近年來，科技的興起改變過去人們交流與戶動的方式，社群網絡成為現代人交流的主要方式，目前以知識為基礎的問答平台都逐漸引入了社交網站人際網絡的概念，建構出網絡式的知識社群，單純的知識問答已經不再是主流，取而代之的是更多人與人之間組成「社群網絡」的元素。中國的知識問答社群平台“知乎”就是一個非常經典的案例。
本研究旨在探討「服務主導邏輯」下對於平台經營的應用。透過理論分析重新定義「服務」並強調其重要性，而後以「知乎」作為本研究分析之平台，分析知乎如何強化社群網絡中使用者之間的連結並增加使用者之間的價值交換，進而達成其目標「與世界分享你的知識、經驗與見解」。
透過對知乎的實際應用進行分析，了解其機制設定並將服務的概念與理論應證於其正向循環之生態圈，提供知識分享平台經營者未來平台功能與機制設計上的參考。

Nowadays, the rise of science and technology has changed the way people communicate. Social network has become the main way for people to interact with each other. The current knowledge-based question and answer platform has gradually taken in the concept of social networking and built a network-based community. In the knowledge community, pure question and answer form are no longer the mainstream. Instead, more elements form the “social network” among people have replaced the traditional one. China's knowledge sharing platform, Zhihu, is a very classic case.
This study aims to explore the application of platform management under the "service-dominant logic" by redefining “services” through theoretical analysis and emphasizing their importance. We analyze how to improve the connection between users in the social network and increase the value between users through taking “Zhihu” as a platform in this research. We provide a new angle to see how Zhihu makes their participants to exchange and achieve its goal "to share your knowledge, experience and insights with the world."
Through the analysis of practical application of Zhihu, we understand thoroughly about its mechanism, the concept, and theory of service. Zhihu is now confirmed to be a positively-cycled ecosystem and we provide a practical application for platform operators a new aspect to build and design service platform mechanism better.

1. Ahmad Ghazawneh & Ola Henfridsson (2012) Balancing platform control and external contribution in third-party development: the boundary resources model. Info Systems J , 23, 173-192
2. Alter, S. 2008). “Service System Innovation,” in Technology in the Service Economy: Challenges and Possibilities for the 21st Century, M. Barrett, E. Davidson, C. Middleton, and J. DeGross (eds.), Boston: Springer, pp. 61-80.
3. Arthur, B. W. (2009). The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves, New York: Free Press.
4. Atreyi Kankanhalli, Bernard C. Y. Tan and Kwok-Kee Wei. Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1, Special Issue on Information Technologies and Knowledge Management (Mar., 2005), pp. 113-143
5. Barrett, M. and Davidson, E. (2008). “Exploring the Diversity of Service Worlds in the Service Economy,” in Information Technology in the Service Economy: Challenges and Possibilities for the 21st Century, M. Barrett, E. Davidson, C. Middleton, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), New York: Springer, pp. 1-10.
6. Coleman, J. S (1990). Foundations of Social Theory, Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA
7. Donath, J. S (1999). "Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community," in Communities in Cyberspace, M. A. Smith and P. Kollock (Eds.), Routledge, NewY ork
8. Dörner, N., Gassmann, O., and Gebauer, H. (2011). “Service Innovation: Why Is It So Difficult to Accomplish? ,” Journal of Business Strategy (32:3), pp. 37-46.
9. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). “Building Theories from Case Study Research,” Academy of Management Review (14:4), pp. 532-550.
10. Faraj, S., Jarvenpaa, S. L., and Majchrzak, A. (2011). “Knowledge Collaboration in Online Communities,” Organization Science (22:5), pp. 1224-1239.
11. Fernando Olivera, Paul S. Goodman and Sharon Swee-Lin Tan. Contribution Behaviors in Distributed Environments. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Mar., 2008), pp. 23-42
12. Gallouj, F., and Suvana, M. (2009). “Innovation in Services: A Review of the Debate and a Research Agenda,” Journal of Evolutionary Economics (19:2), pp. 149- 172.
