Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0608116-091940 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0608116-091940
論文名稱
Title
領導者與成員交換關係對角色績效的影響:組織公平的效果
Impacts of Leader-Member Exchange on Role Performance- Effects of Organizational Justice
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
107
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
2016-06-04
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2016-07-08
關鍵字
Keywords
程序公平、角色績效、領導者與成員交換關係、組織公平、組織公民行為、分配公平
LMX, Distributive Justice, Procedural Justice, OCB, Organization Justice, Role Performance
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5628 次,被下載 1324
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5628 times, has been downloaded 1324 times.
中文摘要
現今組織多以團隊或任務小組方式運作,團隊中除了領導者與成員的交換關係會影響團隊成員的角色績效外,團隊公平(組織公平)亦可能成為影響團隊成員角色績效表現的因素之一。故本研究為了探討組織公平是否可能影響團隊中成員的角色績效,係以組織公平對角色績效的直接效果,以及對領導者與成員交換關係對角色績效的調節效果作為主要研究架構。組織公平依分配公平與程序公平兩種構面探討對角色績效的影響;角色績效分成角色內行為與角色外行為(亦稱組織公民行為)分析不同構面的影響效果。領導者與成員交換關係對角色績效影響以個人層次探討,組織公平則以團隊層次探討。為避免共同方法變異問題,以主管-部屬對偶式問卷進行樣本蒐集。總計發放85組配對問卷,主管問卷85人,部屬問卷255人,共340人填答。分析方法採用SPSS單一層次分析及HLM跨層次統計分析。研究結果顯示,領導者與成員交換關係對角色績效有正向顯著關係,組織公平、分配公平對角色績效有部分正向顯著關係,程序公平未獲支持。組織公平、分配公平、程序公平對領導者與成員交換關係對角色績效則無調節效果。最後本研究依研究結果提出管理意涵及建議,供後續研究者參考。
Abstract
Modern organizations are increasing emphasized on operating as a team oriented unit. Not only the relationships between leader member exchange (LMX) will affect each role's performance, organizational justice (OJ) may also be one of the factors that could impact each member’s role performance. This study investigates whether OJ can influence team members’ role performance, as well as observe possible performance fluctuation on relationship between LMX and role performance as the main research areas. In order to avoid common method variance, this study collected from different sources which including 85 supervisors and 255 subordinates, and further used SPSS and HLM to examine the individual level and multi-level. The study concludes that the relationship between LMX has a significant positive influence with role performance, OJ as well as distribution justice has partial positive impact with role performance, and procedural justice has no significant impact. OJ, distribution justice, as well as procedural justice has no significant importance with LMX. This research will provide management implications and recommendations for future reference and study.
目次 Table of Contents
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 研究目的 5
第四節 研究範圍與流程 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 領導者與成員交換關係理論 7
第二節 角色績效 12
第三節 組織公平 18
第四節 領導者與成員交換關係與角色績效之關係 23
第五節 組織公平的效果 24
第三章 研究方法 28
第一節 研究架構與研究假設 28
第二節 研究工具 31
第三節 資料發放與收集 33
第四節 資料分析 36
第四章 研究結果 39
第一節 描述性統計分析 40
第二節 相關係數分析 42
第三節 迴歸分析 44
第五章 討論與建議 61
第一節 研究結論 61
第二節 管理意涵 66
第三節 研究限制與後續研究建議 69
參考文獻 71
附錄 77
參考文獻 References
一、中文部分
林淑姬 (1992)。薪酬公平、程序公平、與組織承諾、組織公民行為關係之研究。
政治大學企業管理研究所,博士論文。
林淑姬、樊景立、吳靜吉、司徒達賢 (1994)。薪酬公平、程序公平、與組織承諾、
組織公民行為關係之研究。管理評論(台灣),13卷,2期,87-108。
張仁杰 (2001)。領導者/部屬交換關係理論與組織公民行為有關變數關係之研究。
國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
溫金豐、錢書華 (2002)。報酬結構、認知公平與研發人員績效關係之研究:以某
高科技研究機構為例。人力資源管理學報,2卷,1期:19-36。
林鉦棽 (2004)。休閒旅館業從業人員的組織公正、組織信任與組織公民行為關係:
社會交換理論觀點的分析。中華管理學報,5卷,1期,P91 - 112
林鉦棽 (2005)。組織公民行為之跨層次分析:層級線性模式的應用。管理學報,
22(4),503-524。
林鉦棽、蕭淑月、何慧清 (2005)。社會交換理論觀點下組織支持,組織知識分享
行為與組織公民行為相關因素之研究-以信任與關係為分析切入點。人
力資源管理學報, 5(1),77-110。
蔡書妮 (2005)。領導行為對於員工的組織公平認知與工作滿意度之影響-以主管
與部屬交換理論觀點探討。國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
洪崇榮 (2005)。組織公平、信任與顧客公民行為之研究。國立中山大學人力資源
管理研究所碩士論文。
林鉦棽、陳心怡 (2006)。組織公正對動機與信任及組織公民行為之影響。亞太經
濟管理評論,9卷,2期,23-42。
林鉦棽 (2007)。跨層次觀點下印象管理動機與主管導向之組織公民行為的關係:
社會互動與組織政治氣候的調節角色。管理學報,24(1),93-111。
溫金豐 (2009)。組織理論與管理,三版,華泰書局。
施智婷、林鉦棽 (2012)。領導成員交換關係,心理契約滿足與組織公民行為理論
模型驗證:資源配置與社會資本觀點。管理學報,29(1),1-16。
廖啓義 (2012)。領導者與成員交換關係對角色績效的影響-與更上層主管交換關
係及領導者組織典範性之調節效果。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所
碩士論文。

二、英文部分
Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, 67(5), 422.
Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). New York: Academic
Press.
Barnard, C.I., The Functions of The Executive, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University
Press (1938).
Bateman, T. S. & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The
relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management
Journal, 26, 587–595.
Bies, R. J. & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of
fairness. In R. J. Lewicki. B. H. Sheppard. & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research
on negotiations in organizations, vol. 1; 43-55. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley 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, 46-78.
Brief, A. P. & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy
of Management Review, 11:710–725.
Chou, H. W., Lin, Y. K., Lin, Y. H., & Chou, S. B. (2013). Exploring the
Relationships among LMX Differentiation, Perceived Cohesion, and Solidarity
Behavior.輔仁管理評論, 20(2), 87-103.
Dienesch, R. M. & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-Member Exchange Model of
Leadership: A Critique and Further Development, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11,No. 3, 618-634.
Duncan, P. & Herrera, R. (2014). The Relationship Between Diversity and the
Multidimensional Measure of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX-MDM). Journal
of Management Policy and Practice, 15(1), 11.
Goodman, P. S. & Friedman, A. (1971). An examination of Adams' theory of
inequity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 271-288.
Graen, G. B. & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal
organizations: A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.),
Leadership frontiers (pp. 143-166). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
Graen, G. B. & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing.
In B. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 175–208). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Graen, G., Novak, M. A., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leader-member
exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30: 109-131.
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. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.
Graham, J. W. (1991). An essay on organizational citizenship behavior. Employee
Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 4: 249–270.
Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of
Management review, 12(1), 9-22.
Greenberg, J. (1987). Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions:
Do the means justify the ends? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, pp. 55-71.
Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational Justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow,
Journal of Management, 16, pp.399-432.
Hsiung, H. H. & Tsai, W. C. (2009). Job definition discrepancy between supervisors
and subordinates: The antecedent role of LMX and outcomes. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 89-112.
Katz, D. (1964). The Motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral
Science, 9,131–146.
Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York:
Wiley.
Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations(2nd ed.). New
York: Wiley.
Liden, R. C. & Graen, G (1980). Generalizability of the Vertical Dyad Linkage
Model of Leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23 pp.451-465.
Liden, R. C. & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member
exchange : An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of
Management, 24(1), 43-72.
Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating
justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and
treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management journal, 43(4),
738-748.
Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and
organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee
citizenship?. Journal of applied psychology, 76(6), 845.
Morrison, E. W. & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model
of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of management
Review,22(1), 226-256.
Niehoff, B. P. & Moorman, R. H. (1993) . Justice as a mediator of the relationship
between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior.
Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier
syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Ozer, M. (2008). Personal and task-related moderators of leader-member exchange
among software developers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1174.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000).
Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and
empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management,
26, 513–563.
Schriesheim, C. A., Neider, L. L., & Scandura, T. A. (1998). Delegation and
leader–member exchanges: Main effects, moderators, and measurement issues. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 298–318.
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior:
Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68: 655–663.
Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship
behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement and validation. Academy of
Management Journal, 37: 765–802.
Wayne, S. J. & Green, S. A. (1993). The effects of leader-member exchange on
employee citizenship and impression management behavior. Human relations,
46(12), 1431-1440.
Weng, L. C. (2014). Delivering Superior Customer Service through Dual-level
Transformational Leadership: a Multi-level, Multi-source Test of the Moderating
Role of LMX Differentiation.中山管理評論, 22(2), 369-406.
Williams, L. J. & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational
commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behavior. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.
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