Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0825103-230404 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0825103-230404
論文名稱
Title
家長式領導、信任與員工效能
to effect employees’ effectiveness while subordinates’ trust in their direct leader’s Paternalistic leadership 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
67
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
2003-07-10
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2003-08-25
關鍵字
Keywords
對直屬主管信任、員工效能、家長式領導
Paternalistic Leadership, Employee effectiveness, Trust in direct leader
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5689 次,被下載 7280
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5689 times, has been downloaded 7280 times.
中文摘要
有關領導理論的發展,長期以來都以西方社會的價值觀為研究的出發點,但有別於西方價值與文化差異的領導理論,且遍佈在華人企業的領導方式,卻是以華人價值觀為出發點的家長式領導。在華人社會裡,上下關係角色概念十分側重單向性的角色規範與行為預測,而不僅是對偶關係而已,同時上下間的權力差距頗大,這與西方權力上下均等是相當不同的。此外,在家長式領導的研究中,家長式領導的三個重要領導面向以及其相對的部屬反應,皆隱含著家長式領導是依附在部屬的追隨(followership)假設上。

然而,「信任」在組織行為的領域?堙A一直是一個重要的研究議題,不論在社會學、社會心理學、行銷管理的理論皆然。信任除了可增加彼此間的合作使合作過程更有效率,也可因為個體信任對方的善意降低監督的交易成本。因此本研究收集194對主管和部屬的對偶資料,探討部屬對直屬主管的信任在家長式領導中對員工效能的影響。

研究結果顯示,對直屬主管的信任對組織公民行為和工作績效無中介效果,但對於對主管滿意、離職機率有部份中介效果、而對組織承諾有較強的中介效果。換言之,信任對於部屬態度面之間接行為有轉化之效果。如果部屬對領導者有下對上的信任關係時,能夠影響部屬心理層面,進而透過心理的轉化、認同,影響對組織承諾的態度。由此可見,對直屬主管的信任,將是影響員工心理歷程很重要之因素。

最後,本研究則對本研究的限制、未來研究的方向、以及管理實務上的意涵,提出具體而簡要的說明。
Abstract
Regarding the development of leadership theory, for long, mostly it starts from the Western point of view. However, owing to the different cultural background perspectives, the leadership in Western society is vividly different from that within Chinese society which is so called Paternalistic Leadership. In Chinese society, the relationship between supervisors and subordinates emphasizes their different roles’ regulations and behaviors’ forecasting, not only their dyadic relationships. Meanwhile, the power distance between supervisors and subordinates is huge. These factors are different from the Western society in which their rights between supervisors and subordinates are equivalent. Subsequently, the Paternalist Leadership has three vital categories, each having subordinate responses which all imply that the Paternalist Leadership is based on the followership of subordinates.

Furthermore, “trust” is a vital discussed issue in the field of organizational behavior, no matter in sociology, social psychology, marketing theory, etc. Trust relationship between supervisors and subordinates enhances the coordination and efficiency of their jobs and likewise, because people trust each other’s goodwill the cost of monitoring will be decreased. Thus, this study, collecting 194 dyadic data, tries to discuss the employees’ effectiveness while subordinates’ trust in their direct leader’s Paternalistic leadership behaviors.

The findings of this study show that while subordinates trust in their direct leaders, there is no moderate effect in organizational citizenship behaviors and job performance. However, trust in leadership has partial moderate effects on subordinates to supervisors’ satisfaction and turn-over rate, and further, it has stronger effects on subordinates to organizational commitment. In other words, while subordinates trust in their direct leaders, it transforms the subordinate’s attitude in indirect behaviors. If subordinates can trust their direct supervisors, it will influence the attitude of subordinates’ psychological level, and this psychological effect enhances the attitude of organizational identification and commitment. That is, subordinates’ trust in their direct leaders is a vital factor to influence their inner minds.

