進階搜尋


 
系統識別號 U0026-0502201615095000
論文名稱(中文) Extension Study of the Ambidexterity Theory of Leadership for Innovation at the Individual Employee Level
論文名稱(英文) Extension Study of the Ambidexterity Theory of Leadership for Innovation at the Individual Employee Level
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 國際經營管理研究所
系所名稱(英) Institute of International Management
學年度 104
學期 1
出版年 105
研究生(中文) 利亞姆
研究生(英文) Matthew O'Neill
學號 RA6027641
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 76頁
口試委員 指導教授-史習安
召集委員-楊曉瑩
口試委員-張巍勳
中文關鍵字 none 
英文關鍵字 Ambidexterity  Innovation  Leadership  Individual  Exploration  Exploitation. 
學科別分類
中文摘要 none
英文摘要 The ability for a business to successfully innovate in order to keep up with and outpace the competition in a rapidly changing environment, is widely regards as one of the most crucial success factors. Despite this importance however, innovation still remains as a difficult concept to understand; even with a plethora of academic research focused on its understanding. One aspect of this focus on understanding innovation, is the link between it and leadership. This paper seeks to explore the nascent ambidexterity theory of leadership for innovation. This newly emerged theory evolved out of the inconsistency found in the relationship between leadership and innovation with popular extant theories. Specifically, this research may provide further validation of the theory at the individual level, and thus contribute to its development. Additionally, other possible moderating factors are analyzed in order to further expand upon the theory. Ultimately, it is hoped that this will help lead to a better understanding of businesses may successfully innovate and thrive in the modern volatility-filled markets.
論文目次 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS II
TABLE OF CONTENTS III
LIST OF TABLES VII
LIST OF FIGURES IX
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background. 1
1.2 Research Purpose. 4
1.3 Research Contribution. 5
1.4 Research Procedure. 6
1.5 Research Structure. 6
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Theoretical Background. 7
2.1.1 Ambidexterity Theory for Organizations. 7
2.1.2 Ambidexterity Theory of Leadership for Innovation. 10
2.2 Construct Elaboration. 13
2.2.1 Leader Opening Behavior. 13
2.2.2 Leader Closing Behavior. 13
2.2.3 Employee Exploration Behavior. 14
2.2.4 Employee Exploitation Behavior. 14
2.2.5 Employee Innovative Performance. 14
2.2.6 Perceived Leader Expectations for Creativity. 15
2.3 Hypothesis Development. 16
2.3.1 Employee Exploration Behavior and Leader Opening Behavior. 16
2.3.2 Employee Exploitation Behavior and Leader Closing Behavior. 16
2.3.3 Employee Innovation, Employee Exploratory Behavior, and Employee Exploitation Behavior. 17
2.3.4 Employee Exploration Behavior, Perceived Leader Creativity Expectations, and Leader Opening Behavior. 17
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 19
3.1 Research Framework. 19
3.2 Summary of Hypotheses. 20
3.3 Questionnaire Design and Construct Measurement. 20
3.3.1 Leader Opening Behavior. 21
3.3.2 Leader Closing Behavior. 22
3.3.3 Employee Exploration Behavior. 22
3.3.4 Employee Exploitation Behavior. 23
3.3.5 Employee Innovative Performance. 24
3.3.6 Perceived Leader Creativity Expectations. 24
3.4 Control Variables. 25
3.4.1 Transformational Leadership. 25
3.4.2 Five-Factor Model of Personality. 26
3.4.3 Positive Affect. 27
3.5 Sampling Plan. 28
3.5.1 Overview. 28
3.5.2 Locations. 28
3.5.3 Target Respondents. 28
3.6 Methods of Analysis. 29
3.6.1 Descriptive Statistics Analysis. 29
3.6.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis. 29
3.6.3 Hierarchical Multiple Regression and Simple Slope Analysis. 30
CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH RESULTS 31
4.1 Data Collection. 31
4.2 Descriptive Analysis. 31
4.2.1 Respondent Demographics. 31
4.2.2 Key Construct Mean and Variance. 34
4.2.3 Control Construct Mean and Variance. 37
4.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Test. 39
4.4 Correlation Matrix. 44
4.5 Hierarchical Regression Analysis. 48
4.5.1 Linear Regression Results. 48
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS 57
5.1 Research Conclusions. 57
5.1.1 Discussion. 57
5.2 Research Limitations. 61
5.3 Suggestions for Future Research. 63
REFERENCES 65
APPENDICES 69
Appendix 1: 69
Appendix 2: 70
Appendix 3: 71

參考文獻 Ahlstrom, D. (2010). Innovation and growth: How business contributes to society. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 11-24.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity. The Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations a state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333.
