Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-1121120-233102 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-1121120-233102
論文名稱
Title
轉換型領導對個人創新行為之影響:情境雙元性之中介效果-以公立博物館為例
Transformation Leadership and Individual Innovative Behavior : the Mediation Effects of Contextual Ambidexterity-the Case of Public Museums
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
87
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2020-11-05
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2020-12-21
關鍵字
Keywords
個人創新行為、公立博物館、情境雙元性、轉換型領導、資源特性、組織系統
organizational systems, transformational leadership, public museums, contextual ambidexterity, resource characteristics, innovative behavior
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 358 次,被下載 251
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 358 times, has been downloaded 251 times.
中文摘要
隨著環境日趨複雜,公部門創新之重要性日益增加,然創新過程涉及控制、彈性取捨的兩難,組織雙元性認為組織可以同時具備探索及應用能力來加以因應,而情境雙元性就是達成組織雙元性的一項途徑。
公立博物館組織層級少、業務性質相對重視創新,卻面臨體制壓力及有限的政府財政經費挹注,具雙元性組織特色,情境雙元性工作氛圍的型塑更顯重要。相關文獻指出,領導行為對個人創新行為具重要影響,然影響兩者間屬於組織層次中介變項較少被討論。此外,組織系統、資源特性亦是促成策略目標達成的重要因素,是否會在領導行為、情境雙元性和個人創新行為間產生影響亦缺乏相關研究。
本研究透過跨層次分析結果顯示,轉換型領導會對個人創新行為有正向影響;情境雙元性會在轉換型領導和個人創新行為間產生中介效果;組織系統正式化、資源相依性會在情境雙元性和個人創新行為間發生調節效果,且當組織系統正式化程度越高、資源相依性越高,皆會使情境雙元性對個人創新行為的正向影響愈弱。最後,本研究提出管理意涵、理論貢獻、研究限制及建議。
Abstract
Public sector innovation has become more important than ever with the increasing complexity of the environment; yet, the choice between control and flexibility in the innovation process poses a dilemma. Organizational ambidexterity asserts that organizations possess the ability to respond by exploring and exploiting simultaneously, while contextual ambidexterity is a means to achieve organizational ambidexterity.
Public museums have a relatively flat organization structure and emphasize more on innovation, although they face institutional pressures and receive limited government funding. As public museums possess organizational ambidexterity characteristics, it is even more vital to cultivate a work atmosphere of contextual ambidexterity.Related studies have argued that leadership behavior has an important effect on innovative behavior; however, studies have rarely discussed the mediators affecting the relationship between the two at the organizational level. Moreover, organization systems and resource characteristics are also important factors that promote the achievement of strategic goals; yet, studies on whether these factors affect leadership behavior, contextual ambidexterity, and innovative behavior are few and far between.
According to the results of cross-level analysis conducted in this study, transformational leadership has a positive effect on innovative behavior, while contextual ambidexterity has a mediating effect on the relationship between transformational leadership and innovative behavior. Meanwhile, organization systems (formalization) and resource characteristics (resource dependence) in organizational systems have a moderating effect on the relationship between contextual ambidexterity and innovative behavior, where the higher is the degree of formalization and resource dependence in organizational systems, the weaker is the positive effect of contextual ambidexterity on innovative behavior. Finally, this study provides managerial implications, theoretical contributions, suggestions, as well as research limitations.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書 i
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 iv
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 2
第三節 研究目的 4
第四節 研究流程 5
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 轉換型領導 7
第二節 個人創新行為 10
第三節 情境雙元性 11
第四節 中介效果 21
第五節 調節效果 24
第三章 研究方法 29
第一節 研究架構 29
第二節 研究變數之操作型定義及衡量 30
第三節 資料收集方式 36
第四節 測量變數概況分析 37
第四章 研究結果與討論 43
第一節 構面信度及效度分析 43
第二節 模型估計 46
第三節 中介效果及調節效果分析 49
第五章 結論及建議 57
第一節 研究結論、管理意涵與理論貢獻 57
第二節 建議 60
第三節 研究限制及未來研究建議 62
參考文獻 65
參考文獻 References
一、中文部分
黃美桓(2008),「轉換型領導、員工的內在動機與組織承諾對組織公民行為之影響-以公部門為例」,國立中央大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
陳淑惠(2012),「轉換型領導與創新行為之關聯性研究:以玩興為中介效果」,元智大學管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。
曾惠君(2013),「轉換型領導對創新行為之影響-以心智模式和工作敬業心為中介變項」,國立臺南大學行政管理學系碩士論文。
林慧如(2014),「轉換型領導、組織認同與創新行為之研究-以服務氣候為調節變項」,國立中正大學勞工關係學系碩士論文。
翁琪雯(2015),「稅務人員創新行為影響因素及其與組織績效關係之探討」,國立臺南大學經營與管理學系科技管理碩士班碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Abedi, G, Rostami, F., & Nadi, A. 2015. Analyzing the Dimensions of the Quality of Life in Hepatitis B Patientsusing Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Global journal of health science, 7(7):22-31.
