論文提要內容：
在公部門稅務界中，稅收的變化除了經濟景氣的影響外，取決於稅務人員的工作表現，稅務人員有否展現組織公民行為是公務組織競爭優勢的重要來源，由於組織成員受到心理知覺以及自身工作態度的影響，使得激發組織成員展現組織公民行為成為管理者的要務。而許多研究發現，員工對組織公平的認知會影響個人結果及組織結果，包括對主管、同事的信任，組織公民行為的展現等。
本研究經由相關文獻探討，以組織公平解釋稅務人員的心理知覺，並以信任、組織公民行為等研究構念建構一理論模式，乃以財政部高雄市國稅局為研究對象，並以組織公平（包括分配公平、程序公平）為自變項，信任（包括主管的信任、同事信任）為中介變項，組織公民行為（包括公私分明、協助同事、不生事爭利、守法充實、認同組織）為依變項，探討個人屬性變項、組織公平、信任與組織公民行為之關係及影響，以作為從事公務人力資源發展之參考，進而提昇公務人員服務績效。本研究共發放問卷707份，取得有效問卷為415份，經由t檢定、單因子變異數分析、Person相關、層級複迴歸等統計分析後，得到重要發現如下：
1. 組織公平、信任與組織公民行為各構面間，均呈非常顯著正相關及影響力。
2. 在稅務人員屬性上，性別、婚姻、年齡、服務年資、教育程度及主管別，對組織公平之分配公平、程序公平，信任以及組織公民行為，均有顯著差異。
3. 經透過層級迴歸分析得知，信任對組織公平與組織公民行為有中介的影響關係；亦即組織公平因素確實會透過信任的中介作用而影響到組織公民行為。
根據實證研究結論，公務機關對稅務人員愈重視程序公平，並能達到分
配公平之境界，人員愈對機關產生信任感，進而愈能表現出組織公民行為。本研究的建議為增強主管與員工間的互動關係、建立有效的建議制度、重視公平的升遷與報償方案與提倡互動公平OCB（組織公民行為）的績效評估等。

Abstract:
Among public tax authorities, in addition to economic booming, the work
performance of tax collector is the major point of deciding the variation of tax collection. Whether a tax collector shows his organizational citizenship behavior is the key resource of edge in public organizational competition. The effect on the members’ metal sense and their own working attitudes enable the encouragement of these members’ organizational citizenship behavior to render the first business of managers. Many studies discover that a tax collector acknowledges the organizational justice can influence both individual and organizational results, as well as the performance of the trust in their superiors and colleagues or organizational citizenship behavior.
This research probes into related document, and construes a tax collector’s mental sense with organizational justice to construct a theoretical model with the research ideas, such as trust and organizational citizenship behavior, taking Ministry of Finance, National Tax Bureau of Kaohsiung City as research subjects, furthermore to take organizational equity (including distributional equity, procedure equity) as self-variable item, trust (including trust to superior and colleagues) as intermediary variation, organizational citizenship behavior (including justice, helping colleagues, no producing quarrels or pursuit of fame, obey the rule and solid, identifying the organizations) as variable item to discuss the correlation and effect among individual tendency variation, organizational justice, trust and organizational citizenship behavior in order to offer references for public resource development, and further upgrade the service efficiency of public servants. This research has handed out 707 questionnaires with 415 effective copies, and through the statistical analysis, such as Independent test, One-way ANVOVA, Person Correlation Analysis, and Hierarchical Multiple Regression , we get the significant discoveries as follows:

1. It presents a direct relation and influence on each dimension of organizational equity, trust and organizational civil behavior.
2. Public servant’s characteristics, such as sex, marriage, age, seniority, and education degree and director levels, influence obviously distributional justice of organizational justice, procedural justice, trust and organizational civil behavior.
3. Through level multiple regression analysis, trust holds a media relation toward organizational justice and organizational civil behavior, that is, the organizational justice factor indeed influences organizational civil behavior through the intermediary of trust.

Based on reality prove that when a public servant put more emphasis on a tax collector and reaches a status of fair distribution, a tax collector senses the trust toward public institute and furthermore perform organizational civil behavior. This research suggests to enhance the interaction between directors and employees, establish effective questioning authority system, value on just promotional and rewarding systems, advocate the achievement evaluation of interactive fair OCB (Organizational Civil Behavior), etc.

