請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/46629
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 戚樹誠 | |
dc.contributor.author | Chiung-Yi Huang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 黃瓊億 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T05:19:44Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2012-07-22 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2010-07-22 | |
dc.date.issued | 2010 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2010-07-20 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 壹、中文部分
蔡啓通(1997)。組織因素、組織成員整體創造性與組織創新之關係。國立台灣大學商學研究所未出版傳士論文。 貳、英文部分 Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Amabile, T. M. (1983). Social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357-377. Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organization. In B. M. Staw., & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 123-167). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivaing creativity in organizations: On doning what you love and loving what you do. California Managemnet Review, 40, 39-58. Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154-1184. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 634-665. Anderson, N., & West, M. A. (1996). The team climate inventory: Development of the TCI and its applications in teambuilding for innovativeness. European Journal of Work Organizational Psychology, 5, 53-66. Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 235-258. Bain, P. G., Mann, L., & Pirola-Merlo, A. (2001). The innovation imperative: The relationships between team climate, innovation, and performance in research and development teams. Small Group Research, 32, 55-73. Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107-124. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. Bartko, J. J. (1976). On various intra-class correlation reliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 762-765. Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Sanchez, R. J., Craig, J. M., Ferrara, P., & Campion, M. A. (2001). Applicant reactions to selection: Development of the selection procedural justice scale (SPJS). Personnel Psychology, 54, 387-419. Betz, F. (1987). Managing technology-cometing through new ventures-innovation, and corporate research. Prentice Hall. Burgess, B. H. (1989). Industrial organization. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J. Burningham, C., & West, M. A. (1995). Individual, climate, and group interaction processes as predictors of work team innovation. Small Group Research, 26, 106-117. Blau, J. R., & Mckinley, W. (1979). Idea, complexity, and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 200-219. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131. Cady, S. H., & Valentine, J. (1999). Team innovation and perceptions of consideration: What difference does diversity make? Small Group Resaerch, 30, 730-750. Caldwell, D. F., & O’Reilly, C. A. (2003). The determinants of team-based innovation in organizations: The role of social influence. Small Group Research, 34, 497-517. Chatman, J. A., & Flynn, F. J. (2001). The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 956-974. Chirumbolo, A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Areni, A., & Kruglandki, A. W. (2005). Motivated closed-mindedness and creativity in small group. Small Group Research, 36, 59-82. Cole, M. S., Walter, F., & Bruch, H. (2008). Affective mechanisms linking dysfunctional behavior to performance in work teams: A moderated mediation study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 945-958. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-104. Cronbach , L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 3, 297-334. Crowson, H. M., Debacker, T. K., & Thoma, S. J. (2006). The role of authoritarianism, perceived treat and need for closure or structure in predicting post-911 attitudes and beliefs, The Journal of Social Psychology, 146, 733-750. Curral, L. A., Forrester, R. H., Dawson, J. F., & West, M. A. (2001). It’s what you do and the way that you do it: Team task, team size, and innovation-related group processes. European Journal Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 187-204. Daft, R. L. (1978). A dual-core model of organization innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 193-210. Dahlin, L. R., Weingart, L., & Hinds, P. J. (2005). Team diversity and information use. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1107-1123. Damanpour, F. (1991). Organitional innovation: A meta analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555-590. De Crada, E., Kruglanski, A.W., Mannetti, L., & Pierro, A. (1999). Motivated cognition and group interaction: need for closure affects the contents and processes of collective negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 346-365. De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Team innovation and team effectiveness: The importance of minority dissent and reflexivity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 285-298. De Dreu, C. K. W. (2003). Time pressure and closing of the mind in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91, 280-295. De Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Cooperative outcome independence, task reflexity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective. Joutnal of Applied Psychology, 92, 628-638. De Dreu, C. K. W., Koole, S. L., & Oldersma, F. L. (1999).On the seizing and freezing of negotiator inferences: Need for cognitive closure moderate the use of heuristics in negotiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 348-362. De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissert and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 1191-1201. De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad, B. A., & Van Kinppenberg, D. (2008). Motived information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 22-49. De Zavala, A. G., Federico, C. M., Cislak, A., & Digger, J. (2008). Need for closure and competition in intergroup conflict: experimental evidence for the mitigating effect of accessible conflict-schemas. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 84-105. de Rivera, J. (1992). Emotional climate: Social structure and emotional dynamics. In K. T. Strongman (Ed.), International review of studies on emotion (pp. 199-218). New York: John Wiley. Dijksterhuis, A., Van Knippenberg, A., Kruglanski, A. W., & Schaper, C. (1996). Motivated social cognition: need for closure effects on memory and judgement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 254-270. Drach-Zahavey, A., & Somech, A. (2001). Understanding team innovation: The role of team processes and structure. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 111-123. Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. Heinemann, London. Dougherty, D., & Bowman, E. H. (1995). The effects of organizational downsizing of product innovation. California Management Review, 37, 28-44. Dougherty, D., & Hardy, C. (1996). Sustained product innovation in large, mature organizations: Overcoming innovation to organization problems. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1120-1153. Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 26-49. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work team. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 250-383. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1-22. Ekvall, G. (1991). The organizational culture of idea management: A creative climate for management of ideas. In Henry, J. & Walker, D. (Eds.), Managing innovation (pp. 177-190). Sage: London. Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5, 105-123. Eysenck, H. J. (1954). The psychology of politics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical science, Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191. Fay, D., Borrill, C., Amir, Z., Haward, R., & West, M. A. (2006). Getting the most out of multidisciplinary teams: A multi-sample study of team innovation in health care. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 553-567. Gaynor, G. H. (2002). Innovation by design: What it takes to keep your company on the cutting edge. NY: AMACOM. Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 451-495. Gil, F., Rico, R., Alcover, C. M., & Barrasa, A. (2005). Change-oriented leadership, satisfaction and performance in work groups: Effects of team climate and group potency. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 312-328. Glick, W. H. (1985). Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: pitfalls in multilevel research. The Academy of Management Review, 10, 601-616. Glisson, C., & James, L. R. (2002). The cross-level effects of culture and climate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 767-794. Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1199-1228. Hays, R. D., Hayashi, T., & Stewart, A. L. (1989). A five-item measure of socially desirable response set. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 629-636. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300. Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104-121. Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24, 623-641. Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity onteam outcome: A meta-analysis review on team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987-1015. Huang, C. Y., Artemis, C., & Chi, S. S. (2008). The structure of need for closure scale in Taiwan. The Sixth Asia Academy of Management Conference (AAOM), Taiwan: Taipei. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. Isaksen, S. G., Lauer, K. J., & Ekvall, G. (1999). Situational outlook questionnaire: A measure of the climate for creativity and change. Psychological Reports, 85, 665-674. Jackson, S. E., May, K. E., & Whitney, K. (1995). Under the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organization (pp. 204-261). San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass. James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 219-229. James, L. R. & Sells, S. B. (1981). Psychological climate: Theoretical perspectives and empirical research. In Magnusson, D. (Ed.), Toward a psychology of situations: an international perspective, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 275-295. James, L. R., James, L. A., & Ashe, D. K. (1990). The meaning of organizations: The role of cognition and values. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 40-84). San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98. Jehn, K. A. (1994). Enhancing effectivness: An investigation of advantages and disadvantages of value-based intragroup conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 5, 223-238. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefit and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282. Johannessen, J. A., & Dolva, J. O. (1994). Competence and innovation: Identifying critical innovation factor. Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Change, 3, 209-222. Jones, A. P., & James, L. R. (1979). Psychological climate: Dimensions and relationships of individual and aggregated work environment perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 201-250. Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 599-627. Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flower bloom: Structure, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 169-211. Kachigan, S. K. (1991). Factor analysis. In Multivariate statistical analysis: A conceptual introduction (2nd ed.). (pp. 236-260). New York, NY, US: Radius Press. Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 581-598. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., vol. 1, pp. 233-265). New York: McGraw-Hill. Kelm, K. M., Narayanan, V. K., & Pinches, G. E. (1995). Shareholder value creation during R&D innovation and commercialization stages. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 770-786. Kim, L. (1980). Organizational innovation and structure. Journal of Business Research, 8, 225-245. King, N., & Anderson, N. (2002). Managing innovation and chang: A critical guide for organization. London: Thomson. King, N., Anderson, N., & West, M. A. (1992). Organizational innovation: A case study of perceptions and processes. Work and Stress, 5, 331-339. Kivimäki, M., & Elovainio, M. (1999). A short version of the team climate inventory: Development and psychometric properties. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 241-246. Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. J. (2000). Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. San Francisco: Joess Bass. Kopelman, R. E., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1990). The role of climate and culture in productivity. In Schneider, B. (Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture (pp. 282-318), Jossey Bass: San Franciso. Kroon, M. B. R., van Kreveld, D., & Rabbie, J. M. (1992). Group versus individual decision making, Small Group Research, 23, 427-458. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge. New York: Plenum Press. Kruglanski, A. W. (1990). Motivations for judging and knowing: Implications for social attributions. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: foundations of social behavior (pp. 335-368). New York: Guildford. Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). The psychology of closed mindedness. New York: Have Psychology Press. Kruglanski, A. W., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448-468. Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103, 263-283. Lovelance, K., Shapiro, D. L., & Weingart, L. R. (2001). Maximizing cross-functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 779-793. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of the methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104. Mannetti, L., Battanier, A., & Pierro, A. (1996). Dominance in group conversation. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 12, 297-307. Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Kruglandki, A., Taris, T., & Bezinovic, P. (2002). A cross-cultural study of the need for cognitive closure scale: comparing its structure in Croatia, Italy, USA and the Netherlands, British Journal of Social Psychology, 41: 139-156. McLeod, P. L., Lobel, S. A., & Cox, T. H. (1996). Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Research, 27, 248-264. Murphy, K. (2002). Using power analysis to evaluate and improve research. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 119-137). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2000). A case for procedural justice climate: Development and test of a multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 881-889. Nicholson, N. (1990). Organizational innovation in context: Culture, interpretation and application. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and Creativity at Work: Psychological and Organization Strategies. Chichester: Wiley. Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Creativity and group innovation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 400-406. Nijstad, B. A., Rietzschel, E. F., & Stroebe, W. (2006). Four principles of group creativity. In L. L. Thompson., & H. S. Choi (Eds.), Creativity and Innovation in Organizational Teams. (pp.161-179). Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Mahwah: New Jersey. Paulus, P. B. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea-generating groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 237-262. Pearce, J. A., & Ravlin, E. C. (1987). The design and activation of self-regulating work groups. Human Relations, 40, 751-782. Pearce, C. L., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). A reciprocal and longitudinal investigation of the innovation process: The central role of shared vision in product and process innovation team. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 259-278. Pelled, L. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 6, 615-631. Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1-28. Petty, R. E., & Jarvis, B. G. (1996). An individual difference perspective on assessing cognitive processes. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research. (pp. 221-257). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., De Grada, E., Livi, S., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2003). Autocracy bias in informal groups under need for closure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 29, 405-417. Pirola-Merlo, A., Härtel, C., Mann, L., & Hirst, G. (2002). How leaders influence the impact of affective events on team climate and performance in R&D teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 561-581. Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903. Posakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531-544. Roets, A. & Van Hiel, A. V. (2007). Separating ability from need: clarifying the dimensional structure of the need for closure scale. Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 266-280. Schein, E. H. (2000). Sense and nonsense about culture and climate. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. M. Wilderom, & M. F. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of organizational culture and climate (pp.ххііі-ххх). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129. Schneider, B. (1990). The climate for service: An application of the climate construct. In Schneider, B. (Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture (pp. 383-412), Jossey Bass: San Franciso. Schneider, B., & Reicher, A. (1983). On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psychology, 36, 19-39. Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998). Linking service climate and customer perceptions of service quality: Testing of a causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 150-163. Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., Lüthgens, C., & Moscovici, S. (2000). Baised information search in group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 655-669. Schulz-Hart, S., Jochims, M., & Frey, D. (2002). Productive conflict in group decision making: Genuine and contrived dissent as strategies to counteract biased information seeking. Organizational Behavior and Human Dceision Proesses, 88, 563-586. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of Economic develop, Boston, MA: Harvard. Schwab, D. P. (2005). Research methods for organizational studies (2nd Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580-607. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445. Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 102-111. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Stasser, G., & Stewart, D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426-434. Teachman, J. D. (1980). Analysis of population diversity. Sociological Methods and Research, 8, 341-362. Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market, and organizational change. Chichester, West Sussex, New York: John Wiley. Thompson, E. P., Roman, R. J., Moskowitz, G. B., & Chaiken, S. (1994). Accuracy motivation attenuates covert priming: The systematic reprocessing of social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 447-489. Thompson, M. M., Naccarato, M. E., & Parker, K. E. (1989). Assessing cognitive need: The development of the personal need for structure and personal fear of invalidity scale. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Paychology Association, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canda. Tjosvold, D., Tang, M. M. L., & West, M. (2004). Reflexity for team innovation in China: The contribution of goal interdependence. Group & Organization Management, 29, 540-559. Tracey, J. B., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Kavanagh, M. J. (1995). Applying trained skills on the job: The importance of the work environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 239-252. Tseng, H. M., Liu, F. C., & West, M. A. (2009). The team climate inventory (TCI): A psychometric test on a Taiwanese sample of work group, Small Group Research, 40, 465-482. Tushman, N. L., & Nadler, D. A. (1986). Organizing for innovation. California Management Review, 28, 74-92. Van Hiel, A., Pandelaere, M., & Duriez, B. (2008). The impact of need for closure on conservative beliefs and racism: differential mediation by authoritarian submission and authoritarian dominance. Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 824-837. Verbeke, W., Volgering, M., & Hessels, M. (1998). Exploring the conceptural expansion within the field of organizational behavior: Organizational climate and organizational culture. Journal of Management Studies, 35, 303-329. Webber, S. S., & Donahue, L. M. (2001). Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 27, 141-162. Webster, D. M. & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062. Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1998). Cognitive and social consequences of the motivation for closure. European Review of Social Psychology, 8, 133-173. West, M. A., & Altink, W. M. M. (1996). Innovation at work: Individual, group, organizational, and socio-historical perspectives. European Journal of Work Organizational Psychology, 5, 3-11. West, M. A., & Wallace, M. (1991). Innovation in health care teams. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 303-315. West, M. A., & Anderson, N. (1996). Innovation in top management teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 680-693. West, M. A., & Rickards, T. (1999). Innovation. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (pp. 45-55). London: Academic Press. West, M. A. (1990). The social psychology of innovation in groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity in work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 309-333). Chichester: Wiley. West, M. A. (1997). Developing creativity in organization. The British Psychological Society (BPS).UK. West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling foundains or stagnant pounds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 355-424. West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and and organizational strategies, Wiley, Chichester. West, M. A., Sacramento, C. A., & Fay, D. (2006). Creativity and innovation implementation in work groups: The paradoxical role of demands. In L. L. Thompson. & H. S. Choi (Eds.), Creativity and Innovation in Organizational Teams. (pp.137-159). Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Mahwah: New Jersey. Wolfe, R. A. (1994). Organizational innovation: Review, critique and suggested research directions. Journal of Management Studies, 31, 405-430. Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., & Holbak, J. (1973). Innovation and Organizations. Wiley: New York. Zohar, D. (2000). A group-level model of safety climate: Testing the effect a group climate on micro-accidents in manufacturing jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 587-596. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/46629 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 組織需透過團隊創新來維持競爭力,因此,什麼樣的因素會促使團隊展現創新績效是一項重要的課題。本研究的目的乃是探討團隊創新氛圍、資訊分享與創新績效的關係,並且探討團隊認知閉合需求、資訊分享與創新績效的關係,進一步欲探討團隊任務導向多元性對上述關係的調節效果。本研究設計了一份團隊認知閉合需求量表,並以一組來自三所大學174份預試樣本進行量表的信效度檢測。在正式研究中,研究者進行兩個研究,研究一以學生創業團隊為對象,獲得來自兩所大學的有效樣本22個團隊,116份團隊成員的資料。研究二以組織內的團隊為對象,獲得來自15個企業組織有效樣本51個團隊,其中包含51份團隊領導者及431份團隊成員的資料。本研究結果顯示,研究一與研究二皆獲得支持顯示,當團隊成員們知覺到團隊創新氛圍越高,團隊內資訊分享程度也越高;而當團隊資訊分享程度越高,團隊創新績效也越高。然而,團隊資訊分享對團隊創新氛圍與團隊創新績效的中介影響效果僅研究一學生創業團隊獲得支持。此外,也僅研究一獲得支持顯示,當團隊認知閉合需求越高,團隊內的資訊分享程度越低,進一步而言,團隊認知閉合需求會透過團隊資訊分享中介效果影響團隊創新績效。最後,在團隊任務導向多元性調節效果部分,僅研究二組織內團隊獲得部分支持顯示,團隊職位背景多元性對團隊認知閉合需求與團隊資訊分享關係具調節效果,當職位背景多元性越高,會緩和團隊認知閉合需求與資訊分享的負向關係。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Organization maintains competitive advantage through by team innovation. Thus, it is important issue what kinds of factor improve team innovation performance. The purpose of this study is to examine team innovation climate and need for cognitive closure to the relationship between team information sharing and team innovation performance. The study designed a team need for cognitive closure scale and tested its reliability and validity by 174 pre-test subjects from three colleges. In the formal study, the researcher designed two studies. Study one obtained an effective sample of 22 teams with 116 team members altogether form two university. Study two obtained an effective sample of 51 teams with 51 team leaders and 431 team members altogether form fifteen organizations. The result of the two studied showed that the more the team members perceive team innovation climate, the more team information sharing behavior. Furthermore, the more team information sharing behavior, the more team innovation performance. However, only study one proved that the team information sharing mediated the relationship between team innovation climate and team innovation performance. Besides of these, only study one showed that the relationship is negative between the teams’ need for cognitive closure and team information sharing. In addition, team information sharing mediated the relationship between teams’ need for cognitive closure and team innovation performance. Finally, about to the task-orientation diversity, only study two proves that the position background diversity moderate the relationship between the teams’ need for cognitive closure and team information sharing, that is to say, if the teams’ position background diversity is high, the negative relationship between teams’ need for cognitive closure and team information sharing will attenuate. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T05:19:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-99-D93741002-1.pdf: 613390 bytes, checksum: 7377a3d288870ea38f5c305e396ca6a9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員審定書
謝辭 中文摘要 英文摘要 目錄 圖目錄 表目錄 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的 7 第二章 文獻探討 8 第一節 團隊創新 8 壹、創新的定義 8 貳、團隊創新的定義 10 參、團隊創新的相關理論模型 11 肆、小結 14 第二節 團隊創新氛圍 16 壹、氛圍的意義 16 貳、氛圍對個體行為的影響 17 參、團隊創新氛圍的意義與構面 18 肆、小結 20 第三節 認知閉合需求 22 壹、Kruglanski的知識動機理論 22 貳、認知閉合需求 24 參、認知閉合需求與團隊成員資訊處理 25 第四節 團隊創新氛圍、資訊分享與團隊創新績效的關係 27 壹、團隊創新績效 27 貳、團隊創新氛圍、團隊資訊分享與團隊創新績效的關係 28 第五節 團隊認知閉合需求、資訊分享與團隊創新績效的關係 30 第六節 團隊任務導向多元性 32 壹、團隊多元性與創新 32 貳、團隊多元性與資訊分享 33 第三章 研究假設 35 第一節 研究架構 35 第二節 研究假設 36 壹、團隊創新氛圍、團隊資訊分享與團隊創新績效的關係 36 貳、團隊認知閉合需求、團隊資訊分享與團隊創新績效的關係 37 參、團隊創新氛圍、團隊任務導向多元性與資訊分享的關係 37 肆、團隊認知閉合需求、團隊任務導向多元性與資訊分享的關係 38 第四章 研究方法 40 第一節 研究設計與程序 40 壹、研究一:學生創業團隊 40 貳、研究二:組織內團隊 41 第二節 研究變項的量測 43 壹、團隊創新氛圍 43 貳、團隊認知閉合需求 44 參、團隊資訊分享的程度 44 肆、團隊任務導向多元性 45 伍、團隊創新績效 46 陸、控制變項 46 第三節 團隊認知閉合需求量表發展 47 第四節 團隊層次之資料加總 52 第五節 資料分析方法 53 第五章 研究結果 55 第一節 研究一學生團隊之研究結果 55 第二節 研究二組織內團隊之研究結果 59 第六章 討論與結論 65 第一節 研究結果討論 65 第二節 研究貢獻與管理意涵 70 第三節 研究限制與未來建議 72 第七章 文獻探討 75 壹、中文部分 75 貳、英文部分 75 附錄1-研究問卷 91 前測學生問卷 91 研究一:學生創業團隊問卷 92 研究二:組織內團隊問卷 97 附錄2-創業團隊學院別類別 104 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 團隊創新氛圍與團隊認知閉合需求對資訊分享與創新績效的影響 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Team innovation climate and need for cognitive closure on information sharing and innovation performance | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 98-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蔡維奇,黃家齊,黃國隆,陸洛,吳玲玲 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 團隊創新氛圍,認知閉合需求,資訊分享,團隊創新績效, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | team innovation climate,need for cognitive closure,information sharing,team innovation performance, | en |
dc.relation.page | 104 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2010-07-20 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 商學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-99-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 599.01 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。