Adcroft, A., & Willis, R. 2005. The (un)intended outcome of public sector performance measurement. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 18(2): 386-400.
Alder, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. 1999. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10(1): 43-68.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. 2014. Innovation and creativity in organizations: a state-of-the- science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5): 1297-1333.
Bandura, A.1977. Social Learning Theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173-1182.
Basu, R., & Green, S. G. 1997. Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: An empirical examination of innovative behaviors in leader-member dyads. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27: 477- 499.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. 2004. Manual for the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Palo Alto, C A: Mind Garden.
Beckman, C. M. 2006. The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior. Academy of Management Review, 49(4): 741-758.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. 2003. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 238-256.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. 1985. The Strategies forTaking Charge. Harper and Row, New York.
Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Boukamel, O., & Emery, Y. 2017. Evolution of organizational ambidexterity in the public sector and current challenges of innovation capabilities. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 22(2): 1-27.
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. 2015. Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: needed and challenging. Public Administration Reviews, 75(5): 647-663.
Cannaerts, N., Jesse, S., & Erick, H. 2016. Ambidextrous design and public organizations: A comparative case study. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(7): 708-724.
Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. 2009. Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20(4): 781-796.
Carlback, J. & Wong, A. 2018. A study on factors influencing acceptance of using mobile electronic identification applications in Sweden. Retrieved from http://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:1214313/FULLTEXT01.pdf (03 April 2019)
Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W. H., & Hunter, G. P. 2001. Organizational action in response to threads and opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5): 937-955.
Chebbi, H., Yahiaoui, D., Vrontis, D., & Thrassou, A. 2016. The impact of ambidextrous leadership on the internationalization of emerging-market firms: the case of India. Thunderbird International Business Review, 59(3):421-436.
Chen, Y. M., Yang, D. H., & Lin, F. J. 2013. Does technological diversification matter to from performance? The moderating role of organizational slack. Journal of Business Research, 66(10): 1970-1975.
Cheung, M. F. Y., & Wong, C. 2011. Transformatiom leadership, leader support, and employee creativity. Leadership & Organization Developmnet Journal, 32(7): 656-672.
Choi, T., & Chandler, S. M. 2015. Exploration, exploitation, and public sector innovation: An organizational learning perspective for the public sector. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 39(2): 139-151.
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Daglio, Marco, Daniel, G., & Hannach, K. 2015. Building organizational capacity for public sector innovation. OECD Conference: Innovating the public sector: from ideas to impact, Paris, France.
Deserti, A., & Francesca, R. 2014. Design and organizational culture in the public sector. Design Management Journal, 9(1): 85-97.
De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. 2015. Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration, 94(1): 146-166.
De Waal, A. A. 2010. Achieving high performance in the public sector: What needs to be done? Public Performance and Management Review, 34(1): 81-103.
Do, B. R., Yeh, P.W. & Madsen, J. 2016. Exploring the relationship among human resource flexibility, organizational innovation and adaptability culture, Chinese Management Studies, 10(4): 657-674.
Drucker, P. F. 1986. The changed world economy, Foreign Affairs, 64(4): 768-91.
Duncan, R. B. 1976. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. In R. H. Killman, L. R. Pondy and D. Slevin (Eds.), The management of organization(1: 167-188). New York: North Holland.
Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. 2002. Impact of transformational leadership on follower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 45(4): 735-744.
Elenkov, D. S., Judge, W., & Wright, P. 2005. Strategic leadership and executive innovation influence: an international multi‐cluster comparative study. Strategic Management Journal, 26(7): 665-682.
Fan, Y., French, M., Duray, R., & Stading, G. 2017. Service strategy to improve operational capabilities in the public sector. The Service Industries Journal, 37(11): 703-725.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. 1981. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1): 39-50.
Garvin, D. A. 2012. The processes of organization and management. Sloan Management Review, 39(4): 33-50.
Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. 1994. Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management. Strategic Management Journal, 15(2): 91-112.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 209-226.
Gilbert, C. G. 2005. Unbundling the structure of inertia: resource versus routine rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 741-763.
Gould-Williams, J. 2003. The importance of HR practices and workplace trust in achieving superior performance: A study of public-sector organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1): 28-54.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. 2006. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 693-706.