目 錄

第一章 緒 論---------------------- 1
第一節 研究背景與動機------ ---------1
第二節 研究目的與流程--------------- 4
第三節 國稅局業務概況--------------- 6
第二章 文獻探討-------------------- 11
第一節 組織公平--------------------- 11
第二節 信任------------------------- 26
第三節 組織公民行為----------------- 32
第四節 各變項間的關係--------------- 39
第五節 文獻小結--------------------- 41
第三章 研究方法-------------------- 44
第一節 研究架構--------------------- 44
第二節 研究變項定義與衡量----------- 45
第三節 研究假設--------------------- 58
第四節 資料蒐集方法與研究樣本------- 58
第五節 資料分析方法----------------- 60
第六節 研究限制--------------------- 61
第四章 資料分析與討論-------------- 63
第一節 各研究變項之描述性統計分析--- 63
第二節 個人屬性與各研究項之關係----- 64
第三節 各研究變項間的關係----------- 73
第四節 影響性分析------------------- 76
第五章 結論與建議 ------------------84
第一節 結論------------------------- 84
第二節 建議------------------------- 93
參考文獻---------------------------- 96
中文部份---------------------------- 96
英文部份---------------------------- 97
附錄　研究問卷---------------------- 105

表 目 錄
表1-3-1 財政部高雄市國稅局組織系統表----------------------------------10
表2-1-1 組織公平兩構面分類架構----------------------------------------12
表2-1-2 Adams 的公平理論----------------------------------------------14
表2-1-3 國內有關組織公平課題之研究------------------------------------23
表2-2-1 信任的型式----------------------------------------------------30
表2-3-1 組織公民行為的研究構面----------------------------------------34
表2-3-2 影響組織公民行為因素之彙整------------------------------------36
表2-5-1 文獻整理------------------------------------------------------42
表3-2-1 各量表之來源與信度--------------------------------------------48
表3-2-2 分配公平因素結構----------------------------------------------50
表3-2-3 研究變項內部一致性信度值彙總表--------------------------------51
表3-2-4 程序公平因素結構----------------------------------------------53
表3-2-5 信任因素結構--------------------------------------------------55
表3-2-6 組織公民行為因素結構------------------------------------------57
表3-4-1 實際抽樣結果--------------------------------------------------59
表3-4-2 樣本資料分析表------------------------------------------------60
表4-1-1 各研究變項之描述性統計表--------------------------------------64
表4-2-1 性別與各變項間之t檢定表---------------------------------------65
表4-2-2 婚姻與各變項間之t檢定表---------------------------------------66
表4-2-3 年齡與各變項之單因子變異數分析表------------------------------67
表4-2-4 服務年資與各變項間之單因變異數分析表--------------------------68
表4-2-5 教育程度與各變項間之單因子變異數分析表------------------------69
表4-2-6 主管別與各變項間之t檢定表-------------------------------------71
表4-2-7 官等與各變項間之t檢定表---------------------------------------72
表4-2-8 單位別與各變項間之t檢定表-------------------------------------73
表4-3-1 研究變項相關分析表--------------------------------------------75
表4-4-1 公私分明的層級迴歸分析（一）----------------------------------76
表4-4-2 公私分明的層級迴歸分析（二）----------------------------------77
表4-4-3 協助同事的層級迴歸分析（一）----------------------------------78
表4-4-4 協助同事的層級迴歸分析（二）----------------------------------79
表4-4-5 不生事爭利的層級迴歸分析（一）--------------------------------79
表4-4-6 不生事爭利的層級迴歸分析（二）--------------------------------80
表4-4-7 守法充實的層級迴歸分析（一）----------------------------------81
表4-4-8 守法充實的層級迴歸分析（二）----------------------------------82
表4-4-9 認同組織的層級迴歸分析（一）----------------------------------82
表4-4-10 認同組織的層級迴歸分析（二）----------------------------------83
表5-1-1 個人屬性與分配公平的差異性假設驗證彙總表----------------------86
表5-1-2 個人屬性與程序公平的差異性假設驗證彙總表----------------------87
表5-1-3 個人屬性與信任的差異性假設驗證彙總表--------------------------88
表5-1-4 個人屬性與組織公民行為的差異性假設驗證彙總表------------------90
表5-1-5 組織公平對組織公民行為影響分析彙總----------------------------91
表5-1-6 信任對組織公民行為影響分析彙總--------------------------------92

圖 目 錄
圖1-2-1 本研究的研究流程--------------------------------------------5
圖1-3-1 我國國稅系統相關圖------------------------------------------6
圖1-3-2 財政部高雄市國稅局之簡明架構--------------------------------7
圖1-3-3 財政部高雄市國稅局功能編組生產線----------------------------9
