本研究探團隊討辯證思維對企業系統整合團隊雙元性的影響，以及同時發展對齊和適應能力如何影響企業系統計畫效能。研究檢視交互記憶系統 (TMS) 和知識整合在此過程中的中介角色。企業系統整合團隊必須平衡與組織目標對齊和適應商業環境變化等看似矛盾的目標。儘管雙元性的文獻探討了對齊和適應之間的衝突，但很少有研究專注於從企業系統整合團隊的角度探討企業系統計畫的雙能力。本研究的動機來自企業系統在組織中日益重要的實施和在企業系統整合團隊中同時發展對齊和適應能力以避免潛在問題的需求。此外先前的文獻並未廣泛討論團隊層面的雙能力，近期的研究則表明領導者的辯證思維可以促進團隊的雙能力。本研究旨在建立在這些發現上，探討團隊辯證思維對企業系統整合團隊對齊和適應能力主題的正面影響。
本研究採用傳統郵寄方式收集了台灣前 1,000 家製造企業的調查數據，並使用PLS分析研究模型。研究結果顯示團隊辯證思維確實會對企業系統整合團隊的對齊能力有正向影響，並能進一步正向影響企業系統計畫效能。雖然團隊辯證思維會對企業系統整合團隊的適應能力並不顯著，但本研究也證實了交互記憶系統和知識整合在團隊辯證思維和企業系統整合團隊雙元性之間起到中介的作用。因此，根據研究結果，本研究提出了管理啟示、侷限以及未來的研究方向。

This study investigates the impact of team dialectical thinking on the ambidexterity of Enterprise System (ES) integration teams, and how developing both alignment and adaptability simultaneously can influence ES program effectiveness. The study examines the role of the transactive memory system (TMS) and knowledge integration as mediators in this process. ES integration teams must balance seemingly contradictory goals of aligning with organizational objectives and adapting to changes in the business environment. While ambidexterity literature explores the conflict between alignment and adaptation, few studies focus on the ambidexterity of ES programs from the perspective of the ES integration team. The study is motivated by the increasing importance of ES implementation in organizations and the need to develop both alignment and adaptability in ES integration teams to avoid potential issues. Additionally, previous literature has not extensively discussed team-level ambidexterity, and recent studies have suggested that a leader's dialectical thinking can promote team ambidexterity. This study seeks to build on these findings and explore the positive impact of team dialectical thinking on the theme of alignment and adaptability within ES integration teams.
This study uses traditional mailing methods to collect survey data from the top 1,000 manufacturing firms in Taiwan and analyzes the research model with PLS. The results indicate that team dialectical thinking indeed has a positive impact on the alignment capability of ES integration teams, which in turn positively influences the effectiveness of the ES program. Although the impact of team dialectical thinking on the adaptability of ES integration teams was not significant, the study also confirmed the mediating role of TMS and knowledge integration in the relationship between team dialectical thinking and the ambidexterity of ES integration teams. Therefore, based on the findings, this study provides managerial implications, limitations, and future research directions.

Argote, L., & Guo, J. M. (2016). Routines and transactive memory systems: Creating, coordinating, retaining, and transferring knowledge in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 65-84.
Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2005). Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58(12), 1652-1661.
Basseches, M. (1984). Dialectical thinking. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Beatty, R. C., & Williams, C. D. (2006). ERP II: best practices for successfully implementing an ERP upgrade. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 105-109.
Browning, T. R. (2018). Building models of product development processes: An integrative approach to managing organizational knowledge. Systems Engineering, 21(1), 70-87.
Burgelman, R. A. (2002). Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(2), 325-357.
Chandrasekaran, A., Linderman, K., & Schroeder, R. (2012). Antecedents to ambidexterity competency in high technology organizations. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1-2), 134-151.
Chang, J. Y., Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Wang, E. T. (2019). Enterprise system programs: Goal setting and cooperation in the integration team. Information & Management, 56(6), 103137.
Chen, S. X., Benet‐Martínez, V., Wu, W. C., Lam, B. C., & Bond, M. H. (2013). The role of dialectical self and bicultural identity integration in psychological adjustment. Journal of Personality, 81(1), 61-75.
Cheng, C. (2009). Dialectical thinking and coping flexibility: A multimethod approach. Journal of Personality, 77(2), 471-494.
