論文名稱：變動薪資、風險偏好與薪資滿足對員工工作態度之影響
校所：國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所
畢業時間及提要別：九十七年度第二學期碩士學位論文提要
論文頁數：94頁
研 究 生：王鵬淑（Peng-Su Wang）
指導教授：辛炳隆（Ping-Lung Hsin）、陳世哲（Shyh-Jer Chen）

論文提要內容：
一套設計優良的薪酬制度將會影響員工的工作動機，並進而反映在員工的工作表現上。從期望理論的角度不難了解，若員工之獎酬制度能與績效制度相結合，將可激勵員工努力工作，藉由創造良好的績效，進而獲取較佳的報酬。亦即企業運用具有激勵性質的薪酬制度來激勵員工，那麼員工的行為將會因受到肯定而持續表現出優良的績效，這樣的結果將有助於組織績效的提升。
過去已有許多關於不同薪資制度影響薪資滿足與員工工作態度的研究分析，但少有探討因員工個人風險偏好不同，對薪資滿足所產生的干擾效果。本研究就員工薪資滿足找出衡量指標，並探究變動薪資在員工個人不同的風險偏好傾向差異下，對其薪資滿意度與工作態度的影響。

經由實證分析後發現：
1. 組織實施變動薪資制度會對薪資滿足產生影響。薪資隨績效變動的幅度愈大，則員工對薪資滿足的程度就愈強。
2. 變動薪資對薪資滿足的影響，不會因員工個人風險偏好不同而有所差異。由於各個企業擬訂之薪資績效辦法不一，故本研究推論：若員工未知覺變動薪資制度將帶來薪資減少的風險，或視其為一種誘因機制，則不會因風險偏好差異與變動薪資的交互作用，而對薪資滿足有干擾影響。
3. 薪資滿足會影響員工工作態度。薪資滿足增加幅度愈大，則員工的組織承諾和工作投入就愈強。
4. 變動薪資會透過薪資滿足間接影響員工工作態度。薪資隨績效變動的幅度增加對組織承諾和工作投入的影響，需部份透過薪資滿足的中介效果。

關鍵字：變動薪資、風險偏好、薪資滿足、組織承諾、工作投入

Abstract
A well designed salary system can influence employee’s work motivation and will reflect on their work performance. It would not be difficult to understand, based on the theory of expectancy, a linkage between reward and performance will motivate employee to work harder, and from which to create good performance and in turn to receive better rewards. That is to say a business which adopts an incentive reward system to motivate employee will receive better performance from them in a consistent manner and the end result is to improve the performance of the organization.
In the past, there have been many researches on influence of salary system on pay satisfaction and working attitude of employee, but few has studied differences in individual risk preference which can interfere with pay satisfaction and to explore differences in risk preference of employee, the effect of variable pay on pay satisfaction and working attitudes.
Through empirical analyses, it was found that:
1. In an organization, an implementation of variable pay system will affect pay satisfaction. As salary links more closely with performance, employee’s pay satisfaction increases.
2. The impact of variable pay on pay satisfaction is not influenced by individual risk preference. Due to differences in salary system to motivate employee, in the business this study concludes if employee is unaware of risk or incentive that is structured in the salary system, then there will be not interaction between difference in risk preference and variable pay system, and will also have no impact on salary satisfaction.
3. Pay satisfaction will have an effect on work attitude of employee. The higher the pay satisfaction, the stronger the organization commitment and job involvement by the employee.
4. Through pay satisfaction, variable pay will indirectly affect employee’s work attitude. A reflection on organizational commitment and job involvement due to salary variable as a result of performance change in part must pass through the intermediate effect of pay satisfaction.

