博碩士論文 106457025 詳細資訊




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:4 、訪客IP:3.94.202.172
姓名 蘇品真(Pin-Chen Su)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 人力資源管理研究所在職專班
論文名稱 矛盾領導行為、矛盾追隨行為與部屬適應性行為關聯性之探討-不確定性規避的調節式中介效果的檢驗
(A Study of Paradoxical leadership behavior , Paradoxical followership behavior , Adaptivity:The Moderated Mediation Effect of Uncertainty Avoidance.)
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]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 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。
  3. 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) VUCA世代的來臨,市場環境的變化與複雜程度遠超乎我們所認知和想像,工作者需具備更好的適應能力來適應所處之環境與多變的任務,在充滿衝突與對立的實務工作中,引發工作者必須思考既相互矛盾又相互依存的方法,讓兩極的衝突可以彼此成就。從領導者與追隨者間的互動關係來看,由於過去並未探討部屬的矛盾追隨行為在主管矛盾領導行為與部屬適應性之間所扮演之角色,此研究缺口便引發了本研究的動機。除此之外,個人對於不確定性的規避程度是否影響矛盾行為與適應性間的關係,與矛盾行為是否存在可能之替代關係,也是本研究希望探討的。
本研究搜集台灣企業之主管與部屬配對問卷樣本共669份,透過兩階段發放的方式避免共同方法變異,其研究結果為:(1)主管的矛盾領導行為與部屬適應性成正相關,且部屬的矛盾追隨行為呈現完全中介的效果(2)部屬的不確定性規避在矛盾追隨行為與適應性行為間,調節效果成立(3)部屬的不確定性規避會調節部屬的矛盾追隨行為對主管的矛盾領導行為與部屬適應性行為間的中介效果。
摘要(英) Along with the coming of VUCA world , the changes and complexities of market environment are far beyond our understanding and imagination. Employees need to adapt to their environment and tasks more rapidly and paradoxically . To examine the interaction between leaders and followers , previous research didn’t explore the role paradoxical followership behavior of the subordinates played in between the relationship of the leaders’ paradoxical leadership behavior and subordinates’ adaptivity and whether individuals′ uncertainty avoidance will affect this relationship. Therefore, the motive for this study was triggered to explore the possible alternative correlation.
In this study, 669 samples of paired-up questionnaires between managers and subordinates in Taiwanese enterprises were collected. To avoid common method variations, the questionnaires were distributed in two phases. The results were found that (1) Paradoxical leadership behavior of managers was positively correlated with subordinates’ adaptivity, and subordinate′s paradoxical followership behavior had complete mediated effect; (2) Uncertainty avoidance of subordinates had moderated effect between paradoxical followership behavior and adaptivity of the subordinates. (3) Uncertainty avoidance of subordinates moderated the mediated effect of subordinates′ paradoxical followership behavior on supervisors′ paradoxical leadership behavior and subordinate’s adaptivity.
關鍵字(中) ★ 矛盾領導行為
★ 矛盾追隨行為
★ 不確定性規避
★ 適應性行為
關鍵字(英) ★ Paradoxical Leadership Behavior
★ Paradoxical Followership Behavior
★ Uncertainty avoidance
★ Adaptive behavior
論文目次 中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi
表目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 1
1-1研究背景與動機 1
1-2研究目的 3
第二章 文獻探討 4
2-1矛盾領導行為 4
2-2矛盾追隨行為 6
2-3不確定性規避 7
2-4適應性行為 7
2-5主管矛盾領導行為、部屬矛盾追隨行為與適應性行為間的關係 8
2-6部屬不確定性規避的調節效果 9
2-7部屬不確定性規避與主管矛盾領導行為、部屬矛盾追隨行為和適應性行為間的調節式中介效果 10
第三章 研究方法 12
3-1研究架構 12
3-2研究樣本與程序 12
3-3研究變數的衡量 13
3-4資料分析與統計方法 16
第四章 研究結果 18
4-1樣本來源與樣本特性 18
4-2信度分析 18
4-3驗證性因素分析 19
4-4相關分析 21
4-5迴歸分析與驗證假設 22
第五章 結論與建議 27
5-1研究結論 27
5-2學術貢獻 28
5-3管理意涵與實務貢獻 28
5-4研究限制與未來建議 29
參考文獻 31
附件 36
參考文獻 〔1〕 Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L.,“Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory.”,The Leadership Quarterly,13,673-704,2002.
〔2〕 Bandura, A., Social learning theory Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977.
〔3〕 Bandura, A., Self-efficacy in changing societies, Cambridge university press, 1995.
〔4〕 Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J., MLQ multifactor leadership questionnaire for research., Statistics Solutions, 1995.
〔5〕 Benson, J. K., “Organizations: A Dialectical View.”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 1-21, 1977
〔6〕 Boies, K., & Howell, J. M., “Leader–member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes”, Leadership Quarterly, 17, 246-257, 2006.
〔7〕 Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S., "Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance." Personnel Selection in Organizations; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 71, 1993.
〔8〕 Burns, T., & Stalker, G. The management of innovation., In American Journal of Educational Research, 456-459, 1961.
〔9〕 Clegg, S. R., Cuhna, J. V., & Cuhna, M. P., “Management Paradoxes: A Relational View.”, Human Relations, 55(5), 483-503, 2002
〔10〕 Crant, J. M., “Proactive behavior in organizations.”, Journal of Management, 26(3), 435-462, 2000.
〔11〕 Cummings, T., & Blumberg, M., Advanced manufacturing technology and work design. In T. Wall, C. Clegg, & N. Kemp (Eds.), The human side of advanced manufacturing technology, 37-60, 1987.
〔12〕 Daniel, R. I. & Elaine, D. P., The Changing Nature of Performance: Implications for Staffing, Motivation, and Development., 1999.