Chin, T., Wang, S., & Rowley, C. (2021). Polychronic knowledge creation in cross-border business models: a sea-like heuristic metaphor. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(1), 1-22.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295-336.
Collinson, D. (2005). Dialectics of leadership. Human Relations, 58(11), 1419-1442.
De Souzabido, D., & Da Silva, D. (2019). SMARTPLS 3: SPECIFICATION, ESTIMATION, EVALUATION AND REPORTING. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa–RAEP, 20(2), 465-514.
Detzen, N., Verbeeten, F. H., Gamm, N., & Möller, K. (2018). Formal controls and team adaptability in new product development projects. Management Decision.
Dragicevic, N., Ullrich, A., Tsui, E., & Gronau, N. (2019). A conceptual model of knowledge dynamics in the industry 4.0 smart grid scenario. Knowledge Management Research & Practice.
El Amrani, R., Rowe, F., & Geffroy‐Maronnat, B. (2006). The effects of enterprise resource planning implementation strategy on cross‐functionality. Information Systems Journal, 16(1), 79-104.
editor., C. W. M. E. w. (2020). About｜CommonWealth Magazine. Retrieved 2023/6/07 from https://english.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=2681
Espinosa, J. A., Slaughter, S. A., Kraut, R. E., & Herbsleb, J. D. (2007). Team knowledge and coordination in geographically distributed software development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(1), 135-169.
Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. University of Akron Press.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Gardner, H. K., Gino, F., & Staats, B. R. (2012). Dynamically integrating knowledge in teams: Transforming resources into performance. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 998-1022.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226.
Goswami, A. K., & Agrawal, R. K. (2020). Explicating the influence of shared goals and hope on knowledge sharing and knowledge creation in an emerging economic context. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(2), 172-195.
Gray, R. J. (1997). Alternative approaches to programme management. International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), 5-9.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24.
Han, G., Bai, Y., & Peng, G. (2022). Creating team ambidexterity: The effects of leader dialectical thinking and collective team identification. European Management Journal, 40(2), 175-181.
Han, G. H., & Bai, Y. (2020). Leaders can facilitate creativity: The moderating roles of leader dialectical thinking and LMX on employee creative self-efficacy and creativity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 35(5), 405-417.
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494.
Hong, D., & Zhang, L. (2017). Does transactive memory systems promote knowledge integration directly? Procedia Computer Science, 112, 896-905.
Huang, J. C., & Newell, S. (2003). Knowledge integration processes and dynamics within the context of cross-functional projects. International Journal of Project Management, 21(3), 167-176.
Im, G., & Rai, A. (2008). Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term interorganizational relationships. Management Science, 54(7), 1281-1296.
Jansen, J. J., Kostopoulos, K. C., Mihalache, O. R., & Papalexandris, A. (2016). A socio‐psychological perspective on team ambidexterity: The contingency role of supportive leadership behaviours. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6), 939-965.
Jansen, J. J., Simsek, Z., & Cao, Q. (2012). Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit contexts: Cross‐level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1286-1303.
Jansen, J. J., Van den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2005). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: The impact of environmental and organizational antecedents. Schmalenbach Business Review, 57, 351-363.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Majchrzak, A. (2008). Knowledge collaboration among professionals protecting national security: Role of transactive memories in ego-centered knowledge networks. Organization Science, 19(2), 260-276.
Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1183-1194.
Kearns, G. S., & Lederer, A. L. (2000). The effect of strategic alignment on the use of IS-based resources for competitive advantage. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(4), 265-293.
Kim, L. (1997). Imitation to innovation: The dynamics of Korea's technological learning. Harvard Business School Press.
Kostopoulos, K. C., & Bozionelos, N. (2011). Team exploratory and exploitative learning: Psychological safety, task conflict, and team performance. Group & Organization Management, 36(3), 385-415.
Kotlarsky, J., van den Hooff, B., & Houtman, L. (2015). Are we on the same page? Knowledge boundaries and transactive memory system development in cross-functional teams. Communication Research, 42(3), 319-344.
Langley, A., Lindberg, K., Mørk, B. E., Nicolini, D., Raviola, E., & Walter, L. (2019). Boundary work among groups, occupations, and organizations: From cartography to process. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 704-736.
Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 587.
