跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.210.83.132) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/25 19:15
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:蘇妍儒
研究生(外文):Yan-Ru Su
論文名稱:建構創新績效與影響因素模型:社會認知理論觀點
論文名稱(外文):Modeling Innovation Performance and Its Antecedents: An Aspect of Social Cognitive Theory
指導教授:廖年淼廖年淼引用關係
指導教授(外文):Nyan-Myau Lyau
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立雲林科技大學
系所名稱:技術及職業教育研究所碩士班
學門:教育學門
學類:綜合教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:中文
論文頁數:68
中文關鍵詞:角色模糊創新績效顧客知識發展自我效能角色衝突
外文關鍵詞:role conflictInnovative performancerole ambiguitycustomer knowledge developmentself-efficacy
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:179
  • 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:0
本研究以創新績效及顧客知識發展做為理論背景架構,將研究焦點放在:
(1) 企業在顧客知識發展對創新績效所造成的影響。
(2) 結果期望對創新績效所造成的影響。
(3) 自我效能、角色衝突、角色模糊對顧客知識發展能力所造成的影響。
(4) 結果期望受自我效能、角色衝突、角色模糊所造成的影響。
基於這樣的目的,本研究以進行新產品開發活動時與顧客接觸之行銷部門人員為研究對象,採取用問卷調查的方式來進行資料收集,共回收302份有效問卷, 經由結構化方程式模式來分析實證資料對研究假設模型的支持程度。而研究主要的發現為:
1. 顧客知識發展與創新績效正相關。標準係數=0.45,t值為 6.98達顯著水準,顯示當企業在發展顧客知識與顧客互動之中,藉由雙方互動將顧客意見帶入新產品開發循環的每個部份,藉以達成新產品創新績效。
2. 結果期望與創新績效正相關。標準係數=0.23,t值為3.84,達顯著水準,顯示結果期望會影響創新績效。
3. 自我效能與結果期望正相關。標準係數=0.18,t值為2.98,達顯著水準,顯示發展自我效能會影響結果期望。
4. 角色自我效能與顧客知識發展正相關。標準係數=0.28,t值為4.43,達顯著水準,顯示發展自我效能會影響顧客知識發展。
5. 角色衝突與結果期望正相關。標準係數=0.02,t值為0.38,未達顯著水準,顯示角色衝突與結果期望沒有相關。
6. 角色衝突與顧客知識發展正相關。標準係數=0.02,t值為0.25,未達顯著水準,顯示角色衝突與顧客知識發展沒有相關。
7. 角色模糊與結果期望正相關。標準係數=-0.30,t值為-4.82,達顯著水準,顯示角色模糊會影響結果期望。
8. 角色模糊與顧客知識發展正相關。標準係數=-0.13,t值為-2.00,達顯著水準,顯示角色模糊會影響顧客知識發展。
In this study, innovation performance and customer knowledge development as a theoretical background structure will study focused on:
(1) Innovation performance impact of the enterprises in the customer knowledge development.
(2) Innovation performance impact of the outcome expectations.
(3) Outcome expectations impact of the self-efficacy, role conflict, role ambiguity.
(4) Enterprises in customer knowledge development impact of the self-efficacy, role conflict, role ambiguity.
Based on this purpose of this study for new product development activities, contact with customers of the marketing department staff as the research object and take with the questionnaire approach to data collection, a total of 302 valid questionnaires recovered through structural equation modeling to analyze hypothetical model for the study of empirical information on the degree of support. The study findings are following:
1. The enterprise customer knowledge development and innovation performance of positive correlation. Standard coefficient = 0.45, t-value= 6.98, reaching a significant level, indicating when companies in the development of customer knowledge and customer interaction among the comments by both the customer interactions into new product development cycle for each part in order to reach a new product innovation performance.
2. Outcome expectations and innovation performance of positive correlation.Standard coefficient = 0.23, t-value =3.84, reaching a significant level, indicating the outcome expectations will affect the innovation performance .
3. Self-efficacy and outcome expectations of positive correlation. Standard coefficient = 0.18, t-value = 2.98, reaching a significant level, indicating the self-efficacy will affect the outcome expectations.
