進階搜尋


 
系統識別號 U0026-0812200915210903
論文名稱(中文) 主管領導風格對部屬因應行為及績效表現之影響:以高等教育體系為例
論文名稱(英文) A Study of the Influence of Leadership on Subordinate Reaction and Performance: An Empirical Study of Higher Education System
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 經營管理碩士學位學程(AMBA)
系所名稱(英) Advanced Master of Business Administration (AMBA)
學年度 97
學期 2
出版年 98
研究生(中文) 郇小冬
研究生(英文) Hsiao-Tung Hwan
學號 rd696107
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 88頁
口試委員 指導教授-吳萬益
口試委員-蔡明田
口試委員-譚伯群
口試委員-賴孟寬
中文關鍵字 家長式領導  德行領導  仁慈領導  威權領導 
英文關鍵字 Paternalistic Leadership  Moral Leadership  Authoritarian Leadership  Benevolent Leadership 
學科別分類
中文摘要 近年來,高等教育體系在面臨少子化現象與大量院校之競爭的問題下,如何作有效的領導,提升學校效能及員工績效,以因應環境中的各種挑戰,已成為不可忽視的重要議題。大多數的領導理論多以西方的研究成果為參考依據,然而,領導模式會隨著社會文化與產業結構等因素而有所不同。因此,本研究採用適合華人企業文化的家長式領導模式進行實證分析,試圖確認出適用於我國高等教育學校體制的領導行為。具體言之,本研究的主要目的在於探討主管之家長式領導風格在高等教育體系中扮演的角色,以瞭解家長式領導風格(包括威權、仁慈及德行領導)對於部屬因應行為(包括敬畏順從、感恩圖報及認同效法)與其績效的影響,得以確認出較佳的領導行為。

本研究針對13所大專院校之行政人員進行網路問卷及主管部屬一對一紙本問卷調查,由本研究之分析結果發現,威權領導對於敬畏順從及認同效法有顯著之正向影響;仁慈領導會引起部屬之感恩圖報與認同效法行為;德行領導則對三種行為均有顯著的正向影響。再者,在不考慮領導者的角色之下,僅有認同效法之部屬因應行為有助於部屬之績效表現。此外,同時考慮領導風格、部屬因應行為、與績效之關係時,本研究發現,較低程度的威權領導、與較高程度的仁慈或德行領導,均能有效使部屬產生認同效法之行為,進而有助於部屬的績效表現;由此可知,威權領導是較為不佳之領導風格,而仁慈領導與德行領導較能有效提升部屬的認同效法行為,進而有助於提高部屬的績效表現,因此,是較佳的家長式領導風格。
英文摘要 Recently, the higher education system in Taiwan has confronted with the decline of population growth and the competition of a large number of colleges and universities. Accordingly, it is critical for higher education system to enhance performance of faculties by effective leadership. Most leadership-related theories are developed based on western culture. However, leadership styles will vary with different cultures and industries. Therefore, the theory of paternalistic leadership, which is suited well to Chinese organizational culture, is employed to identify the appropriate leadership in the colleges and universities. Specifically, the objective of this study is to explore the influences of three paternalistic leaderships (i.e., authoritarian leadership, benevolent leadership, moral leadership) on the subordinates’ response behaviors (i.e., gratitude- repay, dependence-compliance, and respect-identification) and their performances.

The data from leaders and subordinates of 13 colleges and universities in Taiwan were collected. The empirical results show that authoritarian leadership is positively related to gratitude-repay and respect-identification; benevolent responses leadership is positively related to dependence-compliance and respect-identification responses; moral leadership is positively related to all three kinds of responses. In addition, only respect- identification response is significantly associated with performance without regard to leadership styles. As to interrelationships among leadership, subordinate’s response behaviors, and performance, subordinates perceiving lower authoritarian leadership, higher benevolent leadership, of higher moral leadership can lead to higher respect-identification responses and further enhance subordinates’ performances. Accordingly, authoritarian leadership is the worst leadership style for education leaders to achieve better performance. Benevolent and moral leadership styles are better in that they can facilitate subordinates to develop respect and identification responces which in turn increase performance.
