Leadership Behavior as Perceived by Collegiate Golf Coaches and Players in Taiwan and Their Relationship with Basic Personality Traits

台灣大專高爾夫教練與選手對教練領導行為認知與個人基本個性特徵之關係

張碧峰(Bi-Fon Chang) ； 陳敦禮(Tun-Li Chen) ； 李忠穎(Jong-Yiing Lii)

《弘光學報》 51期 (2007/11) Pp. 283-304

https://doi.org/10.6615/HAR.200711.51.24

摘要

本研究之目的在於探討台灣大專高爾夫教練領導行為與其個性特徵，以及運動員個性特徵之關係。此外，也了解運動員一些人口統計學上的變項與其基本個性特徵之關聯性。本研究對象為具有高爾夫運動代表隊之29所大專院校高爾夫教練與236位隊員。他們都受邀參與本研究之調查。本研究利用作者自編之人口統計學資料問卷、領導行為描述問卷第十二版，以及修改過的情緒概況指引問卷等，以取得資料。資料之統計分析乃利用描述統計、獨立樣本t考驗、相依樣本t考驗、皮爾森積差相關等方法進行分析。本研究共有27(93.1%)位教練與168(71.2%)位運動員寄回有效問卷，主要的結果為：(1)高爾夫教練自認為在倡導與關懷兩種領導行為方面所做的比運動員所認知的還多。(2)運動員自我認知在「無法支配」與「支配」兩方面的個性特徵上，明顯地比教練自我認知強烈。然而，在「愛交際」的特徵方面，運動員自我認知比教練自我認知明顯較弱。(3)運動員認為教練在「無法支配的」與「支配的」兩方面的個性特徵方面，比教練自我認知的還強烈。(4)教練自我認知的倡導行為與「不信任的」方面的特徵之間呈負相關。然而，在關懷行為方面，則呈正相關。(5)運動員認知的教練倡導行為與運動員分別在自我認知的「無法支配的」、「憂愁的」以及「不信任的」特徵方面，均呈顯著的正相關。除此之外，運動員認為教練的關懷行為，分別與運動員本身的「信任的」、「不信任的」、「怯懦的」、「支配的」、「積極的」、「偏見的」成正相關。

關鍵字

個性特徵 ； 關懷 ； 倡導

並列摘要

The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship between leadership behaviors demonstrated by golf coaches and their basic personality traits, and the basic personality traits of athletes among collegiate golf teams in Taiwan. Additional information was used to understand selected demographic variables of athletes as related to their personality traits. Twenty-nine golf coaches and 236 collegiate golf players were selected as subjects of the study. Data were collected through the use of a self-designed demographic information questionnaire, the revised Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire, Form XII, and the revised Emotions Profile Index. The descriptive statistics, independent t-test, dependent t-test, and Pearson product-moment correlation were used to analyze the data. Primary findings to emerge from this study including validated questionnaires were 27 (93.1 %) coaches and 168 (71.2 %) athletes. The other primary findings were: (1) Golf coaches regarded the leadership behavior in initiating structure (IS) and consideration (CS) to be used significantly more often than did the athletes. (2) Athletes’ self-perceived personality traits in dyscontrolled and controlled dimensions were significantly stronger than those of coaches. Athletes’ self-perceived personality trait in gregarious dimensions was significantly weaker than that of coaches. (3) Athletes’ perceptions of their coaches regarding the personality traits in dyscontrolled and controlled dimensions were significantly stronger than those of coaches’ self-perceptions. (4) There was a significantly negative relationship between coaches’ self-perceived leadership behavior in IS and coaches’ self-perceived personality traits in distrustful dimension. There was a significant relationship between coaches’ self-perceived leadership behavior in CS and coaches’ self-perceived personality traits in distrustful dimension. (5) There were significant relationships between the team members’ perceived leadership behavior of their coaches in IS and the personality traits of the team members in dyscontrolled, depressed, and distrustful, respectively. In additions, there were significant relationships between the team members’ perceived leadership behavior of their coaches in consideration and the personality traits of the team members in trustful, timid, distrustful, controlled, aggressive and bias, respectively.

並列關鍵字

personality traits ； consideration ； initiating structure

參考文獻

Bennis, W. G. & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper & Row.

Berry, A. J. & Cartwright, S. (2000). Leadership: a critical construction. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(7), 342.

Bracken, D.V. (1994). Straight talk about multilateral feedback. Training and Development, 48(9), 44-51.

Conger, J. Kanungo, R. (1998). Charismatic Leadership in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Chelladurai, P. & Saleh, S. D. (1980). Dimension of leader behavior in sports: Development of a leadership scale. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2, 34-35.