博碩士論文 108427020 詳細資訊




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:17 、訪客IP:18.216.181.242
姓名 黃雅靖(Ya-Jing Huang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 人力資源管理研究所
論文名稱 部屬視角的矛盾內隱領導理論對部屬行為 關聯性之探討-以對主管的認同為中介變項
(The Relationship Between Follower’s Paradoxical Implicit Leadership Theory and Work Role Behavior- Mediation Effect of Identification With Leader)
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]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 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。
  3. 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) 本研究結合「內隱領導理論」與「矛盾領導行為」,探討部屬預期與實際感受到主管矛盾領導的一致性或不一致性,與部屬工作角色行為間之關係,並以「對主管的認同」此變項為中介因子。本研究於台灣主管與部屬有效配對樣本,最終收集共233組。利用多項式迴歸方程式與反應曲面圖,計算出部屬在矛盾內隱領導理論一致和不一致的情況下,與部屬對主管認同,及其工作行為表現之關係為何。
研究結果顯示當部屬對主管矛盾內隱領導理論的個人預期與實際感受兩者呈現一致高時,對主管的認同也較高;當矛盾內隱領導理論超乎預期時,對主管的認同同樣趨於高點;然而矛盾內隱領導理論與適應性行為、主動性行為和熟練性行為統計結果呈現無顯著,也代表對主管認同此變項於矛盾內隱領導理論匹配性與工作角色行為間不具有中介效果。最後,本研究亦針對研究結果提出討論、學術貢獻、管理意涵、研究限制及未來於內隱領導理論領域之研究方向。
摘要(英) This study combines “implicit leadership theory” and “paradoxical leadership behaviors” to explore the correlations of the congruence and the incongruence of the subordinates’ expectations and actual perceived of their supervisors’ paradoxical leadership behaviors and their work role behaviors, also, we use “identification with leader” as the mediation factor. In this study, we matched Taiwan’s supervisors and subordinates’ samples and collected 233 effective samples. Then we applied polynomial regression and response surface graphs to calculate how the congruence and the incongruence of paradoxical implicit leadership affected identification with leader and their work role behaviors.
The results reveal that when subordinates’ expectations and actual perceived of paradoxical implicit leadership tend to be consistent, the identification with leader also tends to be higher; when the paradoxical implicit leadership exceeds expectations, the identification with leader also tends to be higher. However, the statistical results show that the correlation of paradoxical implicit leadership, adaptive behavior, proactive behavior and proficiency behavior are not significant, which also means that the mediation factor “identification with leader “does not have a mediation effect.
Based on the research results, this study proposes discussions, academic contributions, management implications, research limitations, and future research directions in the field of implicit leadership.
關鍵字(中) ★ 內隱領導理論
★ 矛盾領導行為
★ 對主管的認同
★ 適應性行為
★ 主動性行為
★ 熟練性行為
關鍵字(英) ★ implicit leadership theory
★ paradoxical leadership behaviors
★ identification with leader
★ adaptive behavior
★ proactive behavior
★ proficient behavior
論文目次 目錄
中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi
表目錄 ii
一、 緒論 1
1-1 研究背景及動機 1
1-2 研究目的 4
二、 文獻探討與假設 5
2-1 內隱領導理論 5
2-1-1 內隱領導理論之概念與發展 5
2-1-2 內隱領導理論之領導分類意涵 6
2-1-3 內隱領導理論之量測 7
2-2 矛盾領導行為 8
2-3 對主管的認同 11
2-4 工作角色表現 12
2-5 部屬對主管矛盾內隱領導理論之一致性 14