Lewis, K., & Herndon, B. (2011). Transactive memory systems: Current issues and future research directions. Organization Science, 22(5), 1254-1265.
Lewis, K., Lange, D., & Gillis, L. (2005). Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organization Science, 16(6), 581-598.
Li, B., & Qu, G. (2010). Relationship between team social capital and knowledge transfer: The mediated effect of TMS. 2010 International Conference on E-Product E-Service and E-Entertainment,
Liang, D. W., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4), 384-393.
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672.
Marsh, S. J., & Stock, G. N. (2003). Building dynamic capabilities in new product development through intertemporal integration. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20(2), 136-148.
Moreland, R. L., & Myaskovsky, L. (2000). Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 117-133.
Nemeth, C. J. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological review, 93(1), 23.
Nidumolu, S. (1995). The effect of coordination and uncertainty on software project performance: residual performance risk as an intervening variable. Information Systems Research, 6(3), 191-219.
Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: knowledge creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1(1), 2-10.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long range planning, 33(1), 5-34.
Nonala, I., & Kenney, M. (1991). Towards a new theory of innovation management: A case study comparing Canon, Inc. and Apple Computer, Inc. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 8(1), 67-83.
O'Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324-338.
O Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard business review, 82(4), 74-83.
Park, Y., Pavlou, P. A., & Saraf, N. (2020). Configurations for achieving organizational ambidexterity with digitization. Information Systems Research, 31(4), 1376-1397.
Paulus, P. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea‐generating groups. Applied Psychology, 49(2), 237-262.
Pellegrinelli, S. (2011). What’s in a name: Project or programme? International Journal of Project Management, 29(2), 232-240.
Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539-569.
Preston, D. S., & Karahanna, E. (2009). Antecedents of IS strategic alignment: a nomological network. Information Systems Research, 20(2), 159-179.
Qian, L., Agarwal, R., & Hoetker, G. (2012). Configuration of value chain activities: The effect of pre-entry capabilities, transaction hazards, and industry evolution on decisions to internalize. Organization Science, 23(5), 1330-1349.
Ren, Y., & Argote, L. (2011). Transactive memory systems 1985–2010: An integrative framework of key dimensions, antecedents, and consequences. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 189-229.
Ren, Y., Carley, K. M., & Argote, L. (2006). The contingent effects of transactive memory: When is it more beneficial to know what others know? Management Science, 52(5), 671-682.
Sanchez, R. (1995). Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 135-159.
Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., & Wienk, J. A. (2003). Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 24(6), 779-802.
Seddon, P. B., Calvert, C., & Yang, S. (2010). A multi-project model of key factors affecting organizational benefits from enterprise systems. MIS Quarterly, 305-328.
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403.
Soluk, J., Kammerlander, N., & Darwin, S. (2021). Digital entrepreneurship in developing countries: The role of institutional voids. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 170, 120876.
Spencer-Rodgers, J., Peng, K., Wang, L., & Hou, Y. (2004). Dialectical self-esteem and East-West differences in psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(11), 1416-1432.
Staehr, L., Shanks, G., & Seddon, P. B. (2012). An explanatory framework for achieving business benefits from ERP systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(6), 2.
Tatikonda, M. V., & Montoya-Weiss, M. M. (2001). Integrating operations and marketing perspectives of product innovation: The influence of organizational process factors and capabilities on development performance. Management Science, 47(1), 151-172.
Templeton, G. F., Lewis, B. R., & Snyder, C. A. (2002). Development of a measure for the organizational learning construct. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(2), 175-218.
Tiwana, A., & McLean, E. R. (2005). Expertise integration and creativity in information systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(1), 13-43.
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8-29.
Van den Bosch, F. A., Volberda, H. W., & De Boer, M. (1999). Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science, 10(5), 551-568.
Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008.
Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. Theories of Group Behavior, 185-208.
Wegner, D. M., Erber, R., & Raymond, P. (1991). Transactive memory in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(6), 923.
Wegner, D. M., Giuliano, T., & Hertel, P. T. (1985). Cognitive interdependence in close relationships. Compatible and Incompatible Relationships, 253-276.
Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Hayton, J. (2020). What do we know about knowledge integration: Fusing micro-and macro-organizational perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 160-194.
Zhou, K. Z., & Li, C. B. (2012). How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strategic Management Journal, 33(9), 1090-1102.