淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-1706200601555500
中文論文名稱 團隊多元化對團隊創造力影響之研究-以激勵策略與領導型態為干擾變數
英文論文名稱 The Impact of Team Diversity on Team Creativity - Motivation Strategies and Leadership Type as Moderators
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 管理科學研究所碩士班
系所名稱(英) Graduate Institute of Management Science
學年度 94
學期 2
出版年 95
研究生中文姓名 曾婉婷
研究生英文姓名 Wan-Ting Tseng
學號 693561119
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2006-06-02
論文頁數 77頁
口試委員 指導教授-陳定國
共同指導教授-婁國仁
委員-洪英正
委員-何雍慶
中文關鍵字 團隊多元化  團隊創造力  激勵策略  領導型態 
英文關鍵字 Team Diversity  Team Creativity  Motivation Strategies  Leadership Type 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學管理學
中文摘要 對大多數之企業而言,創新是維持及獲得競爭優勢之手段,不管是行銷活動、人力資源等管理上之創新;抑或是包裝、內容等產品上之創新;或是營運、生產流程上之創新等不同創新型態,若企業不具備創新能力,將可能導致企業失敗。其中,創造力是指任何領域中產生新奇有用的創意,創新是指在組織中成功地執行創意(Amabile, 1996),因此,創新需要以創造力為基礎。時至今日,許多行銷活動、專案進行等管理活動皆以團隊合作之形式運作,彙集個人之創造力,以期能夠運用團隊成員各異之價值觀、專業背景、經驗等激盪出團隊之創造力。故本研究以團隊作為研究對象,探討團隊各項多元化對於團隊創造力之影響。另外,分別以激勵策略及領導型態為干擾變數,探究兩者與各項多元化是否具有交互作用,進而干擾團隊多元化與團隊創造力之關係。

本研究提出以下四點研究目的:
1.探討團隊多元化中,社會屬性多元化、價值觀多元化及資訊多元化對團隊創造力之影響。
2.探討團隊多元化對團隊創造力之影響是否會因為激勵策略而有所差異。
3.探討團隊多元化對團隊創造力之影響是否會因為領導型態而有所差異。
4.提供研究之所得,供實務界建構團隊之參考依據。

本研究有效樣本為53個團隊,共235份問卷,經由Pearson相關分析及層級迴歸分析後,結果發現團隊成員年齡差異愈大與價值觀多元化程度愈大,對於團隊創造力愈會產生負面影響。在干擾變數方面,未考慮到交互作用下,僅激勵策略對於團隊創造力有正向影響,領導型態則無。考慮到交互作用下時,激勵策略會干擾價值觀多元化與團隊創造力之關係;領導型態會干擾職能背景多元化與團隊創造力之關係。
英文摘要 For most enterprise, innovation is a method to keep and obtain the competitive advantage. No matter it is administrant innovation of marketing activities and human resources, or it is innovation of product packaging and product content, or it is innovation of operation and production procedure. If the enterprise isn’t provided with innovative ability maybe results in failure. Amabile (1996) said that “creativity means that produces the novel and useful originality in any field, and innovation means that succeeds in carrying out the originality in organization”, hence innovation needs to be based on creativity. Today, many activities and projects perform in team collaboration. We expect that gather individual creativity, and use members’ different values, professional background and experience to inspire team’s creativity. So we collect data for this study by surveying teams, and examine team diversity how to influence team creativity. In addition, this study use motivation strategies and leadership type as moderators to examine the interaction effects of moderators and team diversity, and then affect the relationship between team diversity and team creativity.

And we propose several research questions as follows:
1.The influence between team diversity (social category diversity, value diversity, and informational diversity) and team creativity.
2.Discussing that the relationship between team diversity and team creativity whether has a difference because of the different motivation strategies.
3.Discussing that the relationship between team diversity and team creativity whether has a difference because of the different leadership type.
4.Offer the study results to construct the team.

This study includes 53 teams, and amount to 235 questionnaires. After analyzing via Pearson’s correlation analysis and hierarchical regression analysis, we find age diversity and value diversity negatively influence team creativity. If we don’t consider the interaction effects, motivation strategies positively influence team creativity, but leadership type won’t. If we consider the interaction effects, the interaction between motivation strategies and value diversity influence team creativity, and interaction between leadership type and function background diversity influence team creativity.
論文目次 目錄

