團隊多元化與團隊衝突對專案團隊績效的影響

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：8

、訪客IP：3.140.185.123

姓名

廖乾助(Chien-Chu Liao) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

企業管理學系在職專班

論文名稱

團隊多元化與團隊衝突對專案團隊績效的影響

相關論文

★ 由組織文化與領導行為來探討組織變革中員工的反應	★ 團隊多元化對團隊績效的影響－檢驗中介變數與調節變數的影響
★ 不同身份別護理人員之工作壓力與組織承諾、專業承諾的探討	★ 人格特質對義工行為與組織公民行為之影響研究－以某研究機構為例
★ 勞動標準和外國直接投資	★ 公司特性、知識管理促動因子與知識管理績效指標關聯性之研究
★ 企業使用非典型工作型態僱傭人員對正職人員產生之影響	★ 學習型組織的建構與阻礙因素之探索性研究
★ 學習型組織推動方式及教育訓練流程探討	★ 校園徵才中招募者特性與招募資訊的影響
★ 衡量ERP供應廠商服務品質之成功模式	★ 公務人員績效評估與獎懲制度的滿意度對組織公平認知影響之研究─以關務人員為例
★ 管理才能評鑑量表之評估-以A公司為例	★ 具自動檢查機制的線上調查設計對於問卷有效性的影響
★ 員工僱用身分對其工作態度及行為的影響	★ 團隊多元化及衝突對團隊學習行為的影響

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)

近年來團隊成員人口背景多元化已成為經理人和管理學界最感興趣的話題，有關團隊組成的課題也是團隊研究的重點。在團隊組合日漸多元化之下，組織不僅面臨轉型的挑戰，管理者也必須學習如何去管理多元化所帶來的威脅與機會。基於此背景，本研究探討部門多元化和職位多元化兩種團隊多元化類型，對於衝突以及團隊績效是否有直接或間接的影響。
本研究以問卷調查法，收集各產業共89個團隊的資料，問卷回收並編碼後使用敘述性統計分析、因素分析、ANOVA、信度分析、相關分析以及層級迴歸模式深入探討各項變數對團隊績效的影響。
研究結果主要有四點，部門背景越多元，任務衝突越高；任務衝突越大，專案團隊的績效越差；職位背景越多元，專案團隊的績效越好；關係衝突越大，專案團隊的績效越差。另外以職位多元化對於知識分享具有正面的影響。

關鍵字(中)

★ 團隊多元化
★ 團隊衝突
★ 團隊績效

關鍵字(英)

★ team diversity
★ team conflict
★ team performance

論文目次

目錄
第壹章、緒論…………………………………………………………1
1-1 研究動機……………………………………………………1
1-2 研究目的……………………………………………………3
1-3 研究程序……………………………………………………4
第貮章、文獻探討……………………………………………………5
2-1 團隊績效…………………………………………………5
2-1-1 團隊績效的定義…………………………………………5
2-1-2 團隊績效的衡量…………………………………………6
2-2 團隊多元化………………………………………………9
2-2-1 團隊的定義………………………………………………9
2-2-2 團隊的分類………………………………………………9
2-2-3 多元化的定義……………………………………………12
2-2-4 多元化的分類……………………………………………13
2-3 團隊的衝突………………………………………………16
2-3-1 衝突的定義………………………………………………16
2-3-2 衝突的分類………………………………………………17
2-4 團隊多元化與團隊衝突、專案團隊績效………………18
2-4-1 部門多元化與團隊衝突、專案團隊績效………………18
2-4-2 職位多元化與團隊衝突、專案團隊績效………………19
第參章、研究方法……………………………………………………21
3-1研究架構和研究對象………………………………………………21
3-2研究變項的定義……………………………………………………22
3-3問卷設計與變項衡量………………………………………………23
3-4資料分析方法………………………………………………………26
第肆章、研究結果……………………………………………………29
4-1研究構面的敘述性統計分析………………………………………29
4-2研究構面的效度與信度分析………………………………………34
4-3衝突變項的因素分析………………………………………………37
4-4各變項的相關分析…………………………………………………39
4-5層級迴歸分析………………………………………………………42
4-5-1部門多元化、職位多元化與任務衝突…………………………42
4-5-2部門多元化、職位多元化與關係衝突…………………………43
4-5-3多元化與衝突對知識分享、團隊績效及專案滿意的影響……43
第伍章、結論與建議…………………………………………………47
5-1研究結論……………………………………………………………47
5-2理論與實務意涵……………………………………………………50
5-3研究限制與未來研究建議…………………………………………52
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………56
圖目錄
圖1-1 研究程序………………………………………………………4
圖3-1 本研究的研究架構……………………………………………21
圖3-2 資料分析流程及方法…………………………………………27
表目錄
表4-1 研究樣本的產業分析表………………………………………29
表4-2 研究樣本的團隊類型分佈表…………………………………30
表4-3 研究樣本的開會頻率分佈表…………………………………30
表4-4 研究樣本的團隊成員流動程度分佈表………………………31
表4-5 研究樣本的團隊發展階段分佈表……………………………31
表4-6 研究樣本的團隊性質分佈表…………………………………32
表4-7 研究樣本的團隊人數分佈表…………………………………33
表4-8 研究樣本的團隊成立時間分佈表……………………………33
表4-9 各主要衡量變項的信度分析結果……………………………35
表4-10 任務衝突、程序衝突與關係衝突的因素分析結構表………37
表4-11 知識分享、團隊績效與專案滿意度的因素分析結構表……38
表4-12 各變項之Pearson相關分析…………………………………41
表4-13 多元化對任務衝突的層級迴歸分析表………………………42
表4-14 多元化對關係衝突的層級迴歸分析表………………………43
表4-15 多元化與衝突對知識分享的層級迴歸分析表………………44
表4-16 多元化與衝突對團隊績效的層級迴歸分析表………………45
表4-17 多元化與衝突對專案滿意度的層級迴歸分析………………46
表5-1 各假設之驗證結果……………………………………………47

