矛盾領導行為對創新行為的影響：以觀點採取 與創新角色認同為序列中介變項，複雜整合力 為調節變項

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：24

、訪客IP：3.15.0.223

姓名

王昱翔(Wang Yu Hsiang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

矛盾領導行為對創新行為的影響：以觀點採取與創新角色認同為序列中介變項，複雜整合力為調節變項
(The Influence of Paradoxical Leadership Behavior on Innovative Behavior: Sequential Mediating Variables of Perspective Taking and Creative Role Identity and Moderating Variables of Integrative Complexity)

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)

隨著近年外部環境變動快速，讓組織面對越加複雜、多元的外部需求，進而影響
組織內的運作以及決策，為了要讓組織得以在變動的環境中持續成長，領導者必須具
備滿足各方需求的能力，而矛盾領導行為能接受並且整合看似矛盾實則相互關聯的衝
突之能力，為直接影響到組織生存的重要因素。但是，自從張教授在 2015 年提出並定
義矛盾領導行為，往後的研究大多都僅使用單個中介變項來討論矛盾領導行為的影
響，而矛盾領導行為是高度複雜的，只使用單一變項將無法完整解釋其對於部屬的影
響；因此本研究以 285 份主管和部屬配對之樣本，探討矛盾領導是否會刺激部屬觀點
採取以及創新角色認同，最終提升部屬工作上的創新行為，以及複雜整合力在創新角
色認同以及創新行為間是否具有調節效果。研究結果表明，主管的矛盾領導行為不但
可以直接提升部屬的創新行為，也可以透過提升部屬觀點採取，進而提升其創新行
為，並且，部屬的創新角色認同在矛盾領導與創新行為間有中介效果。同時，部屬觀
點採取行為與創新角色認同在矛盾領導行為和創新行為間有序列中介效果。另外，在
創新角色認同至創新行為的正向影響當中，部屬的複雜整合力具有調節效果。

摘要(英)

In order for an organization to continue to grow in this changing environment, leaders
must meet the needs of all parties, and the ability to accept and integrate seemingly
paradoxical but interrelated conflicts is an important parts that directly affects the survival of
an organization. However, since Professor Chang proposed and defined paradoxical
leadership behavior in 2015, most of the subsequent studies have only used a single mediating
variable to discuss the impact of paradoxical leadership behavior, which is highly complex,
and using only a single variable will not fully explain its impact on subordinates. Therefore,
this study examined whether paradoxical leadership stimulates perspective Taking and
creative role identity, and ultimately enhances innovative behaviors in the workplace, and
whether integrative complexity moderates the relationship between creative role identity and
innovative behaviors. The results showed that paradoxical leadership behaviors not only
directly enhance the innovative behaviors, but also enhance the innovative behaviors by
enhancing their perspective taking, and the creative role identity of subordinates mediates
between paradoxical leadership and innovative behaviors. At the same time, the perspective
taking and creative role identity of the subordinate have a sequential mediating effect between
the paradoxical leadership behavior and the innovative behavior of the subordinate. In
addition, the integrative complexity of the subordinates moderated the positive effect of
creative role identity and innovative behavior .

關鍵字(中)

★ 矛盾領導行為
★ 觀點採取
★ 創新角色認同
★ 創新行為
★ 複雜整合力

關鍵字(英)

★ Paradoxical Leadership Behavior
★ Perspective Taking
★ Creative Role Identity
★ Integrative Complexity
★ Innovative Behavior

