博碩士論文 944301025 詳細資訊


姓名 彭冠宇(Brad Peng)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 企業管理學系在職專班
論文名稱 倖存者組織精簡風險知覺對其生存策略影響之研究
(The Relationship between Survivors’ Surviving Strategy and Different Types Risk Perception of Organization Downsizing)
檔案 [Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [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) 在全球企業皆面臨嚴峻挑戰的今天,如何以各樣成本控制的方式來求取生存及永續經營已蔚為這時代的趨勢,而組織精簡的手法,本研究定義在指勞動力的減少的方式,更為降低成本之具體行動方案,即便在過去以終身雇用聞名的日本,也吹起了裁員的號角,而新竹科學園區亦是這波景氣風暴中受創甚深的一個區塊。
  雖大多相關文獻針對裁員後組織中倖存者反應之研究,多為負面影響之敘述,亦有研究指出有半數的企業在精簡後有生產力提升之現象Cascio(1993)。根據Judge等學者(1999)針對跨國型組織之研究,性格特質及工作態度對於管理者在組織變革下的反應方式有顯著之影響,Dubrin(1992)研究指出,反應(Response)是因為外力之刺激,透過個人的內在因素之處理後(如需求、動機、自我概念、知覺等)所表露出的內外在反應(如行動、情緒及內隱的想法等),本研究便是將組織精簡視為一種極具影響之外力,藉此探討倖存者在工作、家庭、友情及獨處的倖存策略。
  本研究於新竹科學園區為受測的主體,觀察並歸納倖存者的生存策略,發現不同的組織精簡風險知覺類型,其所表現出的生存策略行為模式有明顯的差異,而不同的工作壓力及人格特質也會對採行的策略模式具有影響力,於此亦呼應Judge的研究。
  本研究主要研究結果如下:
1. 不同的組織精簡風險知覺類型與倖存者生存策略皆具有顯著之關係。
2. 工作壓力量的負荷程度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者職場工作策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
3. 工作壓力量的負荷程度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者家庭生活策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
4. 工作壓力質的負荷程度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者職場工作策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
5. 工作壓力質的負荷程度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
6. 正面自我觀念將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者家庭生活策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
7. 正面自我觀念將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者友情經營策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
8 正面自我觀念將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
9. 風險容忍度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者家庭生活策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
10. 風險容忍度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者友情經營策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
11. 風險容忍度將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
12. 性別將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者職場工作策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
13. 性別將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者家庭生活策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
14. 性別將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
15. 是否為家中唯一經濟來源將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者職場工作策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
16. 是否為家中唯一經濟來源將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者友情經營策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
17. 是否為家中唯一經濟來源將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
18. 現職工作年資將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者家庭生活策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
19. 現職工作年資將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放作策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
20. 是否擔任主管職將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者家庭生活策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
21. 是否擔任主管職將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者友情經營策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用。
22. 是否擔任主管職將會對組織精簡風險知覺與倖存者獨處解放策略選擇之關係造成干擾作用
  根據上述的結論,提出下列管理層面上的建議:應考慮倖存者在不同的組織風險知覺類型下具有不同的生存策略。亦可創藉由創造知覺效果,或是考量人格特質、工作壓力以及人口統計變項,達到使員工採行積極的工作策略模式。對於其它因應不同的組織風險知覺類型的生存策略,亦可藉此參考提供相關資源,支持倖存者的生存策略偏好。
摘要(英) Facing the challenge of global tough environment is a big trouble to business all over the world. How to take action and try best for cost down plan has been a trend for business to survive. This research defines “Organization Downsizing” as an action to reduce manpower and this way has become the favorite action of business. Even Japan, which was famous for insisting on hiring employees till retirement, has also put it into practice. It also caused great damage to Hsinchu Science Park definitely.
Most documents about the research of survivors’ reaction after layoff operation are focus at working related topic and the results are negative impact always. However, Cascio (1993) also found there have been increases in productivity in half the companies. Based on the international business research of Judge (1999), the factors about personality and working attitude will influence managers’ reaction when organization changes. Dubrin (1992) pointed out that response is an internal and external reaction from people through dealing process of some inner factors and comes from stimulation outside. This research takes “Organization Downsizing” as an external force which has great influence. It’s in order to study the relationship among survivors’ surviving strategy at the field of their job, family, friendship and staying alone when they have different types risk perception of Organization Downsizing.