參考文獻

中文部份
1、黃家齊•蔡達人(民92)，團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新績效，台大管理論叢13(2)：223~280。
2、董怡君(民92)，團隊多元化及衝突對團隊學習行為的影響，中央大學企業管理系碩士論文。
3、李宛宜(民91)，團隊多元性對學習型組織之影響，中央大學人力資源管理系碩士論文。
4、陳順宇•鄭碧娥(民88)，STATISTICA手冊(Ⅰ)基本統計。台北：華泰。
5、陳順宇(民89)，多變量分析。台北：華泰。
中文部份
1、黃家齊•蔡達人(民92)，團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新績效，台大管理論叢13(2)：223~280。
2、董怡君(民92)，團隊多元化及衝突對團隊學習行為的影響，中央大學企業管理系碩士論文。
3、李宛宜(民91)，團隊多元性對學習型組織之影響，中央大學人力資源管理系碩士論文。
4、陳順宇•鄭碧娥(民88)，STATISTICA手冊(Ⅰ)基本統計。台北：華泰。
5、陳順宇(民89)，多變量分析。台北：華泰。
中文部份
1、黃家齊•蔡達人(民92)，團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新績效，台大管理論叢13(2)：223~280。
2、董怡君(民92)，團隊多元化及衝突對團隊學習行為的影響，中央大學企業管理系碩士論文。
3、李宛宜(民91)，團隊多元性對學習型組織之影響，中央大學人力資源管理系碩士論文。
4、陳順宇•鄭碧娥(民88)，STATISTICA手冊(Ⅰ)基本統計。台北：華泰。
5、陳順宇(民89)，多變量分析。台北：華泰。
中文部份
1、黃家齊•蔡達人(民92)，團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新績效，台大管理論叢13(2)：223~280。
2、董怡君(民92)，團隊多元化及衝突對團隊學習行為的影響，中央大學企業管理系碩士論文。
3、李宛宜(民91)，團隊多元性對學習型組織之影響，中央大學人力資源管理系碩士論文。
4、陳順宇•鄭碧娥(民88)，STATISTICA手冊(Ⅰ)基本統計。台北：華泰。
5、陳順宇(民89)，多變量分析。台北：華泰。
英文部份
1. Alderfer CP. 1977. Group & intergroup relations. In Improving the Quality of Work Life, ed. JR Hackman, JL Suttle, PP. Pallisades, CA: Goodyear 227-96.
2. Amason, A., & Sapienza, H. 1997. The effects of top management team size & interaction norms on cognitive & affective conflict. Journal of Management, 23：496-516.
3. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. 1992. Demography & design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science, 3(3): 321-341.
4. Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. 1989. Top management & innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic management Journal, 10: 107-124.
5. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research：conceptual, strategic, & statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51： 1173-1182.
6. Blau, P. M. 1977. Inequality & heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.
7. Boulding, K. 1963. Conflict & defense. New York：Harper & Row.
8. Campion M.A., Medsker G. J., & Higgs A. C. 1993. Relations between work group characteristics & effectiveness: implications for designing effective work grous. Pers. Psychol. 46: 823-850.
9. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. 1997. What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectivess Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite. Journal of Management, 23(3): 239-290.
10. Cox, T., S. Lobel, & P. McLeod. 1991. Effects of ethnic group culture differences on cooperative & competitive behavior on a group task. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 827-847
11. Cummings, A., Zhou, & J., Oldham, G. R. 1993. Demographic differences & employee outcomes：Effects on multiple comparison groups. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of management. Atlanta, GA.
12. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. 2001. Managing relationship conflict & the effectiveness of organizational teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 3： 309.
13. Dougherty, D. 1992. Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization Science, 3： 179-202.
14. Drucker, P. F. 1998. The coming of the new organization. Harvard Business Review, 88(1): 45-53.
15. Eisenhardt, K. M., Kahwajy, J. L., Bourgeois, L. J. 1997. Conflict & strategic choice: How top management teams disagree. California Management Review, 39(2)： 42-62.
16. Ely R. J. & Thomas, D. A. 2001. Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes & outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2): 229-273.
17. Gist M. E., Locke, E. A., & Taylor, M. S. 1987. Organizational behavior: Group structure, process, & effectiveness, Journal of Management, 13(2): 237-257.
18. Goodacre, D. M. 1951. The use of a sociometric tests as a predictor of combat unit effectiveness, Sociometry, 41: 345-353.
19. Goodstien, J., Gautam, K., & Boeker, W. 1994. The effects of board size & diversity on strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 241-250.
20. Grace, H. A. 1954. Conformance & performance. Journal of social psychology, 40: 333-353.
21. Gross, S. E. 1995. Compensation for teams : how to design & implement team-based reward programs. New York : AMACOM.
