臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著資訊科技的日新月異、日趨複雜的專業技術與全球化的趨勢與挑戰，諸多企業為使組織能快速回應環境變動與效率的提升，促使團隊的組織運作於焉形成，並成為維持企業競爭力的武器之一。
團隊形成的最終目標為績效的提升，爰此在團隊設計之時，應由技術特性與社會特性加以考量。在商業的工作環境中，工作相依為團隊形成的因素之一，且團隊為達成組織所賦予之任務，團隊成員彼此之間需要相互依賴、協助，所以本文在技術特性上以任務相依性為探索的焦點之一。在社會特性方面，由於團隊的特性之一便是人員之間的互動，且社會學領域中探討的主軸在於人際之間的互動，因此探究成員的人際關係亦為本研究的變數之一。另在團隊中，除卻團隊績效的行為表現外，成員的承諾亦是團隊績效的態度表現，亦為本文探究的焦點之一。綜合上述之推論過程，本文係以團隊為探究的對象，試圖探索任務相依性、團隊成員人際關係對團隊承諾、團隊績效之間的脈絡關係。
本研究係以問卷作為實證研究資料蒐集之工具，參酌相關學者發展之量表，發放予具團隊性質之產業，透過立意抽樣的方式進行調查。本研究合計發放420份問卷，有效回收184份問卷，透過相關性分析、變異數分析、迴歸分析等研究分析方法，獲得以下結論：第一、團隊內任務相依性、成員人際關係、團隊承諾與團隊績效間具顯著正相關；第二、任務相依性與人際關係並無交互作用效果存在；第三、任務相依性與團隊承諾、團隊績效具顯著差異，其中交互式相依在團隊承諾上顯著高於集合式相依類型；交互式相依者在團隊績效上顯著高於順序式相依類型者。第四、人際關係與團隊承諾、團隊績效具顯著差異，其中人際關係較佳者在團隊承諾與團隊績效上的表現皆顯著高於人際關係不佳者。

As changing with each passing day of information technology, complexity of specific technique, the challenge and trends of globalization, a great deal of firms in order that respond variation of circumstances and improve efficiency, the operation of teams have been taking place, and become one of weapons to maintain its’ core competency.
The ultimate object of team was to improve performance, therefore it should consider technical and social characteristic when team design. One of elements which team takes shape is task interdependence in order to accomplish task, team members ought to dependent and collaboration, consequently this study focused on tasks interdependence in technical traits. One of team social characteristics is interaction of team members; hence one of constructs in the research was interpersonal relationships. Besides, the commitment of team members is attitude in team performance. The purposes of this study were to investigate the relationships with task interdependence, interpersonal relations, team commitment and team performance.
This study adapted questionnaire, 184 of 420 samples who returned the questionnaires, using Pearson correlation, variance of analysis, regression analysis, obtained four findings. The results show that first, task interdependence, interpersonal relationships, team commitment, team performance has significant positive correlation. Second, task interdependence and interpersonal relationships are not interaction effect. Third, reciprocal interdependence in team commitment is higher than pool interdependence; on team performance with reciprocal interdependence is higher than sequential interdependence. Fourth, members who have well interpersonal relationships on team commitment and performance are higher than weak ones.

