企業對於人才的取得越趨重視，因此組織中的人力資源管理者為企業設置許多吸引及留任人才的相關制度，其中薪酬制度是一項關鍵工具，而在企業的薪資組合當中，最常見的就是績效給薪制度。過去研究指出，績效薪確實能為員工的生產力帶來正面影響，然而近年來也有許多學者指出，若企業未能將績效薪發揮至最佳效果，或者過度強調績效給薪制度，反而會帶來負面效果，例如：工作動機及工作績效的下降，以及在行為上產生冒風險、投機以及越軌行為。由於企業中員工產生越軌行為的比率為35-55%，而隨著社會變遷此行為將會更加頻繁，因此員工越軌行為將是值得關注的一項議題。 本研究針對全職工作者，以問卷調查法探討績效給薪制度、內外在工作動機、工作績效之關聯，並探討越軌行為在績效給薪制度經由員工外在工作動機至工作績效的影響程度。而研究結果為：(1)績效給薪制度與內外在工作動機具顯著正向關聯。(2)內外在工作動機與工作績效具顯著正向關聯。(3)內外在工作動機在績效給薪制度與工作績效之間具中介效果。(4)越軌行為在外在工作動機與工作績效間不存在調節效果。(5)越軌行為在績效給薪制度、外在工作動機與工作績效之間不存在調節式中介效果。;Enterprises pay more and more attention to the talents. Therefore, the human resource managers set up many related systems for attracting and retaining talents in the organization. The compensation system is a key tool. Among the compensation structure of enterprises, the most common one is pay for performance. Past research has pointed out pay for performance can indeed have a positive impact on employee productivity. However, in recent years, many scholars have pointed out if companies fail to maximize pay for performance or overemphasize it, they will bring negative effects. For instance, a decline in work motivation and job performance, and risk-taking, opportunistic, and deviant behavior will appear. Since the ratio of employees′ deviant behavior in the enterprise is 35-55%, and deviant behavior will be more frequent with social changes. For the reason above, the employee′s deviant behavior will be an important issue. This study focused on full-time workers and used questionnaires to explore the relationship between pay for performance, internal and external motivations, job performance. Furthermore, deviant behavior may moderate between external work motivation and job performance. The research results were as follows: (1) Pay for performance had a significant positive relationship with internal and external work motivation. (2) Internal and external motivations had a significant positive relationship with job performance. (3) Internal and external work motivation mediated the relationship between pay for performance and job performance. (4) Deviant behavior had no moderating effect between external work motivation and work performance. (5) Deviant behavior had no moderated mediation effect between pay for performance, external work motivation and the job performance.
