博碩士論文 etd-0625116-135847 詳細資訊


[回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]

姓名 林佩諄(Pei-chun Lin) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開
畢業系所 國際經營管理碩士學程(Master of Business Administration Program in International Business)
畢業學位 碩士(Master) 畢業時期 104學年第2學期
論文名稱(中) 執行長與經營團隊關係品質對組織績效的影響:檢視競爭行為的角色
論文名稱(英) CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Firm Performance: The Role of Competitive Behaviors
檔案
  • etd-0625116-135847.pdf
  • 本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
    請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
    論文使用權限

    紙本論文:5 年後公開 (2021-07-25 公開)

    電子論文:使用者自訂權限:校內 5 年後、校外 5 年後公開

    論文語文/頁數 英文/90
    統計 本論文已被瀏覽 5612 次,被下載 9 次
    摘要(中) 本研究結合高層理論,動態競爭理論與領導者-成員交換理論(Leader-member exchange, LMX理論),探討執行長與高階經營團隊(top management team, TMT) 關係品質對組織績效的影響,以及競爭積極性在執行長與經營團隊關係品質及組織績效之間所扮演的中介角色。同時,本研究也檢視執行長與經營團隊關係差異程度(differentiation)在執行長與經營團隊關係品質與競爭積極性之間的調節效果。本研究以組織層次做為分析單位,依據台灣經濟新報(TEJ)資料庫登載的台灣1,800家上市、上櫃、及興櫃企業資料做為研究母體,並透過調查法取得134家企業、341份高階主管的有效問卷做為研究樣本。分析結果顯示,本研究的理論模型具有良好的配適度,且五大假說也全部獲得支持。研究結果指出,執行長與階經營團隊關係品質和競爭積極性對組織績效有正向的影響; 同時,競爭積極性在執行長與高階經營團隊關係品質及組織績效間扮演了完全中介的角色;最後,執行長與經營團隊關係差異程度在執行長與階經營團隊關係品質與組織績效之間具有負向調節效果。本研究對高層理論,領導者-成員交換理論和動態競爭理論具有重要的理論意涵。首先,本研究將執行長的角色從高階經營團隊中分開,補足以往高階團隊研究未深入檢視執行長與高階主管間之社會/心理互動的缺口。其次,檢視執行長和經營團隊成員的關係品質,也擴展了過去LMX理論傾向以基層員工為對象的範疇。另外,本研究結合LMX理論和動態競爭理論並以競爭積極性為中介變數,也填補了以往動態競爭研究忽略執行長角色的缺口。本研究最後也討論了實務意涵與未來研究方向。
    摘要(英) This study draws upon the upper echelons, competitive dynamics and leader- member exchange (LMX) perspectives to investigate how CEO-top management team (TMT) exchange quality affects firm competitive aggressiveness, and then firm performance. The mediating effect of competitive aggressiveness and the moderating role of CEO-TMT exchange differentiation are also explored. The unit of analysis is at firm level. Based on a survey sample including 341 executives in 134 companies collected from 1,800 TSE, OTC and ROTC firms listed in the Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ) database, the findings reveal a good model fit and support all of the hypotheses. Specifically, CEO-TMT exchange quality is positively related to competitive aggressiveness, which in turn positively affects firm performance, as assessed by the Return on Asset (ROA). The mediating role of competitive aggressiveness as well as the negative moderating effect of CEO-TMT exchange differentiation are also supported.
     This research contributes to the upper echelons, LMX and competitive dynamics theories by identifying the role of CEOs from the other TMT members and examining their socio-psychometric dynamics. The study also contributes to the LMX theory by expanding the examination from typical lower-level employees to TMT-level. An examination of CEO-TMT exchange and its association with competitive aggressiveness also extends the competitive dynamics perspective, which thus far remains largely silent on the role of CEO in the competitive arena. Implications for practices and future directions are discussed well.
    關鍵字(中)
  • 高層理論
  • 競爭積極性
  • 動態競爭理論
  • 領導者-成員交換理論
  • 執行長與高階經營團隊關係品質
  • 執行長與經營團隊關係差異程度
  • 關鍵字(英)
  • Competitive Dynamics perspectives
  • Upper echelons theory
  • CEO-TMT exchange
  • Leader member exchange theory
  • Exchange Differentiation
  • Competitive Aggressiveness
  • 論文目次 論文審定書.................................................................................................. i
    ACKNOWLDGEMENT.................................................................................ii
    摘要.............................................................................................................iii
    ABSTRACT.................................................................................................iv
    TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................v
    LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................... ix
    LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................x
    CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION..............................................................1
    1.1 Research Background and Motivation..................................................1
    1.2 Research Purposes and Objectives......................................................6
    CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................10
    2.1 Perspective of Upper Echelons Theory................................................11
    2.2 Perspective of Leader Member Exchange Theory...............................13
    2.3 Perspective of Competitive Dynamics Theory.....................................15
    2.4 Studied Variables.................................................................................19
      2.4.1 CEO-TMT Exchange Quality...........................................................19
      2.4.2 CEO-TMT Exchange Differentiation................................................20
      2.4.3 Competitive Aggressiveness...........................................................22
    2.5 Hypothesis............................................................................................23
      2.5.1 CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Competitive Aggressiveness......23
      2.5.2 Competitive Aggressiveness and Firm Performance.......................26
      2.5.3 CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Firm Performance.......................27
      2.5.4 The Mediating Role of Competitive Aggressiveness........................28
      2.5.5 The Moderating Role of CEO-TMT Exchange Differentiation..........29
    CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY..............31
    3.1 Research Framework............................................................................31
    3.2 Sample and Data Collection..................................................................32
      3.2.1 Descriptive Statistics Analysis for Sample........................................34
