隨著科技日新月異，科技產業正以跳躍式成長前進，在一波一波的科技軍備競賽中不斷創新與迭代更新。企業創造力攸關於組織是否能繼續在銷售市場上生存與發展。企業的核心競爭力仰賴於員工的創新與創造力，爲顧客提供差異化的服務、產品或新應用，取得差異化競爭優勢才能取得新商機。企業該如何進行變革與持續創新，再創產業另一事業高峰，找出下一個具有競爭力產品，是研究者服務公司當前的挑戰。
本研究目的在於探討高科技產業如何在技術快速迭代更新下，如何讓研發同仁能持續保有技術創新能力。因此設計提升創造力課程，採用以認知、情意及技能三大領域為主要課程架構，並設定教學目標以確保課程設計能環環相扣達到課程目的。同時採用「創意發展個人特質因素量表」為評量工具，試圖了解參與訓練學員的創造力高低與個人特質之關聯性，以及訪談資深學員，了解組織對課程的期待與對提升創造力的看法與建議。
本研究結果發現，創造力訓練課程設計必需考量組織對課程需求目的及了解學員特性，才能達到課程目的與效果。此外，課程設計與實施雖然有正向回饋，但有高階主管支持與政策配套措施，才是課程成功的第一步。透過量表數據分析得知，創造力高低與個人學歷高低無明顯關連性，與個人特質有關。此外，學員反應，公司設研發同仁有效的培訓機制，需有邏輯性的課程設計架構，利用各種不同教學策略與手法，不斷去化學員慣性思維，再提供合宜課程內容才能讓學員容易記憶與使用。
本研究的研究發現與結論，可提供給高科技公司的管理階層及訓練部門參考，在設計提升創造力課程，課程設計可以認知、情意與技能為主架構，同時課程資源與組織政策有完整配套措施，方可為組織做出貢獻。
關鍵詞: 核心競爭力、創造力、創新能力、個人特質

With the rapid development of science and technology, the technology industry is growing by leaps and bounds, constantly innovating and iteratively updating in the wave of the scientific and technological arms race. Creativity is about whether an organization can continue to survive and thrive in the sales market. The core competitiveness of an enterprise depends on the innovation and creativity of its employees to provide customers with differentiated services, products, or new applications, and to obtain differentiated competitive advantages in order to obtain new business opportunities. How should enterprises carry out reform and continuous innovation, create another career peak in the industry, and find the next competitive product is the current challenge for researcher service companies.
The purpose of this research is to explore how the high-tech industry can keep the R&D colleagues continuously maintaining the technological innovation ability under the rapid iterative update of technology. Therefore, the design of the curriculum to enhance creativity adopts the three major areas of Cognition, Affection, and Skills as the main curriculum structure, and sets the teaching objectives to ensure that the curriculum design can be linked to achieving the purpose of the curriculum. At the same time, the "Creative Development Personal Trait Factor Scale" was used as an evaluation tool to try to understand the correlation between the creativity of the trainees and their personal characteristics, and to interview senior trainees to understand the organization's expectations for the course and their views on enhancing creativity.
The results of this study found that the design of creativity training courses must consider the needs of the organization and the characteristics of trainees to achieve the course's purpose and effect. In addition, although there is positive feedback on the course design and implementation, the support of senior managers is the first step to the success of the course. Through the data analysis of the scale, it is known that there is no significant correlation between creativity and personal education, and the elderly have a comparative advantage in creativity. Participate in trainees' feedback and develop an effective training mechanism for colleagues. It requires a logical course design structure, using a variety of teaching strategies and techniques to constantly eliminate trainees' inertial thinking, and then providing appropriate course content to make it easy for trainees to remember and use.
The research findings and conclusions of this study can be used as a reference for the management and training departments of high-tech companies. When designing courses to enhance creativity, the curriculum design can be based on Cognition, Affection, and Skills, and the curriculum resources and organizational policies are coherent, and contribute to the organization.