22. Guo, Shumei S., William C. Chumlea, & David B. Cockram, 1996. “Use of statistical methods to estimate body composition.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 64: 428-435.
23. Guzzo, R. A., Dickson, M.W. 1996. Teams in oganizations:Recent research on performance & effectiveness. Annu. Rev. Psychol, 47: 307-38.
24. Hackman, J. R. 1987. The design of work teams. In Lorsch J. W. (Ed.), “H&book of organizational behavior” , Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall, 315-342.
25. Hackman J. R. (Ed.). 1990. Group that work (& those that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. Hambrick, D. C. 1994. Top management groups: A conceptual integration & reconsideration of the “team” label. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior, 16: 171-213.
27. Hendriks, P. 1999. Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge & Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
28. Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. 1961. Quality & acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous & heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 62: 401-407.
29. Hopkins, D. S. 1980. “New Products Winners & Losers”, The Conference Board Report, No. 773. New York.
30. Husemen, R. C., & J. P. Goodman. 1999. Leading With Knowledge: The Nature of Competition in the 21st Century, London: SAGE.
31. Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. 1991. Some differences make a difference：Individual dissimilarity & group heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions, & turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76： 675-689.
32. Jackson, S. E. 1992. Consequences of group composition for the interpersonal dynamics of strategic issue processing. In J. Dutton, A. Huff, & P. Shrivastava (Eds.), Advances in strategic management, 8: 345-382.
33. Jackson, S., & Stone, V., & Alvarez, E. 1993. Socialization amidst diversity：Impact of demographics on work team oldtimers & newcomers. Research in Organizational behavior, 15.
34. Jackson, S. E. May. K. E., & Whitney, K. 1995. Underst&ing the dynamics of diversity in decision making teams. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas(Eds.), Team effectiveness & decision making in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 204-261.
35. Jackson, S. E. 1996. The consequences of diversity in multidisciplinary work teams. In Michael A. West (ed), H&book of Work Group Psychology: 53-76.
36. Janis, I. L. 1982. Groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
37. Jehn, K. A. 1995. A multimethod examination of the benefits & detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40：256-282.
38. Jehn, K. A. 1997. A qualitative analysis of conflict types & dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42： 530-557.
39. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B. & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, & performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 741-763.
40. Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. 2001. The dynamic nature of conflict：A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict & group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 238-251.
41. Johnson, R. A. Hoskisson, R. E. & Hitt, M. A. 1993. Board of director involvement in restructuring. The effects of board versus managerial controls & characteristics. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 33-50.
42. Kennedy, P. 1979. A Guide to Econometrics Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. Korn, H. J. Millken, F. J. & Lant, T. K. 1992. Top management team change & organizational performance: The influence of succession, composition, & context, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of management. Las Vagas, NV.
44. Kosnik, R. D. 1990. Effects of board demography & directors’ incentives on corporate greenmail decisions. Academy of managemen Journal, 33: 129-150.
45. Lawrence, B. S. 1997. The black box of organizational demography. Organization Science, 8： 1-22.
