淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


系統識別號 U0002-2606200615231600
中文論文名稱 團隊新進人員對決策流程滿意度及團隊績效的影響
英文論文名稱 Impacts of Newcomers on Group Performance and Satisfaction of the Group Decision-making Process
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 企業管理學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Business Administration
學年度 94
學期 2
出版年 95
研究生中文姓名 陳玟秀
研究生英文姓名 Wen- Shiu Chen
學號 693450081
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2006-06-15
論文頁數 80頁
口試委員 指導教授-徐悌
委員-趙慕芬
委員-許金田
委員-徐悌
中文關鍵字 新進人員  決策流程滿意度  團隊績效 
英文關鍵字 Newcomers  Group Performance  Satisfaction of the Group Decision-making Process 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學管理學
中文摘要 因應現今企業環境變動快速,企業組織團隊中常會有人員變動或輪調的情形。組織行為論者對於團隊中加入新成員為團隊所帶來影響有正反兩面的說法。持反對論者認為新成員加入的社會化過程,會分散掉舊成員的精力,使其無法專心在任務上,造成團隊決策流程滿意度及團隊績效的低落。對新成員加入帶來的影響持肯定態度的學者認為,當一個團隊中有新人加入時,通常能帶入不同以往的資訊、觀點及意見,對團隊績效及滿意度的提升有幫助。

本研究是在一個實驗室的設計之下,愈探討三個研究問題:1)實驗組與控制組間的滿意度、衝突行為模式、衝突結果、績效是否有差異;2)小組決策流程滿意度與衝突行為模式、衝突結果的不同對團隊績效是否有影響;3)小組決策流程滿意度、衝突行為模式與衝突結果之間是否有相關。

本研究樣本為由3人或4人組成的49組團隊,利用T檢定、迴歸分析、相關分析的統計分析方法,研究結果顯示,團隊中加入新成員會使決策流程滿意度改變,決策流程滿意度對團隊績效亦有影響,此外,衝突與決策流程滿意度之間也有相關性存在。
英文摘要 Since the environment of an enterprise changes rapidly nowadays, personnel change or turnover has become a normal event in organizations. There are two schools of thoughts in organizational behavior with regard to the influence of newcomer in organizations, namely a positive and a negative side. Theorists holding the negative opinion consider that, socializing newcomers may disperse the energy of old timers and make old timers less able to focus on the task. As a result, it may lead to a lower satisfaction toward both the group decision-making process and the group performance. In contrast, theorists with the positive thinking believe that newcomers may help promote a higher satisfaction toward the group decision-making process and performance due to the fact that newcomers may bring in different ideas, opinions and/or suggestions.

The present study under a laboratory setting was intended to find answers to the following three research questions: 1) whether there was any differences between the control and the experimental groups in terms of their satisfaction toward the group decision-making process, perceived conflicts, and the group performance; 2) which of the following factors contributing the most toward the group performance: group gender composition, members perceived conflicts, and perceived satisfaction; and 3) whether there existed any correlation between perceived conflicts and perceived satisfaction of the group decision-making process.

Based on a sample of 49 teams with three or four persons per team (totally164 participants), the present research had the following findings. Using a T-test, a correlation analysis and a regression analysis, findings of the study revealed that newcomers did produced a different satisfaction toward the group decision-making processes; satisfaction of the group decision-making process would contribute the group performance; and there were indeed some correlations between satisfaction of the group decision-making process and members perceived conflicts.
論文目次 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........................................4
第三節 研究流程........................................5

第二章 文獻探討............................................6
第一節 團隊............................................6
第二節 團隊績效.......................................10
第三節 衝突的定義、層級與性質........................ 15
第四節 衝突對團隊績效的影響...........................19
第五節 影響衝突結果的調節變項.........................22
第六節 團隊性別組成比例與團隊決策流程滿意度、團隊績效的
關係....27
第七節 新進者的加入與決策流程滿意度及團隊績效的關係...29
第八節 團隊流程滿意度與團隊績效的關係.................34

第三章 研究方法...........................................37
第一節 研究架構.......................................37
第二節 研究假設.......................................38
第三節 抽樣對象與樣本特徵.............................39
第四節 研究設計.......................................41
第五節 研究工具.......................................43
第六節 資料分析方法...................................44