論文目次 中文摘要 I
英文摘要 II
總 目 錄 III
圖 目 錄 V
表 目 錄 VI
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 3
第三節 研究範圍及目的 6
第四節 研究步驟 7
第五節 論文結構 7
第二章 文獻探討 9
第一節 領導之起源及其概念 9
第二節 家長式領導行為 12
第三節 部屬因應行為 16
第四節 員工績效表現評估 18
第五節 研究假設之推論 24
第三章 研究設計與方法 29
第一節 研究架構與研究假設 29
第二節 變數操作性定義與問卷設計 31
第三節 抽樣設計及資料蒐集方法 41
第四節 資料分析方法 42
第四章 資料分析及研究結果 44
第一節 樣本敘述性統計 44
第二節 研究變數之敘述性統計 46
第三節 信度 51
第四節 主管領導模式與部屬因應行為之線性結構關係 54
第五節 家長式領導、部屬反應行為與工作績效 58
第六節 主管與部屬之認知差異比較 62
第五章 結論與建議 67
第一節 研究結果 67
第二節 管理上之意涵 71
第三節 研究限制 72
參考文獻 74
一、中文文獻 74
二、英文文獻 77
三、其他 81
附錄 研究問卷 82
參考文獻 一、中文文獻

1.王新怡(2003),家長式領導、信任與員工效能,國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
2.王榮春、陳彰儀(2003),部屬觀點之領導互動論:部屬對主管領導行為的知覺因素與互動內涵初探,應用心理學研究,第20期,pp.181-215。
3.江福興(2004),以社會資本觀點探討國內製造業員工之人格特質與工作價值觀對其工作績效之影響,成功大學企業管理學系研究所碩士論文。
4.吳宗祐、徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎(2002),怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲:華人企業主,管權企導與部屬憤怒反應,本土心理學研究,第18期,pp.3-49。
5.吳明蒼(2004),校長領導型態與教師工作滿意之研究:以南部某技術學院為例,美和技術學院學報,第23期第1卷,pp.43-68。
6.吳萬益(2008),企業研究方法,華泰出版社,台北市。
7.李文娟,1998,領導型態、工作滿意度與工作績效相關之個案實證研究,國立中央大學人力資源管理所碩士論文。
8.李炳賢(2005),中階主管的人格特質、領導風格及情緒智力與工作績效關聯之研究-以汽車零件製造業為例,國立成功大學管理學院高階管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。
9.林明地(2002),學校領導:理念與校長專業生涯,台北市,高等教育。
10.林志峰(2006),主管領導型態、人格特質、組織承諾與工作績效關聯性之研究-以國防部軍備局生產製造中心生產工廠為例,南台科技大學,高階主管企管碩士班碩士學位論文。
11.范熾文(2004),西方與本土:轉型領導與家長式領導的探究省思。台中師院主辦:現代教育論壇,pp.40-46。93年7月7日。台中師院。
12.凌文輇(1991),中國人的領導與行為,見楊中芳、高尚仁(主編):中國人、中國心-人格與社會篇,pp.409-448,遠流出版社。
13.梁雙蓮(1984),中央行政機關公務員組織認同之研究,台北:台灣大學政治研究所博士論文。
14.陳川正(2000),非營利組組織的認同管理--以基督教的「細胞小組模式」等教會為例,台北:政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文。
15.陳仙龍(2007),家長式領導、信任、組織承諾與領導效能相關性之研究-以台灣製造業為例,國立成功大學,高階管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。
16.陳景堂(2005),統計分析SPSS for Windows入門與應用,儒林圖書公司,台北市。
17.陳彰儀(1995),組織心理學,台北:心理出版社。