Keyword：
Core Competitiveness, Creativity, Innovation Ability, Personal Characteristics

一、中文部分
毛連塭 (1989)。 特殊教育行政。 台北:五南圖書公司。
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台 (2000)，創造力研究。台北:心理出版社。
石角完爾 (2020)。 猶太人每天鍛鍊的WHY思考法。台北市：商業周刊。
吳靜吉、丁興祥、邱皓政(2002)。創造力的發展與實踐。應用心理研究, (15),
15-16.
李誠 (2001)。高科技產業人力資源管理。台北市:天下遠見。
沈翠蓮 (2005)。 創意課程設計與教學實踐之研究。課程與教學, 8(3), 55-71。
邱皓政 (2002)。 學校組織創新氣氛的內涵與教師創造力的實踐: 另一件國王的新衣?
應用心理研究, (15), 191-224。
邱皓政 (2006)。量化研究與統計分析。台北:五南圖書公司。
邱皓政、葉玉珠、蔡明宏 (1998)。 技術創造力的定義。論文發表於技術創造力研討
會，高雄，國立中山大學。
邱皓政、陳燕禎與林碧芳 (2009)。 組織創新氣氛量表的發展與信效度衡鑑。
測驗學刊, 56(1), 69-97。
洪榮昭、康鳳梅與林展立 (2003)。 傑出科技創作學童創造特質分析-以機器人
競賽為例。
張文智、潤華 (2008)。 提升設計組織創造力做法之研究。設計學報 (Journal
of Design), 13(1)，33-50。
教育部 (2001)。創造力教育白皮書子計畫（五） －創造性社會學習與社會行動
許文西、許源派 (2012)。企業創新與發展新模式。中華管理評論，15(1)，1-18。
許淑娟（1997），研發人員自陳式人格特質量表之發展-以某高科技公司為例(未出版
碩士論文)。國立中央大學，桃園市。
郭有遹 (2001)。 創造心理學。 台北:正中書局。
陳玉樹 (2008)。 創造力訓練課程成效分析: 準 Solomon 四組設計。課程與
教學, 11(4), 187-212。
陳玉樹、胡夢鯨 (2008)。 任務動機與組織創新氣候對成人教師創意教學表現之
影響: 階層線性模式分析。教育心理學報, 40(2), 179-198。
湯明哲（1999）。策略創新要能持續。遠見雜誌。158，20-22。
湯明哲（2002）。創新教育關係競爭力。遠見雜誌。191，33-34。
黃延聰 (2020)。 組織能力之更新: 組織認定觀點. Management Review, 28(1),
9-66。
楊朝祥 (2007)。高科技產業與人才創新--台灣模式與經驗。財團法人國家政策研究
基金會。
葉玉珠、吳靜吉 (2002)。 創意發展組織因素量表之編製: 以科技產業為例。
應用心理研究, (15), 225-247。
葉玉珠、吳靜吉、鄭英耀。(2000)。影響科技與資訊產業人員創意發展的因素之
量表編製. 師大學報: 科學教育類, 45(2), 39-63。
劉世南、郭誌光 (2001)。創造力的概念與定義。資優教育季, 102, 1-7。
薛琦 (1998)，我國高科技產業與經濟發展。經建會。

二、 英文部分
Amabile, T. M., Collins, M. A., Conti, R., Phillips, E., Picariello, M., Ruscio, J., & Whitney, D. (2018). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Routledge.
Aschbacher, P. R. (1991). Performance assessment: State activity, interest, and concerns. Applied Measurement in Education, 4(4), 275-288.
Boretsky, M. (1980). The role of innovation. Challenge, 23(5), 9-15.
Brown, J. L. (1976). Effects of the creative thinking ability of teachers on their educationally handicapped students’ creative thinking abilities: A longitudinal study using the Torrance test of creative thinking. United States International University.
Cropley, A. J. (2001). Creativity in education & learning: A guide for teachers and educators. Psychology Press.
Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. (1977). Characteristics of creatively gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 21(4), 546-551.
Davis, G. B. (1982). Strategies for information requirements determination. IBM systems journal, 21(1), 4-30.
Dewey, J. (1910). Science as subject matter and as the method. Science, 31(787), 121-127.
