(34.204.185.54) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/16 18:45
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:許乃文
研究生(外文):Nai-Wen Hsu
論文名稱:「動不動,大不同」-團隊發展歷程、成員互動行為與團隊效能之實驗研究
論文名稱(外文):Experimental Research on Group Development Process, Interaction between Group Member and Team Efficiency
指導教授:方祥明方祥明引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsiang-Ming Fang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:靜宜大學
系所名稱:企業管理研究所
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:2007/07/
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:179
中文關鍵詞:團隊效能信任團隊衝突成員互動行為團隊發展歷程
外文關鍵詞:Team EfficiencyTrustTeam ConflictInteractive Behaviors among Team MembersGroup development process
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:16
  • 點閱點閱:331
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
團隊發展歷程是一個動態過程、需要長期觀察與紀錄分析,而過去有關團隊歷程的研究多是以問卷方式來讓受測者回溯其團隊發展過程,但橫斷面研究不易真正的描繪出團隊發展歷程的階段與重要事件。因此,若能以縱斷面的方式進行長期的研究,將對團隊發展的研究產生更大幫助,此為本研究之主要動機。
本研究採取實驗研究的方式,探討團隊發展歷程的完整性對團隊效能的影響,並試圖探討當團隊發展時,團隊衝突與團隊效能之間的關係及信任對其影響為何。其次,透過Bales(1979)所提出的SYMLOG分析法深入分析團隊成員間的互動行為,期在團隊發展的動態過程中,發現影響團隊效能的重要行為模式。此外,本研究也將研究團隊領導者行為及團隊同質性對團隊發展歷程、團隊衝突、信任與團隊效能的影響。期望能夠對實際團隊發展歷程作深入的觀察與了解。
本研究主要是根據研究的背景與動機,蒐集相關的研究、書籍等文獻,進行閱讀、彙整與探討分析以尋求初步的研究概念與變數構念,其次,藉由文獻探討結論確認欲研究的變數構念與相互關係,並建立實證研究架構,且提出八項研究假設。隨後,針對某大學修習「創意管理」課程的42位學生,分成十組團隊為研究對象,以TeamSpirit系統及問卷調查方式蒐集資料進行實證研究,並驗證研究假設,最後得到以下結論:
一、團隊發展歷程較完整的團隊,其團隊效能較高。
二、團隊發展歷程完整性不同的團隊,在團隊衝突沒有顯著差異存在。
三、團隊衝突對團隊效能有顯著的影響存在。其中,任務衝突對團隊效能有顯著的正向影響;過程衝突對團隊效能有顯著的負向影響。
四、信任會對團隊衝突與團隊效能間的關係產生顯著的干擾效果。
五、在團隊發展的各階段中,成員間會有不同互動行為產生。
六、不同效能的團隊,其團隊成員的互動行為模式有所差異。
(一)高效能團隊常出現積極主導團隊(UP)、效率高又認真的管理者(UF)、對其他人的付出表達欽佩與感激(DP)及在工作上非常服從盡職(DF)等四種行為上,這可以使得團隊的向心力和認同感不斷增強,有助於目標任務的順利執行。
(二)友善行為(P)和任務導向行為(F)有助於產生高效能。
(三)社交導向行為(B)對團隊效能幫助不大。
(四)在團隊發展歷程中,出現主動行為(U)次數最多。
(五)在團隊發展歷程中,被動行為(D)發生次數並不多。
七、有實際領導行為產生的團隊在能力認知型信任與競賽總分上優於無領導行為團隊。
八、異質性團隊在任務績效上優於同質性團隊。
最後,本研究根據研究結論提出理論上與實務上的涵義,以及對未來後續相關研究的建議。
Group development is a mobile process, which needs long-term observation and recorded analysis, but in the past there is rarely a complete description in the research on group development. Some relevant researches are mostly retrieving group development with answers given by receivers of questionnaires. It is not good enough to really depict the stages of group development and its important incidents. Therefore, if the research can use vertical section to observe, it will helpful to research of group development. So this the main motive for the research.
