主管視角的內隱追隨力對部屬晉升力評分的影響以主管喜愛部屬、主管部屬交換關係及績效評估為中介變項

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：41

、訪客IP：3.139.83.79

姓名

黃海珊(Haisan Huang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所在職專班

論文名稱

主管視角的內隱追隨力對部屬晉升力評分的影響以主管喜愛部屬、主管部屬交換關係及績效評估為中介變項
(The Relationship between Leader’s Implicit Followership and promotability: The Mediating Effect of Liking, LMX and performance evaluation)

相關論文

★ 組織精簡與員工態度探討 - 以A公司人力重整計劃為例。	★ 訓練成效評估及影響訓練移轉之因素探討----一項時間管理訓練之研究
★ 主管領導風格、業務員工作習慣及專業證照對組織承諾與工作績效之相關研究	★ 研發專業人員職能需求之研究-以某研究機構為例
★ 人力資本、創新資本與組織財務績效關聯性之研究	★ 企業人力資源跨部門服務HR人員之角色、工作任務及所需職能之研究
★ 新進保全人員訓練成效之評估	★ 人力資源專業人員職能之研究－一項追蹤性的研究
★ 影響企業實施接班人計劃的成功因素	★ 主管管理能力、工作動機與工作績效之關聯性探討─以A公司為例
★ 影響安全氣候因子之探討-以汽車製造業為例	★ 台電公司不同世代員工工作價值觀差異及對激勵措施偏好之研究
★ 不同的激勵措施對員工工作滿足及工作投入之影響性分析	★ 工作價值觀、工作滿足對組織承諾之影響(以A通訊公司研發人員為例)
★ 薪資公平知覺與組織承諾關係之探討－以內外控人格特質為干擾變項	★ 改善活動訓練成效評量之研究

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

近年來，內隱追隨力是管理學領域中常被探討的議題，無論在領導者與追隨者之間的關係，領導者對追隨者的影響力，皆有許多的研究。本研究著重於在主管視角的內隱追隨力對晉升力評分產生影響進行探討，並且加入主管喜愛部屬、主管部屬交換關係及績效評估作為中介因子，進一步分析兩者之間的關係是否受到中介因子的影響。
本研究以臺灣企業主管部屬配對的方式進行問卷發放，蒐集有效樣本共 212 份，利用結構方程式分析，了解主管視角的內隱追隨力如何影響部屬的晉升力評分外，也探討了主管喜愛部屬、主管部屬交換關係和績效評估在兩者間扮演的角色。從回收的問卷中發現，內隱追隨力會影響主管喜愛部屬的程度和主管部屬交換關係，主管喜愛部屬的程度與主管部屬交換關係也會影響主管對部屬的績效評估，進而影響到部屬在主管心目中的晉升力評分，因此領導者的內隱追隨力對部屬的晉升力評分會產生的影響外，主管喜愛的部屬、主管部屬交換關係和績效評估，在內隱追隨力和晉升力評分之間具有中介效果。
最後，本研究亦針對研究結果提出討論，並對於學術貢獻、管理意涵，於研究限制與建議中也對未來內隱追隨領域的發展提供不同的研究方向。

摘要(英)

Implicit followership has been a frequently discussed topic in the field of management. There are many studies on the relationship between leaders and followers and the influence of leaders on followers. The purpose of the research is to explore the impact of implicit followership on employee promotability from supervisor’s perspective. The mediating effects of leaders′ liking of subordinates, leader-member exchange (LMX) relationships and supervisor’s performance evaluation scores are examined as well.
Data were collected by questionnaires, which were distributed in the form of matching supervisors and subordinates in Taiwan. A total of 212 valid samples were obtained. The study applied the method of structural equation modeling to test hypotheses. The results support the research model: implicit followership positively effects on leaders′ liking of subordinates and also on leader-member exchange (LMX) relationships. Also as predicted, mediating effects of leaders′ liking of subordinates, leader-member exchange (LMX) relationships and supervisor’s performance evaluation on the relationship between implicit followership and employee promotability were showed significantly.
Finally, based on the results, the study suggests that there are other research directions toward implicit followership for the future studies.

關鍵字(中)

★ 內隱追隨力
★ 主管喜愛部屬
★ 主管部屬交換關係
★ 績效評估
★ 晉升力評分

關鍵字(英)

論文目次

中文摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi
表目錄 vii
一、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的 4
二、文獻探討與研究假設 5
2-1 內隱追隨力理論 5
2-2 內隱追隨力與主管喜愛部屬的關係 8
2-3 內隱追隨力與主管部屬交換關係的關係 9
2-4 主管喜愛的部屬與績效評估的關係 11
2-5 主管部屬交換關係與績效評估的關係 12
2-6 績效評估與晉升力評分 13
三、研究方法 14
3-1 研究架構 14
3-2 研究對象與流程 15
3-3 研究變項之衡量 17
3-3-1 內隱追隨力 17
3-3-2 主管喜愛的部屬 17
3-3-3 主管部屬交換關係 17
3-3-4 績效評估 18
3-3-5 晉升力評分 18
3-3-6 控制變項 18
3-4 資料分析與統計方法 19
四、研究結果 20
4-1 資料來源及樣本特性 20
4-2 信度及效度分析 22
4-2-1 信度分析 22
4-2-2 收斂效度 23
4-2-3 區辨效度 25
4-2-4 驗證性因素分析 26
4-3 相關分析 27
4-4 假設模型檢驗 28
4-4-1 結構方程式檢驗 28
4-4-2 假設檢驗 29
五、結論與建議 31
5-1 研究結果與討論 31
5-2 學術貢獻 32
5-3 管理意涵 33
5-4 研究限制與建議 34
參考文獻 35