18.陳龍弘、蔡英美(2005),華人家長式領導、情緒感受與運動員競技倦怠,大專體育學刊,第7卷第2期,pp.101-110。
19.黃國隆(1986),中學教師的組織承諾與專業承諾之研究,國立政治大學學報,53 期,pp.55-83。
20.楊國樞(1992),中國人的社會取向:社會互動的觀點,楊國樞、余安邦主編,中國人的心理與行為-理念與方法篇,台北:桂冠圖書公司。
21.萬金生 (2003),資訊委外特殊自我效能與目標認同、工作績效及工作滿意的關係:結構方程模型的驗證性研究。商管科技季刊,14(1),125-147
22.趙安安、高尚仁(2005),台灣地區華人企業家長式領導風格與員工壓力之關聯,應用心理研究,第27期,pp.111-131。
23.劉兆明(1996),組織中的情感報:初步的觀點分析,應用心理學報,第5期,pp.1-34。
24.劉兆明(2003),工作價值觀研究之回顧與前瞻,應用心理研究,第19卷,pp.211-250。
25.劉明德(1993),管理學:競爭優勢,台北:桂冠。
26.樊景立、鄭伯壎(2000a),華人組織的家長式領導:一項文化觀點的分析,本土心理學研究,第13期,pp.127-180。
27.樊景立、鄭伯壎(2000b),家長式領導:再一次思考,本土心理學研究,第14期,pp.219-227。
28.蔡秉峰(2004),領導行為與因應策略之評估-以家長式領導風格為例,國立新竹師範學院,教育研究所碩士論文。
29.鄭伯壎(1990),領導與情境-互動心理學研究途徑,大洋出版社,台北。
30.鄭伯壎(1995b),差序格局與華人組織行為,本土心理學研究,第3期,pp.142-219。
31.鄭伯壎(1999),家長領導的概念建構與工具發展:以教育組織為例,國科會專題研究,計畫編號:NSC 88-2413-H-002-014。
32.鄭伯壎(2005),華人領導:理論與實際,桂冠書局,台北縣。
33.鄭伯壎、周麗芳、黃敏萍、樊景立、彭泗清(2003),家長式領導的三元模式:中國大陸企業的證據,本土心理學研究,第20期,pp.209-250。
34.鄭伯壎、周麗芳、樊景立(2000),家長式領導:三元模式的建構與測量,本土心理學研究,第14期,pp.3-64
35.鄭伯壎、姜定宇(2000),華人組織中的主管忠誠:主位與客位概念對員工效能的效果,本土心理學研究,第14期,pp.65-113。
36.鄭伯壎、謝佩鴛、周麗芳(2002),校長領導作風、上下關係品質及教師角色外行為:轉型式與家長式領導的效果,本土心理學研究,第17期,pp.105-161。
37.鄭彩鳳、吳慧君(2006),主管家長式領導與行政人員自我效能、組織承諾及工作滿意度關係之研究:結構方程模式之應用,教育與心理研究,第29卷第1期,pp.47-75。
38.謝金青(2003),家長式領導風格內涵之理解與分析,第二屆教育領導與發展學術研討會,輔仁大學。
39.謝金青(2004),跨文化的領導觀點-家長式領導的概念與回顧,教育研究月刊,119期,pp.41-51。
40.顏碧仁(2003),中階主管績效表現與組織經營績效之探討,中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
41.魏子雲(1992),壽險業務人員個人知覺及人格特質與績效間關係之探討,私立中原大學企業研究所碩士論文。
42.蘇國楨、陳榮德(2003),服務業主管領導行為、組織文化和領導效能之研究,人力資源管理學報,3(4),65-91。
43.蘇義祥(1998),中華電信專戶服務部門領導型態與工作機關係之研究:服務人員特質及成熟度的調節作用,國立中山大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。

二、英文文獻

1.Bass, B. M, & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1). 112-122.
2.Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1995). Leaders: the strategies for taking charge. N.Y., Harper & Row.