The research is adopting experiment research to explore the completeness of group development will have a remarkable influence on team efficiency. And explore when group development process, team conflicts will have a remarkable influence on team efficiency, as well as trust will have a remarkable impact on the relation between team conflict and team efficiency. Secondly, the research applies SYMLOG proposed by Bales(1979) to analyze Interactive Behaviors among Team Members. In hope to find the key behavioral factors which affect team efficiency in the mobile process of group development. In addition, the research also will explore behaviors of the leader of a team and group''s homogeneity will have remarkable influence on group development, team conflict, trust and team efficiency. Hope the research using experimental methods to conduct research so as to be able to conduct in-depth observation and understanding of actual group development.
The data were gathered by TeamSpirit system and questionnaires. There were 42 students that were observed and divided into 10 teams of major in Creative management at the University of Providence. The major findings were as follows:
1.The completeness of group development have a remarkable influence on team efficiency.
2.The completeness of group development have not a remarkable influence on team conflicts.
3.Team conflicts have a remarkable influence on team efficiency. Conflict of task has positive impact on task performance and competition score. And conflict of process has negative impact on task performance.
4.Trust have a remarkable impact on the relation between team conflict and team efficiency.
5.At the various stages of group development, team members have different types of interactive behaviors.
6.At the various team efficiency, team members have different types of interactive behaviors.
(1)The high efficiency often appear active and dominant team behavior(UP), Actuality manager (UF), trust and admire behavior (DP), responsible to obey very much at work behavior(DF). There behaviors can make centripetal force of group and admit sense strengthen constantly.
(2)Friendly(P) and instrumentally(F) controlled can help team to account for high efficiency.
(3)Emotionally expressive (B) have not anything help for team efficiency.
(4)Frequency of dominant(U) is highest in group development process.
(5)Frequency of submissive(D) is low in group development process.
7.Behaviors of the leader have a remarkable influence on trust with recognition of capability and competition score.
8.Heterogeneity team in the task performance is better than homogeneity team.
目錄
中文摘要.................................................................................................................... Ι
英文摘要..................................................................................................................III
謝誌............................................................................................................................V
目錄.........................................................................................................................VII
表目錄.......................................................................................................................IX
圖目錄.....................................................................................................................XII
第一章 緒論.............................................................................................................1
第一節 研究背景與動機...............................................................................1
第二節 研究目的與問題...............................................................................4
第三節 研究程序...........................................................................................5
第二章 文獻探討.....................................................................................................8
第一節 團隊的意義.......................................................................................8
第二節 團隊發展歷程.................................................................................11
第三節 團隊效能.........................................................................................15
第四節 團隊成員互動行為.........................................................................17
第五節 團隊衝突.........................................................................................22
第六節 信任.................................................................................................28
