績效薪、冒風險傾向、外在工作動機對工作績效之影響

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：17

、訪客IP：18.221.187.121

姓名

陳泰州(Tai-Chou Chen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

績效薪、冒風險傾向、外在工作動機對工作績效之影響

相關論文

★ 人格特質對工作績效影響之探討-以F銀行財富管理事業群人員為例	★ 護理人員的人格特質與工作滿意及工作績效之關係—以工作壓力為調節變項
★ 護理人員之工作壓力、工作動機、工作滿意與工作績效的影響-以某公立醫院為例	★ 心理契約與勞雇關係之關聯性探討
★ 情緒智力對工作動機、工作滿意及工作績效之影響-以人力資源工作者為例。	★ 社會人際行為模式測驗與工作績效間關連性之探討
★ 財務與非財務獎酬對工作動機與工作滿意度之干擾研究-以M直銷公司為例	★ 薪酬制度與員工績效表現之個案研究
★ 領導行為、員工創新行為及績效表現關聯性之個案探討	★ 高科技廠商薪資策略與離職率關係之探討
★ 人力資源管理系統與組織文化之交互作用對組織績效的影響	★ 情境式與行為描述式結構性面談之比較研究
★ 日薪人員與月薪人員之工作動機傾向對其工作績效與工作滿意之影響	★ 本地員工人格特質與對外派人員的利他行為、互動適應之關連探討
★ 五大人格量表的效用分析—以Taylor-Russell、Naylor-Shine 及Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser 模型為例	★ 工作動機的效用分析

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]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

績效薪是企業間常用的薪酬政策。企業相信藉由績效薪的發放，可以增進員工的外在工作動機與工作績效，但同時間卻也可能增進員工的冒風險傾向，而員工的冒風險傾向大小與工作績效之間的關係在不同學者之間則看法不一。因此，本研究將主要探討績效薪對工作績效、冒風險傾向、與外在工作動機之影響，並同時探討冒風險傾向、外在工作動機對工作績效的影響，以及冒風險傾向、外在工作動機對績效薪與工作績效的中介效果或調節效果影響。
本研究採取問卷調查方式，研究對象為在台灣工作的正職員工，問卷發放方式採取紙本問卷與網路問卷兩種方式，總體回收之有效問卷為523份。
經由信度分析、相關分析、與階層迴歸分析後，得出研究結果:(1)績效薪對工作績效、冒風險傾向、外在工作動機皆存在正向影響；(2)冒風險傾向、外在工作動機對工作績效皆存在正向影響；(3)冒風險傾向、外在工作動機為績效薪與工作績效的中介變項。

摘要(英)

Pay for performance is a compensation policy that companies usually implement. Those companies believe that pay for performance can not only increase employees’ extrinsic motivation but also their job performance, meantime it might also increase employees’ risk-taking intention. The effects between risk-taking intention and job performance has been argued by different scholars. Therefore, this study will discuss the relationships between pay for performance and job performance, risk-taking intention, and extrinsic motivation. Meanwhile the study will discuss the relationships about risk-taking intention and extrinsic motivation to job performance, and also discuss whether the relationship between pay for performance is affected by mediating effects of risk-taking intention and extrinsic motivation.
The study conduct a survey of the full-time employee in Taiwan. We collect data by paper-and-pencil questionnaire and internet questionnaire, and totally there are 523 questionnaire returned effectively.
Through consistency analysis, Pearson’s analysis, and hierarchical regression analysis, the result indicated:
1. The relationships between pay for performance and job performance, risk-taking intention, and extrinsic motivation are all positive.
2. The relationship between risk-taking intention and job performance is positive.

關鍵字(中)

★ 績效薪
★ 冒風險傾向
★ 外在工作動機
★ 工作績效

關鍵字(英)

論文目次

目錄
第一章緒論 1
第一節研究背景與動機 1
第二節研究目的 3
第二章文獻探討 4
第一節工作績效 4
第二節績效薪 5
第三節工作動機 8
第四節冒風險傾向 14
第三章研究方法 17
第一節研究架構及假設 17
第二節研究對象與資料蒐集 18
第三節研究工具 19
第四章研究結果 21
第一節敘述性統計 21
第二節量表信度分析 25
第三節相關分析 26
第四節迴歸分析 28
第五節調節效果分析 35
第五章結果討論 37
第一節研究結論 37
第二節管理實務建議 40
第三節研究限制 42
參考文獻 44

