(18.206.238.77) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/12 01:13
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:葉育伶
研究生(外文):Yu-Ling Yeh
論文名稱:探討跨領域溝通—以設計與行銷跨領域團隊為例
論文名稱(外文):Exploring the Process of Interdisciplinary Communication-A Case Study of Design and Marketing Interdisciplinary Team
指導教授:王如鈺王如鈺引用關係丁姵元丁姵元引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yu-Yuh WangPei-Yuan Ting
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:中原大學
系所名稱:企業管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:其他商業及管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2009
畢業學年度:97
語文別:中文
論文頁數:174
中文關鍵詞:跨領域團隊溝通認知風格服務學習
外文關鍵詞:cognitive stylecommunicationinterdisciplinary teamservice learning
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:7
  • 點閱點閱:841
  • 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:2
現在企業內有許多跨部門組合,因人員來自不同領域,在溝通上形成障礙,影響團隊的進度與績效表現。目前台灣逐漸走向自有品牌(Brand in Taiwan),設計漸成為企業的發展重點。而過去的研究多為行銷及研發人員之間的相關研究,有關設計及行銷人員互動的相關研究在國內仍很少。加上學校課程設計中少有跨領域的課程,以此為出發點,藉由本校的服務學習跨系合作課程,來研究企管系與商設系之間的跨領域溝通議題,透過研究學生們的互動來釐清行銷與設計人才之間的溝通障礙為何,以供專案管理人員作為借鏡。
本研究主要目的是探討跨領域合作的溝通問題。研究情境以在服務學習課程中的企管系及商設系的同學做為研究主體。此課程的時間為一學年的連續課程,主要是讓學生在學校即有合作的實戰經驗,可從中培養問題解決能力,也較符合企業實際狀況。本研究將透過兩年的課程研究,來探討兩系的合作過程中所造成溝通有效或障礙的原因為何,並研究溝通障礙的解決方案。本研究採用混合研究方式做為此次的研究方法,以質性研究的訪談方式來探究團隊合作之歷程。在團隊合作整體性結果,則以量表方式來測量跨領域合作的溝通效能與團隊績效的關聯性。
本研究透過合併分析後得到下列結論:形成團隊跨領域障礙的因素來自於成員認知風格差異、專業背景以及抱持著未能肯定自我專業價值的心態。由於成員認知風格差異使得團隊成員對溝通管道的偏好不同,以及思考模式的差異,使得團隊的成員在工作上產生摩擦,形成溝通障礙。而因為彼此的專業背景不同,各自有其專業語言,因此常發生聽不懂對方的專業語言造成溝通上的障礙。此外,由於成員未能對自己的專業價值予以肯定,使得不敢向對方要求專業上的努力,也不敢在發生問題當下與之溝通,造成彼此的溝通障礙。但是這些跨領域溝通障礙都可以透過建立團隊關係讓團隊能持有動力共同面對解決問題。研究也發現,團隊成員的認知風格差異會影響團隊的溝通頻率。當認知風格差異大時,團隊的程序溝通以及面對面溝通就會提升,但是團隊的協調溝通以及非面對面溝通就會降低。研究中也發現,成員的認知風格差異則可以產生互補作用提升團隊的規範性績效、創意性績效以及整體績效。另外,研究結果發現,團隊透過程序溝通、協調溝通以及面對面溝通頻率也有助於團隊的規範性績效、創意性績效以及整體績效的提升。
There are many interdisciplinary teams working in business organizations today. Since interdisciplinary team is about a group of people from different departments, it is like that they will have difference in views and opinions. As a result, they are likely to have difficulties in communication. And these problems can also have great impact on the performance of an interdisciplinary team. Most of the researches about interdisciplinary team focus on the cooperation between R&D and marketing teams. But there are very few researches about the interdisciplinary cooperation between the design and marketing people, which has become very important today. This research is a study of the interdisciplinary communication between marketing and design people in the context of a service learning course at an university. It is hoped that the result of this study could help the project managers who are involved in interdisciplinary teams.