Hansen, J., & Ferlie, E. 2016. Applying strategic management theories in public sector organizations: developing a typology. Public Management Review, 18(1): 1-19.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1977. The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5): 929-964.
Havermans, L .A., Den Hartog, D. N., Keegan, A., & Uhl-Bien, M. 2015. Exploring the role of leadership in enabling contextual ambidexterity. Human Resource Management, 54(1): 179-200.
Hayes, A. F., & Rockwood, N. J. 2020. Conditional Process Analysis: Concepts, Computation, and Advances in the Modeling of the Contingencies of Mechanisms. American Behavioral Scientist, 64(1): 19-54.
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. 2004. Exploration v.s. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4): 481-494.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43(1): 115-135.
Huang, J., & Kim, H. J. 2013. Conceptualizing structural ambidexterity into the innovation of human resource management architecture: The case of LG Electronics. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(5): 922-943.
Hsu, S., & Mujtaba, B. G. 2007. Team transformational leadership, trust, satisfaction, and commitment: The testing of a structural equation model in software development teams. Review of Business Information Systems, 11(3): 17- 28.
James L. R. 1982. Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(2): 219-229.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1): 85-98.
Janssen, O. 2000. Job demands, perception of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3): 287-302.
Jansen, J. J. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2005. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: The impact of environmental and organizational antecedents. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 1286-1303.
Jansen, J. J. P., Simsek, Z., & Cao, Q. 2012. Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit context: Cross-level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 1286- 1303.
Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. 1993. Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57(3): 53-70.
Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Tarba, S. Y., Liu, Y., & Cooper, C. 2015. Guest editors’ introduction: The role of human resources and organizational factors in ambidexterity. Human Resource Management, 54(1): 1-28.
Kanter, R. M. 1982. The Middle Manager as Innovator. Harvard Buesiness Review, (July/August), 95-105.
Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. 2003. The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.
Kay, R., & Chris, G. 2016. Public sector innovation: Why it’s different. Edited by Governance Leadership Centre: Australian Institute of Company Director.
Keller, R. T. 1992. Transformational leadership and the performance of research and development project groups. Journal of Management, 18(3): 489-502.
Khan, S. J., & Mir, A. A. 2019. Ambidextrous culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovations: The role of organizational slack and environmental factors. Business and Srategy and the Environment, 28(4): 652-663.
Krull, J. L., & MacKinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel Modeling of Individual and Group Level Mediated Effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(2): 249-277.
Langfords, P. H. 2009. Measuring organizational climate and employee engagement: Evidence for a 7 Ps model of work practices and outcomes. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61(4): 185-198.
Lazonick, W. & Prencipe, A. 2005. Dynamic capabilities and sustained innovation: strategic control and financial commitment at Rolls-Royce Plc, Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(3): 501-542.
Leithwood, K., Menzies, T., Jantzi, D., & Leithwood, J. 1996. School restructuring, transformational leadership and the amelioration of teacher burnout. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 9, 199-215.
Levinthal, D., & March, J. 1993. Myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1): 95-112.
Liao, S., Chen, C., Hu, D., Chung, Y., & Liu, C. 2017. Assessing the influence of leadership style, organizational learning and organizational innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(4): 590-609.
Lin, X., & Germain, R. 2003. Organizational structure, context, customer orientation, and performance: lessons from Chinese state‐owned enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11): 1131-1151.
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. 2006. Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5): 646-672.
Luo, J., Hu, W., & Zhong, J. 2016. A study on the mechanism of ambidextrous leadership on team innovation-from the perspective of interactive cognition. East China Economic Management, 30(7): 35-44.
Luo, B., Luo, C., Ge, J., & Zhang, D. 2016. The moderating effects of slack on the relationship between ambidextrous strategy and performance: Evidence from high-tech firms in China. Journal of Business and Management, 17(5): 734-748.
March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M. & Greenbaum, R. L. 2010. Examining the link between ethical leadership and employee misconduct: the mediating role of ethical climate, Journal of Business Ethics, 95(1): 7-16.
Mintzberg, H. 1971. Managerial work: analysis from observation. Management Science, 18(2):97–110.
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242-266.
Nemanich, L. A., & Vera, D. 2009. Transformational leadership and ambidexterity in the context of acquisition. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(1): 19-33.
Ngodo, O. E. 2008. Procedural justice and trust: The link in the transformational leadership-organisational outcomes relationship. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 4(1): 82-100.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. 2013. Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4): 324-338.
Palm, K., & Johan, L. 2017. Key enabling factors for organizational ambidexterity in the public sector. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 9(1): 2-20.