4. Self-efficacy and customer knowledge development of positive correlation.
Standard coefficient = 0.28, t-value = 4.43, reaching a significant level, indicating the self-efficacy will affect the customer knowledge development.
5. Role conflict and outcome expectations of positive correlation. Standard coefficient = 0.02, t-value = 0.38, no significant level, indicating of the role conflict and the outcome expectations is not relevant.
6. Role conflict and customer knowledge development of positive correlation. Standard coefficient = 0.02, t-value =0.25, no significant level, indicating the role conflict and customer knowledge development is not relevant.
7. Role ambiguity and outcome expectations of positive correlation. Standard coefficient = -0.30, t-value = -4.82, reaching a significant level, indicating the role ambiguity will affect the outcome expectations.
8. Role ambiguity and customer knowledge development of positive correlation.
Standard coefficient = -0.13, t-value = -2.00, reaching a significant level, indicating the self-efficacy will affect the customer knowledge development.
摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝 iv
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 vii
一、 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機 1
1.2 研究目的與研究問題 2
1.2.1 研究目的 2
1.2.2 研究問題 2
1.3 研究限制 3
1.4 研究流程 4
二、 文獻探討 5
2.1 創新績效 5
2.1.1 創新的定義 5
2.1.2 創新績效相關理論 7
2.2 結果期望 7
2.3 顧客知識發展 8
2.3.1 顧客知識發展相關理論與定義 8
2.3.2 知識的意涵 10
2.4 自我效能 11
2.4.1 自我效能的定義 11
2.4.2 自我效能的來源 12
2.4.3 自我效能的影響 13
2.5 角色衝突 14
2.5.1 角色的定義 14
2.5.2 衝突的定義 14
2.5.3 角色衝突相關理論 16
2.6 角色模糊 17
2.6.1 角色模糊理論之研究 17
2.6.2 角色模糊之類型 18
三、 研究方法 19
3.1 研究模式與假設 19
3.2 問卷設計 25
四、 資料結果與分析 26
4.1 回收問卷統計 26
4.2 驗證性因素分析 28
4.2.1 內部一致性分析 28
4.2.2 問項效度分析 29
4.2.3 構面區別效度分析 30
4.2.4 評估模式適合度 31
4.3 研究假設之驗證 33
五、 結論與建議 36
5.1 結論 36
5.2 研究建議 37
參考文獻 39
一、中文部分 39
二、英文部分 43
附錄 54
附錄一 54
自傳 57
壹、中文部分
1. 王瑞祺,2001,學校人事人員角色衝突之研究-以台北市國民小學為例,國立政治大學,碩士論文。
2. 王國揚,2002,角色衝突、工作壓力與離職傾向關係之探討–以財政部台灣省中區國稅局為例,國立中山大學,碩士論文。
3. 方榕吟,2001,補校教師知覺組織支持、角色模糊、授權增能與創新教學結構關係之研究,國立中正大學,碩士論文。
4. 江玉珍,2005,工作滿意度為角色衝突、角色模糊與留任意願關係的中介變項—以北市長期照護機構病患服務員為例,台北護理學院,碩士論文。
5. 李月萍,2004,運用自我效能理論探討安養機構老人規律運動行為,中國醫藥大學,碩士論文。
6. 吳宏志,2007,人力資本彈性與組織資本對組織創新績效的影響─以知識產業為例,國立中山大學,碩士論文。
7. 李青芬、李雅婷、趙慕芬合譯,1994,組織行為學,六版,台北華泰書局。
8. Robbins, Stephen P.(9th ed.),2002,組織行為學修定二版,李青芬譯,華泰文化事業股份有限公司,台北。