目 錄...........................................................I
圖目錄...........................................................III
表目錄...........................................................IV

第一章 緒論......................................................1
1.1 研究背景.....................................................1
1.2 研究動機.....................................................1
1.3 研究問題與目的...............................................2
1.4 概念性架構...................................................3
1.5 研究流程與步驟...............................................4
第二章 文獻探討..................................................6
2.1 團隊.........................................................6
2.1.1 團隊之定義.................................................6
2.2 團隊績效.....................................................9
2.2.1 影響團隊績效之因素.........................................9
2.2.2 團隊績效之內涵............................................17
2.3 團隊承諾....................................................18
2.3.1 團隊承諾之定義............................................19
2.3.2 團隊承諾之內涵............................................20
2.4 任務相依性..................................................21
2.4.1 相依的來源與型態..........................................21
2.4.2 任務相依性之定義..........................................23
2.4.3 任務相依性之分類..........................................24
2.4.4 任務相依性與團隊績效、團隊承諾之關連......................27
2.5 團隊成員人際關係............................................27
2.5.1 人際關係之定義............................................27
2.5.2 人際關係的理論基礎........................................28
2.5.3 人際關係之內涵............................................29
2.5.4 成員人際關係與任務相依性、團隊績效、團隊承諾之關連........32
2.5.5 任務相依性、成員人際關係對團隊承諾、團隊績效之關連........32
第三章 研究方法.................................................34
3.1 研究架構....................................................34
3.2 研究假設....................................................34
3.3 研究對象....................................................35
3.4 研究變數....................................................35
3.5 研究工具....................................................37
3.5.1 量表設計..................................................37
3.5.2 問卷預測..................................................41
3.6資料分析之工具...............................................45
3.6.1 資料分析之方法............................................45
3.6.2 資料分析之流程圖..........................................46
第四章 實證結果分析.............................................48
4.1問卷回收與樣本結構分析.......................................48
4.1.1 問卷回收情形..............................................48
4.1.2 樣本結構分析..............................................48
4.2 資料處理過程................................................49
4.3 研究變數之現況分析..........................................52
4.3.1 任務相依性之現況分析......................................52
4.3.2 團隊成員人際關係之現況分析................................53
4.3.3 團隊承諾之現況分析........................................56
4.3.4 團隊績效之現況分析........................................56
4.4個人屬性與研究變數之差異性分析...............................57
4.4.1 個人屬性在研究變數上之現況分析............................57
4.4.2 個人屬性在研究變數上之差異性分析..........................67
4.5研究假設實證分析.............................................68
4.5.1 研究變數之相關性分析......................................68
4.5.2 研究變數之多變量變異數分析................................73
4.6 研究變數之迴歸分析..........................................79
4.7 團隊承諾在人際關係與團隊績效之中介效果檢驗..................87
4.8 小結........................................................88
第五章 研究結論與建議...........................................89
5.1 研究結論....................................................89
5.2 管理意涵....................................................90
5.3 研究限制....................................................93
5.4 後續研究建議................................................94
參考文獻........................................................95
附錄一..........................................................102

一、英文部分
1.Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A., “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6, 1986, pp. 1173-1182.
2.Bhuian, S. N. and Menguc, B., “An Extension and Evaluation of Job Characteristics, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction in an Expatriate, Guest Worker, Sales Setting,” The Journal of Personal Selling ＆ Sales Management, Vol. 22, No.1, 2002, pp.1-11.
3.Black, J. S. and Porter, L. W., Management-Meeting New Challenges, Prentice Hall, 2000, pp. 294-319.
4.Brammer, L. M., The Helpering Relationship: Process and Skill, New York: Allyn & Bacon, 1993.
5.Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. A. and Higgs, A. C., “Relations between Work Group Characteristics and Effectiveness: Implications for Designing Effective Work Group,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 46, No. 4, 1993, pp. 823-850.
6.Chawla, S. and Renesch, J. E., Learning Organizations: Developing Cultures for Tomorrow’s Workplace, Oregon: Productivity Press, 1995.
7.Cooper, D. R. and Emory, C. W., Business Research Methods, 5th ed., Richard D. Irwin, Inc, 1995.
8.Daft, R. L., Organization Theory and Design, 8th ed., 2004, pp. 262-272.
9.Duffy, M. K., Shaw, J. D. and Stark, E. M., “Performance and Satisfaction in Conflicted Interdependent Groups: When and How Does Self-Esteem Make a Difference,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 4, 2000, pp. 772-782.
10.Fandt, P. M., “The Relationship of Accountability and Interdependent Behavior to Enhancing Team Consequences,” Group and Organization Studies, Vol. 16, No. 3, 1991, pp. 300-312.
11.Gist, M. E., Locke, E. A., and Taylor, M. S., “Organizational Behavior: Group Structure, Process, and Effectiveness,” Journal of Management, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1987, pp. 237-357.
12.Gladstein, D. L., “Groups in Context: A Model of Task Group Effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, 1984, pp. 499-517.
13.Griffin, R. W., Fundamentals of Management: Core Concepts and Applications, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000.
14.Guzzo, R. A. and Shea, G. P., “Group Effectiveness: What Really Matters?,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, 1987, pp. 25-31.
15.Guzzo, R. A., and Shea, G. P., “Group Performance and Intergroup Relations in Organizations,” Handbook of Industrialand Organizational Psychology, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1992, pp. 269-313.
16.Hackman, J. R., A Normative Model of Work Team Effectiveness, New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1983.
17.Heider, F., The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, New York: John Wiley, 1958.
18.Jewell, L. N. and Reitz, H. J., Group Effectiveness in Organizations, Illinois: Foresman and Company, 1981.
19.Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. and Anderson, D., “Social Interdependence and Classroom Climate,” The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 114, No.1, 1983, pp.135-142.
