研究生: |
黃凡瑜 Huang, Fan-Yu |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
公部門非典型人力工作動機與工作績效之關聯性研究-以工作特性為調節變項 Research on the Relevance of Atypical Employment Work Motivation and Work Performance in the Public Sector - The Moderating Effect of Job Characteristics |
指導教授: |
林弘昌
Lin, Hung-Chang |
口試委員: |
林弘昌
Lin, Hung-Chang 張敬珣 Chang, Ching-Hsun 白景文 Bai, Jing-Wen |
口試日期: | 2022/07/22 |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
科技應用與人力資源發展學系 Department of Technology Application and Human Resource Development |
論文出版年: | 2022 |
畢業學年度: | 110 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 70 |
中文關鍵詞: | 工作動機 、工作績效 、工作特性 、公部門非典型人力 |
英文關鍵詞: | Work motivation, Work performance, Job characteristic, Atypical employment |
研究方法: | 調查研究 |
DOI URL: | http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202201834 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:133 下載:0 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
為落實政府公務人員額精簡政策以及維持良好的行政運作,我國行政機關逐漸以非典型人力做為彈性人力的因應措施,然而近年各單位在運用非典型人力之名額與比例上是明顯增加,並且為達成公務服務績效化,公部門更加重視非典型人力之工作績效展現。從實務與過去研究發現,被視為激發員工工作績效的關鍵之一,然而適當的工作設計亦是有助於促進員工生產力,故本研究之目的即是希望實證公部門非典型人力工作動機與工作績效之關聯性,並探討公部門之工作特性是否在工作動機與工作績效之間具有調節效果,作為研究與實務應用之參考。為達到以上研究目的,本研究使用「問卷調查法」,以「公部門非典型人力」為調查對象,共收到171份的有效問卷,並採用迴歸分析進行研究假設之驗證,經討論並提出實務建議。本研究實證結果發現:(1)「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機對任務績效有顯著正向影響。(2)「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機對脈絡績效有顯著正向影響。(3)技能多樣性對「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機與任務績效的關係不具有調節效果。(4)工作回饋性對「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機與任務績效的關係不具有調節效果。(5)工作合作性對「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機與任務績效的關係不具有調節效果。(6)技能多樣性對「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機與脈絡績效的關係具有調節效果。(7)工作回饋性對「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機與脈絡績效的關係不具有調節效果。(8)工作合作性對「公部門非典型人力」的工作動機與脈絡績效的關係具有調節效果。
To implement the government's policy of streamlining the number of civil servants and maintain good administrative operations, our country's executive agencies have gradually adopted atypical employment as a response measure for the flexible workforce. However, the number and proportion of atypical employment used by various agencies have increased in recent years. To achieve a better official service performance, the public sector pays more attention to the implementation of atypical employment. From practice and past research, work motivation is regarded as one of the keys to stimulating employees' work performance. However, proper work design is also helpful in promoting employee productivity. Therefore, the study aims to understand atypical employment's work motivations in the public sector. Relevance to work performance, and explore whether the job characteristics of the public sector have a moderating effect between work motivation and work performance, as a reference for research and practical applications. To achieve the above research objectives, this research took atypical employment in the public sector as research sample and the study retrieved 171 valid questionnaires. The collected questionnaire data was sorted out and analyzed using statistical analysis methods such as descriptive statistics and class regression. Finally, the study will reference government agencies and contractors with future management strategies for atypical employment in the public sector.
The following findings were obtained:(1)Work motivation had a significantly positive impact on the task performance; (2)Work motivation had a significantly positive impact on the context performance; (3)Skill Variety had no moderating effect on the relationship between work motivation and task performance; (4)Feedback had no moderating effect on the relationship between work motivation and task performance; (5)Dealing with others had no moderating effect on the relationship between work motivation and task performance; (6)Skill Variety had a moderating effect on the relationship between work motivation and context performance; (7)Feedback had no moderating effect on the relationship between work motivation and context performance; (8)Dealing with others had a moderating effect on the relationship between work motivation and context performance.