9. 吳幸宜譯,1994,學習理論與教學應用,心理,台北。
10. 李奇然、吳萬益、蔡東峻,2002,“員工角色壓力與工作滿意、工作焦慮及工作績效之相關性研究- Meta-Analysis 法之應用,聯合學報,19卷,頁303~325。
11. 吳思華,2002,“從製造台灣走向知識台灣-「創意、創新與創業」是知識經濟時代的新力量,創業創新育成,5卷,頁7~9。
12. 吳清山,2002,“創意教學的重要理念與實施策略,臺灣教育,614卷,頁2~8。
13. 吳清山,2004,“學校創新經營的理念與策略,教師天地,128卷,頁30~44。
14. 吳清山,2005,學校行政研究,高等教育,台北。
15. 李夢麟,2005,組織焦慮對研發機構員工創新自我效能之研究,大葉大學,碩士論文。
16. 吳曉川,2003,論教師創新教育能力的培養,2009年7月10日,取自
http://www.edu.cn/20011225/3015207.shtml
17. 林育安,2006,顧客知識發展:其影響因素、資訊整合的調節效果及其對新產品研發績效之研究,立德管理學院,碩士論文。
18. 林志維,2002,競爭策略、技術環境、技術創新與 創新績效之關係研究 -以電子高科技業與化工業為研究對象,國立成功大學,碩士論文。
19. 林宏達,2003,影響資訊人員開發資訊系統自我效能之因素分析,中華大學,碩士論文。
20. 林信華,2006,會計專業道德與角色衝突對盈餘管理傾向之研究,立德管理學院,碩士論文。
21. 林婉君,2004,從企業有關顧客知識之觀點探討顧客關係管理,國立交通大學,碩士論文。
22. 林義屏,2001,市場導向、組織學習、組織創新與組織績效間關係之研究:以科學園區資訊電子產業為例,國立中山大學,博士論文。
23. 洪嘉鴻,2003,關係行銷對航空公司貨運業務行銷績效影響之研究,國立台灣海洋大學,碩士論文。
24. 許玉瑩,2005,顧客知識管理資訊系統之架構與分析設計方法研究,銘傳大學,碩士論文。
25. 張明輝,2004,“精緻學校經營的策略與執行措施,教師天地,128卷,頁9~22。
26. 教育百科辭典編輯委員,1994,教育百科辭典,五南圖書公司,台北。
27. 麥孟生,2000,個人心理類型、自我效能及態度對電腦學習成效之影響,國立中央大學,碩士論文。
28. 張春興,1991,張氏心理辭典,東華,臺北。
29. 張德銳,1990,“台北市國民中學行政人員所經歷的角色衝突與角色不明確之研究,新竹師院學報,4卷,頁61。
30. 張銘峻,2003,新產品績效受顧客互動強度與顧客知識管理能力等相關因素影響之研究—以台灣資訊軟體產業為例,中原大學,碩士論文。
31. 張嘉琪,2002,以認知、自我效能及學習型組識理論探討知識創新之研究,大葉大學,碩士論文。
32. 張寶誠,2002,“再談創新,能力雜誌,558卷,頁12~13。
33. 黃文仙,2002,顧客互動強度、顧客知識管理能力及顧客特性對新產品績效影響之研究-以台灣資訊軟體產業為例,中原大學,碩士論文。
34. 曾文忠,2005,創新策略與組織創新績效之關係-以組織策略、創新氣候、創新能力與人力資源管理系統為調節變數,國立中山大學,碩士論文。
35. 黃昆輝,1988,教育行政學,東華書局,台北。
36. 童桂珍,2007,外部知識取得與產品創新績效:內部研發水平之干擾效果,國立臺北大學,碩士論文。
37. 黃荷婷,2003,研究團隊成員目標導向與創新行為、創新績效-自我效能與集體效能的中介效果,東吳大學,碩士論文。
38. 黃郁雯,2003,電腦自我效能、電腦經驗及他人支持三者與電腦態度及電腦焦慮之關係,國立政治大學,碩士論文。
39. 游肇賢,2003,國中兼任行政工作教師角色衝突與工作滿意之調查研究,國立高雄師範大學,碩士論文。
40. 楊仁壽,2000,“動態複雜任務中挑戰性標的與短期標的,管理學報,17卷,1期,頁43~69。
41. 楊益風,2001,國立中小學教師在九年一貫課程改革中之角色衝突及其因應,國立台北師範學院,碩士論文。
42. 勤業管理顧問公司,2000,知識管理的第一本書,商周出版社。
43. 趙美玲,1997,國小已婚女教師工作特性知覺、角色壓力與其工作投入之關係,國立新竹師範學院,碩士論文。
44. 劉佩雲,2000,“自我調整學習模式之驗證,教育與心理研究,23卷,頁173~205。
45. 歐素雯,2006,文化局行政人員角色衝突、工作壓力與職業倦怠關係之研究,國立高雄師範大學,碩士論文。
46. 郭為藩,1971,“角色理論在教育學上之意義,國立台灣師範大學教育研究所集刊,13卷,頁5~27。
47. 郭崑謨,1993,管理學,國立空中大學,台北。
48. 葉雅青,2005,組織結構、領導風格、組織策略及創造力機制與創新績效之關聯性研究,國立成功大學,碩士論文。
49. 陳文章,2001,企業技術創新績效影響因素之研究,長榮管理學院,碩士論文。
50. 陳心瑜,2002,顧客知識管理內容與關係行銷之研究,國立中正大學,碩士論文。
51. 陳立賢,2007,技術導向、市場導向、產品創新績效與企業競爭力關係之研究-以台灣製藥業為例,國立成功大學,碩士論文。
52. 陳春枝,2007,矩陣組織成員角色模糊之因果關係探討,海洋大學,碩士論文。
53. 賴秋燕,2003,組織內外在因素、事業網路互動強度與組織創新績效之關聯性研究,國立成功大學,碩士論文。
54. 陳奎熹,1986,教育社會學,三民書局,台北。