13. Gerald C. Kane, Maryam Alavi, & Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca and Stephen P. Borgatti. What’s Different about Social Media Network? A Framework and Research Agenda. MIS Quarterly Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 275-304/March 2014
14. Henfridsson, O., Yoo, Y. & Svahn, F. (2009) Path creation in digital innovation: a multi-layered dialectics perspective. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 9, 1–26. [WWW document]. URL http://sprouts.aisnet. org/9-20/.
15. Lewicki, R. J., and Bunker, B. B (1996). "Developing and Maintaining Trust in Work Relationships," in Trust in Organizations, R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Sage Publications, London
16. Lusch, R., Vargo, S. L., and Tanniru, M. (2010). “Service, Value Networks and Learning,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (38:1), pp. 19-31.
17. Lyytinen, K., and King, J. L. (2006). “Standard Making: A Critical Research Frontier for Information Systems Research,” MIS Quarterly (30:Special Issue), pp. 405- 411.
18. Maglio, P. P., and Spohrer, J. (2008). “Fundamentals of Service Science,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (36:1), pp. 18-20.
19. Marwell, G., and Oliver, P. (1993) The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro- Social Theory, Cambridge University Press, New York
20. Michael Barrett, Elizabeth Davidson, Jaideep Prabhu, & Stephen L. Vargo (2015). Service Innovation in the Digital Age: Key Contributions and Future Directions. MIS Quarterly, Vol.39, pp. 135-154
21. Molly M. Wasko & Samer Faraj (2005) “Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice”, MIS Quarterly. Vol 29, pp. 35-57
22. Normann, R. (2001). Reframing Business: When the Map Changes the Landscape, Chichester, UK: Wiley.
23. Oke, A. (2007). “Innovation Types and Innovation Management Practices in Service Companies,” International Journal of Operations & Production Management (27:6), pp. 564-587
24. Oliveira, P., and von Hippel, E. (2011). “Users as Service Innovators: The Case of Banking Services,” Research Policy (40), pp. 806-818.
25. Orlikowski, W., and Scott, S. V. (2008). “Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization,” Academy of Management Annals (2:1), pp. 433-474.
26. Putnam, R. (1995a) "Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital," Journal of Democracy (6)
27. Robert F. Lusch & Satish Nambisan (2015) , “Service Innovation: A Service-Dominant Logic Persperctive”. MIS Quarterly, vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 155-175/ March
28. Roman Beck & Immanuel Pahlke and Christoph Seebach. Knowledge Exchange and Symbolic Action in Social Media-Enabled Networks of Practice: A Multilevel Perspective on Knowledge Seekers and Contributors. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 38, No. 42, (Dec., 2014), pp. 1245-1270
29. Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., and Sørensen, C. (2010). “Digital Infra- structures: The Missing IS Research Agenda,” Information Systems Research (20:4), pp. 748-759.
30. Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., and Sørensen, C. (2010). “Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda,” Information Systems Research (21:5), pp. 748-759.
31. Vargo, S. L., and Lusch, R. F. (2004). “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing,” Journal of Marketing (68:1), pp. 1-17.
32. Vargo, S. L., and Lusch, R. F. (2011). “It’s All B2B...and Beyond: Toward a Systems Perspective of the Market,” Industrial Marketing Management (40:2), pp. 181- 187.
33. Wanda J. Orlikowski & Susan V. Scott. The Algorithm and the Crowd:Considering the Materiality of Service Innovation(2015). MIS Quarterly, Vol.39, pp.201-216
34. Yoo, Y. (2010) Computing in everyday life: a call for research on experiential computing. MIS Quarterly, 34, 213–231.
35. Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Lyytinen, K., and Majchrzak, A. (2012). “Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World,” Organization Science (23:5), pp. 1398-1408.
36. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O. & Lyytinen, K. (2010) The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21, 724–735.
37. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., and Lyytinen, K. (2010). “The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research,” Information Systems Research (21:4), pp. 724-735.