跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(98.84.25.165) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/11/10 01:47
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:焦貴真
研究生(外文):Guei-Chen Chiao
論文名稱:績效評估類型與組織公平、衝突之相關研究
論文名稱(外文):The Research on Relationship of Performance Appraisal, Organizational Equity and Conflict
指導教授:萬同軒萬同軒引用關係翁振益翁振益引用關係
指導教授(外文):Tung-Hsuan WanJehn-Yih Wong
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:銘傳大學
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:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:中文
論文頁數:69
中文關鍵詞:績效評估組織公平衝突
外文關鍵詞:performance appraisalorganizational equityconflict
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:3
  • 點閱點閱:220
  • 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:3
摘要

績效評估向來是企業最複雜的人力資源管理活動,回顧過去國內、外學者對此所作的研究不勝枚舉。然而針對本研究所提出之績效評估的分類方式,以及進一步探就其對組織公平與衝突之影響的研究卻不多。本研究根據相關文獻將各種績效評估的方式作一整理,提出「投入-過程-結果」為分類構面,將績效評估方法根據不同的評估指標區分為「個人技能、工作行為、任務結果」三大類型,並且發展相關的量表。再者,依據此種分類方式,延伸探討不同績效評估方法下對於組織公平與衝突之影響。

本研究的目的係針對不同類型之績效評估方法,透過銀行業進行問卷調查,採用立意抽樣的方式共發出735份問卷,回收有效問卷235份,並在資料回收後進行實證研究,經由相關分析、T檢定、單因子變異數分析、迴歸分析等統計分析,分別探討其對組織公平與衝突之影響,並且得到一較為客觀及公平之考核方法,以減少組織員工之衝突發生。

本研究藉由理論探討與實證研究分析後,得到以下之驗證結果:
1. 不同類型的績效評估方式對員工組織公平性的知覺會有所影響,且績效評估與組織公平呈正相關。以個人技能作為評估指標之績效評估方式會影響到分配公平的知覺;以工作行為來作為評估員工的指標,則對員工的分配公平與互動公平都會有所影響;至於以任務結果來作員工的績效評估,則對於組織公平性沒有影響。
2. 對組織衝突的影響上,以個人技能來作為績效評估指標,對衝突並無影響;以工作行為來評估員工績效,則影響到任務衝突與關係衝突,與任務衝突呈正相關,與關係衝突呈負相關;至於以任務結果為指標的績效評估方法,則僅僅影響到關係衝突,呈現出正相關。
ABSTRACT


Performance appraisal is one of the most complex human resource practices. This study concludes the literature and address the classification of PA criteria into “Input-Process-Output”. This study categorize performance appraisal into skill-based, behavior-based, outcome-based. Moreover, this study discusses the PA effect to equity and conflict based on the classification.
Results of analyses conducted on data collected from 735 and returns 235 bank employees. The results of this research was summarized as follows:(1)Performance appraisal was positively related to organizational equity. Moreover, distributive equity will effected by skill-based performance appraisal. Behavior-based performance appraisal will affect both distributive equity and interactional equity.(2)Behavior-based performance appraisal will affect both task conflict and relationship conflict. Outcome-based performance appraisal will affect relationship conflict. And furthermore, behavior-based performance appraisal was positively related to task conflict and negatively related to relationship conflict. Outcome-based performance appraisal was positively related to relationship conflict.
目 錄

目 錄 I
圖 目 錄 III
表 目 錄 IV
第一章 緒 論 1
1.1 研究動機 1
1.2 研究問題 2
1.3 研究目的 3
第二章 文獻探討 4
2.1 績效評估 4
2.1.1 績效評估的定義 4
2.1.2 績效評估的目的 7
2.1.3 績效評估的內容 10
2.1.4 績效評估方法 12
2.1.5 績效評估的分類方式 15
2.1.6 績效評估的標準 17
2.2 績效評估分類矩陣 17
2.2.1 績效評估分類矩陣的構念與說明 17
2.2.2 績效評估分類矩陣 19
2.3 組織公平 21
2.3.1 公平的定義 21
2.3.2 分配公平 21
2.3.3 程序公平 24
2.3.4 互動公平 25
2.4 衝突 26
2.4.1 衝突的定義 26
2.4.2 衝突的原因 29
2.4.3 衝突的影響 30
2.4.4 衝突的類型 31
2.4.5 任務衝突、程序衝突、關係衝突 33
第三章 研究設計 35
3.1 研究架構 35
3.2 研究假設的建立 36
3.3 研究變項之操作性定義 36
3.3.1 績效評估類型 36
3.3.2 組織公平性 38
3.3.3 衝突 40
3.3.4 個人屬性 41
3.4 研究對象 41
3.5 資料蒐集方式 42
3.6 資料分析方法 42
第四章 實証分析 44
4.1 問卷回收與結構分析 44
4.2 敘述性統計分析 45
4.3 量表信度分析 49
4.4 研究變數相關分析 50
4.5 研究假設實證分析 51
4.5.1 控制變數與績效評估、組織公平與衝突之分析 51
4.5.2 績效評估與組織公平之迴歸模式 54
4.6 小結 58
第五章 結論與建議 59
5.1 研究結論 59
5.2 建議 60
5.2.1 管理實務上之建議 60
5.2.2 後續研究上之建議 61
5.3 研究限制 61
參考文獻 62
附錄一 66
參考文獻