第七節 各變數間之相關研究.....................................................................31
第三章 研究方法...................................................................................................38
第一節 研究架構.........................................................................................39
第二節 研究假設.........................................................................................40
第三節 變數操作性定義與研究工具.........................................................42
第四節 研究對象.........................................................................................55
第五節 研究樣本.........................................................................................56
第六節 實驗設計.........................................................................................58
第七節 實驗流程.........................................................................................59
第八節 資料分析方法.................................................................................60
第九節 信度與效度分析.............................................................................63
第十節 研究範圍與基礎.............................................................................69
第四章 研究結果分析...........................................................................................71
第一節 團隊衝突、信任與團隊效能之敘述性統計分析..........................71
第二節 團隊發展歷程分析.........................................................................74
第三節 成員互動行為分析.........................................................................86
第四節 團隊衝突、信任與團隊效能之相關分析.....................................115
第五節 人口統計變數在各因素構面上之差異性檢定...........................116
第六節 團隊發展歷程的完整性對團隊效能與團隊衝突之差異性分析...121
第七節 團隊衝突對團隊效能之影響性分析...........................................123
第八節 信任對團隊衝突與團隊效能關係之干擾效果分析...................125
第九節 領導者行為對團隊發展歷程、團隊衝突、信任與團隊效能之差 異性分析.......................................................................................142
第十節 團隊同質性對團隊發展歷程、團隊衝突、信任與團隊效能之差 異性分析.......................................................................................144
第十一節 研究假設驗證結論.......................................................................146
第五章 結論與建議.............................................................................................149
第一節 研究結論.......................................................................................149
第二節 研究涵義.......................................................................................159
第三節 研究限制.......................................................................................163
第四節 未來研究建議...............................................................................163
參考文獻.................................................................................................................165
附錄一 研究問卷.................................................................................................175
附錄二 TeamSpirit 系統介紹畫面.....................................................................178


表目錄
表2-1 團體與團隊的差異...................................................................................10
表2-2 團隊發展理論彙整表...............................................................................14
表2-3 團隊效能指標彙整表...............................................................................16
表2-4 SYMLOG中26個行為項目定義說明......................................................19
表2-5 衝突的定義彙整表...................................................................................23
表2-6 團隊衝突發生之原因...............................................................................25
表2-7 團隊衝突類型...........................................................................................27
表2-8 信任的定義彙整表...................................................................................29
表3-1 本研究各構念之研究量表.......................................................................42
表3-2 SYMLOG中18個行為項目定義說明......................................................45
表3-3 團隊衝突之操作性定義與衡量題項.......................................................47
表3-4 信任之操作性定義與衡量題項...............................................................48
表3-5 團隊效能各因素構面操作性定義與衡量題項.......................................49
表3-6 團隊效能分群的單因子變異數分析.......................................................51
表3-7 TeamSpirit系統說明彙整表.....................................................................53
表3-8 問卷回收分析狀況表…...........................................................................55
表3-9 研究樣本人口統計變數分析…………………………………………...57