55. 陳盈潔,2004,客服員工之自我效能、組織文化與訓練遷移成效關係之研究-以金融業為例,大葉大學,碩士論文。
56. 陳碧君,2004,基隆市政府主計人員角色衝突之研究,國立政治大學,碩士論文。
57. 蔡立旭,2000,組織氣候、組織學習與自我效能之關係,大葉大學,碩士論文。
58. 鍾岳群,2007,以動態能力觀點探討顧客知識管理能力對公司經營績效影響
之研究:汽車經銷業與保險業之實證分析,國立嘉義大學,碩士論文。
59. 蘇崇鉉,2002,探討自我狀態、自我效能及信念對知識移轉過程影響之研究,大葉大學,碩士論文。
貳、英文部分
1. Afzalur, R.M. (2nd ed.), 1992, Managing Conflict in Organizations, Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
2. Appelbaum, S. H., & Hare, A., 1996, “Self-efficacy as a mediator of goal setting and performance”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol.11, no.3, pp.33-47.
3. Ashwin W. J.,& Sharma, S., 2004, “Customer Knowledge Development:
Antecedents and Impact on New Product Performance”, Journal of Marketing, vol.68, pp.47-59.
4. Bandura, A., 1982, “Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency”, American Psychologist, pp.122-147.
5. Bandura, A., & Schunk , D.H., 1981, “Cultivating competence,self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol.41, pp.586-598.
6. Bandura, A., 1977a, Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
7. Bandura, A., 1977b, “Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change”, Psychological Review, vol.84, no.2, pp.191-215.
8. Bandura, A., 1986, Social Foundations of Thought and Action, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

9. Bandura A., 1989, “Social learning theory”, Annuals of Child Development , vol.6, pp.1-60.
10. Bandura, A., 1995, Self-efficacy in changing societies, Cambridge University Press, New York.
11. Bandura, A., 1997, Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.
12. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y., 1988, “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models”, Academic of Marketing Science, vol.16, no.1, pp.76-94.
13. Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G., 1980, “Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of convariance structures”, Psychological Bulletin, vol.88, no.3, pp.588-606.
14. Biemans, W.G., 1992, Managing Innovation within Networks, Routledge, London.
Biddle, B. J., 1979, Role Theory:Expectations, Identities, and Behaviors, Academic Press Inc, N.Y.
15. Brown, I., & Inouye, D. K., 1978, “Learned Helplessness through modeling: The role of perceived similarity in competence”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol.36, pp.900-908.