參考文獻

中文文獻
王妤珣, & 房美玉. (2004). 人格特質與工作動機對績效之影響-以知覺組織支持為調節變項. 國立中央大學管理研究所碩士論文.
行政院人事行政總處績效管理考評計畫(2011). 行政院人事行政總處.
何瑞儀, & 房美玉. (2000). 人格特質與工作績效之相關研究-以 I 公司為例. 國立中央大學管理研究所碩士論文.
吳方綺. (2014).組織文化與績效薪對於工作動機之影響.國立中央大學管理研究所碩士論文.
吳麗芬.（1986），國民小學組織結構正式化、集中化與教師工作動機之關係，國立台灣師範大學教育研究所未出版碩士論文.
杜梅明. (2005). 風險偏好, 組織氣候, 激勵因素與組織承諾之相關性研究, 國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文.
房美玉. (2000). 半導體產業人力資源管理與組織競爭力之研究: 由人力資源管理與薪酬制度對工作動機及工作表現的角度來探討. 台北: 行政院國家科學會專題研究.
房美玉. (2002). 台灣半導體產業之組織文化對於內外工作動機與工作績效及工作滿意度間關連性的影響. 管理評論, 21(3), 69-96.
林文政. (2008). 薪資管理, 人力資源管理的 12 堂課. 臺北市: 天下文化.
張春興. (1994). 現代心理學 (Vol. 489). 上海: 上海人民出版社.
陳保倫. (2013). 臺北市政府政風機構工作績效與功能效益分析之研究. 國立政治大學行政管理研究所碩士論文
黃運興. (2015). 組織變革、組織文化、人員情緒管理與個人工作績效之影響—以C銀行實施IPO為例. 中國科技大學企業管理研究所碩士論文.
廖良文, & 林文政. (2011). 高績效工作系統於轉換型領導與員工工作績效間之角色-跨層級調節效果之觀點. 東吳經濟商學學報, (73), 29-66.
鄭勝泰. (2002). 人格特質對工作績效之影響探討—已某運輸服務業T公司為例. 國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文