表3-10 實驗設計….............................................................................................58
表3-11 團隊衝突因素分析摘要表…...................................................................65
表3-12 信任因素分析摘要表…...........................................................................66
表3-13 任務績效因素分析摘要表…...................................................................67
表3-14 合作滿意度因素分析摘要表…...............................................................67
表3-15 各因素構面之信度分析摘要表…….......................................................68
表3-16 六位評審評分之相關係數…...................................................................69
表3-17 本研究範圍與基礎摘要表…...................................................................70
表4-1 本研究各構面之敘述性統計表…...........................................................73
表4-2 團隊發展階段特色...................................................................................74
表4-2-1 第一組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..75
表4-2-2 第二組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..76
表4-2-3 第三組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..77
表4-2-4 第四組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..78
表4-2-5 第五組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..79
表4-2-6 第六組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..80
表4-2-7 第七組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表……………………………..81
表4-2-8 第八組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表………….………………….82
表4-2-9 第九組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表………….………………….83
表4-2-10 第十組團隊發展階段內容分析摘要表….…………………………84
表4-3 團隊發展週期比較表…...........................................................................85
表4-4 SYMLOG中18個行為項目的定義說明………………………………..86
表4-4-1 第一組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….87
表4-4-2 第二組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….89
表4-4-3 第三組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….90
表4-4-4 第四組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….91
表4-4-5 第五組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….92
表4-4-6 第六組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….93
表4-4-7 第七組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….94
表4-4-8 第八組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….96
表4-4-9 第九組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….97
表4-4-10 第十組在各階段之互動行為分析表…………………………….99
表4-4-11 各團隊在形成期的有效語幹分析整理表…………………….101
表4-4-12 各團隊在激盪期的有效語幹分析整理表………………………103
表4-4-13 各團隊在規範期的有效語幹分析整理表………………………105
表4-4-14 各團隊在執行期的有效語幹分析整理表………………………107
表4-4-15 各團隊在終止期的有效語幹分析整理表………………………108
表4-5 團隊成員互動行為的總次數分析表………………………………….109
表4-6 本研究各構面間之相關係數分析表….................................................115
表4-7 不同性別成員在各因素構面的 t-test 表…….....................................116
表4-8 不同年齡成員在各因素構面的 t-test 表….........................................117
表4-9 不同年級成員在各因素構面的變異數分析摘要表….........................118
表4-10 不同科系成員在各因素構面的變異數分析摘要表….........................120
表4-11 團隊發展歷程完整性在團隊效能上的t-test表….................................121
表4-12 團隊發展歷程完整性在團隊衝突上的t-test表….................................122
表4-13 團隊衝突對任務績效之迴歸分析表….................................................123
表4-14 團隊衝突對合作滿意度之迴歸分析表….............................................124
表4-15 團隊衝突對競賽總分之迴歸分析表….................................................125
表4-16 情感型信任對團隊衝突與任務績效關係之層級迴歸分析表……….127
表4-17 情感型信任對團隊衝突與合作滿意度關係之層級迴歸分析表…….128
表4-18 情感型信任對團隊衝突與競賽總分關係之層級迴歸分析表……….129
表4-19 能力認知型信任對團隊衝突與任務績效關係之層級迴歸分析表….131
表4-20 能力認知型信任對團隊衝突與合作滿意度關係之層級迴歸分析表.132
表4-21 能力認知型信任對團隊衝突與競賽總分關係之層級迴歸分析表….134
表4-22 工作認知型信任對團隊衝突與任務績效關係之層級迴歸分析表….136
表4-23 工作認知型信任對團隊衝突與合作滿意度關係之層級迴歸分析表…139
表4-24 工作認知型信任對團隊衝突與競賽總分關係之層級迴歸分析表….141
表4-25 領導者行為與團隊發展歷程之卡方檢定…………………………….143
表4-26 領導者行為在各因素構面的t-test表………………………………….144
表4-27 團隊同質性與團隊發展歷程之卡方檢定…………………………….145
表4-28 團隊同質性在各因素構面的t-test表………………………………….146
表4-29 研究假設驗證結果彙整表…………………………………………….147

圖目錄
圖1-1 研究流程圖………………………………………………………………...7
圖2-1 工作群體類型……………………………………………………………...8
圖2-2 SYMLOG三個維度的立體空間示意圖………………………………...18
圖3-1 研究架構………………………………………………………………….39
圖3-2 TeamSpirit系統設計概念流程圖………………………………………..52
圖3-3 TeamSpirit創造性問題解決流程及工具………………...………………52
圖4-1 工作認知型信任對關係衝突與任務績效之干擾作用………………...137
圖4-2 工作認知型信任對過程衝突與任務績效之干擾作用………………...137
圖4-3 工作認知型信任對過程衝突與合作滿意度之干擾作用……………...140
圖4-4 工作認知型信任對關係衝突與競賽總分之干擾作用………………...142
參考文獻
一、中文部分
方祥明(2004)。團隊成員個人知識轉換能力與外部關係資源對創造表現行為之影響-以網絡中心性為中介變數。雲林科技大學管理研究所博士論文。台灣雲林。
王中佑(2003)。團隊虛擬化程度、團隊內互動與團隊效能之關係研究。中興大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。台灣台中。
王建忠(2001)。團隊領導與團隊效能:團隊內互動的中介效果。台灣大學心理學研究所碩士論文。台灣台北。
王精文、陳明德(2006)。創造力-創造性問題解決方法與工具(初版)。台北:鼎茂。