目錄 I
表目錄 II
圖目錄 III
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 2
1.3 觀念性架構與變數定義 3
1.4 研究假說 4
1.5 問卷設計與變數衡量 5
1.6 信度與效度 10
1.7 研究對象與抽樣方法 11
1.8 資料分析方法 14
1.9 研究流程 16
第二章 團隊多元化、團隊創造力、激勵策略與領導型態理論分析 17
2.1 團隊 17
2.2 團隊多元化 20
2.3 團隊創造力 23
2.4 激勵策略 29
2.5 領導型態 33
2.6 團隊多元化、激勵策略、領導型態與團隊創造力 38
第三章 敘述性統計分析與團隊資料檢核 42
3.1 研究變項之敘述性統計分析 42
3.2 團隊層次檢核 44
第四章 多元化、創造力、激勵策略與領導型態相關分析 47
4.1 Pearson相關分析 47
4.2 團隊多元化與團隊創造力之迴歸分析 49
4.3 激勵策略與領導型態之干擾效果檢定 53
4.4 綜合討論與假設驗證 56
第五章 結論與建議 59
5.1 研究發現 59
5.2 研究結論 61
5.3 後續研究建議 63
5.4 研究限制 64
參考文獻 65
附錄 71

表目錄

表1-1 問卷設計 6
表1-2 激勵策略因素分析結果 8
表1-3 領導型態因素分析結果 9
表1-4 各構面信度之衡量 11
表1-5 團隊成員樣本組成 12
表1-6 因素分析KMO and Bartlett’s Test 14
表2-1 團體與團隊之差異 18
表2-2 團體與團隊主要差異 19
表2-3 團隊多元化指標 22
表2-4 領導之定義 33
表3-1 個人層次之敘述性統計分析 43
表3-2 團隊多元化之敘述性統計分析 43
表3-3 團隊層次之敘述性統計分析 44
表3-4 各變項組間變異與組內變異之比較 46
表3-5 任務導向量表IRR計算結果 46
表4-1 各變項之Pearson相關分析 48
表4-2 社會屬性多元化子構面對團隊創造力影響之迴歸分析表 49
表4-3 資訊多元化子構面對團隊創造力影響之迴歸分析表 50
表4-4 價值觀對團隊創造力影響之迴歸分析表 51
表4-5 團隊多元化對團隊創造力影響之迴歸分析表 52
表4-6 團隊多元化與團隊創造力迴歸分析表-以激勵策略為干擾 53
表4-7 團隊多元化與團隊創造力迴歸分析表-以領導型態為干擾 55
表4-8 假設檢定結果 57

圖目錄

圖1-1 研究架構圖 3
圖1-2 研究流程 16
圖2-1 創造力工作環境評估模型 25
圖2-2 創造力之互動模式 26
圖2-3 組織創造力交互模式 28
圖2-4 期望理論 31
圖2-5 團隊領導模式 37



參考文獻 一、 中文部份

Robbins, S.P.(2001/2001). Organizational Behavior.
李青芬、李雅婷、趙慕芬(編譯)。組織行為學第九版。台北:華泰。
二十一世紀的管理挑戰(劉毓玲譯)(民89)。台北:天下文化。(原著出版年:2000年)
激發團隊創意(施貞夙譯)(民89)。台北:中國生產力中心。(原著出版年:1999年)
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(民89)。創造力研究。台北:心理。
王雯君(民88)。多元化管理之研究—以台北市原著民就業為例。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
林文川(民91)。創造力與創造性思考教學之研究。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
林奇芳(民91)。研發團隊創造力指標建構之研究-以高科技產業為例。國立臺灣師範大學工業科技教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
林建煌(民90)。管理學。台北:智勝。
林書弘(民92)。歧見下的創意:虛擬團隊衝突行為與創造力之相關研究。國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
邱奕嘉(民86)。經營特質、創新型態與領導風格對經營績效的影響—新竹科學園區企業之實證分析。國立交通大學科技管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
吳秉恩(民82)。組織行為學。台北:華泰。
吳瓊恩、魏秋宜(民87)。公務人員訓練的新趨勢—論創造力的開發與運用。人事月刊,27(5),42-48。
涂富嵩(民89)。創造力人員激勵因素偏好之研究-以電子業為例。私立大同大學事業經營研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
許士軍(民69)。管理學。台北:東華書局。
許雅隸(民90)。主管領導型態、員工人格特質、組織激勵制度與員工工作績效之相關性。國立東華大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,花蓮縣。
陳定國(民92)。現代管理通論。台北:三民書局。
陳順宇(民89)。多變量分析(2版)。台北:華泰書局。
陳淑雯(民92)。激勵策略、知識創造條件與團隊創新績效關係之研究-以廣告代理業為例。國立彰化師範大學商業教育學系碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
曾兆堂(民91)。中小企業主管領導型態、組織氣候對員工創造力之研究。國立台北大學企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
曾素雲(民89)。工作團隊中工作價值觀、團隊特性與團隊績效之相關研究。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
董怡君(民92)。團隊多元化及衝突對團隊學習行為的影響。國立中央大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
蔡達人(民90)。團隊多元化對知識分享、創造、創新績效之影響-以衝突為中介變項。私立東吳大學企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
劉秀雯(民93)。國際團隊多元性、團隊領導與企業組織環境支援之探討。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
盧佩秋(民92)。團隊領導對集體效能與團隊表現之影響。國立政治大學心理學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
錢毓琦(民91)。影響團隊創造力因素之研究-以廣告業為例。國立臺灣師範大學工業科技教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。