英文文獻
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). Academic Press.
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.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference Inventory: assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 66(5), 950.
Ariely, D., Gneezy, U., Loewenstein, G., & Mazar, N. (2005). Large Stakes and Big. Review of Economic Studies (2009) 76, 451–469
Ariely, D., Gneezy, U., Loewenstein, G., & Mazar, N. (2009). Large stakes and big mistakes. The Review of Economic Studies, 76(2), 451-469.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological review, 64(6p1), 359.
Balkin, D. B., & Gomez?Mejia, L. R. (1990). Matching compensation and organizational strategies. Strategic management journal, 11(2), 153-169.
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.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta?analysis. Personnel psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
Bebchuk, L., & Fried, J. (2004). Pay without performance (Vol. 29). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The review of economic studies, 70(3), 489-520.
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human performance, 10(2), 99-109.
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. M. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. Personnel Selection in Organizations; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 71.
Bromiley, P. (1991). Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance. Academy of Management journal, 34(1), 37-59.
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Pay preferences and job search decisions: A person?organization fit perspective. Personnel psychology, 47(2), 317-348.
Cadsby, C. B., Song, F., & Tapon, F. (2007). Sorting and incentive effects of pay for performance: An experimental investigation. Academy of management journal, 50(2), 387-405.
Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1996). The debate about rewards and intrinsic motivation: Protests and accusations do not alter the results. Review of Educational Research, 66(1), 39-51.
Campbell, J. P., & Pritchard, R. D. (1976). Research evidence pertaining to expectancy-instrumentality-valence theory. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 84-95.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: a meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of applied psychology, 92(4), 909.
Cornelissen, T., Heywood, J. S., & Jirjahn, U. (2011). Performance pay, risk attitudes and job satisfaction. Labour Economics, 18(2), 229-239.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of research in personality, 19(2), 109-134.
Deckop, J. R., Mangel, R., & Cirka, C. C. (1999). Getting more than you pay for: Organizational citizenship behavior and pay-for-performance plans. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 420-428.
Durham, C. C., & Bartol, K. M. (2000). Pay for performance. Handbook of principles of organizational behavior, 150-165.
Eeckhoudt, L., Gollier, C., & Schlesinger, H. (1995). The risk-averse (and prudent) newsboy. Management Science, 41(5), 786-794.
Eeckhoudt, L., Gollier, C., & Schneider, T. (1995). Risk-aversion, prudence and temperance: A unified approach. Economics letters, 48(3-4), 331-336.
Fang, M., & Gerhart, B. (2012). Does pay for performance diminish intrinsic interest?. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(6), 1176-1196.
Fang, M., Gerhart, B., & Ledford Jr, G. E. (2013). Negative effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation: More smoke than fire. World at Work Quarterly, 16(2), 17-29.
Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The journal of abnormal and social psychology, 58(2), 203.
Gerhart, B. A. R. R. Y., & Fang, M. E. I. Y. U. (2017). Competence and pay for performance. Handbook of Competence and Motivation: Theory and Application, 232-250.
Gerhart, B. A., Milkovich, G. T., & Murray, B. (1992). Pay, performance, and participation.
Gerhart, B., & Fang, M. (2014). Pay for (individual) performance: Issues, claims, evidence and the role of sorting effects. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), 41-52.
Gerhart, B., & Rynes, S. (2003). Compensation: Theory, evidence, and strategic implications. SAGE publications.
Glucksberg, S. (1964). Problem solving: Response competition and the influence of drive. Psychological Reports, 15(3), 939-942.
Heneman, R. L. (1992). Merit pay: Linking pay increases to performance ratings. Addison-Wesley/Addison Wesley Longman.
Hitt, M. A., & Tyler, B. B. (1991). Strategic decision models: Integrating different perspectives. Strategic management journal, 12(5), 327-351.
Hull, C. L.(1943). Principles of Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century,.
Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. J. (1990). Performance pay and top-management incentives. Journal of political economy, 98(2), 225-264.
Lam, L. W., & White, L. P. (1998). Human resource orientation and corporate performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(4), 351-364.
Lawler III, E. E. (1973). Motivation in work organizations.
Lazear, E. P. (2000). Performance pay and productivity. American Economic Review, 90(5), 1346-1361.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. Psychological science, 1(4), 240-246.
March, J. G., & Shapira, Z. (1987). Managerial perspectives on risk and risk taking. Management science, 33(11), 1404-1418.
McClelland, D. C. (1956). Risk-taking in children with high and low need for achievement. WESLEYAN UNIV MIDDLETOWN CT.
McClelland, D. C. (1956). Some social consequences of achievement motivation. WESLEYAN UNIV MIDDLETOWN CT.
McNeil, A. J., Frey, R., & Embrechts, P. (2015). Quantitative risk management: Concepts, techniques and tools. Princeton university press.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978) Psychometric theory. 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill,
Pink, D.(2009). Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Riverhead Books.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance.
Porter, L. W., Bigley, G. A., & Steers, R. M. (2003). Motivation and work behavior.
Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of applied psychology, 59(5), 603.
Pratt, J. W. (1975). Risk aversion in the small and in the large. In Stochastic Optimization Models in Finance (pp. 115-130).
Robbins, D. (1991). The work of Pierre Bourdieu: recognizing society. Westview Pr.
Robbins, S. P. (1991). Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies, and applications. Prentice Hall.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Salamin, A., & Hom, P. W. (2005). In search of the elusive U-shaped performance-turnover relationship: are high performing Swiss bankers more liable to quit?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1204.
Sanders, W. G., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Swinging for the fences: The effects of CEO stock options on company risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1055-1078.
Schermerhorn Jr, J. R. (1999). Learning by going? The management educator as expatriate. Journal of Management Inquiry, 8(3), 246-256.
Schmitt, N., & Borman, W. C. (1993). Personnel selection in organizations.
Schon, D. A. (1971). Beyond the stable state: Public and private learning in a changing society. Maurice Temple Smith Limited.
Sewell, G., Barker, J. R., & Nyberg, D. (2012). Working under intensive surveillance: When does ‘measuring everything that moves’ become intolerable?. Human Relations, 65(2), 189-215.
Shaw, J. B., & Barrett-Power, E. (1998). The effects of diversity on small work group processes and performance. Human Relations, 51(10), 1307-1325.
Shaw, J. D., Dineen, B. R., Fang, R., & Vellella, R. F. (2009). Employee-organization exchange relationships, HRM practices, and quit rates of good and poor performers. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 1016-1033.
Singh, J. V. (1986). Performance, slack, and risk taking in organizational decision making. Academy of management Journal, 29(3), 562-585.
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280-285.
Steers, R. M., Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., & Bigley, G. A. (1996). Motivation and leadership at work. McGraw-Hill.
Trank, C. Q., Rynes, S. L., & Bretz, R. D. (2002). Attracting applicants in the war for talent: Differences in work preferences among high achievers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(3), 331-345.
Trevor, C. O., Gerhart, B., & Boudreau, J. W. (1997). Voluntary turnover and job performance: Curvilinearity and the moderating influences of salary growth and promotions. Journal of applied psychology, 82(1), 44.
Trimpop, R. M. (1994). The psychology of risk taking behavior(Vol. 107). Elsevier.
Van Knippenberg, D. (2000). Work motivation and performance: A social identity perspective. Applied psychology, 49(3), 357-371.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation.
Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1964). The roles of information, discussion, and consensus in group risk taking. ETS Research Report Series, 1964(2).
Yates, J. (1992). Risk-taking behavior. John Wiley & Sons.

指導教授

房美玉

審核日期

2018-8-9

推文