王議賢(2004)。人際交往對關係、信任與關係衝突及合作滿意度之影響。高雄醫學大學行為科學研究所碩士論文。台灣高雄。
田靜婷(2003)。影響高科技產業研發團隊學習績效相關因素之研究。彰化師範大學工業教育學系博士論文。台灣彰化。
池榮尉(2004)。國民小學教師團隊發展歷程之研究-以啄木鳥教師團隊為例。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文。台灣桃園。
何駿才(2004)。領導者角色扮演對虛擬團隊績效影響之研究。中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。台灣高雄。
吳麗雲(1997)。團隊歷程分析方法-觀察團體的多重層次系統(SYMLOG)簡介。諮商與輔導,141,26-30。
呂婉瑜(2000)。功能性角色對虛擬團隊效能之影響。中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。台灣高雄。
宋鎮照(2000)。團體動力學(初版)。台北市:五南。
李佩婷(2005)。業務團隊領導風格與業務人員人格特質 對團隊發展之影響-個案研究。雲林科技大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。台灣雲林。
林東清,楊玉琪,吳盛(2002)。虛擬團隊成員互動行為對合作績效影響之研究。臺大管理論叢,13(1),187-226。
林東清、吳盛、楊玉琪、劉勇志(2004)。以SYMLOG的行為架構來比較虛擬團隊的互動行為。資訊管理學報,11(3),1-31。
陳順宇(2004)。多變量分析。台北:華泰。
陳碧玲(1990)。團體互動行為模式之分析。彰化師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。台灣彰化。
楊玉琪(2001)。成員互動行為對虛擬團隊合作績效影響之研究。中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。台灣高雄。
楊睿晴(2005)。「心」經濟起飛 -以體驗觀點探討地方文化產業活動行銷之效益。靜宜大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。台灣台中。
廖乾助(2004)。團隊多元化與團隊衝突對專案團隊績效的影響。中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。台灣桃園。
趙沛(2001)。通路衝突對連鎖體系關係品質影響之研究。高雄第一科技大學行銷與流通研究所碩士論文。台灣高雄。
劉柏緯(2006)。影響團隊成員產生社會賦閒效應相關因素之實驗研究。靜宜大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。台灣台中。
劉麟書(2000)。人際信任整合模型之研究。銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。台灣台北。
潘正德(1995)。團體動力學。台北:心理出版社。
蔡全智(1998)。團隊發展影響因素之研究。政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。台灣台北。
蔡靜婷(2000)。工作團隊多元化、衝突與任務績效之相關研究。中正大學勞工研究所碩士論文。台灣嘉義。
蘇貞樵(2002)。團隊衝突、衝突整合與學習績效之相關性研究。樹德科技大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。台灣高雄。
二、英文部分
Amason, A. C. & Mooney, A. C. (1999). The effect of past performance on top management team conflict in strategic decision making. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 10(4), 340-359.
Amason, A. C. & Sapienza, H. J. (1997). The effect of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive conflict and affective conflict. Journal of Management, 23(4), 459-516.
Amason, A. C. & Schweiger, D. M. (1994). Resolving the paradox conflict, strategic decision making, and organizational peroformance. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 5(2), 239-253.
Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision marking: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 123-148.
Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1997). Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 634-995.
Anderson, J. C. & Narus, J. A. (1990). A Model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 14, 396-405.
Bales, R. F. & Cohen, S. P. (1979). SYMLOG:A System for the Multiple Level Observation of Groups. New York:Free Press.
Bandura, A. (1999). A Socio-cognitive Analysis of Substance Abuse: An Agnatic Perspective. Psychological Science 10(3), 214.
Banker, R. D., Field, J. M., Schroeder, R. G., & Sinha, K. K. (1996). Impact of work teams on manufacturing performance: A longitudinal field study. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 867-890.
Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J. & M. K. Mount. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 377-391.
Bion, W. R. (1961). Experience in groups. New York: Basic Books.
Boulding, K. (1963). Conflict & defense. New York:Harper & Row.
Bradach, J. L. & Eccles, R. G. (1989). Price, authority and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review (of) Sociology, 15, 97-118.
Brehmer, B. (1976). Social judgment theory and the Analysis of interpersonal conflict. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 985-1003.
Capozzoli, T. K. (1995). Conflict resolution-A key ingredient in successful teams. Supervision, 56, (12), 3-5.
Capozzoli, T. K. (1999). Conflict resolution-A key ingredient in successful teams. Supervision, 56, (12), 3-5.
Chen, Ming-Huei. (2001). Investigation of a new model of team development through the development and testing of a self-report inventory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Manchester Bussiness School, UK.
Cohen, S. G. & Ledford, G. E. (1994). The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A quasi-experiment. Human Relations, 47, 13-43.
Coser, L. (1956). The Functions of Conflict. New York: Free Press.
De Dreu, C. K., W., & Weingart, Laurie R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741-749.
Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 265-279.
Dirks, K. T. and Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628.