Finally a concrete brief on the limitations of the study, further research direction in the future and how the study is related to management in the real world is presented.
目次 Table of Contents
目 錄

第一章 緒論 1
第二章 文獻探討 3
第一節 家長式領導 3
壹、家長式領導的定義 3
貳、家長式領導行為與部屬反應 6
參、家長式領導行為與員工效能的相關研究 8
第二節 信任的意涵 9
壹、信任的定義 9
貳、信任的分類 11
參、信任對組織效能、員工效能的影響 12
第三節 研究假設 14
壹、研究架構 14
貳、研究假設 15
第三章 研究方法 16
第一節 研究樣本 16
壹、領導行為 19
貳、對直屬主管信任 22
參、員工效能的測量 23
肆、控制變項 27
第二節 研究程序 28
第三節 資料分析 28
第四章 研究結果 31
第一節 各變項之相關 31
壹、各類變項內之相關分析 31
貳、各類變項間之相關分析 34
第二節 家長式領導對於信任之預測效果 36
第三節 信任之中介效果 38
壹、家長式領導對於員工效能之預測效果 38
貳、對直屬主管信任對於員工效能之預測效果 39
參、家長式領導、對直屬主管信任以及員工效能之預測效果 41
第五章 討論與建議 49
第一節 結果討論 49
壹、家長式領導對直屬主管信任的影響 50
貳、家長式領導對員工效能的影響 50
參、對直屬主管信任對員工效能的影響 51
肆、對直屬主管的信任對家長式領導和員工效能的中介效果 51
第二節 研究限制 52
第三節 未來研究方向 53
第四節 理論與管理實務意涵 54
參考文獻 55
附錄一 部屬的問卷 60
附錄二 主管的問卷 65
表 次
表2-1 華人企業的家長式領導研究 4
表2-2 家長式領導行為與部屬反應 6
表2-3信任的定義 10
表3-1 部屬樣本組成 17
表3-2 主管樣本組成 18
表3-3 仁慈領導之因素分析結果 19
表3-4 德行領導之因素分析結果 20
表3-5 威嚴領導之因素分析結果 21
表3-6 對直屬主管信任因素分析結果 22
表3-7 組織承諾因素分析結果 24
表3-8 組織公民行為因素分析結果 26
表4-1 各變項之相關分析 33
表4-2 家長式領導對信任之區段迴歸分析結果 37
表4-3 家長式領導、對直屬主管信任以及員工效能之區段迴歸分析結果 45
表5-1 研究結果摘要 49

圖 次
圖1-1 本研究架構 14
參考文獻 References
參考文獻

中文部分

王婷玉(2003):《團隊成員間價值觀契合與個人效能:人際信任的中介效果》。國立台灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文。

林明村(2001):《直屬主管之差序格局對領導行為與領導效能影響之研究》。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。

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。

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),391-415。

方世杰、蕭元哲、林麗娟(2000):〈華人文化觀點之組織人際堅信任關係的研究〉,第三屆兩岸中華文化與企業管理學術研討會論文集,華東理工大學與成功大學,3B-3-1~3B-3-13。

凌文輇 (1991) :〈中國人的領導與行為〉。見楊中芳、高尚仁(主編):《中國人、中國心-人格與社會篇》。台北:遠流。

夏侯欣鵬(2000):《信任與權力對組織內知識分享意願影響之研究—以銀行放款部門主管為例》。國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文。

許道然(2001):〈組織信任之研究:一個整合性觀點〉。《空大行政學報》,11期,258-288。

楊中芳(主編)(2001):《中國人的人際關係、情感與信任—一個人際交往的觀點》。台北:遠流。

鄭仁偉、林進財、邵琳(1998):〈台灣汽車產業行銷通路成員信任-承諾模式實證研究〉《交大管理學報》,18卷(2期),143-169。

鄭伯壎(1995a):〈家長權威與領導行為之關係:一個台灣民營企業主持人的個案研究〉。《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》,79期,119-173。

鄭伯壎(1995b):《不同家長權威價值與領導作風的關係:台灣民營企業的實徵研究》。台北:國科會專題研究計畫成果報告。

鄭伯壎(1999):《家長式領導的概念建構與工具發展》。台北:國科會專題研究計畫成果報告。

鄭伯壎(2000):《華人組織的家長式領導:概念再建構、測量、及模式的建立》。台北:國科會專題研究計畫成果報告。

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期,1-65。

鄭伯壎、樊景立(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期,127~180。

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期,105~161。

鄭伯壎、黃敏萍、周麗芳(2001):《家長式領導、部屬反應及部屬效能—一項有效領導行為模式的建立》。發表於華人本土心理學追求卓越計劃第一年研究成果研討會,台灣大學心理系華人本土心學研究追求卓越計劃辦公室主辦。

顧忠華(1993):〈法制與信任—一個法律社會學的探討〉。《中國比較法學報》,14期,203-233。

Fukuyama, F.,李宛蓉(譯)(1998):《誠信—社會德性與繁榮的創造》。台北:立緒文化。

英文部分

Beehr, T. A. 1996. Basic organizational psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Butler, J. K. 1991. Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a condition of trust inventory. Journal of Management, 17, 643-663.
Burt, R. S. 1992. Structural holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Cheng, B. S., Huang, M. P., & Chou, L. F. 2002. Paternalistic leadership and its effectiveness: Evidence from Chinese organizational teams. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 3(1), 85-112. (in Chinese)

