矛盾領導行為對工作績效之影響-以角色衝突、情緒耗竭為序列中介變項

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：45

、訪客IP：3.135.191.228

姓名

石憲光(Hsien-Kuang Shih) 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

矛盾領導行為對工作績效之影響-以角色衝突、情緒耗竭為序列中介變項
(Effects of the paradoxical leadership behavior on subordinate job performance: the Serial Mediating effect of role conflict and emotional exhaustion)

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，矛盾領導行為受到越來越多研究的關注。然而，多數研究仍是關注正面影響的部分，較少研究探討如何降低負面影響，進而有效促進員工工作成果。借鑒角色理論、社會學習理論及資源保存理論的觀點，本研究提出了主管的矛盾領導行為能夠影響部屬的角色衝突，並透過降低部屬角色衝突，進一步降低部屬的情緒耗竭，從而增加其工作績效。因此，本研究以線上問卷的方式訪問了181對主管和部屬作為研究樣本，並以主管的矛盾領導行為作為自變項，部屬的角色衝突與情緒耗竭作為中介變項，部屬的工作績效作為依變項，進行統計分析研究。
研究結果得出以下結論：(1)主管矛盾領導行為會正向影響部屬的工作績效。表示當主管展現矛盾領導行為越強時，部屬的工作績效表現越好；(2)部屬的角色衝突在主管矛盾領導行為和部屬的工作績效間未具有中介效果；(3)部屬的情緒耗竭在主管矛盾領導行為和部屬的工作績效間未具有中介效果；(4)部屬的角色衝突與情緒耗竭在主管矛盾領導行為與工作績效間具有序列的部分中介效果，表示主管的矛盾領導行為展現的越強，不僅可以直接影響部屬的工績效，也可以透過降低部屬的角色衝突，進而降低部屬的情緒耗竭，間接提升部屬的工作績效。

摘要(英)

In recent years, paradoxical leadership has received increasing research attention. However, most studies still focus on the positive impact of paradoxical leadership, and few studies explore how to reduce the negative impact and thus effectively improve employee performance. Drawing upon the role theory, social learning theory and conservation of resource theory perspective, we propose that the supervisor’s paradoxical leadership behavior can affect subordinate’s role conflict. By reducing subordinate’s role conflict, we can decrease subordinate’s emotional exhaustion and further increase their job performance. Therefore, this study used an online questionnaire to interview 181 pairs of supervisors and subordinates as research samples and used SPSS and Amos for statistical analysis. The research framework took supervisors′ paradoxical leadership behavior as the independent variable, subordinates′ role conflict and emotional exhaustion as the mediating variables, and subordinates′ job performance as the dependent variable.
The result of the study indicates that (1) The supervisor’s paradoxical leadership behavior will positively affect the subordinate’s job performance. It means that when the supervisor demonstrates a stronger the paradoxical leadership behavior, the subordinate′s job performance is better. (2) the role conflict of the subordinate did not have a mediating effect between the supervisor’s paradoxical leadership behavior and the subordinate’s job performance; (3) the emotional exhaustion of the subordinate did not have a mediating effect between the supervisor′s paradoxical leadership behavior and the subordinate′s job performance; (4) the subordinate′s role conflict and emotional exhaustion have a serial partial mediating effect between the supervisor′s paradoxical leadership behavior and the subordinate’s job performance, the results indicate that supervisor shows the stronger paradoxical leadership behavior not only directly affect the subordinate′s job performance but also indirectly improve subordinate’s job performance through reducing the subordinate′s role conflict and emotional exhaustion.

關鍵字(中)

★ 矛盾領導行為
★ 角色衝突
★ 情緒耗竭
★ 工作績效

關鍵字(英)

★ Paradoxical Leadership Behavior
★ Role conflict
★ Emotional exhaustion
★ Job performance

論文目次

第一章、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的 3
第二章、文獻探討 4
2-1 矛盾領導行為（Paradoxical Leadership Behavior） 4
2-2 角色衝突(Role conflict) 6
2-3 情緒耗竭(Emotional exhaustion) 7
2-4 工作績效(Job performance) 8
2-5 矛盾領導行為對工作績效的影響 9
2-6 角色衝突對矛盾領導行為與工作績效的中介效果 10
2-7 情緒耗竭對矛盾領導行為與工作績效的中介效果 12
2-8 角色衝突與情緒耗竭在矛盾領導行為與工作績效之間有序列的中介效果 13
第三章、研究方法 15
3-1 研究架構與假設 15
3-2 研究樣本與資料蒐集程序 15
3-3 研究工具 17
3-4 資料分析與統計方法 19
第四章、研究分析與結果 21
4-1 研究樣本來源與特性 21
4-2 題項包裹 23
4-3 信度分析 24
4-4 效度分析 24
4-5 模型適配度分析 26
4-6 相關分析 27
4-7 迴歸分析與驗證假說 28
第五章、結論與建議 32
5-1 研究結果與探討 32
5-2 學術貢獻 33
5-3 管理意涵 34
5-4 研究限制與未來研究建議 35
參考文獻 36

