隨著團隊在組織中的運用愈趨普及，如何提升團隊創造力成為近期研究中所關注的焦點。而團隊中的成員來自不同背景、特性等，如何挑選適當的成員組成團隊成為組織所面臨的挑戰。過去研究探討團隊組合時，多數聚焦於團隊人格特質為基礎的研究，且最常使用五大人格特質做為團隊人格特質多元化的基礎，然而過去研究對於團隊人格特質應是相似或是互補較好，仍未有所共識，且團隊人格特質多元化與團隊創造力之間的關係亦不一致，因此本研究整合過去文獻，提出以團隊年資作為干擾變項，探討其是否會對團隊五大人格特質多元化與團隊創造力之關係造成影響。
本研究共回收45份研發團隊問卷，包括234位團隊成員及45位團隊主管，以階層迴歸分析進行假設檢定。研究發現如下：首先，在團隊年資短時，團隊外向性多元化與團隊創造力兩者呈負相關，而當團隊年資較長時，此一關係則會轉為正向。其次，團隊開放性多元化與團隊創造力之間呈正向關係，且此關係不會受到團隊年資的干擾。再者，當團隊年資較短時，團隊盡責性多元化與團隊創造力呈正向關係，然而當團隊年資較長時，此關係則轉變為負向。最後，本研究亦發現團隊盡責性與外向性的平均水準皆與團隊創造力呈正向關係。
根據研究結果，本研究提出具體的管理意涵如下：1. 藉由選派具有新穎創意與穩重保守的成員、或遴選高度盡責性或外向性的成員組成研發團隊，以促進團隊創造力的產生；2.組成長期運作的研發團隊時，可選派較外向活潑及內向的研發人員；但避免讓具責任感與隨性漫不經心的成員共同編組團隊。

The trend of using teams in the organizations raises questions regarding how to select appropriate members for team diversity that can maximize team creativity. Given researchers hold different point of views on how team personality diversity effect team creativity. According to the past research posting the team tenure as a moderating role, so that we examine if team tenure can moderate the relationship between team personality diversity and team creativity.
We tested hypotheses using a sample of 45 R & D teams (including 234 members and 45 team leaders). Hierarchical regression was used to analyze the moderation effect we proposed, and the result shows that team tenure do moderate the relationship between team personality diversity and team creativity: as short team tenure, team extraversion variation will negatively affect team creativity; however, as team tenure getting longer, team extraversion will turn to positively affect team creativity; team openness diversity positively affect team creativity, and the relationship between them would not be moderated by team tenure; the relationship between team conscientiousness variation and team creativity will change from positive to negative as team tenure getting longer from short; last, in this research we found that the mean of team conscientiousness and extraversion positively affect team creativity.

誌謝 i
摘要 ii
英文摘要 iii
圖 次 v
表 次 vi
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 團隊人格特質多元化：相似性與互補性的觀點 5
第二節 團隊人格特質多元化與團隊創造力的關係：團隊年資的干擾效果 6
第三章 研究方法 12
第一節 研究架構與假設 12
第二節 研究對象與施測程序 13
第三節 研究工具與分析方法 15
第四章 研究結果 18
第一節 敘述性統計和變數間相關分析 18
第二節 團隊五大人格特質多元化與團隊創造力之關係 18
第三節 團隊五大人格特質多元化與團隊年資交互作用項對團隊創造力之影響 21
第五章 討論與建議 23
第一節 研究發現與理論貢獻 23
第二節 管理實務意涵 27
第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 28
參考文獻 30
附錄一 38
附錄二 41

中文部分
池進通、李鴻文、陳芬儀 (2008)。五大人格特質與工作績效關係之研究，經營管理論叢，4(2)，1-9。
邱淑妙 (2006)。團隊人格特質、轉換型領導與團隊效能之關係探討—團隊凝聚力之中介角色。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士在職專班碩士論文。
許百琮 (2006)。透過人格特質組合以及工作設計來探討團隊互動以及團隊績效之關係-以學生團隊為例。國立成功大學工業與資訊管理學系碩士論文。
張軒正 (2001)。在電腦施測情境中，促發、警告、時間限制對降低社會期許之效果。國立政治大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
陳彰儀 (2002)。網路應徵者填寫問卷的作假行為：情境因素與測驗類型的影響。國科會專題研究。
黃家齊、許雅婷 (2006)。團隊成員人格特質隊知識分享及創新績效之影響—個人與團隊層次的分析，管理學報，23(2)，149-170。
黃家齊、蔡達人 (2003)。團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新績效，台大管理論叢，13(2)，233-280。
黃瓊億 (2003)。團隊人格特質、團隊運作隊團隊效能的影響。國立中興大學企業管理學系研究所碩士論文。
蔡維奇、紀乃文 (2008)。團隊情感氛圍形成的前因、情境調節及個人層次後果變項之研究，組織與管理，1(1)，1-37。


英文部分
Aiken, L. S. and West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Anderson, P. (Eds.), Research on Managing Groups and Teams. vol.10, 97-124. CT: JAI Press.