參考文獻

一、中文部分
〔1〕王弘鈺、李雲劍（2018），中國本土情境下內隱追隨的維度與量表開發—基於形成性指標的維度構建方法。廈門大學學報:哲學社會科學版(1)，78-85。
〔2〕林明村（2001），「直屬主管之差序格局對領導行為與領導效能影響之研究」，中山大學，碩士論文，民國90年。
〔3〕俞志緯（2012），「任務性, 脈絡性及適應性績效對晉升力之影響」，國立中央大學，碩士論文，民國101年。
〔4〕徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎、黃敏萍（2002），華人企業領導人的員工歸類與管理行為，本土心理學研究，(18)，51-94。
〔5〕徐瑋伶（2004）：海峽兩岸企業主管之差序式領導：一項歷程性的分析。台灣大學心理學研究所。
〔6〕祝振兵、羅文豪（2017），中國組織情境下的內隱追隨:內容、結構與測量，江西社會科學，37(3)，235-244。
〔7〕郭衍宏、蘭玲（2017），中國情境下內隱追隨理論的建構與測量，中國人力資源開發(7)，25-37。
〔8〕張火燦（1992），因應環境變動技職人力重規劃—高職人力資源發展的省思，技術及職業教育雙月刊，40-44。
〔9〕劉珮琪（2015），華人社會追隨力之概念初探，中央大學碩士論文。

