Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0014118-110840 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0014118-110840
論文名稱
Title
以多層次分析探討經理人雙歧在高績效工作系統與其個人創新行為之中介效果
A Multilevel Analysis to Explore the Mediation Effect of Manager’s Ambidexterity between High-Performance Work System and Their Individual Innovation Behaviors
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
80
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2018-01-08
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2018-01-14
關鍵字
Keywords
經理人雙歧、個人創新行為、高績效工作系統
High-Performance Work System, HPWS, Manager’s Ambidexterity, Individual Innovation Behaviors
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5882 次,被下載 538
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5882 times, has been downloaded 538 times.
中文摘要
在全球化、企業國際化的背景下,市場的競爭日益激烈。因此,為了維持競爭優勢、創造利益而永續發展,創新成為現今企業不可忽視的議題。而創新的核心之一為人,企業創新的達成有一部分乃源自於內部人力創新行為的產生。其中尤為重要的為企業的經理人,經理人對於企業與員工皆發揮著不可忽視的影響力。此外,高績效工作系統被視為一套完整的人力資源管理實務,因此如何藉由有效的人力資源管理來強化企業本身競爭力而達成創新亦具備不可忽視的重要性。有鑑於此,本研究試圖探討企業如何藉由高績效工作系統強化企業內部經理人的創新行為,並且深入探討經理人雙歧性(雙元性) 在其中的中介效果。本研究假設採用高績效工作系統會正向影響經理人創新行為,與此同時,高績效工作系統亦會增強經理人雙歧性,進而而達成經理人創新行為的展現。
本研究使用跨層次階層迴歸分析,結果顯示本研究假設皆成立。研究結果發現: 1.高績效工作系統對經理人創新行為有著正向顯著影響; 2.高績效工作系統對於經理人雙歧性有著正向顯著影響: 3.經理人雙歧性對於經理人創新行為有著正向顯著影響; 4.經理人雙歧性對於高績效工作系統與經理人創新行為具部分中介效果。
本研究提出的具體管理意涵為: 1.企業應採用高績效工作系統並且強調如獎酬制度、訓練機制等等以增強經理人之創新行為; 2.企業應藉由高績效工作系統建立有益於發展經理人雙歧性之情境。
Abstract
Under the background of globalization and the mobile environment nowadays, the competition are more intense. Therefore, in order to stay competitive and to be sustainable, innovation has become the assignable issue for corporates. One of the core concepts of innovation is people, the goal of innovation is reached through individual innovative behaviors. Along with this, managers within business are of no negligence since they hold a great influence to both the business and employees. Other than that, HPWS has been seen as an integrated HR practices that has been widely discussed over the past.
Thus, how can corporates reach the goal of innovation through manager’s innovative behaviors that is caused by effective HR practices is critical. In sight of this, this study presents a comprehensive examination of the effect that HPWS holds toward manager’s innovative behaviors, and also the mediating effect of manager’s ambidexterity.
This study adopted hierarchical linear model regression analysis and the results indicated that our hypotheses are valid. In sum, this study exposes:
1. HPWS holds a positive and significant effect to manager’s innovative behavior.
2. HPWS holds a positive and significant effect to manager’s ambidexterity
3. Manager’s ambidexterity holds a positive and significant effect on a manager’s
innovative behavior.
4. Manager’s ambidexterity has a partially mediating effect between HPWS and manager’s innovative behavior.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書………………………………………………………………..i
Chinese Abstract………………………………………………………...ii
Abstract ………………………………………………………………....iii
1. Introduction............................................................................ 1
2. Literature Review....................................................................4
2.1 Innovative Behavior................................................................4
2.1.1 The concept and definitions of innovation.......4
2.1.2 The levels of innovation and influential factors 7
2.1.3 Individual innovative behavior 9
2.2 High Performance Work System (HPWS) 11
2.2.1 The evolution of HPWS 12
2.2.2 The definitions and implications of HPWS 13
2.2.2.1 The definition of HPWS 14
2.2.2.2 The implications of HPWS 15
2.2.3 The Factors of HPWS 18
2.2.4 The relationship between HPWS and individual innovative behavior 21
2.3 Ambidexterity 22
2.3.1 Organizational Ambidexterity 22
2.3.2 Perspectives of Organizational Ambidexterity 25
2.3.3 Manager’s Ambidexterity 26
2.3.4 The relationship between HPWS and manager’s ambidexterity 28
2.3.5 The Role of Mediation of Manager’s ambidexterity 29
3. Methodology 31
3.1 Research Framework 31
3.2 Research Variable and Measures 32
3.3 Samples and Procedures 37
3.3.1 Samples 37
3.3.2 Procedure 38
3.3.3 Descriptive Statistics 39
3.3.4 Data Analysis 43
4. Results 44
4.1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis 44
4.2 Variance within and between group 46
4.3 Hypothesis Testing 46
5. Conclusions and Implications 50
5.1 Conclusions 50
5.2 Practical Implications 53
5.3 Limitations & Future Research 55
References 57
Appendix: Questionnaire 69
參考文獻 References
Chinese References
林義屏、黃俊英、董玉娟 (2004)。市場導向、組織學習、組織創新與組織績效間關係之研究:以科學園區資訊電子產業為例。管理評論,23(1),101-134。
溫玲玉、陳明輝 (2008)。組織創新氣候與員工敬業貢獻度對個人創新行為影響之 研究。
閻亮、白少君 (2016)。高績效工作系統與員工創新行為-個人感知視角的影響機制。科技進步與對策,33(20),134-139。
蘇中興、張雨婷、曾湘泉 (2015)。 組織創新戰略如何轉化為員工創新行為?中國人民大學學報,(5)
English References
Abernathy, W. (1978). The productivity dilemma. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of personality and social psychology, 45(2), 357.