Since this research is about the communication within the interdisciplinary teams. The research results demonstrate the difficulties the students encountered in the process of interdisciplinary communication. Moreover, the process of how they solve the problems throughout the course will also be included. In order to find out the process of communication, this research use mixed method, which combines quantitative and qualitative methods.
The results show that the different cognitive styles and different professional background of team members could be barriers to communication in the interdisciplinary team. In addition, if team members couldn’t have confidence in their own profession, it could raise the barriers in the process of communication. However, the evidence demonstrates that the relationship between members could help interdisciplinary team reduce these barriers. The results also show that the difference between team members could affect the frequency of communication, which could result it improving the performance of interdisciplinary team. Finally, the performance of interdisciplinary team could rise up through the frequency of communication.
目 錄
中文摘要...................................Ⅰ
英文摘要...................................Ⅱ
謝誌.....................................Ⅲ
目錄.....................................Ⅳ
圖目錄....................................Ⅵ
表目錄....................................Ⅶ
第壹章 緒論................................1
第一節 研究背景與動機...........................1
第二節 研究目的..............................2
第三節 研究流程..............................2
第貳章 文獻回顧..............................3
第一節 跨領域團隊.............................3
第二節 認知風格..............................5
第三節 團隊溝通..............................7
第四節 團隊績效..............................10
第五節 認知風格、團隊溝通與團隊績效之關聯性.................11
第参章 研究方法..............................15
第一節 混合研究方法............................15
第二節 研究設計..............................16
第肆章 資料分析..............................24
第一節 量化研究資料分析..........................24
第二節 質性研究資料分析..........................85
第三節 合併分析..............................120
第伍章 研究結論與建議...........................125
第一節 研究結論..............................125
第二節 研究發現..............................128
第三節 研究貢獻與建議...........................132
第四節 研究限制..............................135
第五節 未來研究建議............................135
參考文獻...................................137
附錄一 量化問卷-上學期(企管系問卷) ....................151
附錄二 量化問卷-下學期...........................160
附錄三 訪談逐字稿(摘錄) ..........................164
附錄四 編碼 ................................165
圖目錄
圖1-1:研究流程................................2
圖3-1:研究架構................................17
圖5-1:跨領域團隊溝通障礙、解決方式以及團隊績效交互影響............130
表目錄
表3-1:協調溝通衡量題項............................20
表3-2:合作效能衡量題項............................20
表3-3:訪談大綱................................22
表3-4:研究資料來源..............................23
表4-1:性別結構................................24
表4-2:原始學院結構..............................24
表4-3:重分類學院結構.............................25
表4-4:組別人數結構..............................25
表4-5:S5題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表...................26
表4-6:S7題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表...................27
表4-7:S8題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表...................28
表4-8:S9題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表...................28
表4-9:S10題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................29
表4-10:S12題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................30
表4-11:S15題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................31
表4-12:S16題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................31
表4-13:S18題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................32
表4-14:S20題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................33
表4-15:S33題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................34
表4-16:S34題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................34
表4-17:S36題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................35
表4-18:S37題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................36
表4-19:O1題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表..................37
表4-20:O2題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................38
表4-21:O3題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................39
表4-22:O4題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................39
表4-23:O5題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................40
表4-24:O6題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................41
表4-25:O7題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................42