20.Jones, G. R. and George, J. M., Contemporary Management, 3 th ed., McGraw Hill, 2003, pp. 477-503.
21.Katzenbach, J. R. and Smith, D. K., “The Discipline of Teams,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71, No. 2, 1991, pp.111-120.
22.Ketchand, A. A. and Strawser, J. R., “The Existence of Multiple Measures of Organizational Commitment and Experience-Related Differences in a Public Accounting Setting,” Behavioral Research in Accounting,Vol. 10, 1998, pp.109-137.
23.Kiggundu, M. N., “Task Interdependence and The Theory of Job Design,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 6, No. 3, 1981, pp. 499-508.
24.Kirkman, B. L. and Rosen, B., “Beyond Self-Management: Antecedents and Consequences of Team Empowerment,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42, No. 1, 1999, pp. 58-74.
25.Lewis, J. P., How to Build and Manage a Winning Project Team, New York: American Management Association, 1993.
26.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.
27.McCann, J. E. and Ferry, D. L., “An Approach for Assessing and Managing Inter-Unit Interdependence,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1979, pp. 113-119.
28.McGrath, J. E., Social Psychology: A Brief Introduction, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1964.
29.McHugh, P. P., “Team-Based Work Systems: Lessons from the Industrial Relations Literature,” Human Resource Planning, Vol. 20, No. 3, 1997, pp. 44-48.
30.Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J., “A Three-component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment,” Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1, 1991, pp. 61-89.
31.Mitchell, T. R. and Silver, W. S., “Individual and Group Goals When Workers Are Interdependent: Effects on Task Strategies and Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75, 1990, pp. 185-193.
32.Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G. and Mohrman, A. M., Designing Team-Based Organizations: New Forms for Knowledge Work, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.
33.Morgan, B. B., Glickman, A. S., Woodard, E. A., Blaiwes, A. S. and Salas, E., Measurement of Team Behaviors in a Navy Environment, Florida: Naval Training Systems Center, 1986.
34.Morrow, P. C., “Concept Redundancy in Orgnanizational Research: the Case of Work Commit,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 8, 1983, pp. 486-500.
35.Mowday, R. T., Poter, L. W. and Steers, R. M., Employee-Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover, New York: Academic Press, 1982.
36.Nadler, D. A. and Spencer, J. L., Executive Teams, San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1997.
37.Nahavandi, A. and Aranda, E., “Restructure Teams for the Reengineered Organizations,” Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1994, pp. 58-68.
38.Nieva, V. F., Fleishman, E. A. and Reick, A., Team Dimensions: Their Identity, their Measurement and their Relationships, Washington, D.C: Advanced Research Resources Organization, 1978.
39.Pfeffer, J. and Salanick, G. R., “A Social Information Approach to Attitudes and Task Design,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 1978, pp. 224-253.
40.Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T. and Boulian, P. V., “Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover among Psychiatric Technicians,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 59, No. 5, 1974, pp. 603-609.
41.Robbins, S. P. and Coulter, M., Management, 7th ed., Prentice Hall, 2003, pp. 398-417.
42.Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A. and Tannenbaum, S. I., Toward an Understanding of Team Performance and Training Teams: Their Training and Performance, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1992.
43.Schutz, W. C., Three-Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Behavior, 1960.
44.Schwarz, R., The Skilled Facilitator: Practical Wisdom for Developing Effective Groups, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994.
45.Senge, P. M., The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, 1994.
46.Shonk, J. H., Working in Teams: A Practical Manual for Improving Work Groups, New York: AMACOM, 1982.
47.Steers, R. M., “Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 22, 1977, pp. 46-56.
48.Stewart, G. L. and Barrick, M. R., “Team Structure and Performance: Assessing the Mediating Role of Intrateam Process and the Moderating Role of Task Type,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 2, 2000, pp. 135 -148.
49.Thompson, J. D., Organization in Action, New York：Mcgraw Hill, 1967, pp. 51-65.
50.Tjosvold, D., “Cooperative and Competitive Dynamics within and between Organizational Units,” Human Relations, Vol. 41, No. 6, pp. 425-436.
51.Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L. and Koenig, R. Jr., “Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 41, 1976, pp. 322- 338.
52.Van Der Vegt, G. S. Emans Ben, J. M. and Van De Vliert, E., “Patterns of Interdependence in Work Teams: a Two-Level Investigation of the Relations with Job and Team Satisfaction,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2001, pp. 51-69.
53.Wageman, R., “Interdependence and Group Effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1, 1995, pp. 145-180.