Fazio, R. H., Chen, J. M., McDonel, E. C., & Sherman, S. J. (1982). Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(4), 339-357.
Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: A knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 29(4), 255-268.
Feldhusen, J. F., & Treffinger, D. J. (1980). Creative thinking and problem-solving in gifted education. Dubuque, IA: Kendall. J. Feldhusen, D. Treffinger.
Feldman, D. H. (1999). The development of creativity. Handbook of creativity, 169.
Fink, A., Grabner, R. H., Benedek, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2006). Divergent thinking training is related to frontal electroencephalogram alpha synchronization. European Journal of Neuroscience, 23(8), 2241-2246.
Francis, D., & Bessant, J. (2005). Targeting innovation and implications for capability development. Technovation, 25(3), 171-183.
Gardner, J. (1993). On leadership. Simon and Schuster.
Godin, B. (2004). The obsession for competitiveness and its impact on statistics: the construction of high-technology indicators. Research Policy, 33(8), 1217-1229.
Golden, P. A., Doney, P. M., Johnson, D. M., & Smith, J. R. (1995). The dynamics of marketing orientation in transition economies: A study of Russian firms. Journal of International Marketing, 3(2), 29-49.
Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 267.
Hallman, R. J. (1966). Aesthetic pleasure and the creative process. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 6(2), 141-147.
Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. Handbook of Creativity, 53-75.
Karlin, S. (1957). Pólya type distributions, II. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 28(2), 281-308.
Keating, D. P. (2004). Cognitive and brain development. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 45–84). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Kerr, B., & Gagliardi, C. (2003). Measuring creativity in research and practice. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 155–169). American Psychological Association.
Lazar, A. L., Gensley, J., & Gowan, J. (1972). Developing Positive Attitudes Through Curriculum Planning For Youn Gifted Children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 16(1), 27-31.
Ma, H. H. (2006). An alternative method for quantitative synthesis of single-subject research: Percentage of data points exceeding the median. Behavior Modification, 30(5), 598-617.
Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220.
Mellou, E. (1996). The two‐conditions view of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 30(2), 126-143.
Messmann, G., & Mulder, R. H. (2015). Reflection as a facilitator of teachers' innovative work behavior. International Journal of Training and Development, 19(2), 125-137.
Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 27.
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607-634.
Ripple, R. E. (1989). Ordinary creativity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14(3), 189-202.
Runco, M. (2004). Personal creativity and culture. In Creativity: When East Meets West (pp. 9-21).
Runco, M. A., & Sakamoto, S. O. (1999). Experimental studies of creativity. Handbook of Creativity, 4, 62-84.
Runco, M. A., Nemiro, J., & Walberg, H. J. (1998). Personal explicit theories of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(1), 1-17.
Sapp, D. D. (1992). The point of creative frustration and the creative process: A new look at an old model. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 26(1), 21-28.
Saracho, O. (2012). Creativity theories and related teachers’ beliefs. Early Child Development and Care, 182(1), 35-44.
Schmoch, U., Hinze, S., Jäckel, G., Kirsch, N., Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Münt, G. (1996). The role of the scientific community in the generation of technology. In Organisation of Science and Technology at the Watershed (pp. 1-138). Physical, Heidelberg.
Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361-388.
Shalley, C. E. (1995). Effects of coaction, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 483-503.
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity from a historiometric perspective. Handbook of Creativity, 116-133.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Abilities are forms of developing expertise. Educational Researcher, 27(3), 11-20.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53.
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Cultural discontinuities and the development of originality of thinking. Exceptional Children, 29(1), 2-13.
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Non-test ways of identifying the creatively gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 6(3), 71-75.
Torrance, E. P. (1969). Creative positives of disadvantaged children and youth. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13(2), 71-81.
Torrance, E. P., & Shaughnessy, M. F. (1998). An interview with E. Paul Torrance: about creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 441-452.
Treffinger, D. J. (1980). Fostering independence and creativity. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 3(4), 214-224.
Woodman, R. W. (1981). Creativity as a concept in personality theory. Journal of Creative Behavior, Buffalo Vol. 15 (1981), pp. 43-66.