表4-26:O8題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................43
表4-27:O9題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................43
表4-28:O10題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................44
表4-29:O12題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................45
表4-30:O15題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................46
表4-31:O17題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................46
表4-32:O18題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................47
表4-33:O19題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................48
表4-34:O20題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................49
表4-35:O21題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................50
表4-36:O22題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................50
表4-37:O24題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................51
表4-38:O25題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................52
表4-39:O26題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................53
表4-40:O28題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................54
表4-41:O29題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................54
表4-42:O30題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................55
表4-43:O31題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................56
表4-44:O32題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................57
表4-45:O33題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................58
表4-46:O35題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................58
表4-47:O36題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................59
表4-48:O37題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................60
表4-49:O38題項之填答情況與學院之交叉分析表.................61
表4-50:認知風格顯著差異題項彙整.......................61
表4-51:組別自我評估認知風格顯著差異題項彙整.................65
表4-52:組別評估對方認知風格顯著差異題項彙整.................66
表4-53:溝通之因素分析結果..........................67
表4-54:溝通與績效之衡量構面、問卷題數與信度值分析表.............69
表4-55:溝通與績效之信度分析結果表......................69
表4-56:組內認知風格差異與團隊溝通、團隊績效t-test結果彙整..........72
表4-57:自我評估顯著差異題項與團隊溝通及團隊績效之影響分析..........73
表4-58:評估對方顯著差異題項與團隊溝通及團隊績效之影響分析..........76
表4-59:溝通與績效之相關分析表(上學期)....................78
表4-60:溝通與績效之相關分析表(下學期)....................79
表4-61:規範性績效迴歸模式的整體檢定結果分析表................80
表4-62:規範性績效迴歸係數與複共線性分析表..................80
表4-63:創意性績效迴歸模式的整體檢定結果分析表................81
表4-64:創意性績效迴歸係數與複共線性分析表..................81
表4-65:整體績效迴歸模式的整體檢定結果分析表.................82
表4-66:整體績效迴歸係數與複共線性分析表...................82
表4-67:團隊溝通與團隊績效影響結果彙整....................83
表4-68:量化研究結果分析摘要表........................84
表4-69:質性資料分析架構...........................85
表4-70:兩系評估認知風格差異彙整.......................90
表4-71:溝通管道優缺點彙整..........................93
中文部分
沈玲玲(2006)。團隊多元化對團隊內衝突與後續行為的影響:以認知風格和價值觀一致性為調節變項的研究。國立東華大學企業管理研究所在職專班碩士論文,未出版,花蓮。
林千乃、謝清佳、謝定助、尤國任(2006)。科技中介之組織溝通理論反思:研究典範與後設理論之重建。資訊管理學報,13(3),204-211。
姜廷儒(2003)。跨功能合作對新產品開發績效影響之研究。私立中原大學企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版,桃園。
柳林緯(1996)。組織中電腦中介傳播系統使用之研究:以電子郵件為例。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹。
胡幼慧主編(1996)。質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北:巨流。
徐木蘭(1994)。行為與科學管理。台北:三民書局。
張存金、盧淵源 (2001)。研發團隊結構特性及整合機制與研發績效關係之研究—因徑分析模式。企業管理學報,49,97-134。
許雅婷(2002)。人格特質與團隊組合對知識分享、創新績效的影響。東吳大學企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。台北:五南。
陳宜文(2005)。「設計師認知風格對團隊溝通與問題解決的影響」。私立大同大學工業設計研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
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,未出版,台北。
董雅菁(2006)。跨功能研發團隊中溝通模式對設計知識整合之影響。私立大同大學工業設計學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
廖洲棚(1997)。團隊型組織之溝通訊息傳遞過程:符號與資訊科技互動的研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
蔡淑敏(2001)。企業內溝通媒介、員工溝通滿足及組織承諾關係之研究-以台灣電子資訊產業為例。長榮管理學院經營管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台南。
蕭瑞麟(2007)。不用數字的研究:鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究。台北:台灣培生教育。
謝安田(1982)。企業管理。台北:五南圖書公司。
英文部分
Agor, W. H. (1986). The Logic of Intuitive Decision Making: A Research Approach for Top Management. New York.
Allinson, C. W. & Hayes, J. (1994). Matching the cognitive styles of management students and teachers: a preliminary study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79(3), 1256-1258.
Allinson, C. W. & Hayes, J. (1996). The Cognitive Style Index: A measure of intuition-analysis for organizational research. Journal of management Studies, 33(1), 119-136.
Allinson, C. W., Armstrong, S. J., & Hayes, J. (2001). The effect of cognitive style on leader-member exchange: A study of manager-subordinate dyads. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(2), 201-220.
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New York.
