悖論領導行為、員工建言與部屬工作創新行為之研究：探討部屬心理安全調節式中介效果

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：102

、訪客IP：18.119.108.98

姓名

初永華(CHU,YUNG-HUA) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

高階主管企管碩士班

論文名稱

悖論領導行為、員工建言與部屬工作創新行為之研究：探討部屬心理安全調節式中介效果

相關論文

★ 溝通與領導課程訓練成效之分析	★ 母國企業直線主管領導風格與國際人力資源管理措施對外派人員績效之影響
★ 豐田管理模式之人才培育對品質與成本之影響-以某汽車公司為例	★ 360 度回饋系統對企業主管行為改變意圖的影響-以跨國飲料 SC 公司為例
★ 兩岸研發人員職能發展應用研究－以M公司為例	★ 企業併購過程中的人力資源角色
★ 組織變革成功個案分析 - John P. Kotter 領導變革八大步驟之觀點	★ 社群網站經營模式分析－以『BB-BOX』網站為例
★ 觸控IC經營策略之個案研究－以Ａ公司為例	★ 科技研發單位實施接班人計畫之探討─以國內某科技研發單位為例
★ 面對數位匯流，傳統媒體代理商應對策略探討─以安吉斯集團偉視捷媒體公司為例	★ 台灣光電產業選擇產品認證外包廠商的決定因素─以發光二極體照明產品為例
★ 團隊激勵獎金與團隊績效關連性之研究	★ 晶圓代工業關鍵成功因素的探討—以台積公司為例
★ 員工潛能與績效對員工晉升的影響--以營造建築業為例	★ 建構整合性智慧健康照護網絡─以中壢天晟醫院醫療小管家為例

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)

隨著全球化和科技發展，企業面臨的不確定性和複雜挑戰日益增加。在這樣的環境背景下，悖論領導行為成為一種關鍵的領導者策略，領導者展現在管理過程中相互矛盾的感知與期望之間找到平衡，以推動組織創新和持續成長。悖論領導不僅需要領導者展現出高度的自我覺察和調節能力，還需要他們激勵員工積極參與創新過程。
本研究的目的在探討悖論領導行為如何影響部屬的創新工作行為，以及員工建言的中介效果和心理安全感的調節作用如何在此過程中發揮效果。在當今高度競爭和變化快速的環境中，對於實施悖論領導行為重要性，因為悖論領導將有助於促進組織的穩定性和靈活性，從而增強適應性與創新工作能力。
本研究收集台灣企業主管與部屬配對的有效問卷268份進行分析研究，研究結果證實了悖論領導與部屬工作創新行為之間存在顯著的正向影響。研究發現，員工建言在悖論領導與創新工作行為之間起了中介效果，然而，心理安全並未如預期般展現調節作用。這結果突顯了悖論領導在促進工作創新方面的重要性，並顯示了心理安全感在不同產業與工作環境下可能存在的局限性。

摘要(英)

As globalization and technological development progress, businesses are increasingly facing uncertainties and complex challenges. In such an environment, paradoxical leadership emerges as a critical strategy for leaders tasked with balancing contradictory perceptions and expectations to drive organizational innovation and growth. Paradoxical leadership demands not only high self-awareness and adaptability from leaders but also that they inspire their employees to actively participate in the innovation process.
This study aims to examine the effects of paradoxical leadership on subordinates′ innovative work behaviors, specifically through the mediating role of employee voice and the moderating role of psychological safety. In today′s environment of intense competition and rapid change, the importance of applying paradoxical leadership is emphasized. This leadership style contributes to organizational stability and flexibility, thereby enhancing adaptability and the capacity for innovative work.
The research analyzed 268 valid paired surveys from supervisors and subordinates in various Taiwanese companies, establishing a significant positive correlation between paradoxical leadership and subordinates’ innovative behaviors. The results revealed that employee voice serves as a mediator between paradoxical leadership and innovation, although psychological safety did not display the expected moderating effect. These findings emphasize the significance of paradoxical leadership in fostering innovation at the workplace and illustrate the potential constraints of psychological safety across different industries and work environments.

關鍵字(中)

★ 悖論領導行為
★ 員工建言
★ 創新工作行為
★ 心理安全

關鍵字(英)

★ Paradoxical Leadership Behavior
★ Employee Voice
★ Innovative Work Behavior
★ Psychological Safety

論文目次

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi
表目錄 vi
一、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的 3
二、文獻探討 5
2-1 悖論領導行為 5
2-2 心理安全 9
2-3 員工建言 10
2-4 創新工作行為 11
2-5 悖論領導行為對部屬創新工作行為的影響 12
2-6 員工建言在悖論領導與部屬創新工作行為之間的中介效果 13
2-7 部屬心理安全在悖論領導行為與員工建言間之的調節效果 15
2-8 心理安全在主管悖論領導行為、員工建言以及部屬創新工作行為間具有調節式中介效果 16
三、研究方法 18
3-1 研究架構與假設 18
3-2 研究樣本與資料蒐集程式 18
3-3 研究工具 20
3-4 資料分析與統計方法 22
四、研究結果 24
4-1 資料來源與樣本特性 24
4-2 題項包裹法 26
4-3 信度分析 26
4-4 驗證性因素分析 27
4-5 相關分析 31
4-6 迴歸分析與驗證假設 32
五、結論與建議 36
5-1 研究結論 36
5-2 學術貢獻與管理意涵 37
5-3 研究限制與未來研究建議 38
參考文獻 40