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 ...................................................................................................................................... 2
第二章、文獻探討................................................................................................................................. 4
2-1 矛盾領導行為 ............................................................................................................................. 4
2-2 觀點採取 ..................................................................................................................................... 5
2-3 創造性角色認同 .......................................................................................................................... 7
2-4 複雜整合力 .................................................................................................................................. 7
2-5 矛盾領導行為與創新行為的關連性........................................................................................... 8
2-6 觀點採取在矛盾領導行為以及創新行為的中介效果.............................................................. 9
2-7 創新角色認同在矛盾領導行為以及創新行為的中介效果.................................................... 10
2-8 觀點採取和創新角色認同的序列中介效果............................................................................. 11
2-9 複雜整合力在創新角色認同以及創新行為之調節效果......................................................... 12
第三章、研究方法............................................................................................................................... 14
3-1 研究架構與假設 ....................................................................................................................... 14
3-2 研究樣本與資料蒐集程序........................................................................................................ 15
3-3 研究工具 ................................................................................................................................... 15
3-4 資料分析與統計方法................................................................................................................ 17
第四章、研究分析與結果................................................................................................................... 19
4-1 研究樣本來源與特性................................................................................................................ 19
4-2 信度分析 ................................................................................................................................... 21
4-3 效度分析 ................................................................................................................................... 21
4-4 相關分析 .................................................................................................................................... 24
4-5 迴歸分析與驗證假說................................................................................................................. 25
第五章、結論與建議........................................................................................................................... 31
5-1 理論意義 .................................................................................................................................... 32
5-2 管理意涵 .................................................................................................................................... 33
vi
5-3 研究侷限性與未來方向............................................................................................................. 34

