博碩士論文 110457010 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:6 、訪客IP:44.223.39.67
姓名 吳曉華(Wu, Hsiao-Hwa)  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 主管矛盾領導行為對部屬工作績效之影響-探討部屬角色模糊之中介效果與因應之道
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 如今已成為世界秩序常態,企業正經歷多變、不確定、複雜和模糊的經營環境, 並對未來產生難以預測的模糊性。本研究關注模糊不確定的環境變化,為組織帶來的複 雜且相互矛盾之緊張局勢,以及個人可能因為角色功能或工作職責缺乏明確性和不可預 測性,進而對工作績效所產生的影響。本研究探討矛盾領導行為、角色模糊、尋求回饋 行為與工作績效間的關聯性,以瞭解矛盾領導行為對工作績效更為全面性的影響,並同 時尋求因應改善之道。
本次研究結果顯示,主管矛盾領導行為能在模糊矛盾的工作環境中,滿足組織的結 構需求和部屬的個人要求,適當因應內外部環境各種多元複雜、模稜兩可的矛盾問題與 模糊性,並協助部屬降低角色模糊的不確定與不可預測性,提升工作績效。此一發現如 開雲見日,協助釐清矛盾領導行為可能提高角色模糊而為工作績效帶來黑暗面之疑慮。 同時本研究亦驗證,部屬主動尋求回饋行為可以協助部屬釐清職責和預期的績效標準, 減少不確定性,有效降低角色模糊對績效之負面影響,提升部屬工作績效。
因此,企業希望能彈性靈活因應環境變化並促進績效,可藉由主管積極展現策略敏 捷性與矛盾領導行為,引領團隊尋求兼容並蓄的創造性解決方案,並鼓勵部屬主動尋求 回饋,以有效降低模糊性對工作績效的影響。
摘要(英) VUCA is the norm of the world. Organizations are experiencing volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous operating environments that create unpredictable ambiguity about the future. This study is to concern with the complex and competing tensions that lead organizations to the ambiguous and uncertain environments, and the impact on individuals’ performance due to lack of clarity and unpredictability of roles or job responsibilities. This study is to examine the correlations between paradoxical leadership behaviors, role ambiguity, feedback-seeking behaviors, and work performance to understand the more comprehensive impact of paradoxical leadership behaviors on work performance and identify ways to improve it.
The results show that leaders′ paradoxical leadership behaviors can meet the structural needs of the organization and the personal needs of their subordinates in ambiguous and contradictory work environments so that leaders can appropriately respond to the complex, ambiguous and contradictory issues, and ambiguities of the internal and external environments. Leaders′ paradoxical leadership behaviors help subordinates to improve work performance by reducing the uncertainty and unpredictability of role ambiguity. This finding is to clarify that paradoxical leadership behaviors may increase role ambiguity and lead to the dark side of performance. Furthermore, the results show that proactively seeking-feedback behaviors of subordinates can effectively reduce uncertainty and the negative impact of role ambiguity on performance by clarifying their responsibilities and performance standards.
These findings have implications for organizations when facing on rapid changes of environments, leaders can demonstrate strategic agility by showing paradoxical leadership behaviors and encouraging subordinates proactively seeking feedbacks, therefore leaders can lead their teams to reduce the impact of ambiguity on performance, to seek inclusive and creative solutions, and to respond the uncertain changes whit flexibility and adaptivity.
關鍵字(中) ★ 矛盾領導行為
★ 角色模糊
★ 尋求回饋行為
★ 工作績效
關鍵字(英)
論文目次 中文摘要 ................................................................. i ABSTRACT ................................................................ ii 誌謝 ................................................................... iii 目錄 .................................................................... iv 圖目錄 ................................................................... v 表目錄 .................................................................. vi 第一章 緒論 .............................................................. 1 第二章 文獻探討 .......................................................... 4 第三章 研究方法 ......................................................... 16 第四章 研究分析與結果 ................................................... 20 第五章 結論與建議 ....................................................... 33 參考文獻 ................................................................ 40 附錄 .................................................................... 50
參考文獻 張偉豪, 統計學, 鄭時宜, & 公共行政. (2012). 與結構方程模型共舞: 曙光 初現. 前程文化.
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.
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory. The leadership quarterly, 13(6), 673-704.
Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2017). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory. Leadership Perspectives, 129-160.
Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual review of psychology, 49(1), 141-168.
Ashford, S. J. (1986). Feedback-seeking in individual adaptation: A resource perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 465-487.
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.
Ashford, S. J., & Tsui, A. S. (1991). Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The role of active feedback seeking. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 251-280.
Backhaus, L., Reuber, A., Vogel, D., & Vogel, R. (2022). Giving sense about paradoxes: paradoxical leadership in the public sector. Public Management Review, 24(9), 1478-1498.
Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing
societies. Self-efficacy in changing societies, 15, 334. 40
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Englewood cliffs Prentice Hall.
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.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). MLQ: multifactor leadership questionnaire for research: permission set. Mind Garden.
Biddle, B. J. (1979). Role Theory: Expectations. Identities, and behaviors. Boekaerts, M., Zeidner, M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1999). Handbook of self-regulation.
Elsevier.
Boies, K., & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader–member exchange in teams: An
examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The leadership quarterly, 17(3), 246-257.
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475-482.
Burney, L., & Widener, S. K. (2007). Strategic performance measurement systems, job‐relevant information, and managerial behavioral responses—Role stress and performance. Behavioral research in accounting, 19(1), 43-69.
Calder, B. J. (1977). Attribution theory: Phenomenology or science? Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3(4), 612-615. 41

Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1982). Control theory: A useful conceptual framework for personality–social, clinical, and health psychology. Psychological bulletin, 92(1), 111.
Chatuverdula, S., Raghuraman, S., & Murthy, R. (2017). Impact of tolerance of ambiguity on job performance, creativity and decision-making: s study of Indian software professionals. International Journal for innovative research in multidisciplinary field, 3(3), 102-112.
Clegg, S. R., da Cunha, J. V., & e Cunha, M. P. (2002). Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human relations, 55(5), 483-503.
Dashuai, R., & Bin, Z. (2020). How does paradoxical leadership affect innovation in teams: An integrated multilevel dual process model. Human Systems Management, 39(1), 11-26.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182.
Denis, J.-L., Langley, A., & Sergi, V. (2012). Leadership in the plural. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 211-283.
Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organization Science, 6(5), 524-540.
Dubinsky, A. J., Michaels, R. E., Kotabe, M., Lim, C. U., & Moon, H.-C. (1992). Influence of role stress on industrial salespeople′s work outcomes in the United States, Japan and Korea. Journal of International Business Studies, 23, 77-99.
42

Earley, P. C., Northcraft, G. B., Lee, C., & Lituchy, T. R. (1990). Impact of process and outcome feedback on the relation of goal setting to task performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 87-105.
Fürstenberg, N., Alfes, K., & Kearney, E. (2021). How and when paradoxical leadership benefits work engagement: The role of goal clarity and work autonomy. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 94(3), 672-705.
Fisher, R. T. (2001). Role stress, the type A behavior pattern, and external auditor job satisfaction and performance. Behavioral research in accounting, 13(1), 143-170.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. In: Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
Galvin, B. M., Waldman, D. A., & Balthazard, P. (2010). Visionary communication qualities as mediators of the relationship between narcissism and attributions of leader charisma. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 509-537.
Gephart Jr, R. P. (1978). Status degradation and organizational succession: An ethnomethodological approach. Administrative science quarterly, 553-581. Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-Analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 82(6), 827.
Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work.
Research in organizational behavior, 28, 3-34.
Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role
performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. 43

Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 327-347.
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.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, 1, 20.
Howell, J. M., Neufeld, D. J., & Avolio, B. J. (2005). Examining the relationship of leadership and physical distance with business unit performance. The leadership quarterly, 16(2), 273-285.
Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349.
Ishaq, E., Bashir, S., & Khan, A. K. (2021). Paradoxical leader behaviors: Leader personality and follower outcomes. Applied Psychology, 70(1), 342-357.
Jansen, J. J., Kostopoulos, K. C., Mihalache, O. R., & Papalexandris, A. (2016). A socio‐psychological perspective on team ambidexterity: The contingency role of supportive leadership behaviours. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6), 939-965.
Jones, T. M., Felps, W., & Bigley, G. A. (2007). Ethical theory and stakeholder- related decisions: The role of stakeholder culture. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 137-155.
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. The leadership quarterly, 20(6), 855-875.
44