3.Black, J. S. & Gregersen, H. B. (1997). Participative decision-making: an integration of multiple dimensions. Human Relations, 50(7). 859-878.
4.Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.). Personnel selection in organization. 71-98. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.Borman, W. C. & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: the meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2). 99-109.
6.Brouthers, K. D. (2002). Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2). 203-223.
7.Burress, M. A. (1996). The relationship between team leader behaviors and team performance and satisfaction. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of North Texas.
8.Brown, S. P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2). 235-255.
9.Campbell, J. P. (1970). Managerial behavior performance and effectiveness. N.Y.: McGraw-Hill.
10.Chakravarthy, B. (1986). Measuring strategic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(5). 437-458.
11.Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses:Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7. 89-117.
12.Chou, L. F., Cheng, B. S., & Jen, C. K. (2005). The contingent model of paternalistic leadership: Subordinate dependence and leader competence. Paper Presented at 2005 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. Hawaii, U.S.A.
13.Davies, B. (1997). Rethinking the educational context: a reengineering approach. In B. Davies, and L. Ellison, (Eds.). School leadership for the 21st century: A competency and knowledge approach (36-53). London: Routledge.
14.Dalton, D. R., Todor, W. D., Spendolini, M. J., Fielding G. J. and Porter, L. W. (1980). Organizational structure and performance: a critical review. Academy of Management Review, 5. 49-64.
15.Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). The moderating role of individual differences in the relation between transformational/ transactional leadership perceptions and organizational identification. The Leadership Quarterly, 16. 569-589.
16.Farh, J. L., Leung, F. & Law, K. (1998). On the cross-cultural validity of Holland’s model of vocational choices in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52. 425-440.
17.Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A culture analysis of paternalistic leadership in chinese organization, In J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui, & E. Weldon (Eds.). Management and Organizations in the Chinese context. 84-130, London: Macmillan.
18.Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B., & Organ, D. W. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior in the People's Republic of China. Organization Science, 15. 241-253.
19.Fournet, G. P., Distefano, M. K. Jr., & Pryer, M. W. (1996). Job satisfaction, issues, and problems. Personnel Psychology, 19. 165-183.
20.French, C, and Seward, F. (1983). Impetus for action: a cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in society. Administrative Science Quarterly. 421-434
21.Gatewood, R. D., & Field, H. S. (1998). Human Resource Selection (4th ed.). New York: the Dryden Press, Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
22.Graen, G., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role making model of leadership in formal organizations: A development approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.). Leadership frontier. (143-165). OH: Kent State University Press.
23.Hamilton, G. G. (1990). Patriarchy, patrimonialism, and filial piety: a comparison of China and Western Europe. British Journal of Sociology, 41 (1). 77-104.
24.Ho, D. Y. F. (1994). Filial piety, authoritarian moralism, and cognitive conservatism in Chinese societies. Genetic. Social and General Psychology Monographs, 120. 347-65.
25.Hofstede G. H., & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucius connection: from cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16 (4). 4-21.
26.Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage.
27.Hoppock, R. (1935). Job Satisfactory. NY: Happer & Row.
28.House, R. J. & Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business, 3. 81-98.
29.House, R. J., Filley, A. C. & Kerr S. (1971). Relation of leader consideration and initiating structure to R & D subordinate’s satisfaction. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16. 19-30.
30.House, R. J., Wright, N. S., & Aditya, R. N. (1997). Corss-cultural research on organizational leadership: a critical analysis and a proposed theory, In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.). New Perspectives on International Industrial/ Organizational Psychology. 535-625.
31.Hui, C. H. (1992). Values and attitudes, In R. I. Westwood (Ed). Organizational Behavior: Southeast Asian Perspective. Hong Kong, 63-92.
32.Hui, C & Graen, G.(1997). Guanxi and professional leadership in contemporary sino-american join ventures in Mainland China. Leadership Quarterly, 8(4). 451-465.
