本研究以電信公司之397位第一線服務人員為對象，探討電信第一線服務人員對於員工知覺組織推行高績效工作系統、主管與部屬交換與員工對組織的情感性承諾間之關係。以員工知覺組織推行高績效工作系統為自變項，員工對組織的情感性承諾為之依變項，並以主管與部屬交換為中介變項，以檢驗主管與部屬交換對員工知覺組織推行高績效工作系統及員工對組織的情感性承諾之間具中介效果，人口統計變項透過T檢定及ANOVA分析。本研究採用問卷調查法收集資料。為避免出現共同方法變異問題，本研究區分二階段進行資料蒐集。
研究結果發現，第一線服務人員知覺高績效工作系統的認知與主管與部屬交換具有正向影響關係，主管與部屬交換對員工對組織的情感性承諾具有正向影響關係，主管與部屬交換在員工知覺組織推行高績效工作系統與情感性承諾關係之間具有中介效果。而人口統計變項ANOVA分析在區域別顯示北區員工高於中區及南區員工認知對推行高績效工作系統和主管與部屬交換滿意程度較高，組織系統組織文化是會影響主管及員工的行為，於情感性承諾的過程表現出對組織有情感上的依附。 顯示本研究之員工知覺公司透過高績效工作系統的實施，經由主管與部屬交換，進而增進員工的情感性承諾。最後，本研究根據研究結果提出一些結論與建議，供本研究之公司作為經營管理的參考。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among high performance work system (HPWS), Leader-member Exchange (LMX), and Employee's Affective Commitment. Data was collected along with a 2- phase questionnaire, which were filled out by first-line servicing employee, with a total of 397 valid samples. In phase I analyzed high performance work system measurement result, phase II started 2 weeks after phase I questionnaire in order to prevent common method variance, which collected leader-member exchange and employee’s affective commitment.
The results showed that the high performance work systems positively relate to leader-member exchange, leader-member exchange has a positive effect on affective commitment, leader-member exchange is a mediator between high-performance work system and affective commitment. Finally, some implications based on this study conclusion.

目錄
論文審定書 i
中文摘要 ii
ABSTRACT iii
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 4
第三節 研究流程 5
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 高績效工作系統之探討 7
第二節 主管與部屬交換之探討 10
第三節 情感性承諾之探討 12
第四節 各構面間關係之探討 13
第三章 研究設計 16
第一節 研究架構與假設 16
第二節 研究對象與資料蒐集方法 18
第三節 資料處理分析方法 21
第四節 因素分析與效度分析 24
第五節 研究變項的操作型定義與衡量 26
第四章 實證分析與結果 34
第一節 研究構面基本特性資料分析 34
第二節 構面之間的關聯性分析 40
第三節 變異數分析 43
第四節 構面整體模式分析 47
第五節 研究假設與實證結果 53
第五章 結果與建議 54
第一節 研究結論 54
第二節 管理意涵 57
第三節 研究限制與建議 61
參考文獻 62
一、 中文部份 62
二、 英文部份 63
附錄 68

一、 中文部份
1. 高希均、石滋宜（1997）。《競爭力手冊》。台北：天下遠見出版社。
2. 王淑貞（1999），新進人員角色期望對其工作行為之影響--並檢驗與主管關係及 與同事關係干擾效果，中央大學人力資源管理研究所未出版之碩士論文。
3. 黃家齊 (2002)，人力資源管理活動認知與員工態度、績效之關聯性差異分析－心理契約 與社會交換觀點，管理評論，21(4)，101-127。
4. 鍾娉華 (2006)，人力資源管理措施之絕對員工工作績效之影響－工作投入及組織承諾之中介效果分析，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
5. 李冠群 (2012)，高績效工作系統、員工知覺組織支持及員工工作轉換意圖之關係，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所之碩士論文。
6. 朱正國(2011)，「領導者-成員交換關係(LMX)對工作滿足及員工創造力之影響」，成功大學高階管理碩士在職專班(EMBA)學位論文。
7. 陳詠晴(2014)，高績效工作系統對員工創造力與順從行為之影響—社會交換觀點之中介效果，國立中正大學勞工關係學系暨研究所之碩士論文。
8. 吳萬益、林清河 (2000)，企業研究方法，華泰圖書。
9. 蕭文龍（2007）。多變量分析最佳入門實用書：SPSS＋LISREL（SEM）。台北：碁峰。
二、 英文部份
1. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and application. Thousand Oaks.
2. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage.Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
3. Barney, J. B., & Hesterly, W. S. (2008). Strategic management and competitive advantage: concepts and cases. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
4. Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial implications. In Research in personnel and human resource management.
5. Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., & Ulrich, D. (2001). The HR scorecard: Linking people, strategy, and performance. Harvard Business Press.
6. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Transaction Publishers.
7. Bloodgood, James M., and Jeffrey P. Katz. "Manufacturing capacity, market share, and competitiveness." Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal 14.1/2 (2004): 60-71.
8. Cole, M. S., Schaninger, W. S., & Harris, S. G. (2002). The workplace social exchange network a multilevel, conceptual examination. Group & Organization Management, 27(1), 142-167.
9. Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational behavior and human performance,13(1), 46-78.