參考文獻

一、中文部分
余惠敏，「矛盾領導行為對部屬工作績效之影響：工作熟練度、適應行為與主動積極行為的中介效果探討」，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所，碩士論文，民國109年。
周欣磊、劉生敏(2021)，「矛盾領導對員工主動性行為的影響-基於員工耗竭的中介作用」，經濟研究導刊，460。
陳婉如，「矛盾領導行為對創新行為與工作績效之影響」，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所，碩士論文，民國109年。
陳晨、秦昕、譚玲、盧海陵、周漢森、宋博迪(2020)，「授權型領導—下屬自我領導匹配對下屬情緒衰竭和工作績效的影響」，管理世界(12)，145-162。
黃芳銘，結構方程模式-理論與應用，五版，台灣五南圖書出版股份有限公司，臺北市，民國104年。
褚昊、黄甯寧(2020)，悖論式領導對員工工作績效的影響: 二元工作激情和角色認同的作用，財經理論與實踐(6)，133-140。
鄧伊惠，「矛盾領導行為與部屬任務性績效的關聯性-以部屬複雜整合立即部屬整合性思維為中介變項」，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所，碩士論文，民國107年。
羅瑾璉、胡文安和鐘競(2017)，「悖論式領導，團隊活力隊團隊創新的影響機制研究」，管理評論，29(7)，122-134。
二、英文部分
Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization science, 10(1), 43-68.
Allen, D. G., & Griffeth, R. W. (2001). Test of a mediated performance–turnover relationship highlighting the moderating roles of visibility and reward contingency. Journal of applied psychology, 86(5), 1014.
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands‐resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 43(1), 83-104.
Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models′ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1(6), 589.
Bedeian, A. G., Armenakis, A. A., & Curran, S. M. (1981). The relationship between role stress and job-related, interpersonal, and organizational climate factors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 113(2), 247-260.
Bentler, P., & Wu, E. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W.C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.),
Personnel selection in organization, pp71-98. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bowling, N. A., Khazon, S., Alarcon, G. M., Blackmore, C. E., Bragg, C. B., Hoepf, M. R., . . . Li, H. (2017). Building better measures of role ambiguity and role conflict: The validation of new role stressor scales. Work & Stress, 31(1), 1-23.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological methods & research, 21(2), 230-258.
Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M.D. Dunnette & L.M, Hough (Eds.). Handbook of
industrial and organizational psychology, 1(2), 687-732.
Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., West, B. J., Patera, J. L., & McGregor, R. (2010). Exploring social constructions of followership: A qualitative study. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 543-562.
Chen, M.-J. (2002). Transcending paradox: The Chinese “middle way” perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2), 179-199.
Chen, Z. X., Tsui, A. S., & Farh, J. L. (2002). Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational commitment: Relationships to employee performance in China. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 75(3), 339-356.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182.
Diebig, M., Bormann, K. C., & Rowold, J. (2017). Day-level transformational leadership and followers’ daily level of stress: A moderated mediation model of team cooperation, role conflict, and type of communication. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 26(2), 234-249.
Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS quarterly, 453-461.
Drazin, R., Kazanjian, R. K., & Glynn, M. (2008). Creativity and sensemaking among professionals. Handbook of organizational creativity, 263-281.
Fang, T. (2005). From" onion" to" ocean": Paradox and change in national cultures. International Studies of Management & Organization, 35(4), 71-90.
Fang, T. (2010). Asian management research needs more self-confidence: Reflection on Hofstede (2007) and beyond. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27(1), 155-170.
Fang, T. (2012). Yin Yang: A new perspective on culture. Management and organization Review, 8(1), 25-50.
Firth, L., Mellor, D. J., Moore, K. A., & Loquet, C. (2004). How can managers reduce employee intention to quit? Journal of managerial psychology, 19(2), 170-187.
Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of management Review, 25(1), 154-177.
Fogarty, T. J. (1996). An examination of job tension and coping in the relationship between stressors and outcomes in public accounting. Journal of Managerial Issues, 269-285.
Fogarty, T. J., Singh, J., Rhoads, G. K., & Moore, R. K. (2000). Antecedents and consequences of burnout in accounting: Beyond the role stress model. Behavioral Research in accounting, 12, 31-68.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.
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.
Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in organizational behavior, Vol. 19: 175-208. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of management Review, 10(1), 76-88.
Greenleaf, R. K. (2003). The servant-leader within: A transformative path. New York: Paulist press.
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.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5. 3). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hamner, W. C., & Tosi, H. L. (1974). Relationship of role conflict and role ambiguity to job involvement measures. Journal of applied psychology, 59(4), 497.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
Hobfoll, S. E. (1988). The ecology of stress: New York: Hemisphe
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American psychologist, 44(3), 513.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested‐self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied psychology, 50(3), 337-421.
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323-352.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (1987). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice: Random House Trade.
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.
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(1), 16-78.
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.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity.New York: Wiley and Sons.
Kantz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organization. In: John Willey And Son. New York.