Cheng, B.S., Chou, L. F., Huang, M. P., Wu, T. Y., & Farh, J. L. ( in Press). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate reverence: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organization. Asian Journal of Social Psychology.(SSCI)

Craig, S. B., & Gustafson, S. B. 1998. Perceived leader integrity scale: An instrument for assessing employee perceptions of leader integrity. Leadership Quarterly, 9, 127-145.

Carnevale, D. G.. 1998. Organizational trust. In T. M. Shafritz(Ed.), The international encyclopedia of public and administration. West Review Press.

Deutsch, M. 1962. Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. Industrial Relations, 8(1), 1-127.

Driscoll, J. W. 1978. Trust and participation in organizational decision making as predictors of satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 44~56.

Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C. 1997. Impetus for action: A cultural Analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 421-444.

Farh, J. L., Leung, F. & Law, K. 1998. On the cross-cultural validity of Holland's model of vocational choices in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 425- 440.

Farh, J. L., Tsui, A. S., Xin, K., & Cheng, B. S. 1998. The influence of relational demography and guanxi: The Chinese case. Organization Science, 9, 471-488.

Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. 2000. A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui, & E. Weldon(Eds.), Management and organizations in the Chinese context. London: Macmillan.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human performance, 16, 250-279.

Hofstede, G. H. 1980. Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. H. 1994. Cultural constraints in management theories. In D. E. Hussey (Ed.) International review of strategic management. New York: Wiley.

Hsu, F. L. K. 1981. Americans and Chinese: Passage to differences (3rd ed.). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Jones, G. R. & George, J. M. 1998. The experience and evolution of trust: implication for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 531-546.

Jourard, S. M. 1971. Self-disclosure:An experimental analysis of the transparent self. New York:Wiley.

Kasperson, R. E., Golding, D., & Tuler, S. 1992. Social distrust as a factor in sitting hazardous facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 161-187.

Kee, H. W. & Knox, R. E. 1970. Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 14, 357-366.

Lewicki, R. J. & Bunker, B. B. 1996. Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research, 114-139. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.

Luhmann, N. 1979. Trust and power: Two works. New York: John Wiley.

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.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. 1997. Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mishra, A.K. 1996. Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mishra, J. & Morrissey, M. A. 1990. Trust in employee/employer relationships: A survey of west Michigan managers. Public Personnel Management, 19(4), 443~486.

Nyhan, R. C., & Marlowe, H. A. 1997. The psychometric properties of the organizational trust inventory. Evaluation Review, 21, 614-635.

Nyhan, R. C. 1999. Increasing affective organizational commitment in public organizations. Review of Public Personnel Administrative, Summer, 58-70.

Nyhan, R. C. 2000. Changing the paradigm: Trust and its role in public sector organizations. American Review of Public Administration, 30(1), 85-109.

O’Reilly, C., & Chatman, J. 1986. Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492-499.

Pincus, J. D., Knipp, J. E., & Rayfield, R. E. 1990. Internal communication and job satisfaction revisited:The impact of organizational trust and influence on commercial bank supervisors. In L. A. Grunig & J. E. Grunig (Eds.), Public relations research annual, 2, 173-191. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erbraum Associate.

Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. 1998. Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393~404.

Sitkin, S. B., & Roth, N. L. 1993. Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organization Science, 4(3), 367~392.

Silin, R. H. 1976. Leadership and value: The organizational of large-scale Taiwan enterprises. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Tyler, T.R. & Degoey, P. 1996. 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.

Westwood, R. I. 1997. Harmony and patriarchy: The cultural basis for “paternalistic headship” among the overseas as Chinese. Organization Studies, 18, 445-480.

Westwood, R. I., & Chan, A. 1992. Headship and leadership. In R. I. Westwood (Ed.), Organizational behavior: A southeast Asian perspective. Delhi: Sage.

Yang, K. S. 1996. Psychological transformation of the Chinese people as a result of societal modernization. In M. H. Bond(Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Yang, K. S. 1998. Chinese responses to modernization: A psychological analysis. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 75-97.

Yukl, G. 1998. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Zucker, L. G. 1986. Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1972,. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 53~111.
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:校內外都一年後公開 withheld
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