2-6 部屬對主管矛盾領導預期與實際感受匹配類型 14
2-6-1 部屬對主管矛盾內隱領導理論一致性 15
2-6-2 部屬對主管矛盾內隱領導理論不一致性 15
2-7 對主管認同在矛盾內隱領導理論與工作角色行為的中介效果 17
三、 研究方法 18
3-1 研究樣本與程序 18
3-2 研究工具 19
3-2-1 矛盾內隱領導理論 19
3-2-2 對主管的認同 20
3-2-3 部屬工作角色表現 21
3-2-4 控制變項 21
3-3 資料分析與統計方法 21
四、 研究結果 24
4-1 資料來源與樣本特性 24
4-2 信度分析 26
4-3 驗證性因素分析 26
4-4 Pearson相關分析 27
4-5 顯著差異樣本數比例 28
4-6 假設檢定 29
4-6-1 部屬在矛盾內隱領導理論行為一致和不一致時對其行為之關係 29
4-6-2 對主管認同在矛盾內隱領導理論與工作角色行為的中介效果 34
五、 結論與建議 36
5-1 研究結果與討論 36
5-2 學術貢獻 37
5-3 管理意涵 38
5-4 研究限制與未來研究建議 39
參考文獻 40


圖目錄
圖 1 部屬對領導的預期與實際感受的四種匹配類型 15
圖 2 曲面反應圖及估計值(Z=對主管的認同) 31
圖 3 曲面反應圖(Z=適應性行為) 33
圖 4 曲面反應圖(Z=主動性行為) 33
圖 5 曲面反應圖(Z=熟練性行為) 33




























表目錄
表 1 樣本資料來源與特性表 25
表 2 信度分析表 26
表 3 驗證性因素分析表 27
表 4 Pearson相關分析表 28
表 5 顯著差異樣本比例 28
表 6 多項式迴歸係數結果(Z=對主管的認同) 30
表 7 多項式迴歸係數結果(Z=部屬工作行為) 32
表 8 部屬工作行為估計值 34
表 9 矛盾內隱領導理論理論於依變項之間接中介效果(對主管的認同) 34
表 10 假設與研究結果總表 35
參考文獻 吳明隆、涂金堂(2011)。SPSS與統計應用分析。台北市:五南。
余惠敏(2020)。矛盾領導行為對部屬工作績效之影響(碩士論文)。國立中央大學,桃園市。
林文政(2016年6月24日)。銳利、嚴格卻不傷人的領導者【經理人】。取自https://www.managertoday.com.tw/columns/view/52696。
林孜庭(2020)。主管與部屬矛盾領導行為的一致性對部屬行為之影響—以任務複雜度為調節效果(碩士論文)。國立中央大學,桃園市。
陳子筠(2020)。主管家長式領導對部屬態度與工作行為之影響—部屬的預期與實際感受之適配觀點(碩士論文)。國立中央大學,桃園市。
黃芳銘(2015)。《結構方程模式-理論與應用》。台北市:台灣五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
張偉豪、鄭時宜(2012)。與結構方程模型共舞:曙光初現。新北市:前程文化。
Alfes, K., & Langner, N. (2017). Paradoxical leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 46(2), 96-103.
Angelici, M., & Profeta, P. (2020). Smart-working: work flexibility without constraints.
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6), 673-704.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (1995). Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. The leadership quarterly, 6(2), 199-218.
Backhaus, L., Reuber, A., Vogel, D., & Vogel, R. (2021). Giving sense about paradoxes: paradoxical leadership in the public sector. Public Management Review, 1-21.
Bateman, T. S., & Crant, J. M. (1993). The proactive component of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates. Journal of organizational behavior, 14(2), 103-118.
Bentler, P. M. (1982). Confirmatory factor analysis via noniterative estimation: A fast, inexpensive method. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 417-424.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological bulletin, 88(3), 588.
Berg, J. M., Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2010). Perceiving and responding to challenges in job crafting at different ranks: When proactivity requires adaptivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2‐3), 158-186.
Blau, G. (1994). Testing the effect of level and importance of pay referents on pay level satisfaction. Human relations, 47(10), 1251-1268.
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human performance, 10(2), 99-109.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 17(5), 475-482.
Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this" We"? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 71(1), 83..