Keywords: variable pay, risk preferences, pay satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement

目 錄

第一章 緒論
第一節 研究背景與動機 ----------------------------------------- 1
第二節 研究目的 ----------------------------------------------- 2
第三節 研究流程 ----------------------------------------------- 2

第二章 文獻探討
第一節 變動薪資對員工工作態度的影響 --------------------------- 4
第二節 變動薪資對薪資滿足的影響 ------------------------------ 10
第三節 風險偏好的干擾效果 ------------------------------------ 16
第四節 薪資滿足對員工工作態度的影響 -------------------------- 21

第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究架構 ---------------------------------------------- 28
第二節 研究假設 ---------------------------------------------- 29
第三節 研究變項操作型定義與測量工具 -------------------------- 32
第四節 研究對象及資料蒐集 ------------------------------------ 36
第五節 資料分析方法 ------------------------------------------ 37

第四章 實證分析與討論
第一節 樣本敘述性統計分析 ------------------------------------ 39
第二節 信度分析 ---------------------------------------------- 42
第三節 相關分析 ---------------------------------------------- 44
第四節 迴歸分析 ---------------------------------------------- 46

第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論 -------------------------------------------------- 73
第二節 管理意涵與建議 ---------------------------------------- 75
第三節 研究限制與後續研究建議 -------------------------------- 77


參考文獻 --------------------------------------------------------- 78
附錄一 問卷 ----------------------------------------------------- 84
附錄二 倂組後之受訪者樣本描述性統計 ----------------------------- 88
附錄三 變動薪資與風險偏好對薪資滿足-薪資水準影響的迴歸分析 ------ 89
附錄四 變動薪資與風險偏好對薪資滿足-福利影響的迴歸分析 ---------- 90
附錄五 變動薪資與風險偏好對薪資滿足-調薪影響的迴歸分析 ---------- 91
附錄六 變動薪資與風險偏好對薪資滿足-制度與管理影響的迴歸分析 ---- 92
附錄七 變動薪資、薪資滿足對組織承諾影響之迴歸分析 --------------- 93
附錄八 變動薪資、薪資滿足對工作投入影響之迴歸分析 --------------- 94

參考文獻
一、中文部份：
王怡堯，1998，製造業員工薪酬制度、薪酬滿足與組織承諾之相關研究，東海大學工業工程研究所碩士論文。
余明助，2004，高科技產業薪資管理、薪資滿意、公平認知與人才吸引和維持效果關係之研究，高應科大人文社會科學學報，第一期，頁213-232。
余慶華，2001，消費金融從業人員之工作投入、工作滿足、薪酬福利與工作績效之相關研究-以高雄地區銀行為例，中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
宋明哲，2001，現代風險管理，台北，五南圖書出版有限公司。
李德玲，1992，企業員工對薪酬制度反應之研究，中國文化大學企業管理研究所未出版之碩士論文。
李元松，1997，績效獎勵制度的相關影響因素及效果研究－以資訊公司為實證對象，中原大學企業管理研究碩士論文。
李培銘，2001，薪資組合與工作投入關係之研究，私立中國文化大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
林長毅，2000，印刷業員工對薪酬制度滿意度及工作投入之研究，華岡印刷傳撥學報，第三十一期：頁97-103。
吳家聲，1989，員工分紅入股制度之探討，勞工行政，16期，台北。
俞文釗，1996，管理心理學，台北，五南出版社。
黃洲煌，2000，個人人格特質、激勵認知、工作態度與組織公民行為之關聯性研究，國立台灣科技大學管理研究所碩士論文。
車龍淵，2001，非營利事業組織中員工工作動機、薪酬滿足、組織文化對組織承諾影響之研究，淡江大學管理科學學系碩士論文。
張旭明，1996，汽車業務人員個人屬性與激勵制度及滿意度之研究，國立台灣科技大學管理技術研究所碩士論文。
張世宗，1998，不同激勵制度對新世代工作族群之激勵效果及對其工作滿足與組織承諾之影響 : 以一電腦製造公司為例，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
張榮利，2000，中鋼與其協力廠商人力彈性運用之研究，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
游宏智，1998，利潤分享制度對員工工作態度影響之研究，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
陳志發，2002，員工股票選擇權滿意度對離職意願、組織承諾關係之研究--以外商高科技公司為例，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
陳芳靖，1994，臨床護理人員薪資滿足之研究-以台南地區綜合醫院為例，東海大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
陳譚、王怡堯，1998，中小企業之薪酬制度與薪酬滿足對組織承諾之影響，東海學報，39：41-56。
陳玫芳，2004，研發人員薪酬獎勵滿意度對組織承諾之關係-以南部科學園區光電產業為例，國立成功大學企業管理學系碩博士班碩士論文。
陳昭儒，2003，工作動機、工作投入與工作績效之關聯性研究－以某鋼鐵公司KT 廠為例，國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
曹國雄，2000，變動式薪資對薪資滿足的影響。中原學報，28，1-11。
蔡蕙鎂，2003，領導型態、激勵制度、人格特質與組織承諾關係之研究─以台灣地區民營銀行為例，逢甲大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
蔡玲玉，1989，薪酬管理制度與勞資關係氣氛之研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
蔡崑源，2001，華進集團員工滿意度、工作投入、組織承諾與離職意願之研究， 國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
湛瑄宇，2000，員工薪資滿足之前因後果之研究，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
許雅棣，2001，主管領導形態、員工人格特質、組織激勵制度與員工工作績效之相關性-以保險業務員為例，國立東華大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
諸承明，1995，薪資設計要素與組織效能關係之研究-以組織特性與任務特性為情境變項。國立台灣大學商學研究所博士論文。