46. McLeod, P. L., ＆ Lobel, S. A. 1992.The effects of ethnic diversity on idea generation in small groups. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings: 227-231.
47. Meglino, B. M., Ravlin, E. C., & Adkins, C. L. 1989. A work values approach to corporate cultural：A field test of the value congruence process & its relationship to individual outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology. 74： 424-432.
48. Mullen B., Anthony , T., Salas, E., & Driskell, J. E., 1994. Small Group Research, 25(2): 189-204.
49. Mullen, B., & Copper, C. 1994. The relation between group cohesiveness & performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115: 210-227.
50. Murray, A. I. 1989. Top management group heterorgeneity & firm performance. Strategic management Journal, 10: 125-141.
51. Nonaka Ikujiro, & H. Takeuchi. 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University Press.
52. O’Reilly, C. A., Caldwell, D. F., & Barnett, W. P. 1989. Work group demography, social integration, & turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34： 21-37.
53. Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M. & Xin, K. R. 1999. Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, & performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 1-28.
54. Pelled, L. H., 1996. Relational demography & perceptions of group conflict & performance: A fielinvestigation,International
Journal of Conflict Management, 7: 3.
55. Pfeffer, J. 1983. Organizational demography. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5： 299-357.
56. Senge, P. M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. N. Y. :Doubleday.
57. Senge, P. M. 1997. Sharing knoeledge. Executive Excellence, 15(6): 11-12.
58. Simons, T. 1995. Top management team consensus, heterogeneity, & debate as contingent predictors of company performance: The complimentarity of group structure & process. Academy of management Best Papers Proceedings: 62-66.
59. Smith, Ken G., Ken A., Smith, Judy D. Olian, Henry P. Sims, Douglas P. O’Bannon, & Judith A, Scully. 1994. Top management team demography & process: The role of social integration & communication. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 412-438.
60. Thomas, K. W. 1992. Conflict & Conflict Management：Reflections & Update. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13: 265-249.
61. Tri&is, H. , & Kurowski, L. , & Gelfanc, M. 1994, Workplace diversity, In H. Tri&is, & M. Dunnette , & L. Hough（Eds.） H&book of Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 4： 769-827. CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
62. Teachman, J. D. 1980. Analysis of population diversity. Sociological Methods & Research, 8: 341-362.
63. Tjosvold, D. 1991. The conflict Positive Organization. Reading, MA：Addison-Wesley.
64. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1992. Being different：Relational demography & Organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37： 549-579.
65. Tsui, Anne S., Susan J. Ashford, Lynda St. Clair, & Katherine R. Xin . 1995. “Dealing with discrepant expectations; Response strategies & managerial effectiveness.” Academy of Management Journal. 38: 1515-1543.
66. Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, 1993. Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process & performance: Comparing homogeneous & diverse task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 590-602.
67. Wiersema, M. F., & Bantel, K. A. 1992. Top management team demography & corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 35： 91-121.
68. Wiersema, M. F., & Bird, A. 1993. Organizational demography in Japanese firms：Group heterogeneity, Individual dissimilarity, & top management team turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 3：996-1025.
69. Williams, Katherine Y., & Charles A. O’Reilly, 1998. Demography & diversity in organizations. In Barry M. Staw & Robert M. Sutton (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 20: 77-140.
70. Zaccaro, S. J. & McCoy, M. C. 1998. The effects of task & interpersonal cohesiveness on performance of a disjunctive group task. Journal of applied social psychology, 18: 837-851.

指導教授

葉穎蓉(Ying-Jung Yeh)

審核日期

2004-12-3

推文