影響華人社會多源評量結果接受態度因素之探討-以權力距離與華人傳統觀念為調節變項

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：25

、訪客IP：3.145.85.74

姓名

許軒豪(Hsuan-Hao Hsu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

影響華人社會多源評量結果接受態度因素之探討-以權力距離與華人傳統觀念為調節變項
(The Determinants of Ratees’ Acceptance of Multi-Source Feedback Systems in ChineseSociety—the Moderating Effects of Power Distance and Chinese Tranditionality)

相關論文

★ 企業全球化布局的可行模式：以趨勢科技為個案研究	★ 轉換型領導與企業創新-以T公司為例
★ 高階經理人薪酬決定因子之研究：以C公司為例	★ 高等教育師資移動因素之探討
★ 高階經理人誘因機制隊公司財務槓桿之影響	★ 企業購併後對員工工作壓力與工作績效之影響－以台新銀行為例
★ 影響消費性電子產品業知識工作者留任意願因素之探討-以L公司為例	★ 高離職率職位招募甄選工具之應用與研究－以台灣人壽公司為例
★ 綠色職場生活與綠色家庭生活平衡之研究	★ 個人績效評估與時序變動之動態資料包絡分析: 人力資本效率模型的模式發展與實證分析
★ 企業社會責任與招募成效關聯性之研究	★ 高科技產業工程專業人員職能需求分析～以某半導體公司為例
★ SOHO族經營技術來源之初探	★ 銀行業主管人員管理能力取得管道及其決定因素之分析
★ 經濟發展與員工福利	★ 高科技產業知識創造與產品創新之研究

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)

多源回饋於企業員工領導發展上，有其使用價值，特別是在於能夠提供受評
者更準確、有價值的回饋。這項評量工具在以美國為主的管理體系中被廣泛使用，
但從過去文獻中卻發現，在中國文化所影響的華人社會中，潛藏著某些不利於多
源回饋之因素，而降低了多源評量的使用價值。因此，本研究即欲探討在華人社
會中，那些因素將不利於受評者接受多源回饋制度之結果。
本研究以跨公司樣本蒐集的方式，回收了129 份有效問卷，並分別檢驗了主
效果與調節效果兩大部分之假設。於第一部分的階層回歸分析結果顯示，受評者
之主管為參與式管理風格者，其對於整體回饋結果接受態度越高。此外，高經驗
開放性之受評者，將對於來自部屬的評量抱持更正面的接受態度。
第二部分之研究則為探討權力距離與華人傳統觀念於來源能力知覺與結果
接受態度間之調節效果。研究結果顯示，高傳統觀念的受評者，其主管來源能力
知覺與整體回饋結果接受態度間之關係受到傳統觀念的調節，產生了更正向之關
係。同樣在高傳統觀念的情況下，部屬來源能力知覺與整體回饋結果接受態度間
之關係則受調節效果之影響，而削弱了兩變數間之正向關係。

摘要(英)

The major purpose of multi-source feedback is to provide employees with
valuable and precise feedback for their own leadership development. It has been
widely used as a performance evaluation tool in the US, but a growing body of
literature questions the application of multi-source feedback in the Chinese society.
Thus, the major purpose of this study is to examine the determinants of ratees’
acceptance of multi-source feedback systems in Chinese society.
Drawing on a cross-organizational sample of 129, I examining the main and
moderating effects of the hypotheses proposed in this study. Results of the main effect
of regression analysis show that ratees’ supervisors who are participative leaders are
more likely to accept the overall feedback results. Results also indicate that ratees
who are more openness to experience are more likely to accept their subordinates’
feedback.
The second major purpose of this study is to examine the moderating effect of
power distance and Chinese traditionality on the relationships between the perception
of raters’ rating ability and ratees’ attitude toward feedback results. Results show that
Chinese traditionality moderates the relationships between the perception of
supervisors’ rating ability and ratees’ attitude toward feedback results in such a way
that the positive relationship between the perception of supervisors’ rating ability and
ratees’ attitude toward feedback results is stronger when ratees are person with higher
Chinese tranditionality. On the country, results show that Chinese traditionality
moderates the relationships between the perception of subordinates’ rating ability and
ratees’ attitude toward feedback results in such a way that the positive relationship
between the perception of subordinates’ rating ability and ratees’ attitude toward
feedback results is weaker when ratees are person with higher Chinese tranditionality.