This research is based on survivors in Hsinchu Science Park and studies their surviving strategy. And there are a significant relationship between survivors’ surviving strategy and different types risk perception of Organization Downsizing. Moreover, personality and the stress of work will interfere the survivors’ strategy selecting. It’s also echo to Judge’s research.
The results are as follows:
1. There is a significant relationship between different types of Organization Downsizing perception and survivors’ surviving strategy.
2. Quantity Load of job will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s working strategy selecting.
3. Quantity Load of job will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s family life strategy selecting.
4. Quality Load of job will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s working strategy selecting.
5. Quality Load of job will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
6. Positive Self-concept will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s family life strategy selecting.
7. Positive Self-concept will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s friendship running strategy selecting.
8. Positive Self-concept will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
9. Risk Tolerance will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s family life strategy selecting.
10. Risk Tolerance will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s friendship running strategy selecting.
11. Risk Tolerance will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
12. Gender will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s working strategy selecting.
13. Gender will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s family life strategy selecting.
14. Gender will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
15. To be only financial source in family or not will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s working strategy selecting.
16. To be only financial source in family or not will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s friendship running strategy selecting.
17. To be only financial source in family or not will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
18. Working years in currently job will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s family life strategy selecting.
19. Working years in currently job will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
20. To be manager or not will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s family life strategy selecting.
21. To be manager or not will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s friendship running strategy selecting.
22. To be manager or not will interfere the relationship of Organization Downsizing risk perception and survivor’s alone releasing strategy selecting.
