家長式領導在華人企業組織中是一相當受歡迎的領導風格，其核心價值在於華人領導者的恩威並濟領導行為。然而大部份研究「恩威並濟」領導行為時採用威權領導和仁慈領導分開測量之量表，待分析結果時才將之合而為一，這不僅失去了恩威並濟的本質也衍生出許多待解決的問題。為了解決恩威並濟行為的本質問題，後續研究解釋了華人領導者展現恩威並濟行為的動機、時機、方式和相對應的部屬反應，進而發展出發展式領導理論模型。
本研究以操弄情境和問卷的方式，總計回收145份有效問卷，進行發展式領導理論模型的驗證，並提出發展式領導能夠帶來的正向部屬反應，另外以主管能力作為發展式領導理論之適用條件。研究發現主管展現發展式領導能夠增加部屬對主管的認知評價和喜好程度，另外對於能力不足的主管而言，展現發展式領導能夠補償自身能力不足的缺點，進而提升部屬對主管的認知評價。最後亦討論本研究之理論與實務貢獻和研究限制。

Paternalistic leadership (PL), the core value demonstrated leader authoritarianism and benevolence, is a prevalent leadership style in Chinese organizations. However, most research on leader authoritarianism and benevolence adopted separated scale of authoritarian leadership and benevolent leadership, which lost the core value of paternalistic leadership and caused a lot of problems. To solve above problems, following research brings a new theory, developmental leadership, explains why, when and how Chinese leaders demonstrate authoritarianism and benevolence at the same time and the responses of subordinates’ as their leaders adopt developmental leadership.
To verify the theoretical framework of developmental leadership, this study, which valid sample was composed of 145 from various industries, manipulates the situation in the questionnaire. Moreover, this study proposes some subordinates’ responses if supervisors adopt developmental leadership may bring up. Finally, this study supposes supervisors’ competence as a moderator that can be applied to developmental leadership. Research shows that when supervisors adopt developmental leadership, supervisors receive more positive evaluation from subordinates. On the other hand, supervisors who lack of competence would receive more positive evaluation if they adopt developmental leadership. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed at the end.

目錄
論文審定書 i
致謝 ii
摘要 iii
ABSTRACT iv
圖次 vii
表次 viii
第一章 研究背景與目的 1
第二章 文獻探討 4
第一節 威權領導 4
第二節 仁慈領導 5
第三節 威權領導與仁慈領導之間的矛盾 5
第四節 發展式領導 7
第五節 部屬對主管的認知評價和喜好程度 10
第六節 主管能力 11
第七節 主管能力的調節效果 11
第三章 研究方法 13
第一節 研究樣本與受試對象 13
第二節 研究設計 16
第三節 研究工具 16
第四章 分析結果 25
第一節 操弄檢核 25
第二節 發展式領導的主要效果 26
第三節 主管能力的主要效果 27
第四節 主管能力的調節效果 27
第五章 研究貢獻與未來建議 30
第一節 研究摘述 30
第二節 研究貢獻 32
第三節 研究限制與未來建議 34
參考文獻 36
附錄－研究問卷 41
附錄一 「能力高程度高」情境腳本問卷 41
附錄二 「能力高程度低」情境腳本問卷 48
附錄三 「能力低程度高」情境腳本問卷 55
附錄四 「能力低程度低」情境腳本問卷 62