16. Bollen, K. A., 1989, Structural equations with Latent variables, Wiley, New York.
17. Cooper, R. G., 1992, “The New Prod System: The Industry Experience”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol.9, pp.113-127.
18. Chambliss, C., & Murray, E. J., 1979, “Cognitive procedures for smoking reduction: Symptom attribution versus efficacy attribution”, Cognitive Therapy and Research, vol.3, pp.91-95.
19. Chen, C., Greene, P., Gene, & Grick, A., 1998, “Does enterpreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers”, Journal of Business Venturing, vol.13, pp.295-316.
20. Chen, P. P., 2003, “Exploring the accuracy and predictability of the self-efficacy beliefs of seventh-grade mathematics students”, Learning and Individual Differences, vol.14, pp.79-92.
21. Chin, W.W., & Todd, P., 1995, “On the Use,Usefulness,and Ease of Use of Structural Equation Modeling in MIS Reaeach: A Note of Caution”, MIS Quarterly, vol.19, no.2, pp.237-289.
22. Coser, L., 1956, The Function of Social Conflict, Free Press, New York.
23. Cooper, R. G. & Kleinschmidt E. J., 1996, “Winning business in product development: the critical success factors”, Research Technology Management, vol.39, no.4, pp.18-29.
24. Demarest, M., 1997, “Understanding knowledge management”, Long Range Planning, vol.30, no.3, pp.374-384.
25. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Davis-LaMastro, V., 1990, “Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Diligence, Commitment, and Innovation”, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.75, no.1, pp.51-59.
26. Feltz, D. L., 1982, “Path analysis of the causal elements in Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy and an anxiety-based model of avoidance behavior”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol.42, pp.764-781.
27. Feltz, D. L., & Lirgg, C. D., 1998, “Perceived team and player efficacy in hockey”, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.83, pp.557-564.
28. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F., 1981, “Evaluating Structural Equation Modelswith Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error”, Journal of Marketing Research, vol.18, no.3, pp.39-50.
29. Gales, L., & Mansour-Cole, D. , 1995, “User Involvement in Innovation Projects:
Toward an Information-Processing Model”., Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol.12, pp.77-109.
30. Gemunden, H. G., Heydebreck, P., & Herden, R., 1992, “Technological
Interweavement: A Means of Achieving Innovation Success”, R & D Management, vol.122, pp.359-376.
31. Griffin, R. W., 2001, Management, (7th ed.), Houghton Mifflin Company, New York.
32. Graen, G., 1976, Role-making processes within complex organizations. In M. D,Dunnette (Ed.).Handbook of industrial organizational psychology, Rand McNally, Chicogo.
33. Gardner, D. G., & Pierce, J. L., 1998, “Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy Within the Organizational Context”, Group & Organization management, vol.23, no.1, pp. 48-70.
34. Gupta, A. K., & Souder, W. E., 1998, “Key Drivers of Reduced Cycle Time”,
Research-Technology Management, vol.41, pp.38-43.
35. Hair,J.F.,Anderson,L E.,Tatham,L.L.,& Black,W.C., 1992, Multivariate Data
Analysis with Readings, Macmillan, New York.
36. Hocker, J.L., & Wilmot, W.W., 1985, Interpersonal Conflict, (2nd ed.), Wm.C. Brown Publishers, Dubugue, IA.
37. House, R. J., & Rizzo, J. R., 1972, “Role conflict and ambiguity as criticalvariables in a model of organizational behavior”, Organizational Behavior and HumanPerformance, vol.7, pp.467-505.
38. Ivancevich, J. M., & Donnely, J. H., 1974, “A study of role clarity and need for
clarity for three occupational groups”, Academy of Management Journal, vol.17,
pp.28-36.
39. Jex, S. M., 1998, Stress & Job Performance, Sage Publications, London.
40. Jim?聲ez-Jim?聲ez ,D., & Sanz-Valle, R., 2008, “Could HRM support organizational innovation?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol.19, no.7, pp.1208-1221.
41. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D., 1996, LISREL 8:User’s Reference Guide, Scientific Software Inc, Mooresville, IN.
42. Kahn, R. L.Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R.P., & Snoek, J.D., 1964, Organizations Stress: Studies in Role Conflict andAbiguity, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York.
43. Kahn, R., 1980, Conflict, ambiguity, and overload: Three elements in job stress,
In D. K. Kahn & J. Adama(eds), The Study of Organization (pp.418-428), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
44. King, R. C., & Sethi, V., “1997, The Moderating Effect of Organizational Commitment on Burnout in Information Systems Professionals”, European Journal
of Information System, vol.6, pp.86-96.
45. Koufteros, X., 1999, “Testing a Model of Full Production: a Paradigm for Manufactiring Research Using Structural Equation Modeling”, Journal of Operations Management, vol.17, p.467.
46. Lewicki, R., Litterer, J., Minton, J., & Saunders, D., 1994, Negotiation, Burr Ridge, I11.:IRWIN.
47. Locke, E. A., Frederick, E., Lee, C., & Bobko, P., 1984, “The effect of self-efficacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.69, pp.241-251.
48. Lee, R.T., & Ashforth, B.E., 1996, “A Meta-analytic Examination of the Correlates ofthe Three Dimensions of Job Burnout”, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.81, 2, pp.123-133.
49. Luecke, R., 2004, Creating teams with an edge: The complete skill set to build powerful and influential teams, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
50. Leiblein, M. J., 2007, “Discussant comment: environment, organization, and innovation: how entrepreneurial dicisions appect innovative success”, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, vol.1, pp.141-144.
51. Li, T., & Calantone, R. J., 1998, “The Impact of Market Knowledge Competence on New Product Advantage”, Journal of Marketing, vol.62, pp.13-29.
52. Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P., 1988, “Goodness-of-fit Indexes in Confirmatory Factor Analysis: the Effect of Sample Size”, Psychological Bulletin, vol.103, no.3, pp.391-410.
53. Marsh, H. W., & Hocevar, D., 1985, “The application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First and higher order factor structuresand their invariance across age groups”, Psychological Bulletin, vol.97, no.3, pp.562-582.
54. Marvel, M. R., & Lumpkin, G. T., 2007, “Technology Entrepreneurs’Human Capital and Its Effects on Innovation Radicalness”, ENTREPRENEURSHIP THEORY and PRACTICE, pp.807-828.
55. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H., 1995, The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford University Press, Oxford
56. Nunnally, J., 1978, Psychometric theory, McGraw Hill, New York.
57. Orpen, C., 1999, “The impact of self-efficacy on the effectiveness of employee training”, Journal of Workplace Learning:Employee Couselling Today, vol.11, no.4, pp.119-122.
58. Parsons, T., 1961, The School Class as a Social System-Some of its Function in American Society, Free Press, New York.
59. Pavelky, J., 1991, “Role conflect and role ambiguity in camp staff”, Camping Magazine, vol.64, no.2, pp.2-21.
60. Pruitt, D.C., & Rubin, J. Z.,1986, Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate and Settlement, Random House, New York.
61. Parker, S. K., 1998, “Enhancing role breadth self-efficacy: The role of job enrichment and organizational Interventions”, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.83, pp.835-852.
62. Parsons, T., 1961, An outline of the social system, In T. Parsons et al .(Eds.),
Theory of Society(pp.41-43), Fress Press, New York.
63. Pietsch, J., Walker, R., & Chapman, E., 2003, “The Relationship Among Self-Concept, Self-Efficacy, and Performance in Mathematics During Secondary School”, Journal of Educational Psychology, vol.95, no.3, pp.589-603.
64. Riesenberger, Jr. P., 1998, “Executive Insights:Knowledge-The Source of
Sustainable Competitive Advantage”, Journal of International Marketing , vol.6 , pp.94-107.
65. Rizzo, J. R., House,R.J., &Lirtzman, S. I., 1970, “Role conflict and ambiguity
in complex organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.15, pp.150-163.