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. Academy of management journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
Amabile, T. M., & Fisher, C. M. (2000). Stimulate creativity by fueling passion. Handbook of principles of organizational behavior, 331, 341.
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717.
Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K., & Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state‐of‐the‐science. Journal of organizational Behavior, 25(2), 147-173.
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.
Arthur, J. B. (1992). The link between business strategy and industrial relations systems in American steel minimills. ILR Review, 45(3), 488-506.
Appelbaum, E. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high-performance work systems pay off. Cornell University Press.
Baird, L., & Meshoulam, I. (1988). Managing two fits of strategic human resource management. Academy of Management review, 13(1), 116-128.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Baron, R. A., & Tang, J. (2011). The role of entrepreneurs in firm-level innovation: Joint effects of positive affect, creativity, and environmental dynamism. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1), 49-60.
Becker, B., & Gerhart, B. (1996). The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: Progress and prospects. Academy of management journal, 39(4), 779-801.
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.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of management review, 28(2), 238-256.
Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). Building an ambidextrous organisation.
Bonesso, S., Gerli, F., & Scapolan, A. (2014). The individual side of ambidexterity: do individuals’ perceptions match actual behaviors in reconciling the exploration and exploitation trade-off?. European Management Journal, 32(3), 392-405.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2007). High‐performance work systems and organisational performance: Bridging theory and practice. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 261-270.
Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2009). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781-796.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128-152.
Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high‐performance work practices matter? A meta‐analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Personnel psychology, 59(3), 501-528.
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of management journal, 34(3), 555-590.
Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human resource management and labor productivity: does industry matter?. Academy of management Journal, 48(1), 135-145.
Dawes, J. (2008). Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used. International journal of market research, 50(1), 61-77.
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.
Delery, J. E. (1998). Issues of fit in strategic human resource management: Implications for research. Human resource management review, 8(3), 289-309.
Delery, J. E., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). The strategic management of people in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and extension. In Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 165-197). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Drucker, P. F., & Noel, J. L. (1986). Innovation and Entrepreneurship: practices and principles. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 34(1), 22-23.
Drucker, P. (2014). Innovation and entrepreneurship. Routledge.
Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The management of organization, 1, 167-188.
Edwards, P., & Wright, M. (2001). High-involvement work systems and performance outcomes: the strength of variable, contingent and context-bound relationships. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(4), 568-585.
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of personality and social psychology, 81(4), 728.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Brown, S. L. (1998). Competing on the edge: Strategy as structured chaos. Long Range Planning, 31(5), 786-789.
Farr, J. L., & West, M. A. (Eds.). (1990). Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies. Wiley.
Fey, C. F., Björkman, I., & Pavlovskaya, A. (2000). The effect of human resource management practices on firm performance in Russia. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(1), 1-18.
Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of management review, 25(1), 154-177.
Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. Academy of Management review, 21(4), 1112-1142.
Gaynor, G. (2002). Innovation by design: what it takes to keep your company on the cutting edge. Amacom.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update. wps. ablongman. com/wps/media/objects/385. George 4answers pdf.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of management Journal, 47(2), 209-226.
Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451-495.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of management journal, 49(4), 693-706.
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence from New Zealand. Academy of management Journal, 44(1), 180-190.
Hayes, R. H., & Abernathy, W. J. (2007). Managing our way to economic decline. Harvard Business Review, 85(7-8).
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization science, 15(4), 481-494.
Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., & Zhou, J. (2009). A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of management journal, 52(2), 280-293.
Hoque, K. (1999). Human resource management and performance in the UK hotel industry. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 37(3), 419-443.
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.
Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. (1997). The effects of human resource management practices on productivity: A study of steel finishing lines. The American Economic Review, 291-313.
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1995). Understanding human resource management in the context of organizations and their environments. Annual review of psychology, 46(1), 237-264.