Amabile, T. M. (1994). The Atmosphere of Pure Work: Creativity in R&D. The Social Psychology of Science, edited by S. Fuller and W. R. Shadish. New York: Guilford Press.
Ancona, D. C. & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance. Organization Science, 3, 321-341.
Ancona, D. G. & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 634-995.
Armstrong, S. J. (1999). Cognitive style and dyadic interaction: a study of supervisors and subordinates engaged in working relationships. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Leeds, UK.
Bantel, K. & Jackson, S. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107-124.
Baron, R. A. (1991). Positive effects of conflict: A cognitive perspective. Employees Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 4, 25-36.
Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 377-391.
Berscheid, E. (1985). Interpersonal attraction. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 3rd ed., edited by G. Lindzey and E. Aronson. New York: Random House.
Bettenhausen, K. L. (1991). Five years for groups’ research: What we have learned and what needs to be addressed. Journal of Management, 17, 345-381.
Bolton, Bruce. (1997). Their Best Selves. Building Character Education and Service Learning Together in the Lives of Young People. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Bradach, J. L. & Eccles, R. G. (1989). Price, authority and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review (of) Sociology, 15, 97-118.
Brewer, M. (1979). In group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307-324.
Brilhart, J. K (1978). Effective Group Discussion, 3rd ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C.
Brophy, J. E. & Good, T. L. (1974). Teacher-student Relationships: Causes and consequences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Brown, S. L. & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995). Product Development: Past Research, Present Findings, and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 343-378.
Bryman, A. (2006). Integration quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done. Qual, Res 6, 97-113.
Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integration quantitative and qualitative research. J Mixed Methods Res 1, 8-22.
Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Carron, A. V., Hausenblas, H. A., & Mack, D. (1998). Social influence and exercise: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 18(1), 1-16.
Cohen, W. B. & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What make team work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239-290.
Contractor, N. S. & Eisenberg, E. M. (1990). Communication Networks and New Media in Organizations. Organizations and Communication Technology, edited by J. Fulk and C.W. Steinfield. 143-172.
Cox, T. H., Lobel, S. A. ,& Mcleod, P. L. (1991). Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 827-847.
Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, B. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daft, R. L. & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191-233.
Daft, R. L. & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: An introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dimbleby R. & Burton, G. (1992). More than Words: An Introduction to Communication, 2nd ed. Routledge, London.
Distefano, J. J. (1970). Interpersonal perceptions of field-independent and field-dependent teachers A', and students. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 32, 463A-464A.
Doob, L. W. (1958). Behavior and grammatical style. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 56, 398-400.
Dougherty, D. J. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization Science, 3, 179-202.
Dunn, R., Giannitti, M. C., Murray, J. B., Rossi, I., Geisert, G., & Quinn, P. (1990). Grouping students for instruction: Effects of learning style on achievement and attitudes. Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 485-494.
Eisenhardt, K. & Schoonhoven, K. (1990). Organizational growth: Linking founding team strategy, environment, and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 504-529.
Entwhistle, N. (1981). Styles of Learning and Teaching. Bulletin of the Los Angeles Neurological Societies, 34, 313-320.
Ferraei F.M. & Toledowu J. C. (2004). Analyzing the knowledge management through the product development process. Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(8), 117-129.
Finkelstein, S. & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic Leadership: Top Executives and Their Effects on Organization. St. Paul, MN: West.
Fisher, B. A. (1978). Perspectives on Human Communication. Macmillan, New York.
Frank, B. M. & Davis, J. K. (1982). Effect of field –independence match or mismatch on a communication task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 23-31.
Freedman, N., O’ Hanlon, J., Oltman, P., & Witkin, H. A. (1972). The imprint of psychological differentiation on kinetic behavior in varying communicative contexts. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 79, 239-258.
Fulk, J., Schmitz, J., & Steinfield, C. W. (1990). A Social Influence Model of Technology Use. Organizations and Communication Technology, edited by J. Fulk and C. W. Steinfield. London: Sage.