行政院及所屬各機關學校臨時人員進用及運用要點(2008年1 月1 日)。
行政院及所屬機關學校臨時人員進用及運用要點。行政院院授人組字第10800481201號函修正(2019年,11月15日)。
余德成(1996)。品質管理人性面系統因素對工作績效之影響[未出版之博士論文]。國立中山大學企業管理研究所,高雄。
呂育誠、廖鎮文(2019)。當臨時人員不再「臨時」-策略性人力資源管理觀點下政府運用契約人力之問題分析。人事行政,208,16-32。
沈建中、吳美雲、施乃元(2017)。政府績效管理之變革。國土及公共治理季刊,5(3),94-107。
沈湘縈、張瑞顯(2018)。從工作滿意度及工作動機探討領導風格與組織承諾之研究。管理資訊計算,7(2),57-68。https://doi.org/10.6285/MIC.201809_7(2).0005
卓庭鈺(2019年9月)。行政院人事行政總處及所屬 109 年度單位預算評估報告。台北市:立法院。
房美玉(2002)。台灣半導體產業之組織文化對於內外工作動機與工作績效及工作滿意度間關連性的影響。管理評論,21(3),69-96。https://doi.org/10.6656/MR.2002.21.3.CHI.69
林惠彥、陸洛、吳珮瑀、吳婉瑜(2012)。快樂的員工更有生產力嗎?組織支持與工作態度之雙重影響。中華心理學刊,54(4),451-469。https://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.20120220
林澄貴(2001)。知識管理、工程專業人員核心能力與工作績效關係之研究:以中鋼公司為例[未出版之碩士論文]。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所,高雄市。
政府採購法。總統華總一義字第10800049691號(2019年,5月22日)
政府機關(構)運用勞務承攬參考原則。勞動部勞動關 2 字第1050125217號函公布增訂(2016年,02月04日)
政府資料開放平臺(2022)。勞動部勞動力發展署高屏澎東分署運用勞務承攬人數統計及臨時人員統計資料。https://data.gov.tw/suggests/136433
徐瑋伶(2003)。工作動機研究之回顧與前瞻。應用心理研究,19,89-113。
馬珮禎(2018)。公務人員之工作動機、社會支持、公共服務動機影響離職意願之研究:以臺北市政府為例[未出版之碩士論文]。銘傳大學公共事務學系碩士在職專班,台北市。
張佑宇、陳慧穎、施慧鈺(2019)。探討工作動機、創意過程與創意績效:工作特性之干擾效果。科技管理學刊,24(3),37-76。
張淑眧、陳志忠、李明興、蘇文娟(2006)。組織結構、工作特性、員工生涯發展與組織承諾的關係探討,中華管理評論,9(4),1-28。
張烽益(2010)。公部門的勞動派遣亂象。新社會政策,12,43-46。https://doi.org/10.29752/NST.201010.0010
張鎧如、陳敦源、簡鈺珒、李仲彬(2015)。探索臺灣公務人員工作績效之影響因素:能力、動機與機會的整合觀點。東吳政治學報,33(4),1-71。
http://dx.doi.org/10.6418/SJPS
陳重安、許成委(2016)。公共服務動機:回顧、反思與未來方向。公共行政學報,51,69-96。https://doi.org/10.30409/JPA.201609_(51).0003
陳峯偉(2020)。公部門勞務契約承攬人力探討-以行政院農業委員會動植物防疫檢疫局為例[未出版之碩士論文]。淡江大學公共行政學系公共政策碩士在職專班,新北市。
陳殷哲、謝孟婷(2018)。公務人員工作負荷對情緒耗竭之影響-情緒智力與工作特性之調節效果。企業管理學報,118,101-138。https://doi.org/10.3966/102596272018090118004
陳敦源、廖洲棚、董祥開(2017)。公共治理與績效管理:以政府網站管理為例之研究。國土及公共治理季刊,5(3),34-53。
陳欽雨、王美雅、薛永慎(2016)。通訊業員工人際網絡、成就動機及工作績效對升遷機會之影響。創新與管理,12(1),1-38。http://dx.doi.org/10.30118/JIM
黃阿芬(2018)。職場個人學習、創新效能感、工作動機、創造力及工作績效間之關係—以組織創新氛圍為跨層次調節效果[未出版之博士論文]。國立臺北大學企業管理學系,新北市。
黃教昇(2019)。後備幹部內外在動機對協力國軍人才招募工作績效之研究-以新北市為例[未出版之碩士論文]。國立政治大學行政管理碩士學程,台北市。
黃維德(2018年10月24日)。太過注重團隊合作,對你的工作不一定是好事。天下雜誌。
https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5092619
監察院(2020)。政府對於非典型就業規範及執行情形之探討通案性案件調查研究報告。台北市,監察院。https://www.cy.gov.tw/AP_Home/Op_Upload/eDoc/%E5%87%BA%E7%89%88%E5%93%81/109/1090000071010900521.pdf
褚麗絹、何育敏、曾冠豪、許宏誠(2016)。工作特性、領導風格及心流經驗對工作績效影響之研究。經營管理論叢,12(1),15-27。https://doi.org/10.6872/OMR.201612_12(1).0002
劉兆明(2001)。工作動機的整合模式︰概念架構的發展與初步分析,中華心理學刊,43(2),189-206。
劉廷揚、陳世通、杜怡潔(2017),員工組織承諾對主管領導風格和工作績效之中介作用兼論員工幸福感之調節效果,經營管理學刊,12,1-20。
劉富美(2013)。工作特性與組織承諾關係之研究-以宜蘭縣鄉鎮市公所清潔隊員為例。空大行政學報,26,95-128 http://ir.nou.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/2609/2/E26_095-128.pdf
蔡秦倫、夏侯欣鵬、劉平成(2020)。社會經濟組織工作者的熱情與耗損:工作特徵立基視角。臺大管理論叢,30(3),183-213。https://doi.org/10.6226/NTUMR.202012_30(3).0006
鄭晉昌、劉曉雯、林俊宏、陳春希(2006)。多向度之管理職能評鑑與主管級員工績效及績效改善之關係:一項結合橫貫面與縱貫面之研究。人力資源管理學報,6(4),1-21。https://doi.org/10.6147/JHRM.2006.0604.01
謝安田、蔡美賢(2008)。部屬知覺主管領導效能與其工作動機之關係:以工作特性為干擾變數。文大商管學報,13(4),1-23。https://doi.org/10.30163/BR.200812.0002
謝琇玲、謝宜樺(2013)。員工工作績效的影響因素探討:華人社會文化脈絡與心理行為現象。勞資關係論叢,14,1-22。
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic Motivational Orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950-967.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.950
Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A. L. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high-performance work systems pay off. London, UK: Economic Policy Institute: Cornell University Press.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. NY: Wiley.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118619179