二、 英文部份

Amabile, T.M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
Amabile, T. M.(1996). Creativity in the context. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T.M. & Gryskiewicz, S.S. (1989). The creative environment scales: Work environment inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 231-253.
Amabile, T.M., Collins, M.A., Conti, R., & Phillips, E. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, Co: Westview Press.
Amabile, T.M., Schatzel, E.A., Moneta, G.B., & Kramer, S.J. (2004). Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader suppor. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 5-32.
Bantel, K. & Jackson, S. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the team make a difference? . Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107-124.
Buchholz, S., Roth, T. & Hess, K. (1987). Creating the high-performance team. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Coste, T.G. (1996). Group creativity: Divergence and convergence in technological design. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan Technological University, Michigan.
Cronbach, L.J. (1987). Statistical tests for moderator variables: Flaws in analysis recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 414-417.
Davis, K. (1972). Human behavior at work: Organizational behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Drucker, P.F. (1988). The coming of the new organization. Harvard Business Review, 66(1), 45-65.
Ely, R.J. (1994). The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 203-238.
Glick, W.H., Miller, C.C., & Huber, G.P. (1993). The impact of upper-echelon diversity on organizational performance. New York: Oxford University Press.
Guzzo, R.A., & Dickson, M.W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 307-338.
Haustein, H.D. (1981). Human resources, creativity and innovation: The conflict between homo faber and hono wdern. Behavior Science, 26(3), 243-255.
Hoffman, L.R., & Maier, N.R.F. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solution by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 27-32.
Hussey, D.E. (1997). The innovation challenge. London: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Jackson, S., Stone, V., & Alvarez, E. (1993). Socialization amidst diversity: Impact of demographics on work team oldtimers and newcomers. Research in Organizational Behavior, 15, 45-109.
James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliabililty with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98.
Jehn, K.A., Northcraft, G.B., & Neal, M.A. (1999). Why difference make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroup. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741-763.
Jessup H.P. (1990). New role in team leadership. Training & Development Journal, 44(11), 79-83.
Kasof, J. (1995). Explaining creativity: The attributional perspective. Creative Research Journal, 8, 311-366.
Katznbach, J.R., & Smith, D.K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. New York: Harper Collins.
Kenny, D.A., & LaVoie, L. (1985). Separating individual and group effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 339-348.
King, N., & Anderson, N. (1990). Innovation in working group. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Koontz, H., & O’Donnell, C., (1974). Management: A systems and contingency analysis of managerial functions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kuczmarski, T.D. (1996). Innovation: Leadership strategies for the competitive edge. New York: NTC Publishing Group.
Lawler, E.E., Mohrman, S.A., & Ledford, G.E. (1995). Creating high per formance organizations: Practices and results of employee involvement and total quality management in Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Leonard, D.A. & Swap, W.C. (1999). When sparks fly. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Majaro, S. (1991). The creative marketer. London: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
Maw Der Foo, Poh Kam Wong, & Andy Ong (2005). Do others thinks you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges’ evaluation of ideas in a business plan competition. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 385-402.
Maxon, J. (1988). Creating new ideas. Journal of Management Decision, 26, 40-43.
McCoy, J.M. (2000). The creative work environment: The relationship of the physical environment and creative teamwork at a state agency-A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI.
Messick, D., & Massie, D. (1989). Intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 45-81.
Miller, E.K. (1994). Diversity and its management: Training managers for cultural competence with the organization. Management Quarterly, 36, 17-23.
Milliken, F.J., & Martins, L.L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 402-433.
Mohrman, S.A., Cohen, S.G., & Mohramn, A.M.. Jr. (1995). Designing team-based organizations: New forms for knowledge work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhard, 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.
Quick, T.L. (1992). Successful team building. New York: American Management Association.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
Sanjib Chowdhury (2005). Demographic diversity for building an effective entrepreneurial team: Is it important? . Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 727-746.
Sethi, R., Simith, D.C., & Park, C.W. (2002). How to kill a team’s creativity. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 16-17.
Shalley, C.E., & Gilson, L.L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster and hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33-53.
Shonk, J.H. (1982). Working in teams: A practical manual for improving work. New York: Amacom.
Stewart G.L., & Manz, C.C. (1995). Leadership for self-managing work teams: A typology and integrative model. Human Relations, 48(7), 747-770.
Tannenbaum, R., Weschler, I.R., & Massarik, F. (1961). Leadership and organization. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Teachman, J.D. (1980). Analysis of population diversity. Sociological Methods and Research, 8, 341-362.
Terry, G.R. (1960). Principle of management(3rd ed.). Homewood: Richard D. Irwin Inc.
William, K.Y., & O’Reilly, C.A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organization Behavior, 20, 77-140.
Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E., & Griffin, R.W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-321.
Zenger, T.R., & Lawrence, B.S. (1989). Organizational demography: The differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 353-376.
Zhou, J. & George, J.M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 682-692.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2007-06-23公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2007-06-23起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信