Fulk, J., Steinfield, C.W., Schmitz, J., & Power, G. (1987). A Social Information Processing Model of Media Use in Organizations. Communication Research, 14(5), 529-552.
Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. MA: Addison-Wesley.
Garvin M. R. & Ramsier R. D. (2003). Experiential learning at the university level: a US case study. Education + Training, 45(5), 280-285(6).
Gazzaniga, M. S. (1971). Changing hemisphere dominance by changing reward probability in split brain monkey. Experimental Neurology, 33, 412-419.
George, T. R., & Feltz, D. L. (1995). Motivation in sport from a collective perspective. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26(1), 98-116.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Group in Context: A Model of Task Group Effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Goodenough, D. R., Witkin, H. A., Lewis, H. B., Koulak, D., & Cohen, H. (1974). Repression, interference and field-dependence as factors in dream forgetting. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 33-44.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educ Eval Ploicy Anal, 11, 255-274.
Gruenfeld, D. D. H. & Hollingshead, A. B. (1993). Sociocognition in work groups: The evolution of group integrative complexity and its relation to task and performance. Small Group Research, 24(3), 383-405.
Guzzo, R. & Dickson, M. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-338.
Hackman, J. R. (1983). A Normative Model of Work Team Effectiveness. CT: Yale University.
Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S. & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms’ competitive moves. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 659-684.
Handley, P. (1982). Relationship between supervisors' and trainees' cognitive styles and the supervision process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 508-515.
Hanson, W.E., Creswell, J., Plano Clark, V., & Creswell, D. (2005). Mixed method design in counseling psychology. J Couns Psyclol, 52, 224-235.
Hayes, J. & Allinson, C. W. (1998). Cognitive style and the theory and practice of individual and collective learning in organizations. Human Relations, 51(7), 847-872.
Henke W. John, Krachenberg A. Richard, & Lyons Thomas, (1993). PERSPECTIVE: Cross-Functional Teams: Good Concept, Poor Implementation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10, 216-229.
Hough, A. & Steinberg, L. (1995). Homophily of internalized distress in adolescent peer groups. Developmental Psychology, 31, 897-906.
Jackson, S. E. & Ruderman, M. N. (1995). Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigms for A Changing Workplace. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Jackson, S. E. (1991). Team composition in organizational settings: Issues in managing an increasingly diverse work force. Group Process and Productivity, London: Sage.
Jackson, S. E., Stone, V. K., & Alvarez, E. B. (1992). Socialization amidst diversity: Impact of demographics on work team oldtimers and newcomers. Research in Organizational Behavior, CT: JAL Press.
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. (1995). A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530-557.
Jones, G. R. & George, J. M. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 531-546.
Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Effects of leadership style and problem structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting system environment. Personnel Psychology, 50, 121-146.
Katz, N. (1990). Problem solving and time: Functions of learning style and teaching methods. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 10, 221-236.
Keely, R. H. & Roure, J. B. (1990). Management, strategy, and industry structures as influrnces on the success of new firms: A structural model. Management Science, 36, 1256-1269.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York:Norton.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). Learning Style technical manual. Boston: Mcber and Company.
Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. The modern American college, edited by A. W. Chickering and associates. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kolodny, H. F. & Kiggundu, M. N. (1980). Toward the development of a sociotechnical systems model in woodlands mechanical harvesting. Human Relations, 33, 623-645.
Krone, K. J., Jablin, F. M., & Putnam, L. L. (1987). Communication Theory and Organizational Communication: Multiple Perspectives. Handbook of Organizational Communication, edited by F. M. Jablin et al. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 18-40.
Krueger, R. A. (1986). Focus group interviewing: A helpful technique for agricultural educators. The Visitor, 73(7), 1-4.
Kubes, M. (1992). Cognitive style and interpersonal behavior: The Kirton Adaptation-Innovation and Schutz's FIRO-B Inventories. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 29, 33-38.
Langer, S. K. (1972). Mind: An essay in human feeling. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University.
Lasswell, H.D. (1948). The Structure and Function of Communication in Society. The communication of ideas, edited by L. Bryson. N.Y.: Harper and Bros.