〔13〕 DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J., “Who will lead and who will follow? A socialprocess of leadership identity construction in organizations.”, The Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627-647, 2010.
〔14〕 Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R., "Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open?", Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869-884, 2007.
〔15〕 Doheny, M., Nagali, V., & Weig, F., “Agile operations for volatile times.”, McKinsey Quarterly, 2012.
〔16〕 Dorfman, P. W., & Howell, J. P., “Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited.”, Advances in International Comparative Management, 3, 127-150, 1988.
〔17〕 Duncan, R. B., “Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty.”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 313-327, 1972.
〔18〕 Evans, P. A. L., “The dualistic leader: Thriving on paradox. In S. Chowdhury (Ed.)”, Management 21C: New visions for the new millennium, New York, NY/London, UK: Prentice Hall/Financial Times. , 66-82, 2000.
〔19〕 Farh, J.-L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J., “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, 715-729, 2007.
〔20〕 Galvin, B. M., Waldman, D. A., & Balthazard, P., “Visionary communication qualities as mediators of the relationship between narcissism and attributions of leader charisma.”, Personnel Psychology, 63, 509-537, 2010.
〔21〕 Geert Hofstede., “Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.” Academy of Management, 6(4), 681-683, 1981.
〔22〕 Geletkanycz, M. A.”The salience of ‘culture’s consequences’: The effects of cultural values on top executive commitment to the status quo.” Strategic Management Journal, 18(8), 615-634, 1997.
〔23〕 Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V., “Meta-analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844, 1997.
〔24〕 Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K., "A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts." Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 327-347, 2007.
〔25〕 Ha, F. W. S., & Thanh, T., ” Entrepreneurial Orientation, Uncertainty Avoidance and Firm Performance: An Analysis of Thai and Vietnamese SMEs”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 4(1), 46-58, 2003.
〔26〕 Handy, C., The age of paradox., Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press., 1994.
〔27〕 Hollander, E. P., & Offermann., L., “Power and leadership in organizations: Relationships in transition.”, American Psychologist, 45, 179-189, 1990.
〔28〕 Hollander, E. P., & Offermann., L., “Relational features of organizational leadership and followership. In Measures of leadership.”, In Measures of leadership, 83-97, 1990.
〔29〕 Inkson, J. H. K., Schwitter, J. P., Pheysey, D. C., & Hickson, D. J., “A comparison of organization structure and managerial roles: Ohio, U.S.A., and the midlands, England.”, Journal of Management Studies, 7, 347-363., 1970.
〔30〕 Katz, D., & Kahn, R., The social psychology of organizations., 1978.
〔31〕 Lewis, M. W., “Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide.”, Academy of Management Review, 25, 760-776, 2000.
〔32〕 Lippitt, R., “The changing leader-follower relationships of the 1980s.”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 18, 395-403, 1982.
〔33〕 Michael Frese, & Doris Fay.”Personal initiative : An active performance concept for work in the 21st century.”, University of Giessen and University of Amsterdam, 2001.
〔34〕 Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W., “Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem.”, Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26-45, 2018.
〔35〕 Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M., & Turner, N., ”Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 63-652, 2006.
〔36〕 Perrow, C., “A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations.”, American Sociological Review, 32, 194-208, 1967
〔37〕 Popova, N., & Shynkarenko, V., “Personnel development at enterprises with regard to adaptation to the VUCA world.”, Economic Annals-ХХI, 156(1-2), 88-91, 2016.
〔38〕 Potsangbam, C., “Adaptive performance in VUCA ERA – Where is research going?”, International Journal of Management, 8(6), 99-108, 2017.
〔39〕 Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E., “Adaptability in the workplace : Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 612-624, 2000.
〔40〕 Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E., "Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance." Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 612, 2000.
〔41〕 Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E., “Organizational strategy and organization level as determinants of human resource management practices.” Human Resource Planning, 10(3), 125-141, 1987.
〔42〕 Shamir, B., “Social distance and charisma: Theoretical notes and an exploratory study.” Leadership Quarterly, 6, 19-47, 1995.
〔43〕 Smith, C., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P., "Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents." Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653, 1983.
〔44〕 Smith, K. K., & Berg, D. N., Paradoxes of group life: Understanding conflict, paralysis, and movement in group dynamics., 1997.
〔45〕 Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W., "TOWARD A THEORY OF PARADOX: A DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM MODEL OF ORGANIZING." Academy of management review, 36(2), 381-403, 2011.
〔46〕 Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L., “Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams.”, Organization Science, 16, 522-536, 2005.
〔47〕 Taras, V., Kirkman, B. L., & Steel, P., “Examining the impact of culture’s consequences: A three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede’s cultural value dimensions.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 405-439, 2010.
〔48〕 Thompson, J. D., Organizations in action., 1967.
〔49〕 Trist, E., “The evolution of socio-technical systems.”, 19-75, 1981.
〔50〕 Zhang, Y., Waldman, D. A., Han, Y.-L., & Li, X.-B., “Paradoxical Leader Behaviors in People Management: Antecedents and Consequences.”, Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 538-566, 2015.
〔1〕 邱郁雅,「矛盾追隨行為量表之建立」,桃園市國立中央大學,碩士論文, 民國一零六年。
〔2〕 張容瑄,矛盾追隨行為前因及後果探討,桃園市國立中央大學,碩士論文,民國一零六年。
〔3〕 傅馨瑩,矛盾領導行為對部屬工作績效之影響: 矛盾追隨行為的中介與調節效果的探討, 桃園市國立中央大學,碩士論文, 民國一零七年。
〔4〕 黃芳銘,結構方程模式理論與應用(五版),台北:五南,民國九十六年。
指導教授 林文政 審核日期 2019-7-9
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明