圖2-1-1 組織公平的兩種主要形式和其反應------------------------------16
圖2-1-2 兩條互補的績效途徑------------------------------------------21
圖2-4-1 組織公平與組織公民行為的關係--------------------------------39
圖2-4-2 組織公民行為和社會交換關係----------------------------------41
圖3-1-1 研究架構圖--------------------------------------------------45

參考文獻
中文部份
1. 林鉦棽（1996），組織公正、信任、組織公民行為之研究;社會交換理論之觀點，管理科學學報，13卷，3期，頁391-415。
2. 林淑姬（1992），「薪酬公平、程序公正與組織承諾、組織公民行為關係之研究」,國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文。
3. 黃光國（1988），中國人的權力遊戲，台北：巨流圖書公司。
4. 黃英忠(1997)，人力資源管理，台北：三民書局，頁247-250。
5. 黃俊英、林震岩（1997），SAS精析與實例，台北：華泰書局。
6. 賴志超（1993），程序正義、分配正義與組織成員工作意向之關係，國立臺灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文。
7. 古永嘉譯(1996)，企業研究方法，華泰，台北，Donald R. Cooper, C. William Emory著。
8. 李美華等譯(1998)，社會科學研究方法上，時英，台北
Earl Babbie著。
9. 李美華等譯(1998)，社會科學研究方法下，時英，台北
Earl Babbie著。
10. 洪振順(1998)，「組織公正對組織公民行為影響之研究─信任關係之觀點」，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
11. 廖瓊瑤 (1998)，「臺灣地區各縣市文化中心組織公民行為之研究」，銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文
12. 劉鈞慈 (2000)，「程序公平、組織承諾、信任與組織公民行為關係之研究─以我國產物保險產業為例」，銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
13. 世界經理文摘（1997），台北，第132期，「程序公平，結果會更好」，頁22-49英文部份
1. Adams, J. S. (1963), “Toward an Understanding of Inequity” Jouranl of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol.67,pp. 422-436
2. Adams, J. (1963), Wage inequties, productivity, and woek quality.Industrial Relations,3, 9-16.
3. Adams, J.S. (1965), “Inequity in social exchange.” Advance in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.2, New York: Academic Press,pp. 267-299
4. Alexander S. & Ruderman, M.(1987),”The Role of Procedural and Distributive Justice in Organizational Behavior.”，Social Justice Research, Vol.1. No.2, pp.177-198.
5. Arvey,R.D,1979,Fairness in Selecting Employees, MA:Addison-Wesley
6. Bateman, T.S, & Organ, D. W.(1983),Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academic of Management Journal,26, 587-595.
7. Bies, R.J. & Moag, J. S. (1986).Interactional Justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiation in Organizations,1. 43-55.
8. Blau, P. M.(1964), Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
9. Bradach, J.L. & Eccles, R. G. (1989). Price, authority, and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology,15,97-118
10. Brayfield, A. H.,＆ Crockett, W. H.,“Employee attitudes and Employee Performance,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 52, 1955, pp.396-424.
11. Bromeley, B., & Cummings, L. (1995).The Organizational trust inventory (OTI):Development and validation. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Campbell, J. P., and Pritchard, R. R., Motivation Theory in Industrial and Organization Psychology, Handbook of Industrial and Organization Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976,pp. 63-130.
13. Dipboye, R. L., & De Pontbriand, R. (1981), “Correlates of employee reactions to performance appraisale and appraisal systems.” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.66, pp,.248-251.
14. Dittrich, J.E., and Carroll, M. R., “Organizational Equity Perceptions, Employee. Job Satisfaction, and Departmental Absence and Turn-over Rates,” “Organization, al behavior and Human Performance”, Vol. 24, 1979,pp. 29-40.
15. Farh, j., Podsakoff, P. M., and Organ, D. W., “Accounting for Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Leader Fairness and Task Scope Versus Satisfaction”; pecial Journal of Management ,Vol. 16, 1990,pp. 705-722.
16. Folger, R. (1986), “Rethinking Equity Theory: A Referent Congitions Model.”, ed. By H. W. Bierhoff, R.L. Cohen, & J. Greenberg, Justice in Social Relations, New York: Plenum,pp. 145-162.