第四章 統計分析........................................45
第一節 信度分析、因素分析與資料檢查...................45
第二節 檢定假設.......................................53
第三節 研究假設與結果.................................58

第五章 研究結果探討....................................59
  第一節 實驗組與控制組間的差異.........................59
第二節 影響團隊績效的因素.............................61
第三節 決策流程滿意度與衝突構面的相關性...............64

第六章 結論............................................67
第一節 相關研究.......................................67
第二節 研究架構與樣本.................................67
第三節 統計結.果......................................68
第四節 討論...........................................69
第五節結論與建議......................................70

參考文獻...........................................................73
中文部份.......................................................73
英文部分.......................................................73
表 目 錄
表 2-1-1 團隊的定義.................................................7
表 2-1-2 團體與團隊的差異...........................................9
表 2-2-1 團隊效能指標整理..........................................13
表 3-3-1基本樣本特徵統計量.........................................39
表 4-1-1 柯-史單一樣本檢驗.........................................46
表 4-1-2 衝突行為模式部份反映象(Anti-image)相關矩陣................47
表 4-1-3 衝突結果部份反映象(Anti-image)相關矩陣....................47
表 4-1-4 衝突行為模式與衝突結果題目刪減量表信度分析表..............48
表 4-1-5 衝突行為模式部份共同因素間的相關矩陣......................51
表 4-1-6 衝突行為模式問卷因素分析結果..............................51
表 4-1-7 衝突結果問卷因素分析結果..................................52
表 4-2-1 決策流程滿意度獨立樣本F 檢定與T 檢定結果...................53
表 4-2-2 衝突構面獨立樣本F 檢定與T 檢定結果........................54
表 4-2-3 變動前後衝突構面計分積差相關係數與相依樣本T 檢定..........55
表 4-2-4 決策流程滿意度獨立樣本F 檢定與T 檢定結果..................55
表 4-2-5 積差相關係數矩陣..........................................56
表 4-2-6 影響團隊績效因素之逐步迴歸分析表..........................56
表 4-2-7 相關分析表................................................57
表 4-3-1 研究假設與結果............................................58
表 5-1-1 實驗組與控制組的決策流程滿意度............................59
表 5-1-2 實驗組與控制組的衝突處理方法與衝突結果....................60
表 5-1-3 實驗組與控制組的團隊績效..................................60
表 5-2-1 團隊流程滿意度對團隊績效的影響............................61
表 5-2-2 衝突行為模式與衝突結果對團隊績效的影響....................62
表 5-2-3 團隊性別組成比例對團隊績效的影響..........................63
表 5-3-1 決策流程滿意度與衝突處理方法的關係........................64
表 5-3-2 決策流程滿意度與衝突結果的關係............................65
表 5-3-3 決策流程滿意度各變項間的關係..............................66

圖 目 錄
圖 1-1-1 工作團體與工作團隊的比較...................................1
圖 1-3-1 研究流程...................................................5
圖 2-3-1 衝突的命名與定義..........................................18
圖 2-8-1 影響團隊體系的因素........................................34
圖 3-1-1 研究架構..................................................37
參考文獻 參考文獻
中文部分
王美玲(民91),醫療產業團隊管理之實證研究,靜宜大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
玉井智子(民90),團隊組織特徵、運作過程、團隊績效之關係研究─台日學生之差異比較,國立中山大學企業管理學系研究所碩士論文。
李弘暉、鍾麗英(民88),團隊運作過程對團隊績效之影響之研究,人
力資源學報,11,1-18。
吳崇賓(民91),員工參與制、組織公民行為與團隊合作效能之關聯性研究,國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
吳秉恩(民75),組織行為學,台北:華泰書局。
邱明真 (民92),金融理財專員之核心能力、人格特質與工作績效之相關研究─以C銀行為例,國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士在職專班論文。
林財丁、林瑞發譯(民87)。組織行為。台北:滄海。
許雅婷(民91),人格特質與團隊組合對知識分享、創新績效的影響,
東吳大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
黃曬莉 (民88)。人際和諧與衝突:本土化的理論與研究。台北:桂冠。
鄭默、鄭日昌譯(1998),心理測驗-原理、應用與問題,台北:五南。
蕭筱筠(民92),中國人個性量表與工作績效之關聯性研究-以A公司研發人員為 例,國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所。
蕭佩琪(民91),團隊成員間關係、主觀契合度與團隊效能之關係,銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。

