臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究主要針對中租迪和公司在建構其職能體系與推動360度回饋評量活動的實務探討。
在建構職能體系方面，中租迪和公司建立了六項核心職能與六項管理職能，並明確地描述了每一項職能的定義及關鍵行為；在推動360度回饋評量方面，以公司協理級與處長級主管20人、經理級主管57人，共計77人為受評者，評量結果發現中租迪和公司主管在核心職能的得分多數高於管理職能的得分，處協級主管的得分普遍高於經理級主管的得分，「部屬」對受評者的看法較為分歧，「跨部門同事」對於受評者的回饋較為一致。此外，相關分析結果顯示，「跨部門同事」與其他各評分來源除「主管」外，均達顯著相關，而「主管」與「部屬」看法的相關性均呈負相關。
本研究進一步指出研究之限制以及對於有意建立職能體系與推動360度回饋評量的公司提供諸多實務上的建議。
關鍵詞：職能體系、360度回饋評量、核心職能、管理職能

Abstract
The focus of this research is to discuss the construction of competency model and implementation of 360° feedback assessment with the example of Chailease Finance Co., Ltd.
In the construction of competency model, Chailease Finance Co., Ltd. establishes six core competencies and six managerial competencies, and describes the definition and key behavior of each competency clearly. There are 77 persons chosen as the targets for the implementation of 360°°feedback assessment of this research, including 20 senior executive vice presidents (SEVP) and executive vice presidents (EVP) and 57 senior vice presidents (SVP). The research result finds that the core competency scores for the supervisors of Chailease Finance Co., Ltd. are higher than their managerial competency scores. In general, the scores of SEVP and EVP are comparative higher than SVP. The subordinates have different points of view about the targets, it is consistent among cross-department colleagues. In addition, the research result also shows that except the supervisors, cross-department colleagues and other raters is highly related to their point of view, while the supervisors and subordinates correlates negatively with their point of view.
This research will further indicate restrictions of the research and propose some practical suggestions for the companies, which intend to build the competency model and carry out the 360°°feedback assessment.
Key words: competency model、360° feedback assessment、core competency、managerial competency

目　　　次
感謝辭 …………………………………………………………Ⅰ
中文摘要 ………………………………………………………Ⅱ
英文摘要 ………………………………………………………Ⅲ
圖目次　…………………………………………………………Ⅵ
表目次　…………………………………………………………Ⅶ
第一章　緒論　…………………………………………………1
第一節　研究動機與目的　………………………………………1
第二節　研究架構　………………………………………………7
第三節　名詞定義　………………………………………………8
第二章　文獻探討　……………………………………………10
第一節　職能的內涵及其運用　…………………………………10
第二節　360度回饋評量的作法與相關研究　…………………30
第三章　研究方法　……………………………………………47
第一節　個案公司簡介　…………………………………………47
第二節　研究樣本　………………………………………………51
第三節　研究工具　………………………………………………60
第四節　研究程序　………………………………………………62
第四章　研究結果　……………………………………………65
第一節　職能問卷調查結果　……………………………………65
第二節　高階主管職能決定研討會結果　………………………70
第三節　360度回饋評量結果　……………………………………80
第四節　360度回饋評量結果之相關分析　………………………92
第五章　結論與建議　…………………………………………98
第一節　研究結論探討　…………………………………………98
第二節　研究限制　………………………………………………105
第三節　研究建議　………………………………………………109
參考文獻　………………………………………………………115
中文部份　…………………………………………………………115
英文部份　…………………………………………………………116
附錄　……………………………………………………………121
附錄Ａ　……………………………………………………………121
附錄Ｂ　……………………………………………………………131
附錄Ｃ　……………………………………………………………139
圖　目　次
圖1-1　建構職能體系模型　…………………………………3
圖1-2　本研究之研究架構　…………………………………7
圖2-1　內在、核心與外顯的職能　…………………………11
圖2-2　職能因果流程模型　…………………………………12
圖2-3　個人職能與組織職能的關係　………………………14
圖2-4　個人職能圖像範例　…………………………………15
圖2-5　職能與組織績效的連結　……………………………16
圖2-6　工作職能評鑑法之流程與績效指標　………………25
圖2-7　專家會議模式　………………………………………26
圖2-8　管理職能模式的應用　………………………………28
圖2-9　360度回饋評量示意圖　……………………………30
圖2-10　360度回饋評量實施流程示意圖　…………………36
圖2-11　自他評一致性影響過程模式　………………………44
圖3-1　個案公司360度回饋評量方式　……………………58
圖3-2　個案公司發展職能體系流程圖　……………………60
圖3-3　個案公司推動360度回饋評量流程圖　……………61
圖4-1　處協級各項職能中優勢職能之人數比例　…………81