參考文獻

Anderson, N., Potočnik, 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.
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2017). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory.
Leadership Perspectives, 129-160.
Batson, C. D., Early, S., & Salvarani, G. (1997). Perspective taking: Imagining how another
feels versus imaging how you would feel. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
23(7), 751-758.
Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (Eds.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of leader-member
exchange. Oxford University Press,10.1093,175-176
Bommer, W. H., Rubin, R. S., & Baldwin, T. T. (2004). Setting the stage for
effectiveleadership: Antecedents of transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership
Quarterly, 15(2), 195-210.
Chen, M. J. (2002). Transcending paradox: The Chinese “middle way” perspective. Asia
Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2), 179-199.
Cialdini, R. B., Brown, S. L., Lewis, B. P., Luce, C., & Neuberg, S. L. (1997). Reinterpreting
the empathy–altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 481.
Cronin, M. A., & Weingart, L. R. (2007). Representational gaps, information processing, and
conflict in functionally diverse teams. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 761-773.
Dambrun, M., & Ricard, M. (2011). Self-centeredness and selflessness: A theory of self-based
psychological functioning and its consequences for happiness. Review of General
Psychology, 15(2), 138-157.
36
Davis, M. H., Conklin, L., Smith, A., & Luce, C. (1996). Effect of perspective taking on the
cognitive representation of persons: a merging of self and other. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 70(4), 713.
Eisenberg, N., & Mussen, P. H. (1989). The roots of prosocial behavior in children.
Cambridge University Press,20-28.
Epley, N., Morewedge, C. K., & Keysar, B. (2004). Perspective taking in children and adults:
Equivalent egocentrism but differential correction. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 40(6), 760-768.
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.
Farmer, S. M., Tierney, P., & Kung-McIntyre, K. (2003). Employee creativity in Taiwan: An
application of role identity theory. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 618-630.
Feldman, S. P. (1989). The broken wheel: The inseparability of autonomy and control in
innovation within organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 26(2), 83-102.
Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains.
Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112-1142.
Fuller, C. W., Ekstrand, J., Junge, A., Andersen, T. E., Bahr, R., Dvorak, J., ... & Meeuwisse,
W. H. (2006). Consensus statement on injury definitions and data collection procedures
in studies of football (soccer) injuries. Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in
Sports, 16(2), 83-92.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention:
Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of
management journal, 54(1), 73-96.
Galinsky, A. D., Ku, G., & Wang, C. S. (2005). Perspective-taking and self-other overlap:
Fostering social bonds and facilitating social coordination. Group Processes &
Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 109-124.
37
Guilford, J. P. (1957). Creative abilities in the arts. Psychological review, 64(2), 110.
Hackman, J. R., Oldham, G., Janson, R., & Purdy, K. (1975). A new strategy for job
enrichment. California Management Review, 17(4), 57-71.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable
mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. In: University of Kansas, KS.
Hannah, S. T., Balthazard, P. A., Waldman, D. A., Jennings, P. L., & Thatcher, R. W. (2013).
The psychological and neurological bases of leader self-complexity and effects on
adaptive decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 393.
Harmon-Jones, E. (2000). Cognitive dissonance and experienced negative affect: Evidence
that dissonance increases experienced negative affect even in the absence of aversive
consequences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(12), 1490-1501.
Hoever, I. J., Van Knippenberg, D., Van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering
team creativity: perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity′s potential. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 97(5), 982.
Jung, K. B., Kang, S. W., & Choi, S. B. (2022). Paradoxical Leadership and Involvement in
Creative Task via Creative Self-Efficacy: A Moderated Mediation Role of Task
Complexity. Behavioral Sciences, 12(10), 377.
Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C., & Sheep, M. L. (2006). On the edge of identity: Boundary
dynamics at the interface of individual and organizational identities. Human Relations,
59(10), 1315-1341.
Ku, G., Wang, C. S., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). The promise and perversity of perspectivetaking in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 35, 79-102
Liden, R. C., & Graen, G. (1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of
leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23(3), 451-465.
Liu, Y., Xu, S., & Zhang, B. (2020). Thriving at work: how a paradox mindset influences
innovative work behavior. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(3), 347-366.
38
Manz, C. C., & Sims Jr, H. P. (1981). Vicarious learning: The influence of modeling on
organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 6(1), 105-113.
Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological
perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38(1), 299-337.
McCall, G. J., Simmons, J. L. 1978. Identities and Interactions, NY: The Free Press. rev.
ed.
Miron-Spektor, E., & Erez, M. (2017). Looking at creativity through a paradox lens. The
oxford handbook of organizational paradox, 434-451.
Parker, S. K., Atkins, P. W., & Axtell, C. M. (2008). 5 Building better workplaces through
individual perspective taking: a fresh look at a fundamental human process. International
Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 23, 149.
Quintana, S. M., Castaneda-English, P., & Ybarra, V. C. (1999). Role of perspective-taking
abilities and ethnic socialization in development of adolescent ethnic identity. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 9(2), 161-184.
Riley, A., & Burke, P. J. (1995). Identities and self-verification in the small group. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 61-73.
Rothman, N. B., & Melwani, S. (2017). Feeling mixed, ambivalent, and in flux: The social
functions of emotional complexity for leaders. Academy of Management Review, 42(2),
259-282.
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.
Shalley, C. E. (1995). Effects of coaction, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity
and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 483-503.
Shao, Y., Nijstad, B. A., & Täuber, S. (2019). Creativity under workload pressure and
integrative complexity: The double-edged sword of paradoxical leadership.
39
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155, 7-19.
Sherf, E. N., & Morrison, E. W. (2020). I do not need feedback! Or do I? Selfefficacy,perspective taking, and feedback seeking. Journal of Applied Psychology,
105(2), 146.
Smith, A. (1976). The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. DD Raphael and AL Macfie.
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.
Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). 27 Conceptual/integrative complexity.
Tadmor, C. T., Galinsky, A. D., & Maddux, W. W. (2012). Getting the most out of living
abroad:biculturalism and integrative complexity as key drivers of creative and
professional success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(3), 520.
Tendayi Viki, G., & Williams, M. L. J. (2014). The role of identity integration in enhancing
creativity among mixed‐race individuals. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 48(3), 198-
208.
Titus, R. G. (2000). The immunomodulatory factors of bloodfeeding arthropod saliva.
Parasite immunology, 22(7), 319-331.
Waldman, D. A., & Bowen, D. E. (2016). Learning to be a paradox-savvy leader. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 30(3), 316-327.
Wang, C. J., Tsai, H. T., & Tsai, M. T. (2014). Linking transformational leadership and
employee creativity in the hospitality industry: The influences of creative role identity,
creative self-efficacy, and job complexity. Tourism management, 40, 79-89.
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.
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,
40
58(2), 538-566.
Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Law, K. S., & Zhou, J. (2022). Paradoxical leadership, subjective
ambivalence, and employee creativity: effects of employee holistic thinking. Journal of
Management Studies, 59(3), 695-723.
Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. J. (2014). Research on workplace creativity: A review and redirection.
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 333-
359

指導教授

林文政

審核日期

2023-6-27

推文