參考文獻

林文政（2019年2月號）。成為最佳矛盾領導人。哈佛商業評論。 https://www.hbrtaiwan.com/article/18561/become-the-best-contradictory-leader
陳婉如(2020)。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。
黃芳銘(2015)。結構方程模式-理論與應用。台灣五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
彭台光、高月慈、林鉦棽(2006)。管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救。管理學報，23(1)，77-98 . https://doi.org/10.6504%2fJOM.2006.23.01.05
羅勝強（2022年1月27日）。矛盾式領導的好處。香港中文大學商學院https://www.bschool.cuhk.edu.hk/chi/the-virtue-of-paradoxical-leadership/
Anderson, N.; Potonik, K.; Zhou, J. (2014).Innovation and Creativity in Organizations: A State-of-the-Science Review, Prospective Commentary, and Guiding Framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297–1333. https://doi:10.1177/0149206314527128
Amabile, T. M. (1993). Motivational synergy: Toward new conceptualizations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 3(3), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(93)90012-S
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (2002). "Assessing the work environment for creativity." Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154-1184. https://doi.org/10.5465/256995
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
Batool, U., Raziq, M. M., & Sarwar, N. (2023). The paradox of paradoxical leadership: A multi-level conceptualization. Human Resource Management Review, 33(4), 100983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2023.100983
Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications (8th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Bennett, N., & Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What VUCA really means for you. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/01/what-vuca-really-means-for-youBrowne
Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual (Vol. 6). Encino, CA: Multivariate software.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational research methods, 8(3), 274-289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105278021
Boies, K., & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader–member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.004
Bledow, R., Rosing, K., & Frese, M. (2013). A Dynamic Perspective on Affect and Creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 56(2), 432–450. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0894
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1986 3-28), 2.D
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian journal of social psychology, 2(1), 21-41.
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. E. (2010). "Learning behaviors in the workplace: The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety." Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 26(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.932
Chen, MJ. (2002). Transcending Paradox: The Chinese “Middle Way” Perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 19, 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016235517735
Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the End-User Computing Satisfaction Instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 453. https://doi.org/10.2307/249524
De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and innovation management, 19(1), 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x
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. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279183
Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Voice Theories: Taken-for-Granted Rules of Self-Censorship at Work. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 461–488. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925
DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Sage publications.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage publications.
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), 827–844. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827
Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self‐determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. Bantam Books, Inc.
Gumusluoglu, L., & Ilsev, A. (2009). Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research, 62(4), 461–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.07.032
Hernandez Bark, A. S., Escartín, J., Schuh, S. C., & Van Dick, R. (2016). Who Leads More and Why? A Mediation Model from Gender to Leadership Role Occupancy. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2642-0
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th Edition, Pearson, New York.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
Hirak, R., Peng, A. C., Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. M. (2012). Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: The importance of psychological safety and learning from failures. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.009
Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317900167038
Kahn, William A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi:10.5465/256287
Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J.-L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0176
Morgan, D., & Zeffane, R. (2003). Employee involvement, organizational change and trust in management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1), 55–75. doi:10.1080/09585190210158510
Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee Voice Behavior: Integration and Directions for Future Research. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373–412. https://doi:10.1080/19416520.2011.574506
Morrison, E. W., Wheeler-Smith, S. L., & Kamdar, D. (2011). Speaking up in groups: A cross-level study of group voice climate and voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 183–191. https://doi:10.1037/a0020744
M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
Martins, E.C. and Terblanche, F.(2003), "Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation",European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060310456337
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), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430
Nunnally, J. C. (1994). Psychometric theory 3E. Tata McGraw-hill education.
Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), 941–966. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.413
Neeley, T. (2021). The future of flexibility at work. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/2021/09/the-future-of-flexibility-at-work
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. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1601_4
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. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308389
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 956–974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. The Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958
Schein, E. H. (1993). "On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning." Organizational Dynamics, 22(2), 40-51.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607. https://doi.org/10.2307/256701
Sharma, P. N., & Kirkman, B. L. (2015). Leveraging Leaders: A Literature Review and Future Lines of Inquiry for Empowering Leadership Research. Group & Organization Management, 40(2), 193–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601115574906
Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2008). Exploring Nonlinearity In Employee Voice: The Effects of Personal Control and Organizational Identification. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1189–1203. https://doi:10.5465/amj.2008.35732719
Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity.Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.2307/256902
Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management science, 32(5), 590-607. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.590
Vogel, R., & Masal, D. (2015). Public Leadership: A review of the literature and framework for future research. Public Management Review, 17(8), 1165–1189. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.895031
Wheaton, B. (1987). Assessment of Fit in Overidentified Models with Latent Variables. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 118–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124187016001005
Waldman, D. A., & Bowen, D. E. (2016). Learning to Be a Paradox-Savvy Leader. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(3), 316–327. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2015.0070
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0095-1
Zhang, W., Liao, S., Liao, J., & Zheng, Q. (2021). Paradoxical Leadership and Employee Task Performance: A Sense-Making Perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 753116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.753116
Zhang, M. J., Zhang, Y., & Law, K. S. (2022). Paradoxical Leadership and Innovation in Work Teams: The Multilevel Mediating Role of Ambidexterity and Leader Vision as a Boundary Condition. Academy of Management Journal, 65(5), 1652–1679. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1265
Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.48037118
Zhang, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Paradoxical Leadership and Employee Voice: A Role-perception Perspective. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2023, No. 1, p. 14341). https://doi.org/10.5465/AMPROC.2023.14341abstract
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. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0995

指導教授

林文政

審核日期

2024-6-17

推文