Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118615
|
| Title: | 領導者特質對威權領導的影響——績效導向組織文化價值觀之調節作用
The Influence of Leaders’ Characteristics on Authoritarian Leadership—The Moderating Effect of Performance-oriented Organizational Cultural Value |
| Authors: | 陳翔 |
| Contributors: | 林姿葶
陳翔 |
| Keywords: | 權威取向
嚴謹性
績效導向組織文化價值觀
威權領導 |
| Date: | 2018 |
| Issue Date: | 2018-07-12 14:00:25 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 威權領導是華人組織中最具特色的一種領導行為，對於威權領導過往的研究議題大多集中在結果變項，而對於威權領導的前置因素的部分的研究則較少，例如：領導者對部屬的情緒知覺、領導者的人格特質作為影響威權領導行為展現的主要因素。本研究基於特質誘發理論，探討領導者的人格特質與績效導向組織文化價值觀交互作用的結果，即透過主管權威取向、嚴謹性的人格特質與績效導向組織文化價值觀之間的相互作用下，誘發領導者的人格特質與威權領導的關係。本研究採用問卷調查法進行線上施測，對大陸各民營企業發放問卷218套，有效問卷136套。通過階層迴歸分析結果發現，權威取向不能有效預測專權領導、尚嚴領導行為的展現；而嚴謹性則可以負向預測專權領導行為，以及對尚嚴領導行為有正向的預測作用，並且績效導向組織文化價值觀對領導者人格特質與威權領導行為間並無調節作用效果。最後，針對本研究的主要研究發現與研究限制進行討論，並說明本研究之未來研究方向與管理實務意涵。
Authoritarian leadership is one of the most distinctive leadership behaviors among Chinese organizations. The majority of the research on authoritarian leadership has focused on the outcome variables, and there are few studies on the antecedent factors of authoritarian leadership. For example, the leader`s emotional perception of the subordinates and traits of the leader are the main factors that influence the demonstration of authoritarian leadership behaviors. Based on the trait activation theory, this study explores the interaction between traits of leaders and the performance-oriented organizational cultural value, that is, the interaction between the authoritarian-oriented, consciousness traits and the relationships between the traits of leaders and authoritarian leadership under the interaction of performance-oriented organizational cultural value. In this study, a questionnaire survey was used to conduct site surveys, and 218 questionnaires were distributed to private enterprises in the mainland China, and 136 valid questionnaires were collected. Through hierarchical regression analysis it has been found that authoritarian orientation cannot effectively predict discipline-focused authoritarian leadership and dominance-focused authoritarian leadership; consciousness can negatively predict dominance-focused authoritarian leadership, and have a positive predictive effect on discipline-focused authoritarian leadership, and performance-oriented organizational cultural value has no moderate effect on authoritarian-orientation and consciousness. Finally, the main research findings and research limitations of this study are discussed, and the future research directions and management practices of this study are explained. |
| Reference: | 于桂兰、杨术、孙瑜（2016）。威权领导,员工沉默行为与员工绩效关系研究。山东大学学报（哲学社会科学版），77-84。
石之瑜（1998）。[權威人格]研究的今昔。問題與研究，37（9），67-86。
任金剛、樊景立、鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2003）。高階主管之家長式領導與組織效能：一項個人與組織層次的分析。教育部華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究報告。台北：國立台灣大學。
李艷、孫健敏、焦海濤（2013）。分化與整合——家長式領導研究的走向。心理科學進展，21（7），1294-1306。
杜七一、柳瑩娜（2016）。教練員家長式領導對運動員個人主動性的影響——基於自我效能感的中介作用。武漢體育學院學報，50（第12），83-89。
吳宗祐、周麗芳、鄭伯壎（2008）。主管的權威取向及其對部屬順從與畏懼的知覺對威權領導的預測效果。本土心理學研究，（30），65-115。
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。
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。
吳稼祥（2006）。權威落差與政治穩定。《二十一世紀》網絡版。
林毅豐（2017）。家長式領導與組織認同感之關聯性研究-以信任主管為調節變項。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
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。
周婉茹、鄭伯壎、連玉輝（2014）。威權領導：概念源起,現況檢討及未來方向。中華心理學刊，56（2），165-189。
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。
周麗芳、周婉茹、嚴珮瑜（2011）。威權領導的前因與後果：主管與部屬間的壓力移轉。第七屆華人心理學家學術研討會，台北=Taipei,Taiwan。
周麗芳、廖偉倫、蘇柏丞（2011）。中庸思維，是華人的印象整飾嗎？企業組織中的反證。台灣心理學會主辦[台灣心理學會年會]（台中）宣讀之論文。
周麗芳、鄭伯壎、陳靜慧、任金剛、許金田（2005）。華人高階管理者網絡中的特殊連帶與人際情感：深層心理契合與正式工作關係的效果.。本土心理學研究，（23），201-257。
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。《企業管理學報》（新北），77，1-46。
陳嵩、李佩芬（2006）。上司家長式領導風格對銷售人員目標取向之影響-以壽險業為例。企業管理學報，（71），1-34。
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。
曾秋美、王俊明（2011）。家長式領導對大專體育科系運動代表隊團隊氣氛及競技倦怠的影響。長榮運動休閒學刊，（5），93-112。
楊國樞（1981）。中國人的性格與行為：形成及蛻變。《中華心理學刊》（台北）。
楊國樞（1992）。父子軸家庭與夫妻軸家庭：運作特徵,變遷方向及適應問題。1992年家庭與心理衛生國際研討會主題演講文稿。
楊國樞（1993）。中國人的社會取向：社會互動的觀點。中國人的心理與行為：理論與方法篇（一九九二）》。台北：桂冠圖書公司，87-142。
楊國樞、余安邦、葉明華（1989）。中國人的傳統性與現代性：概念與測量。中國人的心理與行為（241-206頁）。台北：桂冠。
鄭伯壎（1995）。差序格局與華人組織行為。本土心理學研究，（3），142-219。
鄭伯壎（1990）。組織文化價值觀的數量衡鑑。中華心理學刊，（32），31-49。
鄭伯壎（2005）。華人組織行為研究的方向與策略：由西化到本土化。本土心理學研究，（24），191-245。
鄭伯壎（2005）。《華人領導：理論與實際》。台北桂冠圖書公司
鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2005）。家長式領導三元模式：現代轉化及其影響機制──威權領導：法家概念的現代轉化。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告，報告編號NSC94-2413-H-002-003-PAE。台北：行政院國家科學委員會。
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。
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。
蔡英美（2005）。家長式領導三元模式的主要效果與互涉作用對運動團隊滿意度的預測。輔仁大學體育學刊，（4），99-108。
蔡英美（2005）。家長式領導，情緒感受與團隊凝聚力之關係研究。國立體育學院論叢，16（2），347-358。
簡晉龍、黃囇莉（2015）。華人權威取向之內涵與形成歷程。本土心理學研究，（43），55-123。
汪敬傑（2008）。社會取向，組織文化及組織公民行為關係之探討。臺灣大學心理學研究所學位論文，1-77。
王玉波（1988）。歷史上的家長制 （Vol. 1）。谷風出版社。
Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L. Y., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 191.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
Brown, R. (1965). The authoritarian personality and the organization of attitudes. In R. Brown (Ed.), Social psychology (pp. 477-546). NewYork: Free Press.
Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analysis. Journal of a Applied Psychology, 89(5), 901.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
Chatman, J. A. (1989). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. In Academy of Management Proceedings,199-203.
Chan, W. S. (1963). A source book in Chinese philosophy. Princeton.
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.
Cheng, B. S., Wang, A. C., & Huang, M. P. (2009). The road more popular versus the road less travelled: An ‘insider`s’ perspective of advancing Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 5(1), 91-105.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.
Chiang, T. J., Wang, A. C., Chen, X. P., & Cheng, B. S. (2009). CEO authoritarian leadership in China: Exploring its effects on employee and organizational performance. Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago, IL.
Chiu, C. Y., & Yang, C. F. (1987). Chinese subjects` dilemmas: humility and cognitive laziness as problems in using rating scales. Bulletin of the Hong Kong Psychological Society, 18, 39-50.
Chou, W. J., Chou, L. F., Cheng, B. S., Jen, C. K. (2010). Juan-chiuan and shang-yan: The components of authoritarian leadership and their interaction effects with benevolence on psychological empowerment. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 34, 223-284.
Erdogan, B., Liden, R. C., & Kraimer, M. L. (2006). Justice and leader-member exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. Academy of Management journal, 49(2), 395-406.
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, London.
Farh, L. J., 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 (p. 171).
Farh, L. J., Cheng, B., Chou, L. F., & Chu, X. (2004). Authority and benevolence: Employee’s responses to paternalistic leadership in china.
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, 421-444.
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2002). The dynamics of organizational identity. Human Relations, 55(8), 989-1018.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4), 15-41.
Hongyu, N., Mingjian, Z., Qiang, L., & Liqun, W. (2012). Exploring relationship between authority leadership and organizational citizenship behavior in China: The role of collectivism. Chinese Management Studies, 6(2), 231-244.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Leadership, culture and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Janssen, I., Katzmarzyk, P. T., & Ross, R. (2004). Waist circumference and not body mass index explains obesity-related health risk. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 79(3), 379-384.
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. The leadership quarterly, 20(6), 855-875.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2, 102-138.
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751.
Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L. D., Zagenczyk, T. J., Kiewitz, C., & Tang, R. L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512-519.
Kriger, S. F., & Kroes, W. H. (1972). Child-rearing attitudes of Chinese, Jewish, and Protestant mothers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 86(2), 205-210.
Li, Y., Sun, J., & Jiao, H. (2013). Disintegration and Integration: The Research Trend of Paternalistic Leadership. Advances in Psychological Science, 21(7), 1294-1306.
Lin, C. Y. C., & Fu, V. R. (1990). A comparison of child‐rearing practices among Chinese, immigrant Chinese, and Caucasian‐American parents. Child Development, 61(2), 429-433.
Motowildo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10(2), 71-83.
Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., Scullen, S. M., & Rounds, J. (2005). Higher‐order dimensions of the big five personality traits and the big six vocational interest types. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 447-478.
Ott, J. S. (1989). The organizational culture perspective. Dorsey Press.
Ravlin, E. C., & Meglino, B. M. (1987). Effect of values on perception and decision making: A study of alternative work values measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), 666.
Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433-458.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York, NY: Free press.
Roberson, L., & Alsua, C. J. (2002). Moderating effects of goal orientation on the negative consequences of gender-based preferential selection. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 103-135.
Sanford, N. (1973). Authoritarian personality in contemporary perspective. In J.N. Knutson (Ed.), Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 139-170). San
Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E., & Popper, M. (1998). Correlates of charismatic leader behavior in military units: Subordinates` attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors` appraisals of leader performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 387-409.
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational Culture: What it is and How to Change it. In Human Resource Management in International Firms, 56-82.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organisational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. San Francisco.
Tett, R. P., & Guterman, H. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34(4), 397-423.
Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500.
Wang, L., Huang, J. X., Chu, X. P, & Wang, X. U. (2010). A multilevel study on antecedents of manager voice in Chinese context. Chinese Management Studies, 4, 212-230.
Wilkins, A. L., & Ouchi, W. G. (1983). Efficient cultures: Exploring the relationship between culture and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 468-481.
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, 851-862.
Yee, J. H. Y. (1983). Parenting attitudes, acculturation and social competence in the Chinese-American child.
Yukl, G. A. (2013). Leadership in organizations. Pearson Education India. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
心理學系
105752024 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105752024 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/THE.NCCU.PSY.004.2018.C01 |
| Appears in Collections: | [心理學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 202401.pdf | 1803Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 9 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