Baer, M., Oldham, G. R., Jacobsohn, G. C., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2008). The Personality Composition of Teams and Creativity: The Moderating Role of Team Creative Confidence. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(4), 255-282.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
Barrick, M. R., & Stewart, G. L. (1998). Relating Member Ability and Personality to Work-Team Processes and Team Effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 377-391.
Barry, B., & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition, Process, and Performance in Self-Managed Group: The Role of Personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 62-78.
Bolin, A. U., & Neuman, G. A. (2006). Personality, Process, and Performance in Interactive Brainstorming Groups. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(4), 565-585.
Bond, M. H. & Shui, W. Y. (1997). The relationship between a group's personality resources and the two dimensions of its group process. Small Group Research, 28(2), 194-218.
Buchanan, R. (1996). Branzi’s Dilemma: Design in Contemporary Culture. Design Issues, 14(1), 3-20.
Camacho, L. M., & Paulus, P. B. (1995). The role of social anxiousness in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1071-1080.
Chi, N. W., Huang, Y. M., & Lin, S. C. (2009). A Double-Edged Sword? Exploring the Curvilinear Relationship between Organizational Tenure Diversityand Team Innovation: The Moderating Role of Team-Oriented HR Practices. Group & Organization Management, 34, 698-726
Collaros, P. A., & Anderson, L. R. (1969). Effect of perceived expertness upon creativity of members of brainstorming groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 159-163.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NEO Five-FactorInventory Professional Manual, Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL.
English, A., Griffith, R. L., & Steelman, L. A. (2004). Team Performance - The effect of Team Conscientiousness and Task Type. Small Group Research, 35(6), 643-665.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality Psychology in Europe, Vol. 7 (pp. 7-28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Goodman, P. S., & Leyden, D. P. (1991). Familiarity and Group Productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(4), 578-586.
Hair, J. F. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis (4th ed.). Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Halfhill, T., Sundstrom, E., Lahner, J., Calderone, W., & Nielsen, T.M. (2005). Group personality compostion and group effectiveness: an integrative review of emperical research. Small Group Research, 36(1), 83-105.
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond Relational Demography: Time and The Effects of Surface- and Deep-Level Diversity on Work Group Cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 96-107.
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, Teams, and Task Performance: Changing Effects of Surface- and Deep-Level Diversity on Group Functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1029-1045.
Harrison, D. A., Mohammed, S., McGrath, J. E., Florey, A. T., & Vanderstoep, S. V. (2003). Time matters in team performance: Effects of member familiarity, entrainment, and task discontinuity on speed and quality. Personnel Psychology, 56, 663–669.
Hirst, G. (2009). Effects of membership change on open discussion and team performance: The moderating role of team tenure. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(2), 231-249.
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (1991). Personality and status. In D. G. Gilbert & J. J. Connolly (Eds.), Personality, social skills, and psychopathology: An individual differences approach (pp. 137–154). New York: Plenum Press.
Humphrey, S. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Meyer, C. J., Ilgen, D. R. (2007). Trait Configurations in Self-Managed Teams: A Conceptual Examination of the Use of Seeding for Maximizing and Minimizing Trait Variance in Teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 885-892.
George, J. M. & King, E. B. (2007). "Chapter 5 Potential Pitfalls of Affect Convergence in Teams: Functions and Dysfunctions of Group Affective Tone". Vol. Iss: 10, pp.97 – 123.