英文部分
Ainger, A., Kaura, R. & Ennals, R. (1995). Executive guide to business success
though human-centered systems, New York: Springer.
Ancona, D. C. & Caldwell, D. F. (1992), “Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance,” Organization Science, 3, 321-341.
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A Psychological Interpretation, New York:Holt, Rinehart & Winson.
Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and Growth in Personality, New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Alper, Steve., Tjosvold, Dean.& Law, Kenneth S. (2000) Conflict
management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams.
Personnel-Psychology, 53(3), 625-642
Amason, A. C. & Schweiger, D. M. 1994. Resolving the paradox of conflict,
strategic decision making and organizational performance.
International Journal of Conflict Management, 5, 239-253.
Andrew, T., & Anthony, D. L. (2003). Small group decision- making in face- to- face and computer- mediated environments: the role of personality. Behavior & Information Technology, 22, 203- 218.
Bantel, K., & Jackson, S. (1989). Top management and innovations in
banking: Does the composition of the team make difference? ,Strategic
Management Journal, 10, 107-124.
Baron, R.A. (1991). Positive effective of conflict: A cognitive
perspective. Employee Responsibilities and Right Journal, 2, 25-36.
Barrick, M. R., and Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta- analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
Barrick, M. R., and Mount, M. K. (1993). Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the big five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, (2), 111-118.
Barry, B., & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: the role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 62-78.
Berlo, D. K.(1960). The process of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1997). Participative decision-making: An integration of multiple dimensions. Human Relations, 50, 859-878.
Bond, J. R., & Vinacke, W. E. (1961). Coalitions in mixed- sex triads. Sociometry,24, 61-75.
Bowers, C. A., Pharmer, J. A., & Salas, E. (2000). When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: a meta- analysis. Small Group Research, 31, 305- 326.
Brilhart, J. K.(1978). Effective group discussion, 3d ed. Dubuque, IA: Brown.
Burke, K., Aytes, K., & Chidambaram, L. (2001).Media effects on the development of cohesion and process satisfaction in computer- supported workgroups. Information Technology & People, 14, 122-140.
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The desxription of personality: Basic trait resolved into clusters. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 476-506.
Cattel, R. B. (1973).Personality pinned down. Psycgology Today,40-46.
Cini, M.A. (2001). Group newcomers: From disruption to innovation. Group Facilitation,3, 3-13.
Choi,H-S., & Levin, J. M. (2004). Minority influence in work teams: The impact of newcomers. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 273-280.
Christopher M Lowery, N A Beadles & Thomas J Krilowicz. (2004). Using personality and cognitive to predict job performance: An empirical study. International Journal of Management, 21, 300-306.
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectives research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290.
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory
Manual, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory and New Five-Factor Inventory: Professional Manual, Florida:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Donald B. Trow(2000). Membership succession and team performance. Human Relation, 19, 259-269.
Deutsch, M. (1969). Conflicts: Productive and Destructive. Journal of
Social Issues, 25,7-41.
Fiol, C. Marlene. (1994) Consensus, diversity, and learning in
organizations. Organization Science, 5, 403-420.
Ellis, D. G., & Fisher B. A.(1994).Small group decision making.
Ely, R. J. (1995). The power in demography: Women's social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 589-634.
Ettlie, J. E. (1980). Manpower flows and the innovation process. Management Science, 26(11), 1086-1095.
Falk, G., & Falk, S. (1979). The impact of decision rules on the distribution of power in problem- solving teams with unequal power. Group and Organization Studies.
Gadon, H. (1988). The newcomer and the ongoing work group. In H. Gadon & N. Josefowitz (Eds.), Fitting in: How to get a good start in your new job (pp. 161-175). Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: psychological theory and woman’s development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group Effectiveness.Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
Goodman, M. (1981). Group phases and induced countertransference. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 18, 478-486.
Green, S. G. (2001). Professional Entry and the Adviser Relationship:
Socialization, Commitment, and productivity. Group & Organization Studies,16(4), 387-407.
Guestzkow, H. & Gyr, J. (1954). An analysis of conflict in decision-making
group. Human Relations, 7, 367-381
Guzzo, R., & Dickson, M. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-338.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work team. In J. W. Lorsh (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior, 315-342.
Hackman, J. R. (1990). Groups That Work, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hirokawa, R. Y., DeGooyer, D., & Valde, K. (2000). Using narratives to study task group effectiveness. Small Group Research, 573- 391.