一、中文部分
吳宗祐, 徐瑋伶, & 鄭伯壎. (2002). 怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲: 華人企業主管威權領導與部屬憤怒反應. 本土心理學研究, (18), 3-49.
吳宗祐. (2008). 主管威權領導與部屬的工作滿意度與組織承諾: 信任的中介歷程與情緒智力的調節效果. 本土心理學研究, (30), 3-63.
周婉茹, 周麗芳, 鄭伯壎, & 任金剛. (2010). 專權與尚嚴之辨: 再探威權領導的內涵與恩威並濟的效果. 本土心理學研究, (34), 223-284.
林姿葶, & 鄭伯壎. (2012). 華人領導者的噓寒問暖與提攜教育: 仁慈領導之雙構面模式. 本土心理學研究, (37), 253-302.
林姿葶, 鄭伯壎, & 周麗芳. (2014). 家長式領導二十年: 問題與解答. 本土心理學研究, (42), 147-177.
許金田, 胡秀華, 淩孝綦, 鄭伯壎, & 周麗芳. (2004). 家長式領導與組織公民行爲的關係: 上下關係品質之中介效果. 交大管理學報, 2, 119-149.
陳嵩, 李佩芬, & 陳光偉. (2008). 上司家長式領導對銷售人員目標取向及績效之影響--以銀行理財專員為例.
陳嵩, 陳光偉, & 李佩芬. (2011). 垂直人際信任對部屬工作績效之影響: 上司家長式領導的角色. 管理學報, 28(1), 1-29.
樊景立, & 鄭伯壎. (2000). 華人組織的家長式領導: 一項文化觀點的分析. 本土心理學研究, (13), 126-180.
鄭伯壎, 周麗芳, & 樊景立. (2000). 家長式領導: 三元模式的建構與測量. 本土心理學研究, (14), 3-64.
鄭伯壎, 謝佩鴛, & 周麗芳. (2002). 校長領導作風, 上下關係品質及教師角色外行為: 轉型式與家長式領導的效果. 本土心理學研究, (17), 105-161.

二、英文部分
Chan, S. C., & Mak, W. M. (2012). Benevolent leadership and follower performance: The mediating role of leader–member exchange (LMX). Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(2), 285-301.
Chan, S. C., Huang, X., Snape, E., & Lam, C. K. (2013). The Janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates' organization‐based self‐esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 108-128.
Chen, X. P., Eberly, M. B., Chiang, T. J., Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2014). Affective trust in Chinese leaders linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of Management, 40(3), 796-819.
Cheng, B.S., Huang, M.P., and Chou, L.F.(2002).Paternalistic leadership and its effectiveness: Evidence from Chinese organizational teams. Journal of psychology in Chinese societies, 3(1), 85-112.
Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In Management and organizations in the Chinese context (pp. 84-127). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Farh, J. L., Liang, J., Chou, L. F., & Cheng, B. S. (2008). Paternalistic leadership in Chinese Organizations: Research progress and future research direction. In Leadership and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices.
Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why are women penalized for success at male tasks?: the implied communality deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 81.
Huang, X., Xu, E., Chiu, W., Lam, C., & Farh, J. L. (2015). When authoritarian leaders outperform transformational leaders: Firm performance in a harsh economic environment. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1(2), 180-200.
Hwang, K. K. (1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American journal of Sociology, 92(4), 944-974.
Liang, S. K., Ling, H. C., & Hsieh, S. Y. (2007). The mediating effects of leader-member exchange quality to influence the relationships between paternalistic leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of American Academy of Business, 10(2), 127–137.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734.
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of management journal, 38(1), 24-59.
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., & Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management review, 23(3), 473-490.
Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of management, 34(3), 566-593.


Wang, A. C. (2017). Developmental leadership: How Chinese leaders integrate control and care to cultivate subordinates. Paper accepted for presentation at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Georgia.
Wang, A. C., & Cheng, B. S. (2010). When does benevolent leadership lead to creativity? The moderating role of creative role identity and job autonomy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 106-121.
Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J. M. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of management review, 23(3), 513-530.
Wu, M., Huang, X., Li, C., & Liu, W. (2012). Perceived interactional justice and trust‐in‐supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership. Management and Organization Review, 8(1), 97-121.
Wu, T. Y., Hsu, W. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2002). Expressing or suppressing anger: Subordinate’s anger responses to supervisors’ authoritarian behaviors in a Taiwan enterprise. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 18, 3-49.
Wu, T. Y., Hu, C., & Jiang, D. Y. (2012). Is subordinate's loyalty a precondition of supervisor's benevolent leadership? The moderating effects of supervisor's altruistic personality and perceived organizational support. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 15(3), 145-155.
Yang, K. S. (1993). Chinese social orientation: An integrative analysis, in psychotherapy for the Chinese. In Selected Papers from the First International Conference. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Zhang, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., & Wang, D. X. (2011). Leadership behaviors and group creativity in Chinese organizations: The role of group processes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 851-862.