內隱追隨力前因及後果之探討

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：44

、訪客IP：3.142.43.151

姓名

尤宛萍(Wan-Ping Yo) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

內隱追隨力前因及後果之探討
(The Study of the Antecedents and Consequences of Implicit Followership)

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)

近年來內隱追隨力在組織中的功能日益獲得重視與討論，然而鮮少有研究同時對於內隱追隨力之前因與後果進行探討與實證。有鑑於內隱追隨力整體性研究之稀缺，本研究以家長式領導為因、工作績效與晉升力評分為果，同時探討華人內隱追隨力之形成因素及其所造成的影響並進行實證研究，以建構華人內隱追隨力之整體模型。
　　本研究欲探討華人內隱追隨力之前因與後果，透過問卷蒐集來自華人地區不同產業共41間私人企業之樣本，並以主管與部屬配對方式發放問卷，最終回收459組有效配對樣本。研究結果顯示，家長式領導的威權領導與內隱追隨力四大構面（顧全大局、尊敬順從、認真盡責、出謀獻策）呈現負向顯著關係、德行領導與內隱追隨力四大構面呈現正向顯著關係、仁慈領導與內隱追隨力四大構面則無顯著關係；追隨者內隱追隨力之認真盡責、出謀獻策與其工作績效呈現正向顯著關係；追隨者工作績效與晉升力評分呈現正向顯著關係。由此可說明，當領導者採取威權領導，會降低追隨者顧全大局、尊敬順從、認真盡責、出謀獻策的態度與行為；當領導者採取德行領導，則會增加追隨者顧全大局、尊敬順從、認真盡責、出謀獻策的態度與行為；而當追隨者較能夠認真盡責、出謀獻策時，也會有較好的工作績效表現，主管對該部屬晉升的認同程度也較高。
本研究亦針對研究結果進行討論，並透過研究限制與建議對未來內隱追隨力相關研究提供參考研究方向。

摘要(英)

There is little research study the antecedents and consequences of Implicit Followership in the same time. Because of the lack of integrity research, the study took Paternalistic Leadership as the antecedents of Implicit Followership and took Task Performance and Promotability Ratings as the consequences of Implicit Followership to construct the model of Implicit Followership Theories.
In this study, the data was successfully collected from 459 pairs of leaders and followers in 41 companies of different industries in Chinese organizations. The result showed that authoritarianism leadership of Paternalistic Leadership negatively influenced Implicit Followership (Team-oriented, Industrious, Following leaders, Suggesting). Moral leadership of Paternalistic Leadership positively influenced Implicit Followership Theories. Benevolence leadership of Paternalistic Leadership has no effect on Implicit Followership. Following leaders and Suggesting of followers positively influenced the task performance and promotability ratings of followers.

關鍵字(中)

★ 追隨力
★ 內隱追隨力
★ 家長式領導
★ 工作績效
★ 晉升力評分
★ 職涯成功

關鍵字(英)

★ Followership
★ Implicit followership
★ Paternalistic Leadership
★ Task Performance
★ Promotability Ratings
★ Career Success

論文目次

摘要.............................i
Abstract.........................ii
誌謝.............................iii
目錄.............................iv
圖目錄............................vi
表目錄............................vii
第一章緒論......................1
第一節研究背景與動機.............1
第二節研究目的..................6
第二章文獻探討..................7
第一節內隱追隨力之概念與內涵.....7
第二節內隱追隨力之量測..........8
第三節內隱追隨力之前因..........11
第四節內隱追隨力之後果..........17
第三章研究方法.................20
第一節研究架構.................20
第二節研究對象與流程............21
第三節研究變項衡量..............22
第四節資料分析與統計方法........28
第四章研究結果.................29
第一節資料來源與樣本特性........29
第二節信度與效度分析............30
第三節共同方法變異檢驗..........34
第四節驗證性因素分析............35
第五節相關分析..................37
第六節假設檢定..................39
第五章結論與討論................46
第一節結論與討論................46
第二節研究貢獻..................49
第三節管理意涵..................52
第四節研究限制與建議.............53
參考文獻 .........................55