    3.3 Hypothesis to be Tested.........................................................................37
    3.4 Constructs Measurements and Definition of Variables..........................38
      3.4.1 CEO-TMT Exchange Quality............................................................38
      3.4.2 Competitive Aggressiveness............................................................39
      3.4.3 CEO-TMT Exchange Differentiation.................................................40
      3.4.4 Firm Performance.............................................................................40
      3.4.5 Control Variables..............................................................................41
    3.5 Data Analysis. ......................................................................................42
      3.5.1 Descriptive Statistic Analysis...........................................................42
      3.5.2 Reliability Test..................................................................................43
      3.5.3 Interrater Reliability Test..................................................................43
      3.5.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis……....................................................44
      3.5.5 Pearson Correlation Coefficient.......................................................45
      3.5.6 Hierarchical Multiple Regression.....................................................45
    CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH RESULTS..................................................47
    4.1 Legitimacy of Raw Data Aggregation...................................................47
    4.2 Reliability Test.......................................................................................48
    4.3 Assessing Full Measurement Model with CFA.....................................48
    4.4 Pearson Correlation..............................................................................49
    4.5 Hierarchical Regression Analyses........................................................53
      4.5.1CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Competitive Aggressiveness.......53
      4.5.2Competitive Aggressiveness and Firm Performance........................54
      4.5.3CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Firm Performance .......................54
      4.5.4 The Mediating Role of Competitive Aggressiveness .......................55
      4.5.5 The Moderating Role of CEO-TMT Exchange Differentiation..........57
    CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS..............................63
    5.1 Discussion and Conclusion...................................................................63
      5.1.1 CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Competitive Aggressiveness......63
      5.1.2 Competitive Aggressiveness and Firm Performance.......................64
      5.1.3 CEO-TMT Exchange Quality and Firm Performance.......................64
      5.1.4 The Mediating Role of Competitive Aggressiveness........................64
      5.1.5 The Moderating Role of CEO-TMT Exchange Differentiation...........65
    5.2 Implications for Research.......................................................................66
    5.2.1 Theoretical Implications.......................................................................66
      5.2.2 Managerial Implications....................................................................68
    5.3 Limitation and Future Direction...............................................................68
    REFERENCES.............................................................................................72
    參考文獻 Abatecola, G., Mandarelli, G., & Poggesi, S. (2013). The personality factor: how top management teams make decisions. A literature review. Journal Of Management & Governance, 17(4), 1073-1100.
    Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.
    Attaway, M. C. (2000). A study of the relationship between company performance and CEO compensation. American Business Review, 18(1), 77-85. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216319517?accountid=12698
    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(6), 1173.
    Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS structural equations program manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statistical Software.
    Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
    Blackford, B. (2010). The role of CEO statement of aggressiveness and the
      competitive aggressiveness of firms. What us the impact on performance?
      Dissertation and thesis from the college of business administration. Paper 14.
    Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
    Boies, K. & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader-member exchange in teams: an examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 246-257.
    Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(3), 275-284.
    Chan, D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2): 234-246.
    Chan, S. C., & Mak, W. M. (2011). Benevolent leadership and follower performance: The mediating role of leader-member exchange (LMX). Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(2), 285-301.
    Chen, M. J (1996). Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 100-134.
    Chen, M. J., Lin, H. C. & Michel, J. G. (2010). Navigating in a hypercompetitive environment: the roles of action aggressiveness and TMT integration. Strategic Management Journal, 31(13), 1410-1430.
    Chen, M. J. & Miller, D. (2012). Competitive dynamics: Themes, trends, and a prospective research platform. The academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 135-210.
    Choi, D. J. (2013). Differentiated leader-member exchange and group effectiveness: a dual perspective. PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) thesis, University of Iowa.