二、英文部分：
Adams, J. S. 1965, Injustice in Social Exchange, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 87-92.
Angle, H. L. & Perry, J. L. 1981, An empirical essessment of organizational commitment and organizational effective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26：1-14.
Argyris, C. 1998, Empowerment: The emperor's new clothes, Harvard Business Review, 76(3)：98-105.
Belcher, J. G. 1994, Gainsharing and variable pay: The state of the art. Compensation & Benefits Review. 26(3)：50-60.
Belcher, J. G. 1996, How to design & implement a results-oriented variable pay system. New York: Amacom.
Berger, C. J. & Schwab, D. P. 1980, Pay incentives and pay satisfaction, Industrial Relaltions, 19：206-211.
Brockhaus, R. H. 1980, Risk-taking propensity of entrepreneurs, Academy of Management Journal, 23：509-520.
Bromiley, P. & Curley, S. 1992, Individual differences in risk taking, In J. F. Yates(ed.), Risk-taking Behavior, 87-132. New York: John Wiley.
Brown, S. P. 1996, A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2)：235-255.
Brown, D. 2002, Bonus and variable pay: lessons from the U.K. Compensation & Benefits Review, 34(6)：24-31.
Delaney, J. T. & Huselid, M. A. 1996, The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4)：949-969.
Deshpande, S. P. 1996, The impact of ethical climate types on facets of job satisfaction: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(6)：655–660.
Dubin, R. 1956, Industrial work’s worlds: A study of the central life interests of industrial workers, Social Problem, 3：131-142.
Freeman, S. 2001, Upping the stakes. People Management, 7：24-29.
Gerhart, B. & Milkovich, G. 1990, Organizational differences in managerial compensation and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4)：663-691.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R. & Theresa, M. W. 1988, Compensation strategy: An overview and future steps. Human resource Planning, 11(3)：173-189.
Gross, S. E. & Bacher, J. P. 1993, The new variable pay programs: How some succeed, why some don’t? Compensation and Benefits Review, 25(1)：51-57.
Heneman, R. L. 1984, Pay for Performance: Exploring the Merit System, Pergamon Press, New York.
Heneman III, H. G. & Schwab, D. P. 1985, Pay satisfaction: Its multidimensionalnature and measurement, International Journal of Psychology, 20：129-141.
Janis, I. L. & Mann, L. 1977, Decision making, New York: Free Press.
Judge, T. A. 1993, Validity of the dimensions of the pay satisfaction questionnaire: evidence of differential prediction. Personnel Psychology, 46：331-355.
Kanter, R. M. 1987, The attack on pay. Harvard Business Review, 2：60-67.
Kanungo, R. N. 1979, The concepts of alienation and involvement revisited. Psychological Bulletin, 86(1)：119-138.
Kanungo, R. N. 1982, Measurement of Job and Work Involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3)：341-349.
Kogan, N. & Wallach, M. A. 1964, Risk-taking: A Study in cognition and personality, Holt: New York.
Kogan, N. & Wallach, M. A. 1967, Group risk taking as a function of members’ anxiety and defensiveness, Journal of Personality, 3：50-63.
Kuhn, K. M. & Yockey, M. D. 2003, Variable pay as a risky choice: determinants of the relative attractiveness of incentive plans. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90：323-341.
Latham, G. P. & Wexeley, K. N. 1994, Increasing Productivity Through Performance Appraisal, 2nd Edition. Addison-Wesley.
Laurel, R. G. 2002, Organizational commitment across three sectors: Public, non-profit, and for-profit. Public Personnel Management, 31(2):201-211.
Lawler, E. E. III. 1971, Pay and Organizational Effectiveness: A Psychological View, New York : McGraw-Hill.
Lawler, E. E. III. 1981, Pay and Organization Development, Reading, Mass：Addison-Wesley.
Lawler, E. E. III. 1988, Outlook on Compensation and Benefits: Pay for Performance Making it Work. Personnel, 65(10)：68-71.
Lawler, E. E. III. & Hall, D. T. 1970, Relationship of job characteristics to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of applied Psychology, 54(4)：305-312.
