科會計畫編號：NSC-96-2516-S-008-001-MY2)。國立中央大學機械工程學系研究所。

智慧財產局(2014)。認識專利。經濟部智慧局

瞿海源、畢恆達、劉長萱、楊國樞(2012)。設計及行為科學研究法(二)：質性研究法。東華書局。台北市。

陳龍昇(2014)。專利法，元照。台北市。

陳介玄(1998)。台灣產業的社會學研究-轉型中的中小企業。聯經。台北市。

徐宏昇(1998)。專利權談判之若干思考。智慧財產權管理季刊，16期，32-33。

陳麗昭(2000)。台灣各人發明人專利商品化歷程之研究。未出版之碩士論文，國立雲林科技大學企業管理研究所。

陳麗昭(2000)。個人發明人專利商品化面臨困難之研究。碩士論文，國立雲林科技大學。

陳威霖、林殿琪(2001)。專利或技術之鑑價(下)。工業雜誌，10月號。

劉友菁、單驥(2006)。發明人企業化及成立專業研發廠商之可行性分析。未出版之碩士論文，國立中央大學。

黃建榮(2002)。台灣獨立發明人之社會資本與商品化模式、創新滿意度之研究。碩士論文，國立雲林科技大學企業管理研究所。

沈祐德、周永平(2015)。專利發明的設計思維對商品化的影響。CID 2015&IDSFC 2015，研討會論文。

黃慧昕(2010)。數位遊戲產業專利佈局策略之研究。碩士論文，義守大學管理學院。

潘淑滿(2003)。質性研究理論與應用。心理。台北市。

陳月娥(2000)。社會研究法（含概要）。千華。台北市。

葉至誠(2000)。社會科學概論。揚智文化。台北市。

袁方(2002)。社會研究方法。五南。台北市。

朱柔若譯(2000)。社會研究方法（質化與量化取向）。揚智文化。台北市。

台灣專利申請須知(http://www.joupo.com/main3.php)

台灣專利形式審查簡介(http://powercreate.pixnet.net/blog/category/90219)

專利實質審查簡介(http://www.proguidescreen.com/?p=1543)

智慧局公布2013年受理專利商標申請概況(https://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=507482&ctNode=7123&mp=1)

五大局受理專利商標申請概況
（http://iknow.stpi.narl.org.tw/Post/Read.aspx?PostID=10710）

經濟部智慧局專利審查基準(http://www.tipo.gov.tw/fp.aspfpage=cp&xItem=219469&ctNode=6683&mp=1&Captcha.ImageValidation=Or50p)







 
外文書籍與文獻

Adelman, M., Rader, R., Thomas, J. & Wegner, H. (1998).Cases and Materials on Patent Law. WEST GROUP.

Arabsheibani, G., de Meza, D., Maloney, J., & Pearson, B. (2000) And a Vision Appeared Unto Them of a Great Profit: Evidence of Self-Deception Among the Self-Employed, Economics Letters, Vol.67, pp 35-41.

Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 85-92.

Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking can transform organizations and inspire innovation. Harpercollins.

Chang H. T. and Chen J. L. (2003) An Innovative Product Design Approach Combining Extension Method With TRIZ. Journal Of The Chinese Society Of Mechanical Engineering, No 03-11-22.

Dagenais, D. L., Louis, S. D. & Claude, D. (1991). Analysis of Individual Canadian inventor Behavior. Technovation, Vol. 11 (6), pp 357-372.

Ernst, H. (1997).The use of patent data for technological forecasting: the diffusion of CNC-technology in the machine tool Industry. small business Economics, pp.361-381.

Ernst, H. (2003) Patent Information for Strategic Technology Management. World Patent Information, Vol.25, pp.233-242.

Esslinger, H. (2009). A Fine Line: How Design Strategies Are Shaping the Future of Business (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Henderson, S. J. (2004). Product Inventors and Creativity: The Finer Dimensions of Enjoyment. Creativity Research Journal, Vol.16, No.2&3, pp.293-312.

Khoury, S., Daniele, J. & Germeraad, P. (2001). Selection and Application of Intellectual Property Valuation Methods In Portfolio Management and Value Extraction. Les Nouvelles September, 79.

Kotler, P. (2004). Marketing Management. 11th ed., N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Livesay, H. C., Lux, D. S. and Brown, M. A. (1996), Human Factors and the Innovation Process. Technovation, Vol.16 (4), pp 173-186.

Liedtka, J. & Ogilvie T. (2011). Design for growth: A Design Thinking Tool Kit for Manager. Columbia University Press.

Merholz, P., Wilkens, T., Schauer, B. & Verba, D. (2008). Subject to change (1st ed.). O'Reilly Media.

Poole, M. (1980). Creativity Across the Curriculum, London: George Allen and Unwin.

Peter W. (1991), The Social Practice of Independent Inventing. Science, Technology and Human Values, Vol.16 (2), pp 208-232.

Parker, R. G., Gerald, G. U. & Blades, L. (1996). The New Independent inventor: Implications For Corporate Policy. Review of Business, Vol. 17(3), pp 7-11.

Rossman, J. (1931). The Psychology of the Inventor: A Study of the Patentee. Washington D. C., Inventor Publishing Co.

Roman, H. T. (2005).Tips for Inventors. Tech Directions, Vol.25, No.1,pp.13-14.

Robertson, A. (1984). Characteristics of the Successful Inventor: Some Notes on the Nature of Creativity and the Creative Mind. Technovation, No.2, pp.141-145.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard Univeristy Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 225.

Tavakoli, J. (2003). Collateralized Debt Obligations and Structured Finance. Foundation Press.

Udell, G. G., Baker,K.G. & Albaum, G. S.(1976). Creativity: Necessary,But Not Sufficient, The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol.10 (2), pp 92-103.

Udell, G. G., Neill, O. & Michael, F.(1977). Technology Transfer-Encouraging the Noncorporate Inventor, Business Horizons, pp 40-50.

Udell, G. G. (1990). It’s Still Caveat, Inventor. J PROD INNOV MANAG, Vol.7, pp.230-243.

Yung-Ping, C. & Yoo-De, S. (2014). Leveraging with IPR: Exploring the IPR Knowledge Needed for Design Innovations in Small Cultural Creative Industries. IJCC, volume 2, issue3, 50-63.