Papachroni, Angeliki, Loizos, H., & Sotirios, P. 2016. In pursuit of ambidexterity: Managerial reactions to innovation-efficiency tensions. Human Relation, 69(9): 1791-1822.
Perry, J., Engbers T., & Jun, S. 2009. Back to the future? Performance related pay, empirical research, and perils of persistence. Public Administration Reviews, 69(1): 39-51.
Piccolo, R. F., & Colquitt, J. A. 2006. Transformational leadership and job behaviors: the mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 327-340.
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. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879-903.
Potočnik, K., & Anderson, N. 2012. Assessing Innovation: a innovation:A 360‐degree appraisal study. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20(4): 497-509.
Plimmer, G., Bryson, J., & Teo, S. T. 2017. Opening the black box: The mediating roles of organisational systems and ambidexterity in the HRM-performance link in public sector organisations. Personnel Review, 46(7): 1434-1451.
Rainey, H. G., & Steinbauer, P. 1999. Galloping elephants: Developing elements of a theory of effective government organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(1): 1-32.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3): 375-409.
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. 2009. Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4): 685-695.
Raj, R., & Srivastava, K. B. L. 2016. Transformational leadership and innovativeness: The mediating role of organizational learning. Journal of Management Research, 16(4): 201-219.
Renvers, M., Engen, M., Vinkenburg, C., & Wilson, E. 2008. Transformational leadership and innovative work behavior: Exploring the relevance of gender differences. Journal Compilation, 17(3): 227-244.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. 2002. Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature, Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4): 698-714.
Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. 2011. Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership innovation relationship: ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22( 5): 956-974.
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(2): 224-253.
Schutte, N., & Barkhuizen, N. 2016. The development of a strategic leadership competency measure for public sector leaders. Organizational Studies and Innovation Review, 2(3): 21-29.
Schwartz, S. H. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25(1): 1-65.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. 1994. Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovaion in the Workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3): 580-607.
Shalley, C. E., Gilson, L. L. & Blum, T. C. 2009. Interactive effects of growth need strength, work context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3): 489-505.
Shin, S., & Zhou, J. 2003. Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 703-714.
Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J. F., & Souder, D. 2009. A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity’s conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5): 864-894.
Sine, W. D., Mitsuhashi, H., & Kirsch, D. A. 2006. Revisiting Burns and Stalker: Formal structure and new venture performance in emerging economic sectors. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1): 121-132.
Stan, C. V., Peng, M. W., & Bruton, G. D. 2014. Slack and the performance of state-owned enterprises. Asia Pacific Journal of management, 31(2): 473-495.
Tan, J., & Peng, M. W. 2003. Organizational slack and firm performance during economic transitions: two studies from an emerging economy, Strategic Management Journal, 24(13): 1249-1263.
Thompson, J. D. 1967. Organizations in actions: Social sciences bases of administrative theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly III, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4): 8-29.
Tushman, M. L., & Nadler, D. A. 1978. Information processing as an integrative concept in organizational design. Academy of Management Review, 3: 613-624.
Van der Vegt, G. S., & Janssen, O. 2003. Joint impact of interdependence and group diversity innovation. Journal of Management, 29: 729-751.
Visser, D. J., De Coning, T. J., & Smit, E. V. D. M. 2005. The relationship between the characteristics of the transformational leader and the entrepreneur in South African SMEs. South African Journal of Business Management, 36(3): 51-64.
Wageman, R. 1995. Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 145-180.
Wang, C. L. & Rafiq, M. 2014. Ambidextrous organizational culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation: a comparative study of UK and Chinese high-tech firms. British Journal of Management, 25(1): 58-76.
West, M. A. 2002. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in workgroups, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(3): 355-387.
West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (Eds.),1990. Innovation and Creativity at Work: Psychological and Organizational Strategies. Oxford, England:John Wiley & Sons.
Yang, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. 2007. Ambidexterity in product innovation management: the direct and contingent effects on product development performance. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management Meeting, Philadelphia, PA.
Zacher, H., Robinson, A., & Rosing, K. 2014. Ambidextrous leadership and employees’ self-reported innovative performance: The role of exploration and exploitation behaviors. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(1): 24-46.
Zacher, H., & Rosing, K. 2015. Ambidextrous leadership and team innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(1): 54-68.
Zhang, Y., Waldman, D., Han, Y., & Li, X. 2015. Paradoxical leader behavior in people management: antecedents and consequences. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2): 538-66.
Zheng, X., Liu, Z., & Gong, X. 2016. Why does leader attention scope matter for innovation ambidexterity? The mediating role of transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(7): 912-935.
Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. 2014. Research on workplace creativity: a review and redirection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1): 333-359.
電子全文 Fulltext
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 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code