Dirks, Kurt T. (2000). Trust in Leadership and Team Performance: Evidence from NCCA Basketball. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 1004-1012.
Early, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 26-49.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
Eisenhardt, K. M., Kahwajy, J. L., & Bourgeois, L. J. (1997). How management teams can have a good fight. Harvard Business Review, 77-85.
Fuhriman, A. & Barlow, S. A. (1994) Interaction Analysis:Instrumentation and Issues. In the Fuhriman, A. and Burling, G. M. (Eds), Handbook of Group Psychotherapy:An empirical and clinical synthesis, New York:John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Gambetta, D. (1998). Trust making and breaking cooperative relations. New York: Basil Blackwell.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
Guetzkow, H., & Gyr, J. (1954). An analysis of conflict in decision-making groups. Human Relations, 7, 367-381.
Hackman, J. R. (1983). A Normative Model of Work Team Effectiveness. New Haven, CT :Yale University.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). Handbook of Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs. NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Hackman, J. R. (1990). Group that work (& those that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Henri Barki (2001). Interpersonal conflict and its management in information system development. MIS Quarterly, 25(2), 195-228.
Hosmer, L. T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 379-403.
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, 50, 887-904.
Jehn, K. A. & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: a longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238-251.
Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.
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, 44(4), 741-763.
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, 44(4), 741-763.
Jessup, L. M. (1990). Group decision support system: A need for behavioral research. International Journal of Small Group Research, 3(2), 145-204.
Jones, G. R. & George, J. M. (2003). Understanding and managing organizational behavior. 421-423.
Jones, T. S.(1990). Communication conflict. In M. A. Rahim(Ed.), Theory and Research in Conflict Management, New York: Prageger.
Kahai , S. S., Sosik, J. J.; B. J. Avolio. (1997). Effects of leadership style and problem structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting system environment. Personnel Psychology, 50(1), 121-146.
Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high performance organization. Boston:Harvard Business School Press, 45.
Kolodny, H. F. & Kiggundu, M. N. (1980). Toward the development of a sociotechnical systems model in woodlands mechanical harvesting. Human Relations, 33, 623-645.
Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569-598.
Ledford, G. E. Jr, Lawler, E. E. III, & M. S. Albers. (1995). Compensation and benefits review. Saranac Lake Jul/Aug 27(4), 76-80.
LePine, J. A., Hanson, M. A., Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2000). Contextual performance and teamwork: Implications for staffing. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 19, 53-90.
Lewicki, R.J., D.J. McAllister, and R.J. Bies. (1998). Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438-458.
Lewis, J. D. & Weiger, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social Focus, 63(4), 967-985.
Lewis, J. P. (1993). How to Build and Manage a Winning Project Team. New York, N.Y.: American Management Association.
Marcia, P. (1990). Putting the trust with a new team: Funds back faith with assets; Firms owned by minorities & women. Pensions & Investments, 18(22), 35-36.
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59.
McGrath, J. D. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social Psychology : A Brief Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Mellinger, G. D. (1956). Interpersonal trust as a factor in communication. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 52, 304-309.
Miller, Daine L. (2003). The stages of group development: A retrospective study of dynamic team process. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 20(2). p121-134.
Ming-Huei, Chen. (2001). Investigation of a new model of team development through the development and testing of a self-report inventory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Manchester Bussiness School, UK.
Mohr, J.J., Robert J., Fisher & John R. Nevin (1996). Collaborative Communication in Interfirm Relationships: Moderating Effects of Intergation and Control. Journal of Marketing, 60, 103-115.
Moore, S. F., Shaffer, L. S., Pollak, E. L., & Taylor Lemcke, P. (1987). The effect of interpersonal trust and prior common problem experience on common management. Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 19-29.
Morgan, M. R. & Hunt, D. S. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58, 20-38.
Nieva, V. F., Fleishman, E. A. & Reick, A. (1978). Team dimensions: Their identity, their measurement and their relationships.Washington, DC: Advanced Research Resources Organization.
Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
Parker, G. M. (1990). Team players and teamwork: The new competitive business strategy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H. and Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142.