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.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of management Journal, 55(6), 1264-1294.
Torres, J. P., Drago, C., & Aqueveque, C. (2015). Knowledge inflows effects on middle managers’ ambidexterity and performance. Management Decision, 53(10), 2303-2320.
Kang, S. C., & Snell, S. A. (2009). Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous learning: a framework for human resource management. Journal of Management Studies, 46(1), 65-92.
King, N., & Anderson, N. (1995). Innovation and change in organizations. Routledge.
Kleysen, R. F., & Street, C. T. (2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovative behavior. Journal of intellectual Capital, 2(3), 284-296.
Kobarg, S., Wollersheim, J., Welpe, I. M., & Spörrle, M. (2017). Individual ambidexterity and performance in the public sector: a multilevel analysis. International Public Management Journal, 20(2), 226-260.
Kochan, T., & Osterman, P. (1994). The Mutual Gains Enterprise: Forging a Winning Partnership among Labor, Management and Government (Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press).
Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Academy of Management annals, 4(1), 109-155.
LEFFAKIS, Z. M., & DOLL, W. J. (2004). Using high-performance work systems to support individual employment rights and decrease employee telecommunication violations in the workplace. Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 11(4).
Lepak, D. P., & Snell, S. A. (2002). Examining the human resource architecture: The relationships among human capital, employment, and human resource configurations. Journal of management, 28(4), 517-543.
Lepak, D. P., Liao, H., Chung, Y., & Harden, E. E. (2006). A conceptual review of human resource management systems in strategic human resource management research. In Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 217-271). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Levine, D. I. (1995). Reinventing the workplace: How business and employees can both win. Brookings Inst Pr.
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic management journal, 14(S2), 95-112.
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.
MacDuffie, J. P. (1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. ILR Review, 48(2), 197-221.
Mintzberg, H. (1968). The manager at work; determining his activities, roles, and programs by structured observation (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Miron, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2004). Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and efficiency compete or complement each other?. Journal of organizational behavior, 25(2), 175-199.
Moss Kanter, R. (1983). The change masters. New York [etc.]: Simon & Schuster Moss.
Mom, T. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & 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.
Mom, T. J., Fourné, S. P., & Jansen, J. J. (2015). Managers’ work experience, ambidexterity, and performance: The contingency role of the work context. Human Resource Management, 54(S1).
Moss Kanter, R. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective and social conditions for innovation in organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, eds. Staw BM and Cummings LL, 10.
Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological bulletin, 103(1), 27.
Nadkarni, S., & Herrmann, P. O. L. (2010). CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1050-1073.
Nadler, D., Gerstein, M. S., & Shaw, R. B. (1992). Organizational architecture: Designs for changing organizations (Vol. 192). Jossey-Bass Inc Pub.
Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory.
O'Reilly 3rd, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard business review, 82(4), 74-81.
Osterman, P. (1994). How common is workplace transformation and who adopts it?. ILR Review, 47(2), 173-188.
Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P. (2013). Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1420-1442.
Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through people. California management review, 36(2), 9-28.
Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 609-623.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of management, 34(3), 375-409.
Rivkin, J. W., & Siggelkow, N. (2003). Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Science, 49(3), 290-311.
Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 956-974.
Rosing, K., & Zacher, H. (2017). Individual ambidexterity: the duality of exploration and exploitation and its relationship with innovative performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 694-709.
Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. The Academy of Management Executive (1987-1989), 207-219.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge. MA: Harvard.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles (Vol. 1, pp. 161-74). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of management journal, 37(3), 580-607.
Sethia, N. (1991). The evocation of creativity through collaboration. In annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Miami.
Shalley, C. E. (1991). Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. Journal of Applied psychology, 76(2), 179.
Shalley, C. E. (1995). Effects of coaction, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 483-503.
Sheremata, W. A. (2000). Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Academy of management review, 25(2), 389-408.
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California management review, 38(4), 8-29.
Veenendaal, A., & Bondarouk, T. (2015). Perceptions of HRM and their effect on dimensions of innovative work behaviour: Evidence from a manufacturing firm. Management revue, 138-160.
West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (1990). lnnovation and creativity at work: Psychological and Organizational Strategjes. NY: John Wiley & Sons, 265-267.
Wright, P. M., & McMahan, G. C. (1992). Theoretical perspectives for strategic human resource management. Journal of management, 18(2), 295-320.
Wood, S., & De Menezes, L. (1998). High commitment management in the UK: Evidence from the workplace industrial relations survey, and employers' manpower and skills practices survey. Human Relations, 51(4), 485-515.
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.
Zacharatos, A., Barling, J., & Iverson, R. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and occupational safety. Journal of applied psychology, 90(1), 77.
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review, 27(2), 185-203.
Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. (2003). Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. In Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 165-217). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code