Caplan, R. D. (1987). Person-environment fit theory and organizations: Commensurate dimensions, time perspectives, and mechanisms. Journal of Vocational behavior, 31(3), 248-267.
Chen, M. J. (2002). Transcending paradox: The Chinese “middle way” perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2), 179-199.
Cheney, G., & Tompkins, P. K. (1987). Coming to terms with organizational identification and commitment. Communication Studies, 38(1), 1-15.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural equation modeling, 9(2), 233-255.
Choi, J. N. (2004). Person–environment fit and creative behavior: Differential impacts of supplies–values and demands–abilities versions of fit. Human Relations, 57(5), 531-552.
Cole, M. S., Carter, M. Z., & Zhang, Z. (2013). Leader–team congruence in power distance values and team effectiveness: The mediating role of procedural justice climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(6), 962.
Connaughton, S. L., & Daly, J. A. (2004). Identification with leader: A comparison of perceptions of identification among geographically dispersed and co‐located teams. Corporate Communications: An International Journal.
Cronshaw, S. F., & Lord, R. G. (1987). Effects of categorization, attribution, and encoding processes on leadership perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 97.
Day, D. V., Gronn, P., & Salas, E. (2004). Leadership capacity in teams. The leadership quarterly, 15(6), 857-880.
Denis, J. L., Langley, A., & Sergi, V. (2012). Leadership in the plural. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 211-283.
Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open?. Academy of management journal, 50(4), 869-884.
Du, J., & Chen, Z. (2018). Applying Organizational Ambidexterity in strategic management under a “VUCA” environment: Evidence from high tech companies in China. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 2(1), 42-52.
Eden, D., & Leviatan, U. (1975). Implicit leadership theory as a determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(6), 736.
Edwards, J. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 58(1), 51-100.
Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Van Harrison, R. (1998). Person-environment fit theory. Theories of organizational stress, 28(1), 67-94.
Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management journal, 36(6), 1577-1613.
Engle, E. M., & Lord, R. G. (1997). Implicit theories, self-schemas, and leader-member exchange. Academy of management journal, 40(4), 988-1010.
Ensari, N., & Murphy, S. E. (2003). Cross-cultural variations in leadership perceptions and attribution of charisma to the leader. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92(1-2), 52-66.
Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of applied psychology, 89(2), 293.
Epitropaki, O., Sy, T., Martin, R., Tram-Quon, S., & Topakas, A. (2013). Implicit leadership and followership theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership and followership in organizational settings. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(6), 858-881.
Evans, P. A. (2000). The dualistic leader: Thriving on paradox. S. Chowdhury (Ed.), Management C, 21, 66-82.
Fairhurst, G. T., & Grant, D. (2010). The social construction of leadership: A sailing guide. Management communication quarterly, 24(2), 171-210.
Foti, R. J., & Luch, C. H. (1992). The influence of individual differences on the perception and categorization of leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 3(1), 55-66.
Franken, E., Plimmer, G., & Malinen, S. (2020). Paradoxical leadership in public sector organisations: Its role in fostering employee resilience. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 79(1), 93-110.
Gabriel, A. S., Diefendorff, J. M., Chandler, M. M., Moran, C. M., & Greguras, G. J. (2014). The dynamic relationships of work affect and job satisfaction with perceptions of fit. Personnel Psychology, 67(2), 389-420.
Galvin, B. M., Waldman, D. A., & Balthazard, P. (2010). Visionary communication qualities as mediators of the relationship between narcissism and attributions of leader charisma. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 509-537.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1994). Cross-cultural comparison of leadership prototypes. The Leadership Quarterly, 5(2), 121-134.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-Analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of applied psychology, 82(6), 827.
Gioia, D. A., & Poole, P. P. (1984). Scripts in organizational behavior. Academy of management review, 9(3), 449-459.
Gonzalez, R. V. D., & de Melo, T. M. (2018). The effects of organization context on knowledge exploration and exploitation. Journal of Business Research, 90, 215-225.
Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in organizational behavior.
Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in organizational behavior, 28, 3-34.
Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of management journal, 50(2), 327-347.
Gu, Q., Tang, T. L. P., & Jiang, W. (2015). Does moral leadership enhance employee creativity? Employee identification with leader and leader–member exchange (LMX) in the Chinese context. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), 513-529.
Handy, C. B. (1994). The age of paradox. Harvard Business Press.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage publications.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Hülsmann, M., Grapp, J., & Li, Y. (2008). Strategic adaptivity in global supply chains—competitive advantage by autonomous cooperation. International Journal of Production Economics, 114(1), 14-26.
Ishaq, E., Bashir, S., & Khan, A. K. (2021). Paradoxical leader behaviors: Leader personality and follower outcomes. Applied Psychology, 70(1), 342-357.
Johnson, R. W. (2001). An introduction to the bootstrap. Teaching Statistics, 23(2), 49-54
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. The leadership quarterly, 20(6), 855-875.
Junker, N. M., & Van Dick, R. (2014). Implicit theories in organizational settings: A systematic review and research agenda of implicit leadership and followership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(6), 1154-1173.
Kagan, J. (1958). The concept of identification. Psychological review, 65(5), 296.
Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change. Journal of conflict resolution, 2(1), 51-60.
Kenney, R. A., Blascovich, J., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Implicit leadership theories: Prototypes for new leaders. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15(4), 409-437.
Kenney, R. A., Schwartz-Kenney, B. M., & Blascovich, J. (1996). Implicit leadership theories: Defining leaders described as worthy of influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(11), 1128-1143.
Kong, M., Xin, L., Chen, M., & Li, H. (2020). Select the Mr. Right: the interaction effect between implicit leadership and implicit followership on employees′ workplace behaviors. Personnel Review.
Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C., & Sheep, M. L. (2006). Where is the “me” among the “we”? Identity work and the search for optimal balance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 1031-1057.
Lambert, L. S., Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Holt, D. T., & Barelka, A. J. (2012). Forgotten but not gone: An examination of fit between leader consideration and initiating structure needed and received. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 913.
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management review, 25(4), 760-776.
Li, P. P. (2008). Toward a geocentric framework of trust: An application to organizational trust. Management and Organization Review, 4(3), 413-439.
Li, Q., She, Z., & Yang, B. (2018). Promoting innovative performance in multidisciplinary teams: The roles of paradoxical leadership and team perspective taking. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1083.
Ling, W., Chia, R. C., & Fang, L. (2000). Chinese implicit leadership theory. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140(6), 729-739.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology.
Lord, R. G., Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., Avolio, B. J., & Eagly, A. H. (2017). Leadership in applied psychology: Three waves of theory and research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 434.
Lord, R. G., & Foti, R. J. (1986). Schema theories, information processing, and organizational behavior. The thinking organization, 20-48.
Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & De Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational behavior and human performance, 34(3), 343-378.
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Cognitive theory in industrial and organizational psychology. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 2, 1-62.
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (2002). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Routledge.
Lu, J. G., Brockner, J., Vardi, Y., & Weitz, E. (2017). The dark side of experiencing job autonomy: Unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 222-234.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological bulletin, 103(3), 391.
Marsh, H. W., & Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological bulletin, 97(3), 562.
Martin, S. L., Liao, H., & Campbell, E. M. (2013). Directive versus empowering leadership: A field experiment comparing impacts on task proficiency and proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1372-1395.
Massumi, B. (1995). The autonomy of affect. Cultural critique, (31), 83-109.
Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological bulletin, 105(3), 430.
Murphy, P. R., & Jackson, S. E. (1999). Managing work role performance: Challenges for twenty-first century organizations and their employees. The Changing Nature of Performance: Implications for Staffing, Motivation and Development. DR Ilgen et DP Pulakos, dir. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 325-365.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Offermann, L. R., & Coats, M. R. (2018). Implicit theories of leadership: Stability and change over two decades. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(4), 513-522.