According to above conclusions, there are some suggestions for management: we should realize survivors will have different kind of surviving strategy at different kind of Organization Downsizing risk perception. Maybe we could conduct survivors to adopt aggressive working strategy by creating perception, considering different personality, the stress of work and the variances of population statistics, such as gender, marriage, financial burden, and working years. As for other surviving strategy, we could also take it for reference and support survivors’ preference.
關鍵字(中) ★ 組織精簡
★ 工作壓力
★ 人格特質
★ 因應策略
關鍵字(英) ★ Personality
★ Reaction Strategy
★ Organization Downsizing
★ Job Load
論文目次 目錄
中文提要 i
Abstract vi
誌謝 ix
目錄 x
圖目錄 xii
表目錄 xiv
第一章、緒論 1
1-1 研究動機 1
1-2 研究目的 3
1-3 研究問題 5
1-4 研究流程 6
1-5 研究背景 7
第二章、文獻探討 11
2-1 組織精簡 11
2-1-1 組織精簡的定義 11
2-1-2 組織精簡風險知覺程度 13
2-2 工作壓力 15
2-2-1 壓力的定義與理論 15
2-2-2 工作壓力的定義 18
2-3 人格特質 20
2-3-1 人格特質的定義 20
2-3-2 性格特質 22
2-4 倖存者生存策略 24
2-4-1 策略管理 24
2-4-2 因應策略的定義及理論 25
2-4-3 倖存者生存策略之研究 30
第三章、研究方法 34
3-1 研究架構 34
3-2 研究變數定義 35
3-3 研究假設 38
3-3-1 不同的組織精簡風險知覺類型與倖存者生存策略的關係 38
3-3-2 干擾變數 38
3-4 研究工具 42
3-4-1 組織精簡風險知覺程度 42
3-4-2 工作壓力 42
3-4-3 人格特質 42
3-4-4 倖存者生存策略 43
3-5 研究對象與資料分析方法 45
3-5-1 研究對象 45
3-5-2 資料分析方法 45
第四章、研究結果 46
4-1 敘述性統計分析 46
4-2 信度檢定 50
4-3 相關分析 52
4-4 變異數分析 53
第五章、結論與建議 87
5-1 研究結論 87
5-1-1 研究結果 87
5-2 管理實務之參考 90
5-3 研究限制及未來研究之方向 92
5-3-1 研究限制 92
5-3-2 未來研究之方向 93
參考文獻 94
附錄一:訪談內容 102
附錄二:問卷 108
參考文獻 [1] 尹曉穎,「國營事業人員精簡方案與被留任員工之組織行為的關係」,國立台灣大學商學系,碩士論文,民國八十三年。
[2] 弁素雯,「人力成本精簡方案和員工個人特質,對工作態度與生涯規劃認知相關研究─以新竹科學園區積體電路產業為例」,中原大學企業管理學系,碩士論文,民國九十一年。
[3] 吳慧珍摘譯,「德國黃金城難逃失業陰霾」,國際先驅論壇報,民國九十八年。
[4] 李水源、陳琦蓉,「普通班教師面對身心障礙學生之工作壓力與因應策略之研究」,台北市立師範學院學報,第三十四期,1-20頁,民國九十二年。
[5] 李明書,「工作壓力及其管理策略之探討」,勞工行政,第七十四期,22-28頁,民國九十三年。
[6] 李家聖、陳益世,「高科技產業特性、工作壓力、工作滿意暨離職傾向之相關性研究 – 以新竹科學園區高科技廠商研發技術人員為例」,人力資源學報,民國八十八年。
[7] 李雯娣,「國小兒童性格特質之研究」,屏東師範學院國民教育研究所,碩士論文,民國八十九年。
[8] 李誠、黃同圳、蔡維奇、李漢雄、房美玉、林文政、鄭晉昌,人力資源管理的十二堂課,初版,天下文化書坊,台北市,民國八十九年。
[9] 周惠莉,「五大人格特質、性別角色與轉換型領導關聯性研究」,中原大學企業管理研究所,碩士論文,民國九十一年。
[10] 林建煌,策略管理,二版,新陸書局,台北市,民國九十七年。
[11] 林建煌,管理學,二版,新陸書局,台北市,民國九十五年。
[12] 林純文,「國民小學組織氣候、教師工作壓力及其因應方式之研究」,屏東師範學院國民教育研究所,碩士論文,民國八十五年。
[13] 林麗娟,「健保局員工工作壓力、領導型態、人格特質與工作績效關係之研究」,成功大學企業管理研究所,碩士論文,民國九十五年。
[14] 洪永靖,「組織變革下員工反應形成之研究 - 以壓力模型分析」,中正大學勞工研究所,碩士論文,民國九十三年。
[15] 紀怡如,「國中生依附關係、壓力知覺與其因應策略之相關研究」,屏東師範學院教育心理與輔導研究所,碩士論文,民國九十年。
[16] 孫本初,「析論組織精簡之執行策略及其影響」,人事月刊,第十九卷第三期,30-35頁,民國八十三年。
[17] 徐聯恩,企業變革系列研究,華泰書,台北市,民國八十五年。
[18] 張火燦,策略性人力資源管理,第二版,揚智出版社,台北市,民國八十七年。
[19] 張春興,心理學,東華書局,台北市,民國七十八年。
[20] 許昌隆,「組織精簡知覺對員工工作投入與工作滿足之影響─以訓練移轉成效為干擾變項」,中山大學人力資源管理研究所在職專班,碩士論文,民國九十三年。
[21] 陳怡靜,「國內經理人與派外經理人壓力來源、壓力管理策略與工作態度關係之研究」,長榮大學經營管理研究所,碩士論文,民國九十二年。
[22] 陳芳偉,「員工人格特質、工作特性、工作壓力與工作滿意度與顧客導向間關係之研究 – 以東部某基層金融機構為例」,東華大學企業管理學系在職專班,碩士論文,民國九十四年。
[23] 陳順宇,多變量分析,四版,華泰書局,台北市,民國九十四年。
[24] 陳嘉尚,「人格特質型態、成長需求、角色壓力與工作壓力、工作滿足、離職意願之相關研究 – 以新竹科學園區二十一家廠商為對象之實證研究」,中原大學企業管理研究所,碩士論文,民國七十四年。
[25] 陸洛,「工作壓力之歷程:理論與研究的對話」,中華心理衛生學刊,第四期,19-51頁,民國九十六年。
[26] 程一民,「國民小學教師工作壓力與因應方式之研究」,台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所,碩士論文,民國八十五年。
[27] 馮光復,「人力精簡特徵與個人公平性知覺對留任員工工作態度影響之研究」,中原大學企業管理學系,碩士論文,民國九十一年。
[28] 馮美珠,「國小教師人格特質、生活壓力、因應策略與憂鬱傾向之相關研究」,屏東教育大學教育心理與輔導學系,碩士論文,民國九十七年。
[29] 黃同圳、L. L. Byars,、L. W. Rue,,人力資源管理 - 全球思維,本土觀念,普林斯頓國際有限公司,台北市,民國九十五年。
[30] 黃榮真,「啟智教養機構教保人員工作滿意、工作壓力及其因應方式之研究」,師範大學特殊教育研究所,碩士論文,民國八十一年。
[31] 黃維德譯,「全球大失業潮,嚴重影響社會穩定」,經濟學人,Web only民國九十八年二月。
[32] 楊國樞,心理學,台灣商務印書館,台北市,民國七十八年。