Baer, M. (2012). Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1102-1119.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited. The Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238-256. doi: 10.2307/30040711
Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009). A dialectic perspective on [nnovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 305-337. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01154.x
Carless, S. A., Wearing, A. J., & Mann, L. (2000). A short measure of transformational leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14(3), 389-405. doi: 10.1023/A:1022991115523
Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2007). The influence of leaders' and other referents' normative expectations on individual involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 35-48. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.11.001
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences: Routledge.
Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization, designing dual structures for innovation. The Management of Organization Design, 1, 167-188.
Eden, D., Geller, D., Gewirtz, A., Gordon-Terner, R., Inbar, I., Liberman, M., . . . Shalit, M. (2000). Implanting pygmalion leadership style through workshop training: Seven field experiments. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 171-210. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00042-4
Eisenbeiss, S. A., van Knippenberg, D., & Boerner, S. (2008). Transformational leadership and team innovation: Integrating team climate principles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1438.
Farr, J. L., & West, M. A. (1990). Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies: John Wiley & Sons.
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290-309.
George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: an interactional approach. Journal of applied psychology, 86(3), 513.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504-528.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The Interplay between exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706. doi: 10.2307/20159793
Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7 ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. Exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
Jansen, J. J., Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2009). Strategic leadership for exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of environmental dynamism. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(1), 5-18.
Janssen, O., Van de Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and group innovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 129-145.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 2(1999), 102-138.
Jonason, P. K., Teicher, E. A., & Schmitt, D. P. (2011). The TIPI’s validity confirmed: Associations with sociosexuality and self-esteem. Individual Differences Research, 9(1), 52-60.
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 85(5), 751.
Jung, D. D., Wu, A., & Chow, C. W. (2008). Towards understanding the direct and indirect effects of CEOs' transformational leadership on firm innovation. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 582-594.
King, N. (1992). Modelling the innovation process: An empirical comparison of approaches. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(2), 89-100. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1992.tb00487.x
Krause, D. E. (2004). Influence-based leadership as a determinant of the inclination to innovate and of innovation-related behaviors: An empirical investigation. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 79-102.
Lewis, M. W., Welsh, M. A., Gordon, E. D., & Green, S. G. (2002). Product development tensions: Exploring contrasting styles of project management. The Academy of Management Journal, 45(3), 546-564. doi: 10.2307/3069380
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672.
Mackinnon, A., Jorm, A. F., Christensen, H., Korten, A. E., Jacomb, P. A., & Rodgers, B. (1999). A short form of the positive and negative affect schedule: Evaluation of factorial validity and invariance across demographic variables in a community sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 27(3), 405-416. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00251-7
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
Mom, T. J. M., Bosch, F. A. J. v. d., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Understanding variation in managers' ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 812-828. doi: doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0427
Mom, T. J. M., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). Investigating managers' exploration and exploitation activities: The influence of Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and Horizontal knowledge Inflows*. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 910-931. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00697.x
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185-206.
Özarallı, N. (2015). Linking empowering leader to creativity: The moderating role of psychological (Felt) empowerment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 181, 366-376.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539-569.
Qu, R., Janssen, O., & Shi, K. (2015). Transformational leadership and follower creativity: The mediating role of follower relational identification and the moderating role of leader creativity expectations. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 286-299. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.12.004
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685-695.
Raja, U., & Johns, G. (2010). The joint effects of personality and job scope on in-role performance, citizenship behaviors, and creativity. human relations.
Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(1), 203-212.
Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting creativity to work: Effects of leader behavior on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55(1), 120-151.
Reiter-Palmon, R., Robinson-Morral, E. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Santo, J. B. (2012). Evaluation of self-perceptions of creativity: Is it a useful criterion? Creativity Research Journal, 24(2-3), 107-114.
Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 956-974. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607. doi: 10.2307/256701
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review(38), 8-30.
Welbourne, T. M., Johnson, D. E., & Erez, A. (1998). The Role-Based Performance Scale: Validity Analysis of a Theory-Based Measure. The Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 540-555.
West, M. A. (2002a). Ideas are Ten a Penny: It’s Team Implementation not Idea Generation that Counts. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 411-424. doi: 10.1111/1464-0597.01006
West, M. A. (2002b). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 355-387. doi: 10.1111/1464-0597.00951
Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(2), 323-342.
Zacher, H., Robinson, A. J., & Rosing, K. (2014). Ambidextrous leadership and employees' self‐reported innovative performance: The role of exploration and exploitation behaviors. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 0(0), 1-25.
Zacher, H., & Rosing, K. (2015). Ambidextrous leadership and team innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(1), 54-68. doi: doi:10.1108/LODJ-11-2012-0141
Zacher, H., & Wilden, R. G. (2014). A daily diary study on ambidextrous leadership and self‐reported employee innovation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(4), 813-820.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-02-16起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-02-16起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw