跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(216.73.216.31) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/12/03 02:36
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:沈其泰
研究生(外文):Chi-Tai, Shen
論文名稱:團隊共享心智模式對知識分享之影響—以成員特性與成員組合為調節變項
論文名稱(外文):The Power of the Shared Mental Model on Knowledge Sharing - Investigating the moderating effects of personal characteristics and characteristics’similarities between team members
指導教授:黃敏萍黃敏萍引用關係
指導教授(外文):Min-ping, Huang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:元智大學
系所名稱:管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2003
畢業學年度:91
語文別:中文
論文頁數:86
中文關鍵詞:共享心智模式知識分享團隊組成個人特徵人口統計背景性格特質人口統計背景相似性格相似
外文關鍵詞:Shared Mental ModelKnowledge SharingTeam compositionPersonal CharacteristicsDemographic traitPersonalityDemographic similarityPersonality similarity
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:9
  • 點閱點閱:842
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
本研究的目的在探討團隊內共享心智模式對成員知識分享行為之影響效果,並探討成員的個人特徵、性格特質、特徵相似性、以及成員之間的性格相似性所扮演之調節效果。本研究以台灣資訊產業之研發與新產品開發團隊為研究對象,總共搜集了42個團隊、243份個人樣本資料,並將資料轉換為1334筆對偶資料,進行對偶層次之分析。研究結果顯示:(1)團隊成員間之共享心智模式對知識分享有顯著的正向預測效果。(2)成員人口統計背景與人口統計背景差異對於共享心智模式與知識分享間之關係,並不具有調節效果。(3)成員性格特質對於共享心智模式與知識分享間之關係,具有顯著之調節效果;亦即當知識分享者具有高負責性格時,共享心智模式與知識分享間的正向效果將特別顯著,反之,當知識分享者負責性低時,共享心智模式的作用便不顯著;同理,當知識分享者具有高外向性格時,共享心智模式與知識分享間的正向效果亦特別顯著。(4)成員間性格相似性對於共享心智模式與知識分享間之關係,具有顯著的調節效果,然而此效果還需同時考量互動成員雙方之性格特質;就負責性相似而言,當知識分享者(A)具有高負責性格,同時知識接收者(B)具有與知識分享者相似之性格特質時,成員性格相似性對於共享心智模式與知識分享間之關係具有正向調節效果;顯示就負責性而言,成員間性格組配具有相似吸引的特性,並對共享心智模式具有補足的效果。另一方面,就外向性相似而言,當A具有高外向性格,而B不具有與A相似之性格特質時,成員性格相似性對於共享心智模式與知識分享間之關係具有負向調節效果;顯示就外向性而言,成員間性格組配具有相異互補的特性,並對共享心智模式具有補足的效果。由本研究結果可知,成員的性格特質與性格相似性具有複雜的互動效果,並對成員的共享心智模式具有調節作用,值得未來繼續加以探討。
This study aims to investigate how the shared mental model between team members can have influences on team members’ knowledge sharing behaviors. It also aims to examine how the relationship between shared mental model and knowledge sharing can be moderated by team members’ personal characteristics (including demographic traits and personalities) and characteristics’ similarities (i.e., trait similarity and personality similarity) between team members.
We administered network questionnaires to collect full network data of the whole team. Totally 243 samples from 42 research and development teams ( including R&D and NPD teams) in Taiwan’s informational technology industries were collected. Furthermore, in order to facilitate dyadic level analysis, we transferred our data into 1334 dyadic data sets to test the hypotheses.
Results show that, first, the shared mental model between team members has positive effect on knowledge sharing behaviors. Second, there is no any moderating effect found that team members’ demographic traits (including sex, age, and education) and demographic similarities have on the relationship between shared mental model and knowledge sharing. Furthermore, when considering the knowledge sharer’s personalities, both of conscientiousness and extroversion are found to have positive moderating effects on such relationship. Moreover, it’s also found that only when the knowledge sharer has a high conscientious personality and the knowledge receiver has a similar personality with him, then personality similarity between these two members has a positive moderating effect. On the other hand, in terms of the extroverted personality, the personality similarity is found to have a negative moderating effect, only when the knowledge sharer has a high extroverted personality but the knowledge receiver has no similar personality. These results suggest that there is complicated interaction existed between personality trait and personality similarity. Implications for future research on team composition and team management are also discussed.
第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………….1
第一節 研究動機……………………………………………………..1
第二節 研究目的……………………………………………………..3
第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………….6
第一節 團隊研究架構………………………………………………..6
第二節 團隊之知識分享………………………………………….….9
第三節 團隊之共享心智模式……………………………………….13
第四節 成員個人特性之調節效果..…..…………………………….16
第五節 研究架構…………………………………………………….25
第三章 研究方法…………………………………………………………26
第一節 研究樣本…………………………………………………….26
第二節 研究程序…………………………………………………….30
第三節 變項與測量工具…………………………………………….32
第四節 資料分析…………………………………………………….38
第四章 研究結果…………………………………………………………40
第一節 各變項之相關……………………………………………….40
第二節 共享心智模式、個人特徵、特徵相似性
對知識分享之影響………………………………………….42
第三節 共享心智模式、性格特質對知識分享之影響…………….45
第四節 共享心智模式、性格相似性對知識分享之影響………….48
第五章 討論與建議………………………………………………………56
第一節 結果討論…………………………………………………….56
第二節 研究限制…………………………………………………….61
第三節 未來研究方向……………………………………………….62
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………64
附錄一 團隊問卷調查施測說明…………………………………………75
附錄二 團隊問卷調查……………………………………………………76
1. 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。
2. 戚樹誠,1996a,探索企業主管的親信關係,中山管理評論,4卷,1期,頁1-55。
3. 戚樹誠,1996b,企業組織親信角色之實證研究,管理評論,15卷,1期,頁37-59。
4. 夏侯欣鵬,2000,權力與信任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學系博士論文。
5. 黃光國,1988,人情與面子:中國人的權力遊戲,中國人的心理。台北:桂冠。
6. 黃國隆,1997,企業內推薦用人與衝突處理模式─人際網路觀點,行政院國家科學委員會研究計畫,NSC86-2416-H002-041。
7. 黃敏萍,2000,跨功能任務團隊之結構與效能:任務特性與社會系絡之影響,國立台灣大學商學研究所博士論文。
8. 湯令儀,2000,知識分享網路之研究,國立政治大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
9. 楊國樞,2000,中國人之基本性格向度、結構及效應的系統性研究,行政院國家科學委員會研究計畫,NSC87-2413-H002-022。
10. 鄭伯壎,1995,差序格局與華人組織行為,本土心理學研究,3期,頁142-219。
11. 鄭伯壎,1999,華人人際關係研究的困境與出路,本土心理學研究,12期,頁203-214。
12. 羅家德,2000,關係網狀與影片─以組織行為為例,行政院國家科學委員會研究計畫,NSC89-2416-H155-011。
13. Allport, G. W. 1961. Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
14. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. 1992. Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.37, pp.634-665.
15. Bain, P. G., Mann, L., & Pirola-Merlo, A. 2001. The innovation imperative: The relationships between team climate, innovation, and performance in research and development teams. Small Group Research, vol.32, pp.55-73.
16. Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. 1998. Relating member ability and personality to work-team process and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.83, no.3, pp.377-391.
17. Barsade, S. G., Ward, A. J., Turner, J. D. F., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. 2000. To your heart’s content: A model of affective diversity in top management teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.45, pp.802-836.
18. Baugh, S. G., & Graen, G. B. 1997. Effects of team gender and racial composition on perceptions of team performance in cross-functional teams. Group & Organization Management, vol.22, pp.366-383.
19. Buckman, R. H. 1998. Knowledge sharing at Buckman Labs. Journal of Business Strategy, pp.11-15.
20. Burkhardt, M. E., & Brass, D. J. 1990. Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.35, pp.105-127.
21. Byrne, D. E. 1971. The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
22. Carron, A. V., & Hanusenblas, H. A. 1998. Group dynamics in sport. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technique.
23. Chatman, J. A., & Flynn, F. J. 2001. The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, vol.44, no.5, pp.956-974.
24. Chatman, J., Polzer, J., Barsade, S., & Neale, M. 1998. Being different yet feeling similar: The influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Administrative of Management Journal, vol.34, pp.827-847.
25. Chattopadhyay, P. 1999. Beyond direct and symmetrical effects: The influence of demographic dissimilarity on organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, vol.42, pp.273-287.
26. Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Huang, M. P., & Jen, C. K. 2002. Shared team value and team effectiveness: Assessing the mediating effect of intrateam process. Manuscript submitted for publication.
27. Cheng, J. L. 1983. Interdependence and coordination in organizations: A role-system analysis. Academy of Management Journal, vol.26, pp.156-162.
28. Cheng, J. L. 1984. Organizational coordination, uncertainty, and performance: An integrative study. Human Relations, vol.37, pp.829-851.
29. Cheng, J. L., & Miller, E. L. 1985. Coordination and output attainment in work units performing non-routine tasks: A cross-national study. Organization Studies, vol.6, pp.23-39.
30. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. 1997. What makes team work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, vol23, pp.239-290.
31. Cohen, M. D., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.35, pp.128-152.
32. Coleman, D. 1999. Groupware: Collaboration and knowledge sharing. In Liebowitz, J. (Eds.), Knowledge Management Handbook. New York: CRC Press.
33. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. 1988. Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol.54, pp.853-863.
34. Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. 1998. Working knowledge: How organizations management what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
35. De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. 2001. Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.86, pp.1191-1201.
36. Digman, J. M. 1990. Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, vol.41, pp.417-440.
37. Dixon, N. M. 2000. Common knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
38. Driskell, J. E., Hogan, R., & Salas, E. 1988. Personality and group performance. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, vol.14, pp.91-112.
39. Drucker, P. F. 1993. Post-capitalist society. New York, NY: Harper Business.
40. Drucker, P. F. 1994. The age of social transformation. Atlantic Monthly, pp.53-80.
41. Fraser, V., Marcella, R., & Middleton, I. 2000. Employee perceptions of knowledge sharing: Employment threat or synergy for the greater good? Competitive Intelligence Review, vol.11, no.2, pp.39-52.
42. Freeman, L. C. 1979. Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Network, vol.1, pp.215-239.
43. Gist, M. E., Locke, E. A., & Taylor, M. S. 1987. Organizational behavior: Group structure, process, and effectiveness. Journal of Management, vol.13, pp.237-257.
44. Greengard, S. 1998. Storing, shaping and sharing collective wisdom. Workforce, pp.82-88.
45. Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. G. 1986. Resource sharing among SBUs: Strategic antecedents and administrative implications. Academy of Management Journal, vol.29, pp.895-914.
46. Guzzo, R. A., & Shea, G. P. 1992. Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
47. Hackman, J. R. 1986. The psychology of self-management in organizations. In M. S. Pallak & R. Perloff (Eds), Psychology and Work (pp. 89-136). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
48. Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. 1975. Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz(Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology, vol.8, New York: Academic Press.
49. Hansen, M. T. 1999. The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, vil.44, pp.82-111.
50. Hansen, M. T. 2002. Knowledge Networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, vol.13, no.3, pp.232-248.
51. Harriman, B. 1974. Up and down the communications ladder. Harvard Business Review, September-October, pp.143-151.
52. Harris, D. B. 1996. Creating a knowledge centric information technology environment. In http://www.htcs.com/cks.html
53. Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. 1998. Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, Vol.41, no.1, pp.96-107.
54. Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. 2002. Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, vol.45, no.5, pp.1029-1045.
55. Henry, R. A. 1995. Improving group judgement accuracy: Information sharing and determining the best member. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol.62, pp.190-197.
56. Hill, C. W. L., Hitt, M. A., & Hoskisson, R. E. 1992. Cooperative versus competitive structures in related and unrelated diversified firms. Organization Science, vil.3, pp.501-521.
57. Holland, J. L. 1985. Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
58. Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. 1991. Some differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.76, pp.675-689.
59. Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A., & Noe, R. A. 1997. Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, vol.50, pp.877-904.
60. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. 1999. Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.44, pp.741-763.
61. Katz, R. 1982. The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.27, pp.81-104.
62. Katz, R., & Allen, T. 1985. Project performance and the locus of influence in the R & D matrix. Academy of Management Journal, vol.28, pp.67-87.
63. Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. 1993. The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. New York: Harper Collins.
64. Keller, R. T. 1986. Predictors of the performance of project group in R & D organizations. Academy of Management Journal, vol.29, pp.715-726.
65. Klimoski, R., & Mohammed, S. 1994. Team mental model: Construct or metaphor? Journal of Management, vol.20, no.2, pp.403-437.
66. Lee, D. 1998. Intellectual capital. Executive Excellence, pp.9-10.
67. Levesque, L. L., & Wilson, J. M., & Wholey, D. R. 2001. Cognitive divergence and shared mental models in software development project teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol.22, pp.135-144.
68. Lewis, J. P. 1993. How to build and manage a winning project team. New York, NY: American Management Association.
69. McDermott, R. 1999. Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, vol.41, pp.103-117.
70. Mann, R. D. 1959. A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological bulletin, vol.56, pp.241-270.
71. Marks, M. A., Mateieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. 2001. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team process. Academy of Management Review, vol.26, pp.356-376.
72. Marks, M. A., Sabella, M. J., Burke, C. S., & Zaccaro, S. J. 2002. The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.87, pp.3-13.
73. Mathieu, J. E., Heffer, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas. E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. 2000. The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.85, no.2, pp.273-283.
74. McFletcher, D. 1996. Teaming by design: Real teams for real people. Chicago, IL: Irwin Professional Publishing.
75. McGrath, J. D. 1984. Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
76. Mobley, W. H., Horner, S. O., & Hollingsworth, A. T. 1978. An evaluation of precursors of hospital employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.63, pp.408-414.
77. Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. 2001. Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol.22, pp.89-106.
78. Mohammed, S., Klimoski, R., & Rentsch, J. R. 2000. The measurement of team mental models: We have no shared schema. Organizational Research Methods, vol.3, pp.123-165.
79. Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. 1996. Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, vol.17, pp.77-91.
80. Muchinsky, P. M., & Monahan, C. J. 1987. What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary model effect. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol.31, pp.268-277.
81. Nancy, M. D. 2000. Common knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Harvard Business School Press. Boston.
82. Newcomb, T. M. 1956. The prediction of interpersonal attraction. American Psychologist, vol.11, pp.575-586.
83. Neuman, G. A., Wagner, S. H., & Christiansen, N. D. 1999. The relationship between work-team personality composition and the job performance of teams. Group and Organization Management, vol.24, no.1, pp.28-45.
84. Okhuysen, G. A., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2002. Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organization Science, vol.13, pp.370-386.
85. Pelled, L. H. 1996. Relational demography and perceptions of group conflict and performance: A field investigation. The International Journal of Conflict Management, vol.7, pp.230-246.
86. Peters, T. J. 1988. Thriving on chaos. New York: Knopf.
87. 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. Gruning, & J. E. Gruning (Eds.), Public Relations Research Annual, vol.2, pp.173-191. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbraum Associate.
88. Ragins, B. R., & Cornwell, J. M. 2000. Heterosexism in the workplace: Does race and gender matter? Paper presented at the conference on Psychological and Organizational Perspectives on Discrimination in the Workplace, Rice University, Houston.
89. Rentsch, J. R., & Hall, R. J. 1994. Members of great teams think alike: A model of team effectiveness and schema similarity among team members. In M. M. Beyerlein & D. A. Johnson (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams, vol.1, Series on self-managed work teams, pp. 223-262. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
90. Rentsch, J. R., & Klimoski, R. J. 2001. Why do ‘great minds’ think alike?: Antecedents of team member schema agreement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol.22, pp.107-120.
91. Riordan, C. M. 1997. Advancing relational demography theory: A construct validity study of three measures of demographic similarity. In: L. N. Dosier & J. B. Keys (Eds.), Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings.
92. Riordan, C. M. 2000. Relational demography within groups: Past developments, contradictions, and new directions. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, vol.19, pp.131-173.
93. Riordan, C. M., & Shore, L. M. 1997. Demographic diversity and employee attitude: An empirical examination of relational demography within work units. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.82, no.3, pp.342-358.
94. Riordan, C. M., & Weatherly, E. W. 1999. Relational demography within groups: An empirical test of a theoretical model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago.
95. Rouse, W. B., & Morris, N. M. 1986. On looking into the black box: Prospects and limits in the search for mental models. Psychological Bulletin, vol.100, pp.359-363.
96. Salas, E. et al. 1992. Toward an understanding of team performance and training, in R. W. Swezey and E. Salas eds. Team: Their Training and Performance. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation, pp.3-29.
97. Sarin, S., & Mahajan, V. 2001. The effect of reward structures on the performance of cross-functional product development teams. Journal of Marketing, vol.65, pp.35-53.
98. Schreiber, C. T. 1979. Changing places: Men and women in transitional occupations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
99. Senge, P. 1997. Sharing knowledge. Executive Excellence, pp.17-18.
100. Sethi, R. 2000. New product quality and product development teams. Journal of Marketing, vol.64, pp.1-14.
101. Shaw, M. E. 1981. Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior(3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
102. Smith-Jentsch, K. A., & Campbell, G. E. 2001. Measuring teamwork mental models to support training needs assessment, development, and evaluation: Two empirical studies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol.22, pp.179-194.
103. Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. 2001. Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, vol.44, no.2, pp.316-325.
104. Staw, B. M., & Barsade, S. G. 1993. Affect and managerial performance: A test of the sadder-but-wiser vs. happier-and-smarter hypotheses. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.38, pp.304-331.
105. Stewart, G. L., & Barrick, M. R. 2000. Team structure and performance: Assessing the mediating role of intrateam process and the moderating role of task type. Academy of Management Journal, vol.43, pp.135-148.
106. Stewart, G. L., Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P., Jr. 1999. Teamwork and group dynamics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
107. Sveiby, K. E. 1997. New organizational wealth: Managing and measuring knowledge-based assets.
108. Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, vol.17, pp.27-43.
109. Tan & Margaret. 1994. Establishing mutual understanding in systems design: An empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, vol.10, no.4.
110. Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. 2000. Composition of the top management team and firm diversification. Journal of Management, vol.26, pp.1157-1177.
111. Toffer, A. 1990. Powershift: Knowledge, wealth and violence at the edge of the 21st century. New York: Bantam Books.
112. Tornatsky, , L. G. 1986. Technological change and the structure of work. In M. S. Pallak & R. Perloff (Eds), Psychology and Work (pp. 89-136). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
113. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1992. Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.37, pp.547-579.
114. Tsui, A. S., Xin, K. R., & Egan, T. D. 1995. Relational demography: The missing link in vertical dyad linkage. In: S. Jacjson, M. Ruderman, & W. Tornow (Eds.), Work team dynamics and productivity in the context of diversity, Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, pp.97-129.
115. Tsai, W. 2001. Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, vol.44, no.5, pp.996-1004.
116. Tsai, W. 2002. Social structure of “Coopetion” within a multiunit organization: Coordination, Competition, and Intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science, vol.13, no.2, pp.179-190.
117. Tsui, A. S., & O’Reilly, A. A. 1989. Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, vol.32, pp.402-423.
118. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1992. Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.37, pp.547-579.
119. Turner, J. C. 1987. Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
120. Von Hippel, E. 1994. Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science, vol.40, pp.429-430.
121. Wageman, R. 2001. Hower leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coaching. Organization Science, vol.12, pp.559-577.
122. Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1984. Organizational demography and turnover in top management groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.29, pp.74-92.
123. Waldman, D. A., & Avolio, B. J. 1986. A meta-analysis of age differences in job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.71, pp.33-38.
124. Walker, G. 1985. Network position and cognition in a computer software firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.30, pp.103-130.
125. Zander, U., & Kogut, B. 1995. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, vol.6, no.1, pp.76-90.
126. Zenger, T. R., & Lawrence, B. S. 1989. Organizational demography: The differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal, vol.32, pp.353-376.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top