[33] 廖翌妙,「國小教師壓力事件因應方式與情緒經驗之研究」,屏東師範學院教育心理與輔導研究所,碩士論文,民國九十一年。
[34] 趙傑夫,「我國台灣地區國民中學校長工作壓力之研究:工作壓力與社會支持、因應方式、工作滿足關係之分析」,政治大學教育研究所,博士論文,民國七十七年。
[35] 劉芳君,「組織人力精簡對留任員工之態度和行為及組織績效關係之研究」,中山大學人力資源管理研究所,碩士論文,民國九十二年。
[36] 繆敏志,「單親兒童學業成就、人格適應及其相關因素之研究」,政治大學教育研究所,碩士論文,民國八十三年。
[37] 韓經綸,組織行為導論,五南圖書出版社,台北市,民國八十六年。
[38] 藍采風、廖榮利,組織行為學,三民書局,台北市,民國八十三年。
[39] Appelbaum, S. H., R. Simpon, and B. T. Shapiro, “The Tough Test of Downsizing”, Organizational Dynamics, 10(2), page 68-79, 1987.
[40] Allport, G. W., Pattern and Growth in Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961.
[41] Burnam, M. A., and J. Pennebaker, D. C. Glass, “Time Consciousness, Achievement Striving, and the Type A Coronary-Prone Behavior Pattern”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 84, page 76-79, 1975.
[42] Band, D. C., and C. M. Tustin, “Strategic Downsizing”, Management Decision, 33(8), page 36-45, 1995.
[43] Bandura, A., Self-efficiency: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman, 1997.
[44] Begley, T. M., “Coping Strategies as Predictors of Employee Distress and Turnover an Organization Consolidation: A Longitudinal Analysis”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, page 309, 1998.
[45] Bower, S., “Management Stress”, Business Credit, page 18-19, 1999.
[46] Budros, A., “A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Why Organizations Downsize”, Organization Science, 10(1), page 69-81, 1999.
[47] Budner, S., “Intolerance of Ambiguity as a Personality Variable”, Journal of Personality, 30, page 29-50, 1962.
[48] Caplan R.D., S. Cobb, J. R. Frensh, R. Van Harrision and S. R. Pinnean, Job Demands and Worker Health: Main Effective and Occqupational Difference. Washington: U.S. Government Pirinting Office, 1975.
[49] Cameron, K. S., S. J. Freeman, and A. K. Mishra, “Best practices in White-Collar Downsizing: Managing Contradictions”, The Academy of Management Executive, 5(3), page 57-73, 1991.
[50] Cascio, W. F., “Downsizing: What Do We Know? What Have We Learned”, Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), page 95-106, 1993.
[51] Cattell, R.B., The Scientific Analysis of Personality. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1965.
[52] Cooper, C. L., and J. Marshall., “Occupational Source of Stress: A Review of Literature Relating to Cornary Hearet Disease and Mental Health”, Journal of Occupation Psychology, Vol.49, page 11-28, 1976.
[53] Coopersmith, S., Antecedents of Self-Esteem. San Francisco: Freeman, 1967.
[54] Dewitt, R. L., “The Structural Consequences of Downsizing”, Organization Science, 4(1), page 30-40, 1993.
[55] Drelinger, C., and D. Rice., “After the Downsizing”, Training and Development, page 41-45, 1991.
[56] Dubrin, A. J., Human Relations: A Job Oriented Approach. Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 1992.
[57] French, J. R. and R. L. Kahn, “A Programmatic Approach to Studying the Industrial Environment and Metal Health”, Journal of Social Issue, 18, page 1-47, 1962.
[58] French, J. R., Adjustment as Person-Environment Fit, Coping and Adaption. New York: Basic books, 1974.