關鍵字(中)

★ 華人傳統觀念
★ 多源回饋
★ 主管管理風格
★ 經驗開放性
★ 權力距離

關鍵字(英)

★ Multisource Feedback
★ Supervisory Style
★ Chinese Traditionality
★ Openness to Experience
★ Power Distance

論文目次

第一章緒論 ....................................................1
第一節研究背景與動機 ........................................1
第二節研究目的 ............................................4
第三節研究流程 ............................................5
第二章文獻探討與研究假說 ........................................6
第一節多源回饋 ............................................6
第二節受評者對回饋之接受態度 ................................7
第三節評量來源能力知覺與接受態度之關係 ....................8
第四節主管管理風格與接受態度之關係 ........................9
第五節開放性與接受態度之關係 ...............................10
第六節權力距離的調節效果 ...................................11
第七節華人傳統觀念的調節效果 ...............................12
第三章研究方法 ...............................................14
第一節研究架構 ...........................................14
第二節研究對象 ...........................................15
第三節研究工具 ...........................................16
第四章研究結果 ...............................................19
第一節人口統計變項描述 ...................................19
第二節信度與效度分析 .......................................21
第三節相關分析 ...........................................27
第四節階層迴歸分析 .......................................29
第五章結論與建議 ...............................................34
第一節研究結論 ...........................................34
第二節討論與管理意涵 .......................................36
第三節研究限制 ...........................................39
第四節未來研究建議 .......................................40
參考文獻 .......................................................41
附錄 ...........................................................50

參考文獻

一、中文部分
王欣婉(2008)。360度評量影響受評者工作目標設定行為因素之探討－結果正確性知覺的干擾或中介效果檢定。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
沈富鈞(2007)。實施多源評量成功因素、受評者接受態度知覺與受評者自我才能發展意圖關聯性之研究。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
林文政、鄧國宏、劉麗華(2006)。影響銀行主管管理職能評鑑認知因素的探索研究。中山管理評論，14(3)，713-750。
凌周文、江可申(2005)。360度績效評估在中國”水土不服”之原因探析。集團經濟研究，Vol. 10。
陳文堂(2005)。業務人員職能評鑑360度回饋對受評者態度之影響－以某外商藥廠為例。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
陳羿璇(2008)。實施360度評量影響受評者自我才能發展因素之探討－以某汽車經銷商為例。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
陳婷婷(2009)。創業家精神之知覺對創新行為及工作滿意度的影響：以思考風格及經驗開放性為調節變項。國立台灣師範大學教育學院創造力發展碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陸昌勤、方俐洛、凌文輇(2001)。360度反饋及其在人力資源管理中的效用。中國管理科學， Vol. 3。
楊國樞、余安邦、葉明華(1989)。中國人的個人傳統性與現代性：概念與量測。載於楊國樞、黃國光(主編)，中國人的心理與行為(241-306)。台北市：桂冠。
劉麗華(2000)。主管管理才能評鑑360度回饋對受評者態度之影響。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
閻世平、林娟(2008)。論儒家文化對企業360度績效評估的負面影響。貴州社會科學，226(10), 105-109.