Lawrence, G. (1993). People types and tiger stripes: A practical guide to learning styles. Gainsville, FL: Centre for Applications of Psychological Type.
Lawrence, P. R. & Lorsch, J. W. (1969). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Lee, A.S. (1994). Electronic mail as a medium for rich communication: An empirical investigation using hermeneutic Interpretation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 143.
Lindsay, P. (1985). Counselling to resolve a clash of cognitive styles. Technovation, 23, 57-467.
Litteljohn, D. (1990). Hospitality research: philosophies and progress. Managing and Marketing Services, edited by Teare, R., Moutinho, L. and Morgan, N. Cassell Education Ltd, London.
Lott, A. J. & Lott, B. E. (1961). Group Cohesiveness, Communication Level, and Conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 408-412.
Louise Doyle, Anne-Marie Brady, & Gobnait Byrne, (2009). An overview of mixed methods research. Journal of Research in Nursing, 14, 175-185.
Luria, A. R. (1966). Higher cortical functions in man. New York, Basic Books.
Marcus, E. S. (1970). The relationship of psychological differentiation to the congruence of temporal patterns of speech. Doctoral dissertation, New York University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 31, 2288B.
Marks, M. A., Zaccaro, S. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (2001). Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 971-986.
Markus, M. L. (1994). Electronic mail as the medium of managerial choice. Organization Science, 5(4), 502-527.
McCann, J. & Galbraith, J. R. (1981). Interdepartmental relations. Handbook of Organizational Design: Vol.2, Remodeling Organizations and Their Environments, 60-84, edited by P. C. Nystrom and W. H. Starbuck.
McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social Psychology: A Brief Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
McGrath, J. E. (1990). Time Matters in Groups. Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technical Bases of Collaborative Work. NJ: Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 23-62.
McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Communication. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
McHale, J., & Flegg, D. (1985). How Calamity Jane was put in her place. Transition, November, 14-16.
McPherson, J. M. & Smith-Lovin, L. (1987). Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. American Science Review, 52, 370-379.
Messick, D. & Massie, D. (1989). Intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 45-81.
Messick, S. (1984). The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice. Educational Psychologist, 19, 59-74.
Milliken, F. J & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, 402-433.
Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G., & Mohrman, A. M. Jr. (1995). Designing Team-Based Organizations: New Forms for Knowledge Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research, 40, 120-123.
Myers, I. B. (1980). Gifts differing. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Nasca, D. (1994). The Impact of Cognitive Style on Communication. NASSP Bulletin, 78, 99-108.
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey-Crofts.
Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23-32.
Ngai, Steven Sek-yum (2006). Service-learning, personal development and social commitment: a case study of university student in Hong Kong. Adolescence, 41(161), 165-176.
Oldman, G. & Cummings, A. (1998). Creativity in organizational context. Productivity, 39, 187-194.
Packer, J. & Bain, J. D. (1978). Cognitive style and teacher-student compatibility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 864-871.
Packer, J. & Bain, J. D. (1978). Cognitive style and teacher-student compatibility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 864-871.
Papamarcos, S. D. (2005). Giving Traction to Management Theory: Today’s Service-Learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(3), 325–335.
Parry, Mark & Song, X. Michael (1993). Determinants of R&D-Marketing Interface in High-Tech Japanese Firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10, 4-22.
Pask, G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 128-148.
Pearce, J.A. & Ravlin, E.C. (1987). The design and activation of self regulating work groups. Human Relations, 40, 751-782.
Pettigrew, A. (1973). The politics of organizational decision-making. London: Travistock.
Pfeffer, J. (1981¬). Power in Organizations. Boston: Pittman.
Potter, D. & Anderson, M. P. (1976). Discussion in Small Group: A Guide to Effective Practice, 3rd ed., Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc.
Putnam, L. L. & Pacanowsky, M. E. (1983). Communication Organizations: An Interpretive Approach. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
R. Burke Johnson & Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Raymond, R. (1983). Speech Communication, 6th ed. Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey.