33.Jamal, M., (1990). Relationship of job stress and type-a behavior to employees’ job satisfaction. Organizational Commitment, Psychosomatic Health Problems, and Turnover Motivation, Human Relations, 43. 727-738.
34.Kalleberg, A.L. (1997). Work value and job rewards: a theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42. 124-143.
35.Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9. 131-146.
36.Korman, A. (1977). Organization Behavior, Englewood Cliffs. N. J: Prentice Hall, Inc.
37.Lee, H. L., J. A. Jacko, et al. (1999). Shared supply chain info leads to efficiencies. IEE Solutions: 10.
38.Levine, D. U.(1992). An interpretive review of US. research and practice dealing with unusually effective schools. In D. Reynolds & P. Cuttance (Eds.). School effectiveness: Research, policy and practice. (25-47). London: Villiers House.
39.Petty, M. M. & Bruning, N. S. (1980). A comparison of relationships between subordinates' perceptions of supervisory behavior and measures of subordinates; job satisfaction for male and female leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 23(4). 717-725.
40.Price (1997). Handbook of organizational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18. 303-558 (480).
41.Pye, L. W. (1981). Dynamics of Chinese politics. Cambridge, MA: OG & H.
42.Pye, L. W. (1985). Asia power and politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43.Redding, S. G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. N.Y.: Walter de Gruyter.
44.Robbins, S. P. (1998). Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies, applications (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
45.Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational behavior. Landon: Prentice Hall International.
46.Schermerhorm. J. R. (1999). Management for Productivity. 3rd Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
47.Shore, L. M. & Thornton III, G. C. (1986). Effects of gender on self and supervisory ratings. Academy of Management Journal, 29. 115-129.
48.Silin, R. H. (1976). Leadership and value: The organization of large-scale Taiwan enterprises. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
49.Szilagyi, A. D. & Keller, R. T. (1976). A comparative investigation of the supervisory behavior description questionnaire and the revised leader behavior description questionnaire. Academy of Management Journal, 19(4). 642-649.
50.Smith, P. B., & Bond, M. H. (1993). Social psychology across cultures: Analysis and perspectives. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
51.Smith, R. J. (1994). China’s cultural heritage: The Qing dynasty. 1644-1912. Colorado: Westview.
52.Sloma, R. S. (1980). How to Measure Managerial Performance. Macmillan P. C., 66-89.
53.Staw, B. M. (1991). Dressing up like an organization: when psychological theories can explain organizational action. Journal of Management, 17. 805-819.
54.Stogdill, R. (1974). Handbook of leadership. N.Y., Free.
55.Venkatraman, N. & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance on strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4). 801-814.
56.Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
57.Westwood, R. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: the cultural basis for paternalistic headship among the overseas Chinese. Organization Studies, 18 (3). 445-480.
58.Westwood, R. I., & Chan, A. (1992). Headship and leadership, In R. I. Westwood (Ed.). Organizational Behavior: A Southeast Asian Perspective. Hong Kong: Longman.
59.Willian, B., & Mckinnon, S. (1992). Performance evaluation and manager’s descriptions of tasks and activities. Performance measurement, evaluation, and incentive. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
60.Yousef, D. A. (2000). Organizational commitment as a mediator of the relationship between Islamic work ethic and attitudes toward organizational change. Human Relations, 53(4). 513-37.

三、其他

1.行政院教育改革審議委員會(簡稱教改會) (1996),教育改革總諮議報告書,http://www.sinica.edu.tw/info/edu-reform/farea2/tsy-all_members.html。
2.行政院教育部(2008),歷年校數、教師、職員、班級、學生及畢業生數(39~96 學年度),http://www.edu.tw/statistics/content. aspx? site_content _sn=8869
3.行政院衛生署(2008),人口統計概況,http://www.doh.gov.tw/CHT2006/DM/ DM2_2.aspx?now_fod_list_no=10338&class_no=440&level_no=3。
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2010-07-23起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2011-07-23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