360度評量受評者接收回饋後認知反應歷程之探討

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：23

、訪客IP：3.143.244.6

姓名

陳易汝(Yi-ru Chen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

360度評量受評者接收回饋後認知反應歷程之探討
(Ratees’ Cognitive response process to feedback of 360 degree evaluation)

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]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
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。
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)

人才發展為現今企業在因應激烈競爭下所必須重視的，而360度回饋評量制度即為透過多源來源之回饋，使得員工能夠透過回饋結果的檢視，促進個人改善與組織成長，在過去相關的研究中，主要著重於回饋與其他各項變數之間關係的探討，而較少有研究進一步對員工在回饋接收之行為反應歷程，作一完整之檢視及驗證；因此，本研究整合過去學者所提出的回饋認知反應模型，將360度評量受評者接收回饋後之認知反應歷程，透過學術上的結構方程模式之分析技術，針對360度評量受評者接收回饋後一連串認知反應歷程模式中變數之關係進行探討，並進一步進行模式之驗證。
本研究以實施360度評量制度之四家個案公司中的314位受評主管為樣本，進行受評者接收評量回饋結果後之問卷調查，研究結果除了驗證本研究模式之適配，也證實了360度回饋評量接收者在接收回饋後，認知反應歷程之中介變數的中介效果之存在，亦即員工個人對於360度評量回饋訊息的認知反應歷程，由知覺回饋來源可信度影響自我改善意圖，必須透過各項中介變數─知覺回饋資訊準確、知覺回饋資訊有用、回饋結果之接受性態度才能達成。而本研究進一步提出相關的管理意涵，提供實務上欲施行360度評量之企業作為未來所要著重與參考之方向。

摘要(英)

In order to response the challenging competitive environment, enterprises must focus on talent development nowadays. 360 degree feedback system is through the multiple sources feedback to let employees can overview his/herself, enforce motivation of self improvement and led organization growth. Most of the previous researches examined concurrent relationships between feedback and a variety of other variables but failed to examine the process underlying employees’ behavioral or cognitive response to feedback. This research will generate the feedback process model previous researches addressed and use structural equation modeling(SEM) analysis to examine the feedback process model.
341 managers in four different companies were surveyed after getting the feedback results. The results of research revealed the model generally fit, and also shows that a set of cognitive variable (perceived accuracy of feedback information, perceived usefulness of feedback information, and attitude of acceptance of feedback results) was found completely mediate the relationship between perceived multiple sources credibility and motivation of self improvement. Management implications and recommendation are discussed for companies who will adopt the 360 degree feedback system.

關鍵字(中)

★ 360度評量
★ 多源回饋來源可信度
★ 結構方程模式
★ 回饋之認知反應歷程

關鍵字(英)

★ Structural Equation Modeling
★ 360 degree feedback
★ Cognitive response process to feedback

論文目次

摘要 ----------------------------I
圖目錄 ---------------------------IV
表目錄 ---------------------------IV
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
第三節研究流程--------------------4
第二章文獻探討--------------------5
第一節 360度評量制度---------------5
第二節回饋之認知反應歷程模型------7
第三節回饋之認知反應歷程因素-----10
第三章研究方法-------------------16
第一節研究架構-------------------16
第二節研究對象-------------------17
第三節資料分析方法---------------19
第四節變項測量-------------------21
第四章研究結果---------------------24
第一節敘述性統計-------------------24
第二節研究模式之測量模式-----------26
第三節研究模式之結構模式-----------36
第五章結論-------------------------44
第一節研究結論與討論-------------44
第二節管理意涵-------------------49
第三節研究限制-------------------53
第四節研究建議-------------------54
參考文獻----------------------------56