Kauppila, O. P., & Tempelaar, M. P. (2016). The social‐cognitive underpinnings of employees’ ambidextrous behaviour and the supportive role of group managers’ leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6), 1019-1044.
Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of applied psychology, 81(2), 123.
Leiter, M. P. (1991). Coping patterns as predictors of burnout: The function of control and escapist coping patterns. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12(2), 123-144.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9(4), 297-308.
LePine, M. A., Zhang, Y., Crawford, E. R., & Rich, B. L. (2016). Turning their pain to gain: Charismatic leader influence on follower stress appraisal and job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 1036-1059.
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of management Review, 25(4), 760-776.
Maccoby, M. (2004). Narcissistic leaders: The incredible pros, the inevitable cons. Harvard Business Review, 82(1), 92-92.
Madjar, N., Greenberg, E., & Chen, Z. (2011). Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance. Journal of applied psychology, 96(4), 730.
Magnusson, D., & Torestad, B. (1993). A holistic view of personality: A model revisited. Annual review of psychology, 44(1), 427-452.
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative science quarterly, 48(2), 268-305.
Maslach, C. (2003). Burnout: The cost of caring: Ishk.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). MBI: Maslach burnout inventory: Consulting Psychologists Press Palo Alto, CA.
Matta, F. K., Scott, B. A., Koopman, J., & Conlon, D. E. (2015). Does seeing “eye to eye” affect work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior? A role theory perspective on LMX agreement. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1686-1708.
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26-45.
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.
Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative science quarterly, 165-186.
Nasser, F., & Takahashi, T. (2003). The effect of using item parcels on ad hoc goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: An example using Sarason′s Reactions to Tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(1), 75-97.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological review, 108(2), 291.
Örtqvist, D., & Wincent, J. (2006). Prominent consequences of role stress: a meta-analytic review. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(4), 399.
Peeters, M. C., Montgomery, A. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2005). Balancing work and home: How job and home demands are related to burnout. International Journal of Stress Management, 12(1), 43.
Posig, M., & Kickul, J. (2003). Extending our understanding of burnout: test of an integrated model in nonservice occupations. Journal of occupational health psychology, 8(1), 3.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative science quarterly, 150-163.
Saranani, F. (2015). Role conflict and stress effect on the performance of employees working in public works department. The International Journal of Engineering and Science, 4(6).
Schaubroeck, J., Cotton, J. L., & Jennings, K. R. (1989). Antecedents and consequences of role stress: A covariance structure analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 35-58.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(3), 293-315.
Schermerhorn Jr, J. R., Osborn, R. N., Uhl-Bien, M., & Hunt, J. G. (2011). Organizational behavior: john wiley & sons.
Seeman, M. (1953). Role conflict and ambivalence in leadership. American Sociological Review, 18(4), 373-380.
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.
Shao, Y., Nijstad, B. A., & Täuber, S. (2019). Creativity under workload pressure and integrative complexity: The double-edged sword of paradoxical leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155, 7-19.
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.
Stordeur, S., D′hoore, W., & Vandenberghe, C. (2001). Leadership, organizational stress, and emotional exhaustion among hospital nursing staff. Journal of advanced nursing, 35(4), 533-542.
Stumpf, S. A., & Rabinowitz, S. (1981). Career stage as a moderator of performance relationships with facets of job satisfaction and role perceptions. Journal of Vocational behavior, 18(2), 202-218.
Swider, B. W., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2010). Born to burnout: A meta-analytic path model of personality, job burnout, and work outcomes. Journal of Vocational behavior, 76(3), 487-506.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of management Review, 15(4), 666-681.
Tubre, T. C., & Collins, J. M. (2000). Jackson and Schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance. Journal of management, 26(1), 155-169.
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298-318.
Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981). Role conflict and role ambiguity: Integration of the literature and directions for future research. human relations, 34(1), 43-71.
Vandenberghe, C., Panaccio, A., Bentein, K., Mignonac, K., & Roussel, P. (2011). Assessing longitudinal change of and dynamic relationships among role stressors, job attitudes, turnover intention, and well‐being in neophyte newcomers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(4), 652-671.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3): Sage.
Wheaton, B. (1987). Assessment of fit in overidentified models with latent variables. Sociological methods & research, 16(1), 118-154.
Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover. Journal of applied psychology, 83(3), 486.
Yukl, G. A. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zhang, 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.
Zhang, W., Liao, S., Liao, J., & Zheng, Q. (2021). Paradoxical Leadership and Employee Task Performance: A Sense-Making Perspective. Frontiers in psychology, 5750.

指導教授

林文政(Wen-Jeng Lin)

審核日期

2022-6-24

推文