圖4-2　經理級各項職能中優勢職能之人數比例　…………85
圖4-3　經理級各項職能中弱勢職能之人數比例　…………86
圖5-1　願景與職能體系關係圖　……………………………105
圖5-2　職能體系的應用　……………………………………110
表　目　次
表2-1　管理行為綜合分類模式　……………………………17
表2-2　360度回饋評量過程：一個實務模式　……………37
表2-3　360度回饋評量與傳統評鑑方式的比較　…………39
表2-4　自我、主管和同事評量結果的整合分析　…………41
表3-1　核心職能重要程度評分表　…………………………52
表3-2　核心職能重要程度排序表　…………………………53
表3-3　管理職能重要程度評分表　…………………………54
表3-4　管理職能重要程度排序表　…………………………55
表3-5　各職能的關鍵行為項目　……………………………57
表3-6　職能問卷調查中管理職人員的樣本分佈　…………62
表3-7　職能問卷調查中非管理職人員的樣本分佈　………63
表3-8　360度回饋評量說明會場次及參與人數　…………63
表3-9　個案公司同仁的參與程度與相關問卷回收率　……64
表4-1　核心職能重要程度評分結果排序　…………………65
表4-2　核心職能重要程度排序調查結果　…………………66
表4-3　核心職能調查結果總表　……………………………67
表4-4　管理職能重要程度評分結果排序　…………………68
表4-5　管理職能重要程度排序調查結果　…………………68
表4-6　管理職能調查結果總表　……………………………69
表4-7　各職能與成功關鍵因素的關係　……………………72
表4-8　處協級他評結果之職能排序　………………………80
表4-9　處協級他評結果前六項職能得分之人數分佈百分比…
　　　 …………………………………………………………82
表4-10　處協級之前十大優勢行為　…………………………83
表4-11　處協級之最需加強發展的七大行為　………………84
表4-12　經理級他評結果之職能排序　………………………85
表4-13　處協級與經理級他評結果比較表　…………………87
表4-14　經理級之前十大優勢行為　…………………………88
表4-15　經理級最需加強發展的十五大行為　………………90
表4-16　處協級與經理級在部份最需加強發展之行為的人
數比例比較表　………………………………………91
表4-17　處協級各評分來源之相關矩陣表　…………………92
表4-18　經理級各評分來源之相關矩陣表　…………………92
表4-19　處協級各職能間之相關矩陣表　……………………95
表4-20　經理級各職能間之相關矩陣表　……………………96

參考文獻
中文部分：
「如何留住你的明星員工」(民88)。世界經理文摘，158期，頁24∼26。
林玉玲（民89）。回饋預期一致性、程序公平、組織支持、個人特質對360度回饋態度與行為改變意圖之影響。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
范傑倫（民90）。360度回饋與績效改善之縱貫性實證研究。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文研究計畫。
徐崇文（民89）。以360度回饋探討影響主管人員行為改變意圖相關因素之實證研究。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
徐瑋伶（民88）。同儕評量與自評之差異，相對親疏關決策探制力及內外控對團體成員公平知覺之影響。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
郭乃瑋（民88）。探討影響員工對三百六十度績效評估態度之因素。私立東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
張裕隆（民87a）。我國「管理才能評鑑工具發展及信效度分析研究」。國科會專題研究報告。
張裕隆（民87b）。360度回饋。國魂月刊，624期，頁73-75。
陳玉山（民86）。能力基礎途徑應用在人力資源管理之研究。國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
黃國隆、戚樹誠（民87）。「台灣與大陸員工工作價值之比較」，海峽兩岸之企業倫理與工作價值。台北：遠流出版社。
劉怡君（民89）。標竿學院管理新知介紹∼海爾集團∼360度全方位評量。
劉岡憬（民87）。以360度回饋探討主管人員自他評一致性與領導效能關係 之實證研究。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
英文部分：
Antonioni, D. (1994). Improve the performance management process before discontinuing performance appraisals. Compensation and Benefit Review, 26(3), 29-37.
Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organization Dynamics, 25(2), 24-38.
Ashford, S. (1989). Self-assessments in organizations: A literature review and integrative model. In commings, L. L., & Staw, B. M.(Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 11, 133-174. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (1992). Does self-other agreement on leadership perception moderate the validity of leadership and performance prediction? Personnel Psychology, 45, 141-164.
Atwater, L. E., Roush, P., & Fischthal, A. (1995). The influence of upward feedback on self-and follower ratings of leadership. Personnel Psychology, 48(1), 35-60.
Atwater, L., & Yammarino, F.(1997). Self-other rating agreement: A review and model. Researchin personnel and Human Resource Management, 15, 121-174.
Bass, B., & Yammarino, F.(1991). Congruence of self and others’ leadership rating of naval officers for understanding successful performance. Applied Psychology: An international Review, 40, 437-454.
Bernardin, H. J., & Beatty, R. W. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston: PWS-KENT.
Bernardin, J. H., & Beattty, R. W. (1987). Can subordinate appraisal enhance managerial productivity? Slogan Management Review, 28(4), 63-73.