Kichuk, S. L., & Wiesner, W. H. (1997). The Big Five personality factors and team performance: implications for selecting successful product design teams. Journal of ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT JET-M, 14, 195-221.
Kristof-Brown, A., Barrick, M. R., & Stevens, C. K. (2005). When Opposites Attract: A Multi-Sample Demonstration of Complementary PersonTeam Fit on Extraversion. Journal of Personality, 73 (4), 935-958.
LePine, J.A., Hollenbeck, J.R., Ilgen, D.R. & Hedlund, J. (1997). Effects of individual differences on the performance of hierarchical decision making teams: much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 803–11.
Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241-270.
Mazur, A. (1973). A cross-species comparison of status in small established groups. American Sociological Review, 38, 513–530.
McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, Divergent Thinking, and Openness to Experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258-1265.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1997). Personality Trait Structure as a Human Universal. American Psychologist, 52(5), 509-516.
Mohammed, S., & Angell, L. C. (2003). Personality Heterogeneity in Teams: Which Differences Make a Difference for Team Performance? Small Group Research, 34(6), 651-677.
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–192). New York: Academic Press.
Mulvey, P. W., & Klein, H. J. (1998). The Impact of Perceived Loafing and Collective Efficacy on Group Goal Processes and Group Performance. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74(1), 62-87.
Muchinsky, P. M., & Monahan, C. J. (1987). What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit. Journal of Vocational behaviour,31, 268-277.
Neuman, G. A., Wagner, S. H., & Christiansen, N. D. (1999). The Relationship Between Work-Team Personality Composition and the Job Performance of Teams. Group & Organization Management, 24(1), 28-45.
Neuman, G. A. & Wright, J. (1999). Team Effectiveness: Beyond Skills and Cognitive Ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(3), 376-389.
Pirola-Merlo, A., & Mann, L. (2004). The Relationship Between Individual Creativity and Team Creativity: Aggregating Across People and Time. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 235-257.
Plaks, J. E., & Higgins, E. T. (2000). Pragmatic Use of Stereotyping in Teamwork: Social Loafing and Compensation as Function Inferred Partner-Situation Fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 962-974.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.
Poling, T., Woehr, D. J., Arciniege, L. M., & Gorman, A. (2006). The Impact of Personality and Value Diversity on Team Performance. Proceedings of the 10TH biannual confrence of ISSWOV, Tallin, Estonia.
Prewett, M. S., Walvoord, A. A. G., Stilson, F. R. B., Rossi, M. E., & Brannick, M. T. (2009). The Team Personality-Team Performance Relationship Revisited: The Impact of Criterion Choice, Pattern of Workflow, and Method of Aggregation. Human Performance, 22, 273-296.
Sacket, P. R., & Larson, J. R. (1990). Research strategies and tactics in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 419–489). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Schilpzand, M. C., Herold, D. M., & Shalley, C. E. (2011). Members’ Openness to Experience and Teams’ Creative Performance. Small Group Research, 42(1), 55-76.
Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., & Wienk, J. A. (2003). Diversity and Team outcomes: the moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 779-802.
Shin S. J., & Zhou J. (2007) When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1709-1721.
Simons, T., & Peterson, R. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 102-111.
Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K. P., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work Teams – Applications and Effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45(2), 120-133.
Tsui, A. S. & O'Reilly, C. A. (1989). Beyond Simple Demographical Effects：The Importance of Relational Demography in Superior-Subordinate Dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 402-423.
Tuckman, B. & Jensen, M., (1977). Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited. Group Organization Management. 2, 419-427.
van der Vegt, G. & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint impact of interdependence and group diversity on innovation. Journal of Management, 29(5):729–751.
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008 –1022.
van Knippenberg, D. & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work Group Diversity. Annual Review of Psychology,58: 515-541.
Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, L. K. (1993). Cultural Diversity’s Impact on Interaction Process and Performance: Comparing Homogeneous and Diverse Task Groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 590-602.
West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling Fountains or Stagnant Ponds: An Integrative Model of Creativity and Innovation Implementation in Work Group. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(3), 355-424.
Zenger, T. R., & Lawrence, B. S. (1989). Organizational Demography: The Differential Effects of Age and Tenure Distributions on Technical Communication. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 353-376.