Hoffman, L. R. (1979). The beginnings of a hierarchical model of group problem solving. In L. R. Hoffman, The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model. New York: Praeger, 1979.
Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 401-407.
Holly Arrow& Joseph E. McGrath (1993).Membership matters: how member change and continuity affect small group structure, process, and performance. Small Group Research, 24, 334-360.
Hogan, R. T. (1991). Personality and personality assessment. Handbook of
Industical and Organizational Psychology, 3, 873-919.
Hogan, R., Curphy, G.J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership:
Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49, 485-504.
Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 422-447.
Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. (1991), “Some differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates of recuitmant, promotions, and turnover”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, pp.675-689.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nd ed.),. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Jehn, Karen A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and
detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly,
40, 256-283.
Jehn, Karen A. &Chatman, Jennifer A. (2000). The influence of
proportional and perceptual conflict composition on team performance.
International Journal of Conflict Management, 11(1), 56-73.
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B. & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why difference make
a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance
in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly. 44, 741-763.
Janssen, O., Van De Vliert, E. & Veenstra, C. (1998). How task and person
conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management
teams. Journal of Management, 25, 117-141.
Jewell, L. N., & Reitz, H. J. (1981). Group Effectiveness in Organizations,Illinois: Foresman and Company.
Kanter, R. M., & Brinkerhoff, D. (1981). Organizational performance: Recent developments in measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 7, 321-411.
Katz, R. (1982). The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 81-104.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating The High-Performance Organization, New York: Happer Collins.
King, N., & Anderson, N. (1990). Innovation in working groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work (pp. 81-100). West Sussex, England.
Klopfer, F. J., & Moran, T. (1978).Influences of sex composition, decision rule, and decision consequences in small group policy making. Small Group Policy Making, 4(6), 907-915.
Konrad, A. M., Winter, S., & Gutek, B. (1992). Diversity in work group sex composition. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 10, 115-140.
Levine, J. M., & Russo, E. M. (1985). Majority and minority influence. Review of personality and social psychology: Group processes, 8, 13-54.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Locke, E. A., & Schweiger, D. M.(1979). Participating in decision- making: One more look. Research in Organizational Behavior,1979(1), 265- 339.
Lofland, J. F., & Lejeune, R. A. (1960). Initial interaction of newcomers in Alcoholics Anonymous: A field experiment in class symbols and socialization. Social Problems, 8, 102-111.
Lawrence, B. S. (1997). The black box of organizational demography. Organization Science, 8, 1-22.
McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social Psychology: A Brief Introduction, New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
McClelland, D. C. (1961).The achieving society. Princeton, N. J.: Van Nostrand.
McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22, 147-174.
Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G., & Mohrman, A. M. (1995). Designing
Team-Based Organizations: New Forms for Knowledge Work, San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Moreland, R. L. (1985). Social categorization and the assimilation of "new" group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1173-1190.
Moreland, R. L. , & Levine, J. M. (1992).The composition of small groups. Advances in Group Processes ,9,237-280.
Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change. London: Academic Press.
Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. The handbook of social psychology, 2, 347-412.
Mullen, Brian. & Carolyn Cooper. (1994) The relationship between group
cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin,
115, 210-227.
Murnighan, J. Keith, & Donald E. Conlon. (1991) The dynamics of intense
work groups: A study of British string quartrts. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 36, 165-186.
Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23-32.
Neuman, G. A., & Wright, J. (1999). Team effectiveness: Beyond skills and
cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 376-389.
Neuman, G. A., Wagner, S. H., & Christiansen, N. D. (1999). The relationship between work-team personality composition and the job performance of teams. Group & Organization Management. 24, 28-45.
Nieva, V. F., Fleishman, E. A., & Rieck, A. (1978). Team Dimensions: Their
Identity, Their Measurement, and Their Relationship, Washington, DC:
Advanced Research Resources Organizations.
Oldman, G., & Cummings, A. (1998), Creativity in organizational context,
Productivity, 39, 187-194.
O’Reilly, C. A., Caldwell, D. F. & Barnett, W. P. (1989). Work group demography, social integration, and turnover, Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 21-37.