Julmi, C. (2021). Crazy, stupid, disobedience: The dark side of paradoxical leadership. Leadership, 17(6), 631-653.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity.
Kauppila, O. P., & Tempelaar, M. P. (2016). The social‐cognitive underpinnings of employees’ ambidextrous behaviour and the supportive role of group managers’ leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6), 1019-1044.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.
Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C., & Sheep, M. L. (2006). Where is the “me” among the “we”? Identity work and the search for optimal balance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 1031-1057.
Lam, C. F., DeRue, D. S., Karam, E. P., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2011). The impact of feedback frequency on learning and task performance: Challenging the “more is better” assumption. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 217-228.
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 760-776.
Li, X., Xue, Y., Liang, H., & Yan, D. (2020). The impact of paradoxical leadership on employee voice behavior: a moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 537756.
Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative science quarterly, 226-251.
Mahsud, R., Yukl, G., & Prussia, G. (2010). Leader empathy, ethical leadership,
and relations‐oriented behaviors as antecedents of leader‐member 45

exchange quality. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(6), 561-577. Marginson, D. (2006). Information processing and management control: a note exploring the role played by information media in reducing role ambiguity.
Management accounting research, 17(2), 187-197.
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018).
Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think
about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26-45. Morrison, E. W. (1993). Newcomer information seeking: Exploring types, modes, sources, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 557-589. Motowidlo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (2014). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. In Oraganizational Citizenship Behavior and Contextual Performance (pp. 71-83). Psychology
Press.
Mullen, E. J. (1994). Mentorship revisited: Viewing the protégé as a source of
information for the mentor. University of Minnesota.
Nadler, D. A. (1979). The effects of feedback on task group behavior: A review of
the experimental research. Organizational behavior and human
performance, 23(3), 309-338.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. (1978). Psychometric testing. In: New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Olchi, W. G. (1978). The transmission of control through organizational hierarchy.
Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 173-192.
Parker, S. K., & Collins, C. G. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and
differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of management, 36(3),
633-662.
Pearce, J. L. (1981). Bringing some clarity to role ambiguity research. Academy 46

of Management Review, 6(4), 665-674.
Pearce, J. L., & Porter, L. W. (1986). Employee responses to formal performance
appraisal feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 211.
Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562-
578.
Porath, C. L., & Bateman, T. S. (2006). Self-regulation: from goal orientation to
job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 185.
Reddin, W. J. (1970). Managerial effectiveness.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity
in complex organizations. Administrative science quarterly, 150-163. Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016). Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of
Management Annals, 10(1), 5-64.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their
relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(3), 293-315.
Schermerhorn, J., Hunt, J., & Osborn, R. (2000). Organizational behavior, NY, John Willy& Sons. In: Inc.
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner′s guide to structural equation modeling. psychology press.
Shamir, B. (1995). Social distance and charisma: Theoretical notes and an exploratory study. The leadership quarterly, 6(1), 19-47.
Sluss, D. M., Van Dick, R., & Thompson, B. S. (2011). Role theory in
organizations: A relational perspective. In APA handbook of industrial and 47

organizational psychology, Vol 1: Building and developing the organization.
(pp. 505-534). American Psychological Association.
Smith, W. K. (2014). Dynamic decision making: A model of senior leaders
managing strategic paradoxes. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6),
1592-1623.
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.
Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top
management model for managing innovation streams. Organization
Science, 16(5), 522-536.
Sparr, J. L., D. van Knippenberg, and E. Kearney. 2015. “Paradox Perspectives
on Leadership: Developing a Model and Measure.” Presentation at the 17th Congress of the European Congress of Works and Organizational Psychology, Oslo, Norway
Srikanth, P., & Jomon, M. (2013). Role ambiguity and role performance Effectiveness: Moderating the Effect of Feedback seeking Behaviour. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 18(2).
Ullman, S. (2001). In BG Tabachnick, & LS Fidell. Using multivariate statistics, 653-771.
Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981). Role conflict and role ambiguity: Integration of the literature and directions for future research. Human relations, 34(1), 43-71.
Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2004). Understanding self-regulation. Handbook of self-regulation, 19.
Vroom, V. (1964). Expectancy theory. Work and motivation, 964. 48

Walsh, J. P., Ashford, S. J., & Hill, T. E. (1985). Feedback obstruction: The influence of the information environment on employee turnover intentions. Human relations, 38(1), 23-46.
Williams, M. L., Podsakoff, P. M., & Huber, V. (1992). Effects of group‐level and individual‐level variation in leader behaviours on subordinate attitudes and performance. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 65(2), 115-129.
Yagil, D. (1998). Charismatic leadership and organizational hierarchy: Attribution of charisma to close and distant leaders. The leadership quarterly, 9(2), 161- 176.
Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 745.
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, 58(2), 538-566.
Zhou, B., Duan, G., & Lin, Z. (2008). A parametric Lyapunov equation approach to the design of low gain feedback. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 53(6), 1548-1554.
指導教授 林文政 審核日期 2023-7-19
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