二、英文部分
Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an Effective 360-Degree Appraisal Feedback Process. Organizational Dynamics, 25(2), 24-38.
Ashford, S. J. & Cummings, L. L. (1983). Feedback as an Individual Resource: Personal Strategies of Creating Information. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32(3), 370-398.
Atwater, L. & Waldman, D. (1998). 360 Degree Feedback and Leadership Development. Leadership Quarterly, 9(4), 423-426.
Atwater, L. E. & Brett, J. F. (2005). 360-Degree Feedback to Leaders: Does it Relate to Changes in Employee Attitudes? Group & Organization Management, 31(5), 578-600.
Atwater, L. E., Brett, J. F. & Charles, A. C. (2007). Multisource Feedback: Lessons Learned and Implications for Practice. Human Resource Management, 46(2), 285-307.
Bannister, B. D. (1986). Performance Outcome Feedback and Attributional Feedback: Interactive Effects on recipient responses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 203-210.
Barclay, J. H. & Harland, L. K. (1995). Peer Performance Appraisals: The Impact of Rater Competence, Rater Location, and Rating Correctability on Fairness Perceptions. Group & Organization Management, 20(1), 39-60.
Barnes-Farrell, J. L. & Lynch, A. M. (2003). Performance Appraisal and Feedback Programs. In Edwards, J. E., Scott, J. C. & Raju, N. S.(Eds.), The Human Resources Program-Evaluation Handbook(155-176), CA: Sage Publications.
Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
Bernardin, H. J. & Beatty, R. W. (1987). Can Subordinate Appraisals Enhance Managerial Productivity? Sloan Management Review, 28, 63-74.
Borgatta, E. F. (1964). The Structure of Personality Characteristics. Behavioral Science, 9(1), 8-17.
Bracken, D. W., Dalton, M.A., Jako, R. A., McCauley, C. D. & Pollman, V. A. (1994). Should 360-Degree Feedback be Used Only for Developmental Purposes? North Carolina: Center for Creative Leadership.
Brett, J. F. & Atwater, L. E. (2001). 360-Degree Feedback: Accuracy, Reactions, and Perceptions of Usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 930-612.
Brinkmeyer, K. R. (1999). Feedback on feedback: How noncognitive individual differences impact the recipient's view. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, 60(3-B), 1335.
Brutus, S., Derayeh, M., Fletcher, C., Bailey, C., Velazquez, P., Shi, K., Simon, C. & Labath, V. (2007). Internationalization of multi-source feedback systems: a six-country exploratory analysis of 360-degree feedback. Human Resource Management, Vol.17(11),1888-1906.
Cheung, F. M., Cheung, S. F., Zhang, J., Leung, K., Leong, F. & Yeh, K. H. (2008). Relevance of Openness as a Personality Dimension in Chinese Culture: Aspects of its Cultural Relevance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39(1), 81-108.
Clugston, M., Howell, J. P. & Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Dose Cultural Socialization Predict Multiple Bases and Foci of Commitment? Journal of Management, 26(1), 5-30.
Cobb, A. T. (1986). Informal Influence in the Formal Organization: Psychological and Situational Correlates. Group & Organization Studies, 11(3), 229-253.
Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1992). An Introduction of the Five-factor Model and its Applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175-215.
Crystal, B. (1994). The 360 Degree Assessment. Healthcare Executive, 9(6), 18-21.
Earley, P. C. & Erez, M. (1997). The Transplanted Executive. New York: Oxford University Press.
Edwards, C. C. (1995). 360 Degree Feedback. Management Services, 39(6), 24.
Edwards, M. R., Ewen, A. J. & Vendantam, K. (2001). How Do User React to Multisource Feedback? In Bracken, D. W, Timmreck, C. W. & Church, A. H., The Handbook of Multisource Feedback(239-255). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Facteau, C. L., Facteau, J. D., Schoel, L. C., Russell, J. E. A. & Poteet, M. L. (1998). Reactions of Leaders to 360-Degree Feedback from Subordinates and Peers. Leadership Quarterly, 9(4), 427-448.
Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C. & Lin, S. C. (1997). Impetus for Action: A cultural Analysis of Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Chinese Society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 421-444.
Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D. & Liang, J. (2004). Cultural Moderators of Social Exchange at Work in the PRC: Individual Traditionality, Power Distance, and Individualism-Collectivism. Paper resented at the annual meeting of the Academy of management, New Orleans.
Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D. & Liang, J. (2007). Individual-Level Cultural Values as Moderators of Perceived Organizational Support-Employee Outcome Relationships in China: Comparing the Effects of Power Distance and Traditionality. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 715-729.