Lazear, E. P. 2000, Performance pay and productivity, American Economic Review. 5：1346-1361.
Lippert, R. L. & Porter, G. 1997, Understanding CEO Pay：A test of two pay-to-performance sensitivity measures with alternative measures of alignment and influence, Journal of Business Research, 40(2)：127-138.
Lodahl, T. M. & Kejner, M. 1965, The definition and measurement of job involvement, Journal of Applied Psychology, 49(1)：24-33.
MacCrimmon, K. R. & Wehrung, D. A. 1986, Taking risks: The management of Uncertainty, Free Press: New York.
MacCrimmon, K. R. & Wehrung, D. A. 1990, Characteristics of risk taking executives, Management Science, 36(4)：422-435.
Mathieu, J. E. & Zajac, D. 1990, A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin,：171-194.
Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N. J. 1991, A three component conceptualization of organization : Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-legged relation, Human Resource Management Review, 1(1)：61-89.
Miceli, M. P. & Lane, M. C. 1991, Antecedent of pay satisfaction: A review and extension, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 9：235-309.
Milkovich, G. T. & Newman, J. M. 1999, Compensation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M. & Porter, L. W. 1979, The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14：224-247.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W. & Steers, R. M. 1982, Employee organization linkage: The psychology of commitment absenteeism and turnover, New York: Academic.
Porter, L. W. & Lawler, E. E. 1968, Managerial Attitude and Performance. Homewood, III.:Richard D. Irwin.
Porter, L. W. & Smith, F. J. 1970, The etiology of organizational commitment, unpublished paper, University of California, Irvine.
Randall, D. M. 1990, The consequences of organizational commitment: Methodological investigation, Journal of Organization Behavior, 11(2)：361-378.
Reichers, A. E. 1985, A review and reconceptualization of organization commitment, Academy of Management Review, 10 (3)：465-476.
Risher, H. 1999, Are public employers ready for a “New Pay” program? Public Personnel Management, 28：323-343.
Robinowitz, S., Hall, D. T. & Goodale, J. G. 1977, Job scope and individual differences as predictors of job involvement: independent or interactive? Academy of Management Journal, 20(2), pp.273-281.
Robbins, S. P. 1992, Essentials of Organizational Behavior, Prentice Hall International.
Ritzer, G. & Trice H. M. 1969, An empirical study of Howard Becker‘s Side-bet theory, Social Forces, 47(4)：475-479.
Schuster, J. R. & Zingheim, P. K. 1992, The new pay. New York: Lexington Book.
Sheldon, M. E. 1971, Investments and involvement as mechanisms producing commitment to the organization, Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(2)：143-150.
Sitkin, S. B. & Pablo, A. L. 1992, Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. Academy of Management Review, 17：9-38.
Sitkin, S. B. & Weingart, L. R. 1995, Determinants of risky decision marking behavior: a test of the mediation role of risk perceptions and risk propensity, Academy of Management Journal, 38(6)：1573-1592.
Staw, B. M. 1981, The escalation of commitment to a course of action, Academy of Management Review, 6(4)：577-587.
Steers, R. M. 1977, Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1)：46-56.
Steiner, J., Jarvis, M. & Parrish, J. 1970, Risk Taking and Arousal Regulation, British Journal of Medical Psychology 43：336-344.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. 1992, Advance in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainly. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4)：297-323.
Vroom, V. H. 1964, Work and Motivation, New York：John Wiley.
Weber, E. U., Blais A. R. & Betz E. 2002, A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15：263-290.
Weissenberg, P. & Gruenfeld, L. W. 1966, Relationships among Leadership Dimensions and Cognitive Style, Journal of Applied Psychology, 50(5)： 392-395.