17. Folger, R. (1987), “Distributive and Procedural Justice in The Workplace.”, Social Justice Research, pp.143-160.
18. Folger, R. & Greenberg, J. (1985), “Procedural justice: An interpretative analysis of personnel systems.”,Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Vol.3, pp.141-183.
19. Folger, R. & Konovsky, M. A. (1989), “Effects of Procedural Justice and Distributive on Reactions to Pay Raise Decisions.”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.32, No.1, pp. 115-130.
20. Franch, Jr. P. & Raven, B. (1965). The base of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.),Studies in Social power. MI: Institute for Social Research.
21. Gambetta, D. (1988). Can we trustNULL In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust Making and breaking cooperative relations. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
22. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91,481-510
23. Greenberg, J. (1987a),” Ataxonomy of organizational justice theoies.” ; Academy of management Review, Vol.12, No.1, pp.9-22.
24. Greenberg, J. (1987b) .Reaction to procedural injustice in payment distribution: Do the means justify the endsNULL Journal of Applied Psychology, 72 55-61.
25. Greenberg, J. (1990a), “Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts.” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.75, pp. 561-568.
26. Greenberg, J. (1990b), “Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow.” Journal of management, Vol.16, pp.399-432.
27. Greenberg, J. (1978), “Using Diaries to promote procedural justice in performance apprisales.” Social Justice Research. 1. 219-234.
28. Homans, G. G., Social Behavior:Its Elementary Forms, New York: Harcourt, and Brace, 1961.
29. Iaffaldano, M. T., and Muchinsky, P. M., “Job Satis faction and Job Performance:A Meta-Analysis.” Psychological Bulletin, Vol.97, 1985, pp.251-273.
30. Katz, D., ‘The Motivational Basis of Organizational Behavior,” Behavior Science, Vol. 9, 1964, pp.131-146.
31. Kim, W. C., and Mauborgne R. A., “Procedural Justice, Attitudes, and Subsidiary Top Management Compliance with Multinationals’ Corporate Strategic Decisions,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36, No. 3, 1993, pp.502-526.
32. Konovsky, M. A., and Cropanzano, R., “Perceived Faimess of Employee Drug Testing as A Predictor of Employee Attitudes and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76, 1991,pp.698-707.
33. Konovsky, M. A., and Folger, R., “The effects of procedural and Distribuive Justice on Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Academy of Management Journal, 1991.
34. Konovsky, M. A., and Pugh, S. D., “Citizenship Behavior and Shocial Exchange,” Academy of Managemnt Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, 1994,pp. 656-669.
35. Konovsky, M A.M., Folger, R., and Cropanzano, R., “Relative Effects of Procedural and Distributive on Employee Attitudes,” Representative Research in Social Psychology, Vol. 17, 1987, pp.15-24.
36. Konovsky, M. A. & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management, 37, 656-669.
37. Kuamr, N., Scheer, L. K., and Steenkamp, “The Effects of Supplier Fairness on Vulnerable Resellers,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, 1995, pp.54-65.
38. Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978), “Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation.” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.63, No.6, pp.751-754.
39. Leventhal, G. S. (1976), Fairness in social relationships. In J. W. Thibult, J. T. Spence, & R. C. Carson(Eds), Contemporary topic in social psychology. Morristown NJ: General Learning Press.
40. Leventhal, G. S., karuza, J., & Fry, W.R. (1980), “Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences.” In G. Mikula (Ed.), Justice and social interaction, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp.167-218.
41. Leventhal, G. S. (1980), “What should be done with equity theoryNULL” In K. J. Gergen, M.S. Greenberg & R. H. Willis (eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research. New York: Plenum press, pp.27-55.
42. Lind, E. A. & Tyler, T. R. (1988), The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.
43. Lind, E. A., and Kanfer, and Earley, P. C., “Voice, Control, and Procedural Justice: Instrumental and Noninstrumental Concerns in Fairness Judgments,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 59, 1990, pp. 952-959.
44. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., and Schoorman, F. D., “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, 1995,pp.709-734.
45. McAllister, D., “Affect-and Cogniton-Based Trust as foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations,” Academy of Management journal, Vol. 38, 1995, pp. 24-59.
46. Moorman, R. H. (1991), “Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenshipNULL ”Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76, No.6, pp. 845-855.
47. Moorman, R. H., Blakely, G. L., and Niehoff B. P., “Does Perceived Organizational Support Mediate The Relationship Between Procedural Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41, No.3, 1998, pp. 351-357.