Farr, J. L. & Newman, D. A. (2001). Rater Selection: Source of Feedback. In Bracken, D. W, Timmreck, C. W. & Church, A. H., The Handbook of Multisource Feedback(239-255). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fornell, C. & Larker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Foster, C. A. & Law, M. R. F. (2006). How Many Perspectives Provide a Compass? Differentiating 360-Degree and Multi-Source Feedback. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(3), 288-291.
Funderburg, S. A. & Levy, P. E. (1997). The Influence of Individual and Contextual Variables on 360-Degeree Feedback System Attitudes. Group & Organization Management, 22(2), 210-235.
Gabrenya, W. K. & Hwang, K. K. (1996). Chinese Social Interaction: Harmony and Hierarchy on the Good Earth. In Bond, M. H., The Handbook of Chinese Psychology(309-321). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate Data Analysis: with Readings. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Halperin, J. F., Snyder, C. R., Shenkel, R. J. & Houston, B. K. (1976). Effects of Source Status and Message Favorability on Acceptance of Personality Feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(1), 85-88.
Hazucha, J. F., Hezlett, S. A., & Schneider, R.J. (1993). The Impact of 360-Degree Feedback on Management Skills Development. Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 325-351.
Hofstede, G. & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucious Connection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth. Organization Dynamics, 16(4), 5-21.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. CA: SAGE.
Hofstede, G. (1993). Culture constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 81-94.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. CA: SAGE.
Howard, A. , Shudo, K. & Umeshima, M. (1983). Motivation and Values Among Japanese and American Managers. Personnel Psychology, 36(4), 883-898.
Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D. & Tylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of Individual Feedback on Behavior in Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349-371.
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in Theory and Research. Management Science, 28(3), 315-336.
Lawler, E. E. (1967). The Multitrait-Multirater Approach to Measuring Managerial Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51(5), 369-381.
London, M. & Beatty, R. W. (1993). 360-Degree Feedback as a Competitive Advantage. Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 353-372.
London, M., Smither, J. W. & Adsit, D. J. (1997). Accountability. Group & Organization Management, 22(2), 162-184.
Morrison, E. W. & Bies, R. (1991). Impression Management in the Feedback-Seeking Process: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 522-541.
Peiperl, M. A. (2001). Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 142-147.
Raine-Eudy, R. (2000). Using Structural Equation Modeling to Test for Differential Reliability and Validity: An Empirical Demonstration. Structural Equation Modeling, 7(1), 124-141.
Roberts, M. L. & Wortzel, L. H. (1979). New Life-Style Determinants of Women’s Food Shopping Behavior. Journal of Marketing, 43(3), 28-39.
Rowson, A. M. (1998). Using 360 Degree Feedback Instruments up, down and around the world: Implications for global implementation and use of Multi-Rater Feedback. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 6(1), 45-48.
Smither, J. W., London, M. & Richmond, K. R. (2005). The Relationship between Leaders’ personality and Their Reactions to and Use of Multisource Feedback. Group & Organization Management, 30(2), 181-210.
Toegel, G. & Conger, J. A. (2003). 360-Degree Assessment: Time for Reinvention. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(3), 297-311.
Van Vianen, A. E. M., Taris, R., Scholten, E. & Schinkel, S. (2004). Perceived Fairness in Personnel Selection: Determinants and Outcomes in Different Stages of the Assessment Procedure. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12(1/2), 149-159.
Varela, O. E., & Premeaux, S. F. (2008). Do Cross-Cultural Values Affect Multisource Feedback Dynamics? The Case of High Power Distance and Collectivism in Two Latin American Countries. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16(2), 134-142.
Vroom, V. H. & Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and Decision Making. PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Wohlers, A. & London, M. (1989). Rating of Managerial Characteristics: Evaluation Difficulty, Coworker Agreement, and Self-Awareness. Personnel Psychology, 42(2), 235-261.
Yang, K. S. (1993). Chinese Social Orientation: An Integrative Analysis. In Cheng, L. Y., Cheung, F. M. C. & Chen, C. N.(Eds.), Psychotherapy for the Chinese: Selected Papers from the First International Conference(19-56). Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Yang, K.S. (2003). Methodological and Theoretical Issues on Psychological Traditionality and Modernity Research in an Asian Society: In Response to Kwang-Kuo Hwang and Beyond. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 263-285.

指導教授

李誠(Joseph S. Lee)

審核日期

2011-7-22

推文