[59] Fleming, R., A. Baum, and J. E. Singer, “Toward an Integrative Approach to the Study of Stress”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, page 939-949, 1984.
[60] Greenberg, J., and R. A. Baron, Behavior in Organization. Englewood Cliff, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc, 1995.
[61] Goldberg, L. R., “The Development of Makers for the Big-Five Factor Structure”, Psychology Assessment, 4, page 26-42, 1992.
[62] Guilford, T. P., Personality. New York: Megraw-Hill.Hair, 1959.
[63] Hellriegel, D., and J. W. Slocum, Management, 7th Ed, Ohio: ITP Company, 1992.
[64] Jung, C. G.., Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Pantheon, 1963.
[65] Judge, T. A., C. A. Higgms, C. J. Jhoresen, and M. R. Barnck, “The Big Dive Personal Traits”, General Mental Ability and Career Success the Life Span. Personnel Psychology, 2(3), page 621-652, 1999.
[66] Judge, T. A., C. J. Thoresen, V. Pucik, and T. M. Welbourne, “Managerial Coping with Organizational Change: A Dispositional Perspective”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), page 107-122, 1999.
[67] Kahn, R. L., D. M. Wolfe, R. P. Quinn and J. D. Snoek., Organization Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1999.
[68] Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky, Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristic and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
[69] Lazarus, R. S. and S. Folkman, Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer, 1984.
[70] Lippitt, R. and G. Lippitt, “Human Downsizing: Organizational Renewal versus Organizational Depression”, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, Summer, page15-21, 1984.
[71] Mayfield, D. L., “Downsizing as a Model of Organization Change, in R. T. Golembiewski (eds.)”, Handbook of Organizational Consultation, New York: Marcel Dekker, page 559-565, 1993.
[72] McCray, P. R., P. T. Costa, “Personality, Coping, and Coping Effectiveness in an Adult Sample”, Journal of Personality, 54, page 385-405, 1986.
[73] Moorhaead, G.. and R. W. Griffin, Organizational Behavior. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1989.
[74] Niehoff, B. P., R. H. Noorman, G.. Blakely, and J. Fuller, “The Influence of Empowerment and Job Enrichment on Employee Loyalty in a Downsizing Environment”, Group and Organization Management, 26(1), page 93-113, 2001.
[75] Ricketts, “Mechanical Advantage and Efficiency”, The Electronic Journal for Engineering Technology, The Technology Interface Vol3, 2(Spring), 1999.
[76] Pervin, L. A., Personality: Theory, Assessment and Research. 1970.
[77] Robbins, S. P., Organization Behavior, Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey Prentice-Hall International Inc., 1996.
[78] Robbins, S. P., “Layoff-Survivor Sickness: A Missing Topic in Organizational Behavior”, Journal of Management Education, 23, page 31-42, 1999.
[79] Robbins, S. P., Organizational Behavior. 9th Ed., New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 2001.
[80] Robbins, S. P., Organizational Behavior: concepts, controversies, applications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1989.
[81] Rotter, J. B., “Generalized Expectancies for Internal and External Control of Reinforcement”, Psychology Monographs, 1, page 80, 1966.
[82] Ryanwenger, N. M., and S. G. Copeland, “Coping Strategy Used by School-Age Back Children from Low-Income Families”, Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 9(1), page 33-40, 1994.
[83] Selye, H., The Stress of Life. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
[84] Slavin, L. A., K. L. Rainer, M. L. McCreavy, and K. K. Gowda, “Toward a Multicultural Model of Stress Process. Special Issue: Multiculturalism as a Fourth Force in Counseling”, Journal of Counseling and Development, 70(1), page 156-163, 1991.
[85] Sheldon, W., The Varieties of Temperament: A Psychology of Constitution Differences. New York: Harper, 1942.
[86] Streers, R. M., Work and Stress– Introduction to Organizational Behavior. 1983.
[87] Tomasko, R. M., Downsizing– Reshaping the Corporation of the Future. New York: American Management Association, 1990.
[88] Watson, D., L. A. Clark, and A. Tellegen, “Development and Validation of Brief Measures on Positive and Negative Affects: the PANAS Scales”, Journal of personality and social psychology, 54(6), page 1063-1070, 1988.
指導教授 林建煌(Chien-Huang Lin) 審核日期 2009-7-3
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   

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