IT外包供應商中的自主支持式績效評估：感知自主支持、回饋品質與工作滿意度的關聯

Abstract

資訊科技外包情境下，員工同時面臨供應商與客戶的雙重管理。本研究所關注的客戶公司因內部政策禁止客戶端主管直接評核供應商員工，導致傳統績效評核制度出現明顯的管理缺口。本研究旨在檢驗自主支持型績效評核在此情境下的可行性。該制度整合員工自訂目標、自我評估、自主準備佐證資料，以及與供應商主管的同步雙向討論。 研究資料來自單一供應商團隊的兩次匿名員工問卷（2025年基線調查與2026年介入後調查，各39份有效回覆），並搭配37位員工前後配對的主管績效評分。結果顯示，感知自主支持顯著正向預測工作滿意度（b = 1.35，p < .001），支持本研究的主要假設，且此關聯在模型加入組別變項後依然穩定。回饋品質與工作滿意度的關聯在兩組之間並無顯著差異。在主管績效評分上，回饋組與無回饋組的增幅相近，預期的組間差異亦未獲支持。各項問卷測量的組間差異方向為正，但在本研究的樣本規模下未達統計顯著。 本研究的主要貢獻在於實務層面：為處於雙重管理下的供應商企業提供了一套可行方案，使其無需仰賴客戶端回饋，即能讓員工獲得發聲的機會，並感受到「被看見」與被重視的職場體驗。理論貢獻相對有限。本研究發現，當主管角色受到結構性限制時，適當設計的結構化流程仍有機會提供自主支持；此一觀點僅作為後續研究的起點，而非對自我決定理論的修正。 由於本研究受限於單一研究場域、首次實施循環、匿名橫斷面問卷，以及研究者兼具實務管理者身分的設計，解讀結果時應謹慎考量上述限制。

Vendor-based information technology outsourcing places employees under dual management, reporting to both the supplier and the client. At the client firm in this study, corporate policy prohibits client managers from directly evaluating vendor employees, a structural gap that conventional appraisal systems do not address. This thesis asks whether an autonomy-supportive appraisal can work in this context. The system integrates employee self-goal setting, self-appraisal, employee-prepared evidence, and a synchronous two-way review with the vendor manager. Data come from two anonymous employee surveys at a single vendor team (a 2025 baseline and a 2026 post-intervention wave, each with 39 responses) and matched manager-rated performance for 37 employees. Perceived autonomy support was a strong positive predictor of job satisfaction (b = 1.35, p < .001), and the association held with group membership in the model. The association between feedback quality and job satisfaction did not differ by group, manager-rated performance improved similarly in both groups, and the group contrasts were directionally positive but not significant in this small sample. The primary contribution is practical: a viable appraisal approach for vendor firms under dual management that gives employees a voice and the experience of being “seen” without relying on client-side feedback. Theoretically, the findings suggest that when supervisory roles are structurally constrained, a well-designed process can still foster perceived autonomy support, an insight offered as a starting point for future research rather than a revision of self-determination theory. Findings should be read against the study’s limits: a single site, a first implementation cycle, anonymous cross-sectional surveys, and the researcher’s dual role as practitioner and investigator.