Bollen, K.A. & Long, J.S. (1993). Testing Structural Equation Models. Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Borman, W. C. & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organization psychology, in M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organization psychology (2nd ed.), Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1, 687-732.
Campbell, J. P., & Wiernik, B. M. (2015). The modeling and assessment of work performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 47-74.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111427
Cerasoli, C. P. & Nicklin, J. M. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 980-1008. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035661
Çetin, F., & Aşkun, D. (2018). The effect of occupational self-efficacy on work performance through intrinsic work motivation. Management Research Review, 41(2), 186-201. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/mrr-03-2017-0062
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology, 416–436. CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n21
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M.(1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Hackman, J. R., & Lawler, E. E. (1971). Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55(3), 259–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031152
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076546
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101812
Jonson, Emily C. & Adam W. Meade (2010). A multi-level investigation of overall job performance ratings. paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.
Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard-translating strategy into action. Boston: Harvard business school press.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966) The social psychology of organizations. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Korman, A. K. (1977). An examination of Dipboye's "A critical review of Korman's self-consistency theory of work motivation and occupational choice." Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 18(1), 127–128.
https://doi.org/10.1016/00305073(77)90022-8
Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 475-480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.475
Pinder, C. C. (2008). Work motivation in organizational behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Psychology.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E.(1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Essential organisational behaviour. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Seashore, S. E., & Taber, T. D. (1975). Job satisfaction indicators and their correlates. American Behavioral Scientist, 18(3), 333–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276427501800303
Shin, Y., Hur, W.-M., Moon, T.W., &Lee, S. A. (2019). Motivational Perspective on Job Insecurity: Relationships Between Job Insecurity, Intrinsic Motivation, and Performance and Behavioral Outcomes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(10), 1812.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101812
Sims, H. P., Keller, R. T. & Szilagyi, A. D. (1976). The Measurement of Job Characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 195-212. https://doi.org/10.2307/255772
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper and Brothers. https://wpscms.pearsoncmg.com/wps/media/objects/3109/3184076/taylor.pdf
Turner, A. N., & Lawrence, P. R. (1965). Industrial jobs and the worker: An investigation of response to task attributes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Division of Research.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.