參考文獻

Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hancock D (2004). Cooperative learning and peer orientation effects on motivation achievement. J. Educ. Res, 97(3), 159-166.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16(1), 74-94.
Baker, S. D., Stites-Doe, S. A., Mathis, C. J., & Rosenbach, W. E. (2014). The Fluid Nature of Follower and Leader Roles. Followership: What is it and why do people follow?, 73.
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory.
Bass, B. M., & Stogdill, R. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill′s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications: Simon and Schuster.
Bergeron, D. M., Shipp, A. J., Rosen, B., & Furst, S. A. (2013). Organizational citizenship behavior and career outcomes: The cost of being a good citizen. Journal of management, 39(4), 958-984.
Bjugstad, K., Thach, E. C., Thompson, K. J., & Morris, A. (2006). A fresh look at followership: A model for matching followership and leadership styles. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 7(3), 304.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life: Transaction Publishers.
Brouthers, K. D. (2002). Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of international business studies, 33(2), 203-221.
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.
Chaleff, I. (2009). The courageous follower: Standing up to & for our leaders: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. (1997). Nonconscious behavioral confirmation processes: The self-fulfilling consequences of automatic stereotype activation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(5), 541-560.
Cheng, B., Shieh, P., & Chou, L. (2002). The principal’s leadership, leader-member exchange quality, and the teacher’s extra-role behavior: The effects of transformational and paternalistic leadership. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 17(105161), 1983.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.
Collinson, D. (2006). Rethinking followership: A post-structuralist analysis of follower identities. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(2), 179-189.
Conger, J. A., & Fulmer, R. M. (2003). Developing your leadership pipeline. Harvard business review, 81(12), 76-85.
De Cremer, D. (2006). Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice: The moderating effect of autocratic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(1), 79-93.
De Pater, I. E., Van Vianen, A. E., Bechtoldt, M. N., & Klehe, U.-C. (2009). Employees′ challenging job experiences and supervisors′ evaluations of promotability. Personnel Psychology.
Dixon, G., & Westbrook, J. (2003). Followers revealed. Engineering Management Journal, 15(1), 19-26.
Dunegan, K. J., Uhl-Bien, M., & Duchon, D. (2002). LMX and subordinate performance: The moderating effects of task characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17(2), 275-285.
Ford, D. K., Truxillo, D. M., & Bauer, T. N. (2009). Rejected but still there: Shifting the focus in applicant reactions to the promotional context. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17(4), 402-416.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1994). Cross-cultural comparison of leadership prototypes. The Leadership Quarterly, 5(2), 121-134.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 64-86.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological review, 102(1), 4.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis . Uppersaddle River. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed) Upper Saddle River.
Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57(3), 639-683.
Hollander, E. P. (1992). The essential interdependence of leadership and followership. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(2), 71-75.
Holzinger, A. I., & Medcof, A. T. (2006). Leader and follower prototypes in an international context: An exploratory study of Asia and South America.
Igbaria, M., & Wormley, W. M. (1995). Race differences in job performance and career success. Communications of the ACM, 38(3), 82-93.
Jawahar, I., & Ferris, G. R. (2011). A longitudinal investigation of task and contextual performance influences on promotability judgments. Human Performance, 24(3), 251-269.
Jensen, J. L., Olberding, J. C., & Rodgers, R. (1997). THE QUALITY OF LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE (LMX) AND MEMBER PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYTIC REVIEW. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings.
Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, R. D. (1995). An empirical investigation of the predictors of executive career success. Personnel Psychology, 48(3), 485-519.
Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 621-652.