54.Wiener, Y., “Commitment in Organizations: A Normative View,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1982, pp. 418-428.

二、中文部份
1.丁文養，「團隊目標互賴性、團隊成員互動過程對團隊績效影響之研究」，國防管理學院資源管理研究所碩士論文，民國92年6月。
2.丁虹，「企業文化組織承諾之研究」，國立政治大學研究所博士論文，民國86年6月。
3.王保進，視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究，第二版，台北：心理，民國91年。
4.王建忠，「團隊領導與團隊效能：團隊內互動的仲介效果」，國立臺灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文，民國90年6月。
5.朱敬先，健康心理學，台北：五南，民國81年。
6.李弘暉，「團隊原理」，中國行政評論，第6卷，第2期，民國86年，頁73-86。
7.李弘暉、鍾麗英，「團隊運作過程對團隊績效影響之研究」，人力資源學報，民國88年12月，第11期，頁1-30。
8.李佩怡，「人際關係理論」，測驗與輔導，第152卷，民國88年，頁3152-3156。
9.李璧伶，「團隊衝突、團隊凝聚力與社會賦閑之研究」，中國文化大學國際企業管理研究所碩士論文，民國93年6月。
10.周毓敏，「團隊信任與其績效之關聯性研究-以建立虛擬社群爲例」，大葉大學工業關係研究所碩士論文，民國93年6月。
11.林建煌，管理學，台北：智勝，民國92年，頁394-397。
12.林淑華，「國小學童情緒管理與人際關係之研究」，國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，民國91年5月。
13.林欽榮，人際關係與溝通，台北：揚智，民國90年。
14.林靜芬，「國小兒童內外控信念與其相關因素暨團體輔導效果之研究」，國立屏東師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文，民國84年6月。
15.姜占魁，「組織行為與行政管理」，台北：曉園書局，民國82年。
16.孫本初、呂育誠，「從分析單元論團隊的意義及其對公共管理之影響」，國立政治大學學報，第73集，下卷，民國85年，頁145-177。
17.徐西森、連廷嘉、陳仙子、劉雅瑩，人際關係的理論與實務，台北：心理，民國91年。
18.珗躓n，「團隊情感對團隊歷程的影響」，國立東華大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，民92年7月。
19.張宏文、邱文芳，實用人際關係學，台北：商鼎文化出版社，民國85年。
20.張志學，「中國人的人際關係認知：一項多維度的研究」，本土心理學研究，第12期，民國88年，頁261-288。
21.張春興，心理學，台北：東華書局，民國81年。
22.張淑玲，「團隊領導、團隊價值觀對團隊效能之影響」，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，民91年8月。
23.梁凱雯，「組織公平、工作自主性與互依性對觀光旅館懦憚A務員工組織公民行為之相關研究」，世新大學觀光學系研究所碩士論文，民國91年6月。
24.陳盈純，「互依性和社會支持對研發團隊績效的影響-以溝通為干擾變項」，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，民國91年6月。
25.陳皎眉，人際關係，台北：空中大學，民國86年。
26.陳順宇，多變量分析，第三版，台北：華泰，民國93年。
27.陳憶雯，「關係網絡類型與組織績效之相關性研究」，銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文，民國93年6月。
28.曾素雲，「工作團隊中工作價值觀、團隊特性與團隊績效之相關研究」，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，民國90年2月。
29.黃文獻，「不同相互依賴程度對總公司與分支機構間衝突知覺影響之研究」，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，民國88年7月。
30.楊世瑩，SPSS統計分析實務，台北：旗標，民國94年，頁11-3。
31.萬同軒、龐開基與王立華，「組織內人際關係型態之初探」，亞太社會科技學報，第2卷第1期，民國91年，頁189-207。
32.蔡志章，「多層次傳銷上下線間互動關係與經營績效影響因素之研究」，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，民國89年6月。
33.蔡達人，「團隊多元化對知識分享、創造、創新績效之影響－以衝突爲仲介變項」，東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，民國90年6月。
34.鄭伯壎、任金剛、張慧芳、郭建志，「台灣企業網絡中的對偶關係：關係形成與關係效能」，中華心理學刊，第39卷第1期，民國86年，頁79-85。
35.蕭佩琪，「團隊成員間關係、主觀契合度與團隊效能之關係」，銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文，民國91年6月。
36.簡瑜君，「工作團隊特性與團隊效能之關係：以訓練與管理者支援爲干擾變項」，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，民國91年7月。