48. Moorman, R. H., Niehoff, B. P., and Organ, D. W., “Treating Employee Fairly and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Sorting The Effects of job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, and Procedural Justice,” Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, Vol. 6, No. 3, 1993, pp. 209-225.
49. Morgan, R. M., and Shelby D. H., “The commitment─Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, 1994, pp, 20-38.
50. Niehoff, B. P. & Moorman (1993), Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 327-336.
51. Niehoff, B. P., and Moorman, R. H., “Fairness in Performance Monitoring: The Role of Justice in Mediating the Relationship Between Monitoring and Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Academy of Managemnt Journal, Vol, 36, 1993, pp.527-556.
52. Niehoff, B. P., and Moorman, R. H., “Justice as a Mediator of The Relationship Between Methods of Monitoring and Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Academy of Managemnt Journal, Vol. 36, No. 3, 1993, pp. 527-556.
53. Organ, D. W. (1988a). Organizational Citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington.
54. Organ, D. W. (1988b). A restatement of the satisfaction-performance hypothesis. Journal of management, 14, 547-557.
55. Organ, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 157-164.
56. Organ, D. W> and K. Ryan, “A meta-analytic Review of attitudinal and Dispositional Predictors of Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Personal Psychology, 48(4), Winter 1995, 775-802.
57. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., and Hui, C., “Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and Management Evaluations of Employee Performance: A Review and Suggestions of Future Research,” Research in a Personal and Human Resources Management, Vol. 11, 1993, pp. 1-40.
58. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., and Fetter, R., “Transformational Leader Behaviors and Their Effects of Follower’s Trust In Leader, Satisfaction, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior,” Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 1. 1990, pp.107-142.
59. Sholl, R. W., Cooper, E. A., & McKenna, J. F. (1987). Referent selectionin determining equity perceptions: Differential effects on behavioral and attitudinal outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 40, 113-124.
60. Rousseau, D. M., and Parks, J. M., “The contracts of Individuals and Organizations,” Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 15,1993, pp.1-43.
61. Sapienza, H. J., and Korsgaard, M. A., “Procedural Justice in Entrepreneur-Investor Relations,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol.39, No. 3, 1996, pp.544-574.
62. Schnake, m., “Organizational Citizenship: A Review, Proposed Model, and Research Agenda,” Human Relations, Vol. 44, 1991, pp.753-759.
63. Sharlicki, D. P., and Latham, G. P., “Increasing Citizenship Behavior Within a Labor Union: A Test of Organizational Justice Theory,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81. No. 2, 1996, pp.161-169.
64. Sharlicki, D. P., Folger R., and Tesluk P., “Personality As A Moderator In the Relationship Between Fairness and Retaliation,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42, No. 1, 1999, pp.100-108.
65. Sheppard, B. H., Lewicki R. J., & Minton (1992), Organizational justice; The search for fairness in the workplace. New York: Macmillan.
66. Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., and near, J. P., “ Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its nature and Antecedents,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68, 1983, pp.653-663.
67. Smithe, F. J., “Work Attitudes as Predictors of Attendance on A Specific Day,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 62, 1977, pp.650-653.
68. Thibaut, J. W., and Kelly, H. H., The Social Psychology of Groups, New Your: John Wiley, and Sons, 1959.
69. Smith, C A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior; Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 655-663.
70. Thibaut, J. & Walker, L. (1975), Procedure Justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
71. Trevino, L. K. (1992), “The social effects of punishment in organizations: A justice perceptive.” Academy of Management, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.647-676.
72. Tyler, T. R. (1989), “The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the Group-value model.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.57, pp. 830-838.
73. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1989). Beyond formal procedure: The interoersonal contest of procedural justice. IN J. Carrol (Ed.), Advances in applied social psychology: Business settings. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
74. Tyler, T. R., & Degoey, P (1995c). Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of Motive attributions on willingness to accept decisions. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds). Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75. Tyler, T. R. & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational method of authority in groups. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 115-191.
76. Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefiniton, Measurement, and validation. Academy of managemnt Journal, 37, 765-802.
77. Van scotter, J.R. and S.J. Motowidlo, “Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance; Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), Oct 1996, 525-531.
78. Williams, L., and Anderson, S. E., “Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors,” Journal of Management, Vol. 17, 1991, pp. 601-617.
79. Yukl, G., Leadership in organizations, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1994.
，Kim, W. Chan. & Renee Mauborgne 著。