一、英文部份


1.Amason, A. C. and Schweight, D. M., “Resolving the Paradox of Conflict, Strategic Decision Making, and Organizational Performance,” International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 5, 1994, pp. 239-253.
2.Boulding, K., Conflict and Defense, New York: Harper and Row,1963.
3.Carsten, K.W. and Annelies, E.M., “Managing Relationship Conflict and the Effectiveness of Organizational Teams,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2001, pp. 309-328.
4.Cascio, W. and Bailey, E., International Human Resource Management: The State of Research and Practice. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1995, pp. 16-36.
5.Beugre, C. D., “Implementing Business Process Reengineering:The Role of Organizational Justice,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 34, No. 3, 1998, pp. 347-360.
6.Deutsch, M., Distributive Justice:A Social-Psychological Perspective, New Haven, CT:Yale University Press, 1985.
7.Deutsch, M., and Marton, A., “Conflicts: Productive and Destructive,” Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 25, 1969, pp. 7-41.
8.Gaski, J., “The Theory of Power and Conflict in Channels of Distribution,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, No. 2, 1984, pp. 9-29.
9.Gabris, G. T. and Ihrke, D. M., “Does Performance Appraisal Contribute to Heightened Levels of Employee Burnout?The Results of One Study” Public Personnel Management, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2001, pp. 157-169.
10.Chen, G.. and Tjosvold, D., “Conflict Management and Team Effectiveness in China:The Mediating Role of Justice” Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2002, pp. 557-572.
11.Paterson, J. M., Green, A. and Cary, J., “The Measurement of Organizational Justice in Organizational Change Programmes:A Reliability, Validity and Context-Sensitivity Assessment,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 75, 2002, pp. 393-408.
12.Jehn, K. A. and Chatman, J. A., “The Influence of Proportion and Perceptual Conflict Composition on Team Performance,” International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2000, pp. 56-73.
13.Greenberg, J., “A Taxonomy of Organizational Justices Theories,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1987, pp. 9-22.
14.Uen, J. F. and Chien, S. H., “Compensation Structure, Perceived Equity and Individual Performance of R&D Professionals,” Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 4, 2004, pp. 401-405.
15.John, K. and Shah, P., “Interpersonal Relationships and Task Performance: An Examination of Mediating Processes in Friendship and Acquaintance Groups,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 72, 1997, pp. 775-791.
16.John, K., Northcraft, G. and Neale, M., “Why Differences Make a Difference: A Field Study of Diversity, Conflict, and Performance in Workgroups,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44, 1999, pp. 741-763.
17.Jehn, K. A. and Mannix, E. A., “The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, No. 2, 2001, pp. 238-251.
18.Leventhal, G. S, Karuza, J. and Fry, W. R., Beyond fairness:A Theory of Allocation preferences. Justice and Social Interactions, New Your: Springer-Verlag , 1980.
19.Leventhal, G. S., What Should Be Done with Equity Theory? Social Exchange:Advances in Theory and Research, New Your:Plenum., 1980.
20.Milliman, J. F., Nason, S., Lowe, K., Kim, N. H. and Huo, P., “An Empirical Study of Performance Appraisal Practices in Japan, Korea, Taiwan and the U.S.,” Academy of Management Journal, 1995, pp. 182-191.
21.Taylor, M. S., Masterson, S. S., Renard, M. K. and Tracy, K. B., “Managers’ Reactions To Procedurally Just Performance Management Systems,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41, 1998, pp. 568-577.
22.Rahim, M. A., Magner, N.R. and Shapior, D.L., “Do Justice Perceptions Influence Styles of Handling Conflict with Supervisors?:What Justice Perceptions, Precisely?” International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 11, 2000, pp. 5-26.
23.Philip, R., Ford, D., “Stake, Conflict, and Performance in Export Marketing Channels,” Management International Review, Vol. 42, No. 4, 1980, pp. 31-37.
24.Scholl, R. W., Cooper, E. A. and McKenna, J. F., “Referent Selection in Determining Equity Perceptions: Differential Effects on Behavioral and Attitudinal Outcomes”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40, No. 1, 1987, pp. 113-125.
25.Simons T. L. and Peterson R. S., “Task Conflict and Relationship Conflict in Top Management Teams: The Pivotal Role of Intragroup Trust,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85, No. 1, 2000, pp. 102-111.
26.Thibaut, J. W. and Walker, L., Procedural Justice:A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum, 1975.
27.Tuckman, B. W., “Developmental Sequences in Small Groups,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 63, 1965, pp. 384-399.
28.James, W. and Callister, R. R., “Conflict and Its Management,” Journal of Management, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1995, pp. 515-559.


二、中文部份


1.陳巧雲,「績效評估類型與員工衝突之相關性研究」,銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文,民國91年7月
2.李美慧,「績效評估公平性對組織承諾與工作績效的影響-以巨匠電腦公司為例」,台灣科技大學企業管理學研究所碩士論文,民國91年7月
3.劉益民,「績效評估制度應用之研究-以電子業為例」,台灣科技大學管理研究所碩士論文,民國89年7月
4.董欣寧,「個人屬性、組織公平與組織承諾關聯性之研究-以中華電信國際電信公司為例」,交通大學經營管理研究所碩士論文,民國90年7月
5.Daft, R. L.著,李在長編譯,組織理論與管理,第七版,台北:華泰文化事業公司,民國94年1月
6.Robbins, S. P.著,李青芬、李雅婷、趙慕芬編譯,組織行為學,第九版,台北:華泰文化事業公司,民國91年
7.帥韻儀,「以問題解決為導向衝突問題解決模式建立之研究」,中原大學企業管理學研究所碩士論文,民國92年1月
8.陳順宇,多變量分析,第七版,台北:華泰文化事業公司,民國89年
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