Rice, R. E., Chang, S. J. , & Torobin, J. (1992). Communicator style, Media use, Organizational level and evaluation of electronic messaging. Management Communication Quarterly, 6(1), 3-33.
Rickards, T. & Moger, S. (1994). Felix and Oscar revisited: An exploration of the dynamics of a real-life odd couple work relationship. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30, 108-131.
Riding, R. J. & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive Styles-An Overview and Integration. Educational Psychology, 3 and 4(11), 193-215.
Riding, R. J. (1994). Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies. David Fulton Publish, London.
Ring, P. S. & Van de Ven, A. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 19, 90-118.
Robbins, S. P. (1996). Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall International Ltd.
Rogers, E. M. (1986). Communication technology: The new media in society. New York: The Free Press.
Rogers, E.M. & Agarwala-Rogers, R. (1976). Communication in Organisation. Collier Macmillan, London.
Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. Teams: Their Training and Performance, edited by Swezey R. W. and Salas E. NJ: Ablex, 3-29.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437-453.
Schramm (1949). The Process and Effects of Mass Communication. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press.
Sein, M. K. & Robey, D. (1991). Learning style and the efficacy of computer training methods. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72, 243-248.
Shannon & Weaver (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Univ. of Illinois Press.
Shaw, J. B. & Barrett-Power, E. (1998). The effects of diversity on small work group processes and performance. Human Relations, 51(10), 1307-1325.
Shea, G. P. & Guzzo, R. A. (1987). Interclass Correlations. US in Assessing Rater Reliability, Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. John Wiley, New York.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunication. New York: Wiley.
Song, X. M, Thieme J. R., & Xie, J. H. (1998). The Impact of Cross-Functional Joint Involvement Across Product Development Stages: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15, 289-303.
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.
Sperry, R. W. (1964). The great cerebral commissure. Scientific American, 174, 67.
St. John, C. H. & Rue, L. W. (1991). Co-ordinating mechanisms, consensus between marketing and manufacturing groups, and marketplace performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 549-555.
Strauss, A. & J. Corbin (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. London: Sage Publications.
Sullivan, C. B. (1995). Preference for electronic mail in organizational communication task. The Journal of Business Communication, 32(1), 49-64.
Tashakkori, A. & Creswell, JW, C. (2007). Editorial: the new era of mixed methods. J Mixed Methods Res 1, 3-7.
Tjosvold, D. (1988b). Cooperative and competitive interdependence: Collaboration between departments to service customers. Group & Organization Studies, 13(3), 274-289.
Trevino, L., Lengel, R., & Daft, R. (1987). Media symbolism, Media richness, and media choice in organizations. Communication Research, 14, 553-574.
Trevino, L.K., Lengel, R., Bodensteiner, W.D., Gerloff, E.A., & Muir, N.K. (1990). The richness imperative and cognitive style. Management Communication Quarterly, 4(2), 176-197.
Tullett, A. D. (1995). The adaptive-innovative (A-I) cognitive styles of male and female project managers: Some implications for the management of change. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 359-365.
Van de Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. Jr., (1976). Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 41, 322-338.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol1, Problem of General Psychology. (R. W. Riber and A. S. Carton, Eds., N. Minick, Trans.). New York: Plenum Press.
Waterman, A. S. (1997). An overview of service-learning and the role of research and evaluation in service-learning programs. Service-learning: Applications from the research, edited by A. S. Waterman. NJ: Erlbaum.
Wheelwright, Steven C. , & Clark, Kim B. (1992). Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality. New York: The Free Press.
Williams, K. Y. & O’ Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, edited by Staw, B. M. and Sutton, R. M. CT: JAI Press.
Wilson, D. K. (1988). Management learning: a grounded study of the writtenreflections of managers on their approach real time work problem. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Lancaster, England.
Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field dependent and Field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1-64.
Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-dependent and Field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47, 1-64.
Yalom, I. D. (1995). Theory and Practice of group psychotherapy, 4th ed. New York: Basic Books.
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