10. Delery, J. E. (1998). Issues of fit in strategic human resource management: Implications for research. Human resource management review, 8(3), 289-309.
11. Deluga, R. J. (1994). Supervisor trust building, leader‐member exchange and organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67(4), 315-326.
12. Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model ofleadership: A critique and further development. Academy of management review, 11(3), 618-634.
13. Erdogan, B., Liden, R. C., & Kraimer, M. L. (2006). Justice and leader-member exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 395-406.
14. Evans, W. R., & Davis, W. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and organizational performance: The mediating role of internal social structure.Journal of management, 31(5), 758-775.
15. Farias, G. F., & Varma, A. (1998). Research update: High performance work systems: What we know and what we need to know. People and Strategy,21(2), 50.
16. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The leadership quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
17. Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence from New Zealand. Academy of management Journal,44(1), 180-190.
18. Hailey, V. H., Farndale, E., & Truss, C. (2005). The HR department's role in organisational performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 15(3), 49-66.
19. Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of management journal, 38(3), 635-672.
20. Jiang, K. (2013). Bridging the gap between reality and perception: managers’ role in shaping employee perceptions of high performance work systems(Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University-Graduate School-New Brunswick).
21. Kline, R. B. (1998). Software review: Software programs for structural equation modeling: Amos, EQS, and LISREL. Journal of psychoeducational assessment, 16(4), 343-364.
22. Lawler, E. E., & Mohrman, S. A. (2003). HR as a strategic partner: What does it take to make it happen?. Human Resource Planning, 26(3), 15-29.
23. Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization. Administrative science quarterly, 370-390.
24. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitudinal study on the early development of leader-member exchanges. Journal of applied psychology, 78(4), 662.
25. Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. Research in personnel and human resources management, 15, 47-120.
26. Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionafity of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of management, 24(1), 43-72.
27. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of applied psychology,85(3), 407.
28. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological methods, 7(1), 83-104.
29. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human resource management review, 1(1), 61-89.
30. Meyer, J. P., & Smith, C. A. (2000). HRM practices and organizational commitment: Test of a mediation model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue canadienne des sciences de l'administration, 17(4), 319-331.
31. Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human resource management review, 11(3), 299-326.
32. Mohamed, F., Taylor, G. S., & Hassan, A. (2006). Affective commitment and intent to quit: The impact of work and non-work related issues. Journal of Managerial Issues, 512-529.
33. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkage: The Psychology of Commitment Absenteeism and Turnover.
34. Moynihan, R., CG, P., Heath, I., & Henry, D. (2002). Selling sickness: the pharmaceutical industry and disease mongering Commentary: Medicalisation of risk factors. Bmj, 324(7342), 886-891.
35. Munch, R. 1993, Sociological Theory: From the 1850s to the Present, Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers.
36. Nunnally, J.C., (1978), Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.
37. Osterman, P. (1994). Supervision, discretion, and work organization. The American Economic Review, 380-384.
38. Pfeffer, J. L. (1998). Seven practices of successful organizations. California Management Review, 40(2), 96-124.
39. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
40. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 36(4), 717-731.
41. Soens, N., Buyens, D., & Taylor, M. S. (2012). Linking HR and Line Agents’ Implementation of High-Performance Work Systems to Intentions to Leave and Job Performance: A Social Exchange Perspective (No. 12/785). Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
42. Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1983). Employee commitment to organizations.Motivation and work behavior, 99, 441-451.
43. Sun, L. Y., Aryee, S., & Law, K. S. (2007). High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behavior, and organizational performance: A relational perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 558-577.
44. Tomer, J. F. (2001). Understanding high-performance work systems: the joint contribution of economics and human resource management. The Journal of socio-economics, 30(1), 63-73.
45. Vandenberg, R. J., Richardson, H. A., & Eastman, L. J. (1999). The impact of high involvement work processes on organizational effectiveness a second-order latent variable approach. Group & Organization Management, 24(3), 300-339.
46. Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' performance and organizational citizenship behavior.Academy of management Journal, 48(3), 420-432.
47. Way, S. A. (2002). High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of firm performance within the US small business sector. Journal of management, 28(6), 765-785.
48. Wayne, S. J., Coyle-Shapiro, J. A.-M., Eisenberger, R., Liden, R. C.,Rousseau, D. M., & Shore, L. M. (2009). Social influences. In H. J.Klein, T. E. Becker, & J. P. Meyer (Eds.), Commitment in organizations:Accumulated wisdom and new directions,253–284. New York, NY:Taylor & Francis.
49. Whitener, E. M. (2001). Do “high commitment” human resource practices affect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linear modeling. Journal of management, 27(5), 515-535.
50. Wright, P. M., & McMahan, G. C. (1992). Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. Journal of management, 18(2), 295-320.
51. Yukl, G., O'Donnell, M., & Taber, T. (2009). Influence of leader behaviors on the leader-member exchange relationship. Journal of Managerial Psychology,24(4), 289-299.
52. Zacharatos, A., Barling, J., & Iverson, R. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and occupational safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 77.
53. Zaleska, K. J., & de Menezes, L. M. (2007). Human resources development practices and their association with employee attitudes: Between traditional and new careers. Human relations, 60(7), 987-1018.