Pervin, L. A. (1993). Personality: Theory and Research (6th ed.), New York:John Wily & Sons.
Pelled, Lisa Hope., Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. &Xin,-Katherine-R. (1999).
Exporing the black box: an analysis of work group diversity, conflict,
and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1-28.
Peterson, R. S. (1997). A directive leadership style in group decision
making can be both virtue and vice: Evidence from elite and
experimental groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
72, 1107-1121.
Pfeffer, J. (1983). Organizational demography. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior ,5, 299-357
Pfeffer, J. (1997). New directions for organization theory: Problems and prospects. New York:
Priem, Richard.& Kenneth, Price. (1991). Process and outcome expectations
for the dialectical inquiry, devil’s advocacy, and consensus
techniques of strategic decision making. Group and Organization
studies, 16, 206-225.
Putnam, Linda L. (1994). Productive conflict: Negotiation as implicit
coordination. International Journal of Conflict Management, 5,
285-299.
Quattrone, G., & Jones, E. E. The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 38, 141-152.
Quick, T. L. (1992). Successful Team Building, New York: American
Management Association.
Robbins, S.P.(1998), Organizational Behavior, 8 thed., Upper Saddle River,N.J.:Prentice Hall International Inc.
Rose, S. R. (1989). Members leaving groups: Theoretical and practical consideration. Small Group Behavior, 20, 524-535.
Salgado, J. F. (1997). The 5-factor model of personality and job-performance in the European-community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 30-43.
Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training, In Swezey R. W.& Salas E. (Eds.), Teams: Their Training and Performance, NJ: Ablex, pp.3-29.
Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., & Wienk, J. A. (2003). Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6),779.
Schwarz, R. (1994). The Skilled Facilitator: Practical Wisdom for Developing Effective Groups, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Schwenk, Charles. & Joseph S. Valacich. (1994). Effect of devil’s
advocacy and dialectial inquiry on individuals versus groups.
Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 55, 210-222.
Shaw, M. E. (1976). Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Group
Behavior. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Shonk, J. H. (1982). Working in Teams: A Practical Manual for Improving
Work, New York: Amacom.
Simon, T. & Peterson, R. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict
in top management team: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 85, 102-111.
Song, X. M., Montoya-Weiss, & Schmidt, J. B. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of cross – functional cooperation: A comparison of R&D,
manufacturing, and marketing perspectives. Journal of Production Innovation Management, 14, 35-47.
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.Stasser G., & Titus, W. (1987), Effects of information load and percentage ofshared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81-93.
Summers, I., Coffelt, T., & Horton, R. E. (1988). Work group cohesion. Psychological Reports, 63, 627-636.
Sutton, R. I., & Louis, M..R. (1987). How selecting and socializing newcomers influences insiders. Human Resource Management, 26, 347-361.
Steers, R. M., & Braunstein, D. N. (1976). A behaviorally-based measure of manifest needs in work settings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 9, 251–266.
Thomas, K. W.(1976).Conflict and management. In Dunnette, M. D.(ed),
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand
McNally.
Thomas, P., Moore, K. S., & Scott, K. S. (1996). The relationship between self- efficacy for participating in self- managed work groups and the big five personality dimensions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 349- 362.
Tjosvold, Dean., Hui, Chun. & Law, Kenneth S. (2001). Constructive
conflict in China: Cooperative conflict as a bridge between East and
West. Journal of World Business, 36(2), 166-183
Van De Vliert, E. & Euwema, M. C. (1994). Agreeableness and activeness
as components of conflict behaviors. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 66, 674-687.
Van Zelest, R. H. (1952). Sociometrically selected work teams increase production. Personnel Psychology, 5, 175-185.
Vinacke, W. E. (1959). Sex roles in a three person game. Sociometry, 22, 343- 360.
Waston, D., & Tllegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood.
Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235.
West, M.A. (1990). The social psychology of innovation in groups. Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies, 309-333.
Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1998), Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research, Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77-140.
Witteman,H.(1991).Group member satisfaction: a conflict-related account. Small Group Research, 22(1), 24-58.
Yalom, I. D. (1970). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.
Ziller, R. C. (1962). The newcomer's acceptance in open and closed groups. Personnel Administration, 5, 24-31.
Ziller, R. C., & Behringer, R. D. (1961). A longitudinal study of the assimilation of the new child in the group. Human Relations, 14, 121-133.

論文使用權限
  • 不同意紙本論文無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用。
  • 不同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務。


  • 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