二、英文部分
〔1〕 Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16(1), 74-94.
〔2〕 Blau, P. M. J. R. S. (1964). Social exchange theory. 3(2007), 62.
〔3〕 Bjugstad, K., Thach, E. C., Thompson, K. J., & Morris, A. (2006). A fresh look at followership: A model for matching followership and leadership styles. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 7(3), 304.
〔4〕 Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., West, B. J., Patera, J. L., & McGregor, R. J. T. l. q. (2010). Exploring social constructions of followership: A qualitative study. 21(3), 543-562.
〔5〕 Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. J. J. o. E. S. P. (1997). Nonconscious behavioral confirmation processes: The self-fulfilling consequences of automatic stereotype activation. 33(5), 541-560.
〔6〕 Cox Jr, T., & Nkomo, S. M. (1992). Candidate age as a factor in promotability ratings. Public Personnel Management, 21(2), 197-210.
〔7〕 Dansereau Jr, F., Graen, G., Haga, W. J. J. O. b., & performance, h. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. 13(1), 46-78.
〔8〕 De Pater, I. E., Van Vianen, A. E., Bechtoldt, M. N., & KLEHE, U. C. (2009). Employees′ challenging job experiences and supervisors′ evaluations of pormotability. Personnel psychology, 62(2), 297-325.
〔9〕 Dixon, G., & Westbrook, J. J. E. M. J. (2003). Followers revealed. 15(1), 19-26.
〔10〕 Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Davis-LaMastro, V. J. J. o. a. p. (1990). Perceived organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. 75(1), 51.
〔11〕 Engle, E. M., & Lord, R. G. J. A. o. m. J. (1997). Implicit theories, self-schemas, and leader-member exchange. 40(4), 988-1010.
〔12〕 Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. J. J. o. a. p. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. 89(2), 293.
〔13〕 Epitropaki, O., Sy, T., Martin, R., Tram-Quon, S., & Topakas, A. J. T. L. Q. (2013). Implicit leadership and followership theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership and followership in organizational settings. 24(6), 858-881.
〔14〕 Feldman, A. G. J. J. o. m. b. (1986). Once more on the equilibrium-point hypothesis (λ model) for motor control. 18(1), 17-54.
〔15〕 Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.
〔16〕 Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.
〔17〕 Gao, P., & Wu, W. (2019). Effect of leaders’ implicit followership theory on subordinates’ career success. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 47(5), 1-14.
〔18〕 Gilbert, G. R., & Hyde, A. C. J. P. A. R. (1988). Followership and the federal worker. 962-968.
〔19〕 Gioia, D. A., Nag, R., & Corley, K. G. J. J. o. M. I. (2012). Visionary ambiguity and strategic change: The virtue of vagueness in launching major organizational change. 21(4), 364-375.
〔20〕 Graen, G., & Cashman, J. F. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. Leadership frontiers, 143, 165.
〔21〕 Graen, G. B., Liden, R. C., & Hoel, W. J. J. o. a. p. (1982). Role of leadership in the employee withdrawal process. 67(6), 868.
〔22〕 Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. J. R. i. o. b. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing.
〔23〕 Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. J. A. o. m. J. (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. 33(1), 64-86.
〔24〕 Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1993). Job performance attributions and career advancement prospects: An examination of gender and race effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55(2), 273-297.
〔25〕 Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis . Uppersaddle River. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed) Upper Saddle River.
〔26〕 Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. J. A. p. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions: Questions and answers. 51(5), 469.
〔27〕 Hollander, E. P. (1992). The essential interdependence of leadership and followership. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(2), 71-75.
〔28〕 James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (2006). A tale of two methods. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 233-244.
〔29〕 Jussim, L. J. P. r. (1986). Self-fulfilling prophecies: A theoretical and integrative review. 93(4), 429.
〔30〕 Kay, D., Jones, F., Wyer, M., Fleisher, J., Salmon, R., Godfree, A., . . . Shore, R. J. T. l. (1994). Predicting likelihood of gastroenteritis from sea bathing: results from randomised exposure. 344(8927), 905-909.
〔31〕 Kleinsmith, S. L., & Everts-Rogers, S. J. S. A. (2000). The Art of Followership. 57(8), 35-38.
〔32〕 Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1990). The credibility factor: What followers expect from their leaders. Management Review, 79(1), 29-34.
〔33〕 Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitudinal study on the early development of leader-member exchanges. Journal of applied psychology, 78(4), 662.
〔34〕 Longenecker, C. O., & Fink, L. S. J. C. D. I. (2008). Key criteria in twenty‐first century management promotional decisions.
〔35〕 Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & Phillips, J. S. J. L. B. e. v. (1982). A theory of leadership categorization. 104, 121.
〔36〕 Lord, R. G., Maher, K. J. J. H. o. i., & psychology, o. (1991). Cognitive theory in industrial and organizational psychology. 2, 1-62.
〔37〕 Lord, R. G. J. R. i. o. b. (1985). An information processing approach to social perceptions, leadership and behavioral measurement in organizations.
〔38〕 Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475.
〔39〕 Ng, T. W., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367-408.
〔40〕 Notgrass, D. 2014. The relationship between followers’ perceived quality of relationship and preferred leadership style. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(7): 605-621.
〔41〕 Nunally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. (1978). Psychometric Theory, ed. New York McGraw.
〔42〕 Poole, P. P., Gioia, D. A., & Gray, B. J. T. J. o. A. B. S. (1989). Influence modes, schema change, and organizational transformation. 25(3), 271-289.
〔43〕 Powell, G. N., & Butterfield, D. A. (1994). Investigating the “glass ceiling” phenomenon: An empirical study of actual promotions to top management. Academy of management j
〔44〕 Reddin, W. J. (1970). Managerial effectiveness.
〔45〕 Robbins, T. L., & DeNisi, A. S. J. J. o. A. P. (1994). A closer look at interpersonal affect as a distinct influence on cognitive processing in performance evaluations. 79(3), 341.
〔46〕 Rosenbach, W. E., Pittman, T. S., & Potter III, E. H. J. C. i. i. l. (2012). What makes a follower. 77-87.
〔47〕 Rosenthal, R. (1993). Interpersonal expectations: Some antecedents and some consequences. Interpersonal expectations: Theory, research, and applications, 3-24.
〔48〕 Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. J. T. u. r. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. 3(1), 16-20.
〔49〕 Snead, K. B. (2013). Contextual Constraints: An Examination of Implicit Followership Theories.
〔50〕 Shanock, L. R., Baran, B. E., Gentry, W. A., Pattison, S. C., & Heggestad, E. D. (2010). Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(4), 543-554.
〔51〕 Sy, T. (2010). What do you think of followers? Examining the content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), 73-84.
〔52〕 Thacker, R. A. (1999). Perceptions of trust, upward influence tactics, and performance ratings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88(3_suppl), 1059-1070.
〔53〕 Turner, R. H. (1960). Sponsored and contest mobility and the school system. American Sociological Review, 855-867.
〔54〕 Van Scotter, J., Motowidlo, S. J., & Cross, T. C. (2000). Effects of task performance and contextual performance on systemic rewards. Journal of applied psychology, 85(4), 526.
〔55〕 Wang, H., Law, K. S., & Chen, Z. X. J. T. I. J. o. H. R. M. (2008). Leader-member exchange, employee performance, and work outcomes: An empirical study in the Chinese context. 19(10), 1809-1824.
〔56〕 Wayne, S. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of applied psychology, 75(5), 487.
〔57〕 Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., Graf, I. K., & Ferris, G. R. (1997). The role of upward influence tactics in human resource decisions. Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 979-1006.
〔58〕 Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3): Sage.
〔59〕 Whiteley, P., Sy, T., & Johnson, S. K. (2012). Leaders′ conceptions of followers: Implications for naturally occurring Pygmalion effects. The leadership quarterly, 23(5), 822-834.

指導教授

林文政

審核日期

2021-7-6

推文