Bohl, D. L. (1996). Minisurvey: 360-degree appraisals yield superior result, survey shows. Compensation and benefits review, 26(3), 20-24.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competence manager: A model for effective performance. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, R. B. (1993). Meta-competence: A recipe for reforming competence debate. Personnel Review, 22(6), 25-36.
Cascio, W. F. (1992). Managing human resources: Productivity, quality of work life, profits(3rd ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill.
Cofsky, K. M. (1993). Critical keys to competency-based pay. Compensation and Benefits Review, 25(6), 46-52.
deLeon, L., & Ewen, A. J. (1997). Multi-source performance appraisals. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 17(1), 22-36.
Edwards, R. M., & Ewen, J. A. (1996). 360→ Feedback: The powerful new model for employee assessment & performance improvement. New York: AMACOM.
Gorsline, K. (1996). A competency profile for human resources: No more shoemaker’s children. Human Resource Management, 35(1), 53-56.
Gross, S. E. (1995). Compensation for team: How to design and implement team based reward program. New York: American Management Association.
Hall, J. L., Leidecker, J. K., & DiMarco, C. (1996). What we know about upward appraisals of management: Facilitation the future use of UPAs. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7(3), 209-226.
Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peersupervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43-62.
Hayes, J. L. (1979). A new look at managerial competence: The AMA model of worthy performance. Management Review, 68(11), 2-3.
Hazucha, J. F., Hezlett, S. A., & Schneider R. J. (1993). The impact of 360-degree feedback on management skills development. Human Resource Management, 32, 325-351.
Klagge, J. (1995). 360-degree sociometric feedback for individual and organization change. Public Administration Quarterly, 19(3), 352-366.
Klein, A. L. (1996). Validity and reliability for competency-based system: Reducing litigation risks. Compensation and Benefits Review, 28(4), 31-37.
Korsgaard, M. A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in performance evaluation: The role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. Journal of Management, 21(4), 657-669.
Ledford, G. E. (1995). Paying for the skill, knowledge, and competencies of knowledge workers. Compensation and Benefits Review, 27(4), 55-62.
McCall, M. W., & Lombardo, M. M. (1983). What makes a top executive?. Psychology Today, 26-31.
Mohrman, A. M., Resnick-West, S. M., & Lawler Ⅲ. E. E. (1990). Designing performance appraisal systems: Aligning appraisals and organizational realities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moses, J., Hollenbeck, G. P., & Sorcher, M. (1993). Other people’s expectations. Huamn Resource Management, 32(2?), 283-297.
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Muchinsky, M. Paul(1997). Psychology applied to work: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (5th ed.). Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Nowack, K. M. (1993). 360-Degree Feedback: The whole story. Training and Development Journey, 47(1), 69-72.
Raelin, J. A., & Cooledge, A. S. (1995). From generic to organic competencies. Human Resource Planning, 18(3), 24-33.
Robbins, S. P. (1993). Organizational behavior (6th ed.). N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Robbins, S. P. (1996). Organizational behavior (7th ed.). N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Roberts, G. E. (1995). Developmental performance appraisal in municipal government. Review of Public Personnel Management, 15(3), 17-43.
Smither, J. W., & London, M. (1995). An examination of the effects of an upward feedback program over time. Personnel Psychology, 48, 1-34.
Spencer, L. M., Jr. (1995). Reengineering Human Resource. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Spencer, L. M., Jr., & Spencer S. M. (1993). Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Tornow, W. (1993). Perception or reality: Is multi-perceptive measurement a means or an end? Human Resourece Management, 32, 221-230.
Tornow, W. W. (1993). Editor’s note: Introduction to special issue on 360-degree feedback. Human Resource Management, 32, 262-271.
Van Velsor, E., & Leslie, J. B. (1991). Feedback to managers 1991. Reports #149R & #150R. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Ven Velsor E., Taylor, S., & Leslie, J. (1992, August). Self-rater agreement, self-awareness and leadership effectiveness. Paper presented at the 100th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington DC.
Van Velsor, E., Taylor, S., & Leslie, J. (1993). An examination of the relationships among self-perception accuracy, self-awareness, gender, and leader effectiveness. Human Resource Management, 32, 249-264.
Wexley, K. N., & Baldwin, T. T. (1986). Management development. Journal of Management, 12, 274-294.
Woodruffe, C. (1991). Competence by any other name. Personnel Management, 23(9), 30-33.
Yammarino, F. J., & Atwater, L. E. (1993). Understanding self-perception accuracy: Implications for human resource management. Human Resource Management, 32, 231-247.
Yammarino, F. J., & Atwater, L. E., (1997). Do managers see themselves as others see them? Implications of self-other rating agreement for human resources management. Organizational Dynamics, Spring, 35-44.
Yeung, A. K. (1996). Competencies for HR professionals: An interview with Richard E. Boyatzis. Human Resource Management, 35(1), 119-131.