Offermann, L. R., Kennedy Jr, J. K., & Wirtz, P. W. (1994). Implicit leadership theories: Content, structure, and generalizability. The leadership quarterly, 5(1), 43-58.
Olchi, W. G. (1978). The transmission of control through organizational hierarchy. Academy of management Journal, 21(2), 173-192.
Parker, S. K., & Collins, C. G. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of management, 36(3), 633-662.
Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M., & Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of applied psychology, 91(3), 636.
Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2018). Crafting the change: The role of employee job crafting behaviors for successful organizational change. Journal of Management, 44(5), 1766-1792.
Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of management review, 14(4), 562-578.
Pratt, M. G. (1998). Central questions in organizational identification. Identity in organizations, 24(3), 171-207.
Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. W., Arad, S., Borman, W. C., & Hedge, J. W. (2002). Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of a model of adaptability. Human performance, 15(4), 299-323.
Rosch, E., & Lloyd, B. B. (Eds.). (1978). Cognition and categorization.
Rupprecht, E. A., Kueny, C. R., Shoss, M. K., & Metzger, A. J. (2016). Getting what you want: How fit between desired and received leader sensitivity influences emotion and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of occupational health psychology, 21(4), 443.
Rush, M. C., Thomas, J. C., & Lord, R. G. (1977). Implicit leadership theory: A potential threat to the internal validity of leader behavior questionnaires. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20(1), 93-110.
Schyns, B., Felfe, J., & Blank, H. (2007). Is charisma hyper‐romanticism? Empirical evidence from new data and a meta‐analysis. Applied Psychology, 56(4), 505-527.
Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2011). Implicit leadership theories: Think leader, think effective?. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(2), 141-150.
Scott, C. R., Corman, S. R., & Cheney, G. (1998). Development of a structurational model of identification in the organization. Communication Theory, 8(3), 298-336.
Scullen, S. E., Mount, M. K., & Goff, M. (2000). Understanding the latent structure of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 956.
Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization science, 4(4), 577-594.
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.
Shondrick, S. J., Dinh, J. E., & Lord, R. G. (2010). Developments in implicit leadership theory and cognitive science: Applications to improving measurement and understanding alternatives to hierarchical leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(6), 959-978.
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.
Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization science, 16(5), 522-536.
Sparr, J. L., D. Van Knippenberg, & E. Kearney. (2015). Paradox Perspectives on Leadership: Developing a Model and Measure. Presentation at the 17th Congress of the European Congress of Works and Organizational Psychology, Oslo, Norway.
Stock, R. M., & Özbek-Potthoff, G. (2014). Implicit leadership in an intercultural context: theory extension and empirical investigation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(12), 1651-1668.
Strauss, K., Griffin, M. A., Parker, S. K., & Mason, C. M. (2015). Building and sustaining proactive behaviors: The role of adaptivity and job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(1), 63-72.
Sy, T., Shore, L. M., Strauss, J., Shore, T. H., Tram, S., Whiteley, P., & Ikeda-Muromachi, K. (2010). Leadership perceptions as a function of race–occupation fit: The case of Asian Americans. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 902.
Topakas, A. (2011). Measurement of implicit leadership theories and their effect on leadership processes and outcomes (Doctoral dissertation, Aston University).
Van Vugt, M., Jepson, S., Hartman, C., & de Cremer, D. (2004). Why autocratic leadership might fail in solving public good dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 1-20.
White, R. K., & Lippit (1953). Leader behavior and member reaction in three social climates. In D. Cartwright, & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics (pp. 318–335). New York: Row, Peterson and Company.
Yang, Y., Li, Z., Liang, L., & Zhang, X. (2021). Why and when paradoxical leader behavior impact employee creativity: Thriving at work and psychological safety. Current Psychology, 40(4), 1911-1922.
Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education
Zhang, Y., Waldman, D. A., Han, Y. L., & Li, X. B. (2015). Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 538-566.
指導教授 林文政 審核日期 2022-1-21
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明