參考文獻

一、中文
1.王欣婉 (民97)。360度評量影響受評者工作目標設定行為因素之探討─結果正確性知覺的干擾或中介效果檢驗。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
2.沈富鈞 (民96)。實施多源評量成功因素、受評者接受度知覺與受評者自我才能發展意圖關聯性之研究。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
3.陳彥君 (民97)。績效回饋之評價與反應之研究：探討回饋方向、回饋方式及文化我之互動效果。國立臺灣大學商學研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
4.陳羿璇 (民97)。實施360度評量影響受評者自我才能發展因素之探討─以某汽車經銷商為例。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
5.吳明隆 (民96)。結構方程模式─AMOS的操作與應用。台北：五南。
6.黃芳銘 (民93)。結構方程模式理論與應用。台北：五南。
7.邱皓政 (民94)。結構方程模式─LISREL的理論、技術與應用。台北：雙葉書廊。
8.邱皓政 (民97)。量化研究與統計分析。台北：五南。
二、英文
1.Albright, M. D., & Levy, P. E. (1995). The effects of source credibility and performance rating discrepancy on reactions to multiple raters. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(7), 577–600.
2.Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two Step Approach, Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
3.Anseel F. & Lievens F. (2006). Certainty as a moderator of feedback reactions? A
test of the strength of the self-verification motive. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(4), 533–551.
4.Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organizational Dynamics, 25(2), 24-38.
5.Atwater, L. E., Roush, P., & Fischthal, A. (1995). The influence of upward
feedback on self and follower ratings of leadership. Personnel Psychology,
48(1), 35-59.
6.Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academic of Marketing Science. 16(1), 76-94.
7.Banaji M. R. & Prentice D. A. (1994). The Self in Social Contexts. Annual Review of Psychology. 45(1), 297-332.
8.Becton, J. B., & Schareder, M. (2004). Participant input into rater selection: potential effects on the quality and acceptance of ratings in the context of 360 degree feedback. Public Personnel Management, 33(1), 23-32.
9.Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246.
10.Bentler, P. M. (1992). On the fit of models to covariance and methodology to the bulletin, Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 400-404.
11.Bernardin, H.J., Dahmus, S.A., & Redmon, G. (1993). Attitudes of first-linesupervisors toward subordinate appraisals. Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 315-324.
12.Bettenhausen, K.L, Fedor, D.B, (1997). Peer and upward appraisal: A comparison of their benefits and problems, Group & Organization Studies, 22(2), 236-264.
13.Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley.
14.Bracken, D., Timmreck, C., Fleenor, J. and Summers, L. (2001). 360 feedback from another angle. Human Resource Management, 40 (1), 3-20.
15.Bracken D. W., Timmreck C. W., & Church A. H. ( 2001). The Handbook of Multi-source Feedback: the Comprehensive Resource for Designing and Implementing MSF Processes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 102–104.
16.Brett, J. F. & Atwater, L. E. (2001). 360ofeedback: Accuracy, reaction, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 930-942.
17.Cantor, N., & Zirkel, S. (1990).Personality, cognition, and purposive behavior. In L. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 135-164). New York: Guilford.
18.Cedarbloom, D., & Lounsbury, J. (1980). An investigation of user acceptance of peer evaluations. Personnel Psychology, 33(3), 567-579.
19.Chanthika Pornpitakpan. (2004) The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-281.
20.Church, A.H, Bracken, D.W. (1997). Advancing the state of the art of
360-degree feedback. Group & Organization Management, 22(2), 149-160.
21.Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13,(3), 319-340.
22.Dipboye, R.L, Pontbriand, R.D, (1981). Correlates of employee reactions to
performance appraisals and appraisal systems, Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(2), 248-253.
23.Dubrin A. (1993). Applying psychology: individual and organisational
effectiveness. London: Prentice Hall.
24.Edwards, M.R, & Ewen, A.J. (1996). 360 Feedback: The powerful new model
for employee & performance improvement. New York: AMACOM.
25.Fedor, D. B., Davis, W. D., & Maslyn, J. M. (2001). Performance improvement efforts in response to negative feedback: The role of source power and recipient self-esteem. Journal of Management, 27(1), 79-97.
26.Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. Reading, MA: Addision-Wisley.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unbervables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
27.Gunther, A. C. (1992). Biased Press or Biased Public: Attitudes toward Media Coverage of Social Groups. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(2), 147-167.
28.Grewal D., Gotlieb J. & Marmorstein H. (1994). The Moderating Effects of Message Framing and Source Credibility on the Price-Perceived Risk Relationship. The Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 145-153.
29.Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Prentice Hall International: UK.
30.Hair, Jr. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis, (6th ed)., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31.Hazuchq, J. F., Hezlett, S. A., & Schneider, R. J. (1993). The impact of 360 degree feedback on management skills development. Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 325-351.
32.Igbaria M., Schiffman S. J., & Wieckowski T. J. (1994). The respective roles of perceived usefulness and perceived fun in the acceptance of microcomputer technology Behaviour & Information Technology, 13(6), 349 – 361.
33.Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349–371.
34.Ivancevich, J. M. (1982). Subordinates’ reactions to performance appraisal interviews: A test of feedback and goal-setting techniques. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 581-587.