    Colbert, A. E., Barrick, M. R., & Bradley, B. H. (2014). Personality And Leadership Composition in Top Management Teams: Implications For Organizational Effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 67(2), 351-387.
    Cruz, C. C, Gomez-Mejia, L. R. & Becerra, M. (2010). Perceptions of benevolence and the design of agency contracts: CEO-TMT relationships in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 69-89.
    Covin, J. G., & Covin T. J.,(1990). Competitive Aggressiveness, Environmental Context, and Small Firm Performance. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 14.4 (1990): 35-50.
    Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46-78.
    D’Aveni R. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering. Free Press: New York.
    Dawes, J. (1999). The relationship between subjective and objective company performance measures in market orientation research: further empirical evidence. Marketing Bulletin-Department of Marketing Massey University, 10, 65-75.
    Díaz-Fernández, M. C., González-Rodríguez M. R., Pawlak M. (2014). Top management demographic characteristics and company performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(3), 365 - 386.
    Erdogan, B., & Liden, R. C. (2002). Social exchanges in the workplace: A review of recent developments and future research directions in leader-member exchange theory. In L. L. Neider & C. A. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership: 65~114. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
    Erdogan, B., & Bauer, T. N. (2010). Differentiated leader-member exchange: The buffering role of justice climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(6), 1104.
    Ferrier, W. J. (2001). Navigating the Competitive Landscape: The Drivers and Consequences of Competitive Aggressiveness. The Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 858-877. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3069419
    Fombrun, C. J. & Ginsberg, A. (1990). Shifting gears: Enabling change in corporate aggressiveness. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 297-308.
    Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 39-50.
    Grant, A. F., Gino, F. G., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 528-550.
    Garg, V. K., Walters, B. A., & Priem, R. L. (2003). Chief executive scanning emphases, environmental dynamism, and manufacturing firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(8), 725−744.
    Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844.
    Glick W. H. (1985). Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: pitfalls in multilevel research. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 601-616.
    Gilley, K. M., Walters, B. A., & Olson, B. J. (2002). Top management team risk Taking propensities and firm performance: Direct and moderating effects. Journal of Business Strategies, 19(2): 95-114.
    Graen, G., Novak, M. A., & Sommerkamp, P. (1982). The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational behavior and human performance, 30(1), 109-131.
    Graen, G. & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich: JAI Press, 9, 175-208.
    Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The leadership quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
    Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 6). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
    Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A.. (1984). Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers. The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193-206. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/258434
    Hambrick, D. C., & D'Aveni, R. A. (1988). Large corporate failures as downward spirals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33, 1-23.
    Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms’ competitive moves. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4): pp. 659-684.
    Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper Echelons Theory: An Update. The Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334-343.
    Han, G. H. (2010). Trust and career satisfaction: the role of LMX. Career Development International, 15(5), 437-458.
    Hayduk, L. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Baltimore Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.
    Henderson et al. (2009). LMX differentiation: a multilevel review and examination of  its antecedents and outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 20 (4). 517-534.
    Hooper, D. T., & Martin, R. (2008). Beyond personal leader-member exchange (LMX) quality: The effects of perceived LMX variability on employee reactions. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(1), 20-30.
    Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424-453.
    Jacobson, R. (1992). The “Austrian” school of strategy. Academy of management review, 17(4), 782-807.
    James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(2), 219-229.
    Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W.. (2004). Employees' goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 368-384. Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.bibliopam.univ-catholille.fr/stable/20159
    Jones, C. D. (2009). The effects of CEO and top management team heterogeneity on competitive aggressiveness. ProQuest.
    Klein, H. J., & Kim, J. S. (1998). A field study of the influence of situational constraints leader-member exchange, and goal commitment on performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 88-95.
    Le Blanc, P.M. & Gonzalez-Roma, V. (2012). A team level investigation of the relationship between Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) differentiation, and commitment and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 534-544.
    Li, A. N., & Tan, H. H. (2013). What happens when you trust your supervisor? Mediators of individual performance in trust relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 407-425.
    Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 47-119.
    Liden, R. C., Erdogan, B., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2006). Leader-Member Exchange, Differentiation, and Task Interdependence: Implications for Individual and Group Performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(6), 723-746. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4093895
    Lin, H. C., Chang, K. I., Michel, J. G., & Chen, M. J. (2014). CEO-TMT Interplay, competitive readiness, and firm performance: an integrated consideration. In Academy of Management Proceedings ,2014(1), 16635-16635.
    Lin, H.J. & Rababah, N. (2014). CEO-TMT exchange, TMT personality composition, and decision quality: The mediating role of TMT psychological empowerment. The leadership quarterly, 25, 943-957.
    Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of applied psychology, 86(1), 114.
    Ling, Y., Simsek, Z., Lubatkin, M.H., Veiga, J.F. (2008). Transformational Leadership’s role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: Examining the CEO-TMT interface. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3), 557-576.
    Livengood, R. S., & Reger, R. K. (2010). That's our turf! Identity domains and competitive dynamics. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 48-66.
    Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to firm performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
    Ma, L.& Qu, Q. (2010). Differentiation in leader-member exchange: A hierarchical linear modeling approach. The leadership Qurterly, 21, 733-744.
    Markham, S. E., Yammarino, F. J., Murry, W. D., & Palanski, M. E. (2010). Leader- member exchange, shared values, and performance: Agreement and levels of analysis do matter. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 469-480.
    Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2015). Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and Performance: A Meta‐Analytic Review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67-121.
    Miller, D., & Chen, M. J. (1996). Nonconformity in competitive repertoires: A sociological view of markets. Social Forces, 74(4), 1209-1234.
    Peng, T. K.; Kao, Y. T. & Lin C. C. (2006). Common Method Variance in Management Research: Its Nature, Effects, Detection, and Remedies. Management Review , 23(1), 77-98.
    Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). "Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies" (PDF). Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5): 879–903.
    Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.
    Roberts P.W, Eisenhardt K. M. (2003). Austrian insights on strategic organization: from market insights to implications for firm. Strategic Organization, 1(3):345-352.
    Schumpeter, J. (1942). Creative destruction. Capitalism, socialism and democracy, 82-5.
    Schumpeter, J.A. (1950). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy (3rd ed.). New York: Harper.
    Simsek, Z. (2007). CEO tenure and organizational performance: an intervening model.Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 653-662.
    Smith, K. G., Young, G., Becerra, M., & Grimm, C. M. (1996). An Assessment of the Validity of Competitive Dynamic Research. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings.
    Smith, K. G., Ferrier, W. J., & Ndofor, H. (2001). Competitive dynamics research: Critique and future directions. Handbook of strategic management, 315-361.
    Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp.290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Spector, P. E., Brannick, M. T. (2011). Methodological urban legends: The misuse of statistical control variables. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 287-305
    Stambaugh, J., Yu, A., Dubinsky, A. (2011). Before the Attack: A Typology of Strategies for Competitive Aggressiveness. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 12(1), 49-63.
    Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Society of Psychometric Society annual meeting, Iowa City, IA.
    Sue-Chan, C., Au, A. K. & Hackett, R. D. (2012). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between leader-member behaviour and leader-member-exchange quality. Journal of World Business, 47, 459-468.
    TEJ (2015) Taiwan Economical Journal 新版財務資料庫科目說明,Retrieved from: http://www.tej.com.tw/webtej/doc/fin/wnfr4.htm
    Tse H. M. (2014). Linking leader-member exchange differentiation to work team performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(8), 710 - 724
    Walls, M. R., & Dyer, J. S. (1996). Risk propensity and firm performance: A study of the petroleum exploration industry. Management Science, 42(7): 1004-1021.
    Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader- member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of management Journal, 48(3), 420-432.
    Wright, P. M., Boswell, W. R. (2002). Desegregating HRM: A review and synthesis of micro and macro human resource management research. Journal of Management, 28(3):247-276.
    Wu, L. Z., Wei, L. Q, & Lau, C. M. (2010). TMT Educational and Functional Background Diversity, Team Mechanisms and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of CEO Empowering Leadership. Academy Of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1-6.
    Venkatraman, N. & Grant, J. H. (1986). Construct measurement in organizational strategy research: A critique and proposal. Academy of Management review, 11(1), 71-87.
    Yamak, S., Nielsen, S., & Escribá-Esteve, A. (2013). The role of external environment in upper echelons theory: A review of existing literature and future research directions. Group & Organization Management, 1059601113511663.
    口試委員
  • 林杏娥 - 召集委員
  • 施欣宜 - 委員
  • 林豪傑 - 指導教授
  • 口試日期 2016-06-03 繳交日期 2016-07-25

    [回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]


    如有任何問題請與論文審查小組聯繫