Junker, N. M., Stegmann, S., Braun, S., & Van Dick, R. (2016). The ideal and the counter-ideal follower–advancing implicit followership theories. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(8), 1205-1222.
Kelley, R. E. (1992). The power of followership: How to create leaders people want to follow, and followers who lead themselves: Broadway Business.
Kiker, D. S., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1999). Main and interaction effects of task and contextual performance on supervisory reward decisions. Journal of applied psychology, 84(4), 602.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1990). The credibility factor: What followers expect from their leaders. Management Review, 79(1), 29-34.
Kruse, E., & Sy, T. (2011). Manipulating implicit theories by inducing affect. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings.
London, M., & Stumpf, S. A. (1983). Effects of candidate characteristics on management promotion decisions: An experimental study. Personnel Psychology, 36(2), 241-259.
Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & De Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational behavior and human performance, 34(3), 343-378.
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Cognitive theory in industrial and organizational psychology. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 2, 1-62.
Medoff, J. L., & Abraham, K. G. (1981). Are those paid more really more productive? The case of experience. Journal of Human Resources, 186-216.
Ng, T. W., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367-408.
Notgrass, D. (2014). The relationship between followers’ perceived quality of relationship and preferred leadership style. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(7), 605-621.
Nunally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1978). Psychometric theory: New York: McGraw-Hill.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome: Lexington Books/DC Heath and Com.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3(1), 16-20.
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.
Sy, T. (2010). What do you think of followers? Examining the content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), 73-84.
Thacker, R. A., & Wayne, S. J. (1995). An examination of the relationship between upward influence tactics and assessments of promotability. Journal of management, 21(4), 739-756.
Tram-Quon, S. (2013). An exploratory study on the development of an implicit measure of implicit followership theory using the implicit association test.
Tzafrir, S. S., & Hareli, S. (2009). Employees′ emotional reactions to promotion decisions: The role of causal attributions and perceptions of justice. Career Development International, 14(4), 351-371.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 654-676.
Uhl-Bien, M., & Pillai, R. (2007). The romance of leadership and the social construction of followership. Follower-centered perspectives on leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl, 187-209.
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83-104.
Van Scotter, J., Motowidlo, S. J., & Cross, T. C. (2000). Effects of task performance and contextual performance on systemic rewards. Journal of applied psychology, 85(4), 526.
Wang, H., Law, K. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2008). Leader-member exchange, employee performance, and work outcomes: An empirical study in the Chinese context. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(10), 1809-1824.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3): Sage.
Whiteley, P., Sy, T., & Johnson, S. K. (2012). Leaders′ conceptions of followers: Implications for naturally occurring Pygmalion effects. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 822-834.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of management, 17(3), 601-617.
Wu, M., & Xu, E. (2012). 24 Paternalistic leadership: from here to where? Handbook of Chinese organizational behavior: Integrating theory, research and practice, 449.
楊紅玲、彭堅（2015）。內隱追隨理論研究述評。外國經濟與管理，37（3）。
周婉茹、鄭伯壎、連玉輝（2014）。威權領導: 概念源起, 現況檢討及未來方向。中華心理學刊，56（2），165-189。
曹元坤、許晟（2013）。部屬追隨力: 概念界定與量表開發。當代財經（3），82-89。
曹元坤、祝振兵（2015）。內隱追隨理論：概念、測量、前因及後果。心理科學進展，23（2），280-288。
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。
彭堅、王霄（2015）。追隨力認知圖式：概念解析與整合模型。心理科學，38（4），822-827.
樊景立、鄭伯壎（2000）。華人組織的家長式領導：一項文化觀點的分析。本土心理學研究（13），126-180。
鄧景宜、曾旭民、李怡禎、遊朝舜（2011）。「International English Big-Five Mini-Markers」之繁體中文版量表發展。管理學報，28（6），579-615。
鄭伯壎、周麗芳、樊景立（2000）。家長式領導：三元模式的建構與測量。本土心理學研究（14），3-64。
鄭伯壎、林姿葶、鄭弘岳、周麗芳、任金剛、樊景立（2010）。家長式領導與部屬效能：多層次分析觀點。中華心理學刊，52（1），1-23。
鄭伯壎、黃敏萍、周麗芳（2002）。家長式領導及其效能：華人企業團隊的證據。華人心理學報，3（1），85-112。
鄭宜潔（2016）。內隱追隨力量表之建立（未出版碩士論文）。國立中央大學，桃園市。

指導教授

林文政

審核日期

2017-7-25

推文