35.Jöreskog, & Sörbom (1993), LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: SSI, Inc.
36.Jussim, L., Yen, H., & Aiello, J. R. (1995). Self-consistency, self-enhancement, and accuracy in reaction to feedback. Journal of experimental social psychology, 31, 322-356.
37.Kaplan, R. E. (1993). 360-degree feedback plus: Boosting the power of coworker ratings for executives. Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 299-314.
38.Kidwell, R. E. Jr., & Bennett, N. (1994). Employee reactions to electronic control systems. Group & Organization Management, 19(2), 203–218.
39.Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu B., & McKee-Ryan, F. M. (2004). A covariance structure analysis of employees’ response to performance feedback. Journal of applied psychology, 89(6), 1057-1069.
40.Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
41.Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480-498.
42.Landy, F.J, Barnes, J, Murphy, K.R, (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness
and accuracy of performance appraisal, Journal of Applied Psychology,63(6), 751-754.
43.Layne C.& Ally G. (1980). How and Why People Accept Personality Feedback. Journal of Personality Assessment, 44(5), 541-546.
44.Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task
performance. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice Hall.
45.London, M. & Smither, J.W. (1995). Can multi-source feedback change
perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations, and performance-related
outcomes?- Theory-based applications and directions for research. Personnel
Psychology, 48(4), 803-839.
46.London M., Smither J. M., & Adsit D. J.(1997) Accountability: The Achilles' heel of multisource feedback. Group & Organization Management, 22( 2), 162.
47.Manfredo, M. J., & Bright, A. D. (1991). A model for assessing the effects of communication on recreationists. Journal of Leisure Research, 23, 1-20.
48.Milliman, J. F., Zawacki, R. A., Norman, C., Powell, L., & Kirksey, J.(1994). Companies evaluate employees from all perspectives. Personnel Journal, 73(17), 99-103.
49.Nilsen D., Campbell D. P. (2006). Self-observer rating discrepancies: Once an overrater, always an overrater? Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 265-281.
50.Neisser (1967). Cognitive Psychology. New Jersey：Prentice-Hall,Inc.
51.O’Reilly, C., & Anderson, J. (1980). Trust and the communication of Performance appraisal information: The effects of feedback on performance and job satisfaction. Human Communication Research, 6(4), 290-298.
52.Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure
celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness.
Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39–52.
53.Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasive effect of circadian arousal, endorser expertise, and argument strength in advertising. Journal of global marketing, 17(2/3), 141-172.
54.Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (1987). Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model. In L. Berkowitz(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 20, 297-340. New York: Academic Press.
55.Robert L. Solso (1998), Cognitive Psychology,(4th ed), Prentice Hell Inc.
56.Smither J. W., London M., & Reilly R.R. (2005). Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 58 (1), 33-66.
57.Stone, D., & Stone, E. (1985). The effects of feedback consistency and feedback favorability on self-perceived task competence and perceived feedback accuracy. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(2), 167-185.
58.Sussman S. W. & Siegal W. S. (2003). Informational Influence in Organizations: An Integrated Approach to Knowledge Adoption.Preview. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47-65.
59.Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
60.Taylor, M. S., Fisher, C. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1984). Individuals’ reactions to performance feedback in organizations: A control theory perspective. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 2, 81-124.
61.Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 561-570.
62.Tornow, W.W. (1993). Perception or reality：Is multi-perceptive measurement a mean or an end？ Human Resource Management, 32(2-3), 221-230.
63.Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (1987). What do people think they’re doing? Action identification and human behavior. Psychological Review, 94(1), 3-15.
64.Vandaveer, V. V. (1982). The dynamics of the performance feedback process in organizations (Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 4609.
65.Waldman, A. David, & Atwater, E. Leanne（1998）. The power of 360o feedback: How to leverage performance evaluations for top productivity. Houston, TX: Gulf.
66.West, M. D. (1994). Validing a Scale for the Measurement of Credibility: A Covariance Structure Model Approach, Journalism Quarterly, 71(1), 159-168.
67.Woehr, D, (1994). Understanding frame-of-reference training: the impact of
training on the recall of performance information. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 79(4), 525-534.
68.Yammarino, F. & Atwater, L.E. (1993). Understanding self-perception accuracy:
implications for human resources management. Human Resource Management, 32, 231-249.
69.Yoon, K., Kim, C. H., & Kim, M. S. (1998). A cross-cultural comparison of the effects of source credibility on attitudes and behavioral intentions. Mass Communication and Society, 1(3-4), 153-173.

指導教授

林文政(Wen-Jeng Lin)

審核日期

2009-6-29

推文