Putnam, L. L., & Poole, M. S.(1987). Conflict and negotiation. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Robert, & L. W. Porter(Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, CA: Sage: Newbury Park
Putnam, L. L., & Wilson, C. (1982). Communicative strategies in organizational conflict: Reliability and validity of a measurement scale. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication Yearbook ,6, 629-652. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Rahim, M. A., Buntzman, G. F., & White, D. (1999). An empirical study of the stages of moral development and conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10, 154-171.
Reitz, H. J. (1977). Bebavior in organizations. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Robbins, S. P. (1994). Organizational behavior. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Robbins, S. P. (2000). Organizational Behavior. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Robbins, T. L. & Fredenall, L. D. (2001). Correlates of team success in higher education. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141(1), 135-136.
Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal. Journal of Personality, 35, 651-665.
Rotter, J. B. (1980). Interpersonal Trust, Trustworthiness, and Gullibility. American Psychologist, 35(1), 1-7.
Schminke, M., & Wells, D. (1999). Group process and performance and their effects on individuals’ ethical frameworks. Journal of Business Ethics, 18, 367-381.
Schutz, W. C. (1967). JOY: Expanding human awareness. New York:Grove Press.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. N. Y.: Doubleday.
Shea, G. P. & Guzzo, R. A. (1987). Groups as human resources. In Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 5, K. Rowland and G. ferris eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 323-356.
Shonk, J. H. (1982). Working in teams: A practical manual for improving work groups. New York: Amacom.
Smith, H. D. (1967). A Parsimonious Definition of Group: Toward Conceptual Clarity and Scientific Utility, Sociological Inquiry, 141–167.
Sockalingam, S., & Doswell, A. (1999). Conflict in BPR. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(3), 146-153.
Song, X. M., Montoya-Weiss, & Schmidt, J. B. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of cross-functional cooperation: A comparison of R&D, manufacturing, and marketing perspectives. Journal of Production Innovation Management, 14, 35-47.
Spiegel, J. & Torres, C. (1994). Manager’s official guide to team working. Peifeiffer & Company.
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. Journal of Management, 43(2), 135-148.
Stewart, G. L., Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (1999). Team work and group dynamics. New York: Wiley.
Sundstrom, E. DeMeuse, K. P., & Futrull. D.(1990). Work Team: Applications and effectiveness, American Psychology, 45(2), 120-133.
Thomas, K. W. (Eds.). (1976). Conflict and conflict management in Handbook ofindustrial and Organizational Psychology. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, 889-935.
Tjosvold, D. (1988a). Cooperative and competitive dynamics within and between organizational units. Human Relations, 41(6), 425-436.
Tjosvold, D. (1988b). Cooperative and competitive interdependence: Collaboration between departments to service customers. Group and Organization Studies, 13(3), 274-289.
Tjosvold, D. (1997). Conflict within interdependence:its value for productivity and individuality. In De Dreu, C. K. W. and Van de Vliert E. (eds), Sage Publications, London, 23-37.
Tuckman, B. and Jensen, M. (1977). Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organization Studies, 2, 419-427.
Verderber, R. F. & Venderver, K. S. (1995). Inter-Actusing interpersonal communication skills. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Wall, J. A., & Callister, R. R. (1995). Conflict and its management. Journal of Management, 21, 515-558.
Weldon, E., & Weingart, L. R. (1993). Group goals and group perform-ance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32(1), 307-334.
Wheelan, S. (1999). Creating effective teams. SAGE Publications, 73-93.
Wheelan, S. A. (1994). Group processes: A development perspective. Allyn and Bacon.
Wiersema, M. F., & Bird, A. (1993). Organizational demography in Japanese firms:Group heterogeneity, individual dissimilarity, & top management team turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 3:996-1025.
Williams, M. (2001). In whom we trust: Group membership as an affective context for trust development. Academy of management Review, 26(3), 377-396.
三、網站資料
網際網路群體問題解決與決策支援系統網站(TeamSpirit)。2007年1月19日取自http://www.verycreative.net/ebs/。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