66. Robbins, S. P., 1994, Essentials of organizational behavior 4th. Englewood
cliffs, Prentice-Hall, Inc, New jersey.
67. Robbins, S. P., 1996, Organizational behavior : Conceots, controversies, and
application(7th ed.).
68. Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M., 2002, “Management,Upper Saddle River, NJ: Personal Education”, Journal of Instructional Psychology, vol.29, p.139.
69. Sanchez, A. M.,& Elola, L. N., 1991, “Product Innovation Management in Spain”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol.8, pp.49-56.
70. Schumpeter, J. A., 1912, Theory of Economic Development, Harper & Brothers, New York.
71. Schunk, D. H., 1988, Perceived self-efficacy and related social cognitive
performance, ERIC :Document Reproduction services, No. ED 293 866.
72. Schunk, K. H., 1984, “Self-efficacy perspective on achievement behavior”, Educational Psychologist, vol.19, pp.48-58.
73. Sethi, V., Barrier, T., & King, R. C., 1999, “An Examination of the Correlates of
Burnout in Information Systems Professionals”, Information Resources Management Journal, vol.12, no.3, pp.5-13.
74. Sveiby, K.E., 1999, The New Orgaizational Wealth-Managing and Measuring
Knowledge-Based Assets, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco.
75. Shore, L. M., & Wayne, S. J., 1993, “Commitment and Employee Behavior: Comparison of AffectiveCommitment and Continuance Commitment With Perceived Organizational Support”, Journal of Applied Psycholog, vol.78, no.5, pp.774-780.
76. Shunk, D. H., 1991, “Self-efficacy and academic motivation”, Educational Psychologist, vol.26, pp.207-231.
77. Snipes, Robin, La Tour, Michael S., & Bliss, Sara J., 1999, “A model of the effects of self –efficacy on the perceived ethicality and performance of fear appeals in advertising”, Journal of Business Ethics, pp.273-285.
78. Song, X. M. & Parry, M. E., 1997b, “A Cross-National Comparative Study of New Product Development Processes: Japan and the United States”, Journal of Marketing, vol.64, no.2, pp.1-14.
79. Spreitzer, G. M., 1996, “Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment”, Academy of Management Journal, vol.39, pp.483-504.
80. Spector, P. E., 1998, Theories of Organizations Stress, Oxford University Press, New York.
81. Stevens, C. K., & Marilyn, E., 1997, “Effects of Self-efficacy and goal-orientation training on negotiation skill maintenance: what are the mechanisms?”, Personnel Psychology, vol.50, pp.955-978.
82. Sujan, H., Weitz, B., & Kumar, 1994, “Learning Orientation, Working Smart, and
Effective Selling”, Journal of Marketing, pp.58-59.
83. Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Keith, P., 2001, Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change, John Wiley ,New York:.
84. Tanuja, A., 2003, “Innovative human resource practices and organizational commitment: an empirical investigation”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol.14, no.2, pp.175-197.
85. Vansell, M., Arthur, P., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, S. R., 1981, “Role conflict and role ambiguity: integration of the literature and directions for future research”, Human Relations, vol.34, no.1, pp. 43-71.
86. Vansell, M., Brief, A. P. & Schuler, R. S., 1981a, Managing Job Stress, Little, Brown & Company, Boston.
87. Von Hippel, E., 1986, Lead Users: “A Source of Novel Product Concepts,
Management Science”, vol.132, pp.791-805.
88. Wayland, R. E., & Cole, P. C., 1997, Customer Connections: New Strategies for
Growth, Harvard Business School Press.
89. Whyte, G., Saks, A. M.,& Hook, S., 1997, “When success breeds failure: The roleof self-efficacy in escalating Commitment to losing course of action”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol.18, pp.415-432.
90. Wong, S. Y., & Chin, K. S., 2007, “Organizational innovation management An organization-wide perspective”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol.107, no.9, pp.1290-1315.
91. Zeldin, A. L., & Pajares, F., 2000, “Against the odds: Self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific, and technological careers”, American Educational Research Journal, vol.37, pp.215-246.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top