我國大學校院學生事務長領導特質、領導行為與領導效能關係之研究

The study of relationship among leadership attributes, leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness for deans of student in national college

林至善

指導教授 ： 張雪梅

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/公民教育與活動領導學系/博士(2006年)

摘要

我國大學校院學生事務長領導特質、領導行為與領導效能關係之研究
摘要
本研究旨在瞭解我國大學校院學務長領導特質、領導行為與領導效能之關係，研究方法採量化問卷調查、質性訪談。就九十三學年度我國大學校院104 所任滿一年以上學務長分層叢集隨機抽樣，抽取52 所大學校院860 位學務成員進行問卷調查，回收730 份，回收率86%，有效問卷712 份，可用率91%，並以t 考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾遜相關分析、典型相關分析、多元逐步迴歸分析、六位高領導效能學務長質性訪談。並根據研究結果，提出下列結論：
一、學務長在「忠誠度」方面之領導特質、「發展學務特色」方面之領導行為、「待人處事」方面之領導效能，獲得學務成員肯定；學務長在「敏銳觀察力」方面之領導特質、「需求協助少回應」方面之領導行為、「獲得獎勵或額外報酬、待遇」方面之領導效能，則有待改進。
二、學務長在「人格特質」層面之領導特質、「魅力影響與主動介入管理」層面之領導行為、「領導滿意度」層面之領導效能，獲得學務成員肯定；學務長在「人際關係」層面之領導特質、「放任」層面之領導行為與「工作滿意度」層面之領導效能，則有待改進。
三、正直與真誠是學務長最核心的領導特質。
四、學務長領導行為應同時採用轉型領導與互易領導，才能產生高領導效能；若採被動介入管理、放任領導，則產生低領導效能。
五、領導行為與領導領導效能的關係：轉型領導>主動介入管理>條件式酬賞>被動介入管理>放任，與全方位領行為導模式之領導效能大致符合。
六、「單位職稱」、「學校性質」、「學校規模」對領導特質、領導行為與領導效能皆有顯著差異存在。
七、學務長「領導特質」與「領導行為」之積差相關為領導特質各層面與轉型領導各層面、互易領導之主動介入管理、條件式酬賞均呈現高度正相關；與被動介入管理、放任層面，分別均呈現中低度、中度負相關
八、學務長「領導特質」、「領導行為」與「領導效能」之典型相關分析，學務長領導特質可以解釋領導效能總變異量49.58%；領導行為可以解釋領導效能總變異量55.96%。
九、學務長「領導特質」、「領導行為」對「領導效能」的預測，以領導行為最具預測力，達63.1%；「領導特質」與「領導行為」各層面對「領導效能」之預測，以才智啟發最具預測力，達62.7%；「領導特質各層面」對「領導效能」之預測，以「組織管理特質」最具預測能力，達61.3%。「領導行為各層面」對「領導效能」之預測，以才智啟發最具預測能力，達62.1%。
十、學務長之領導和相關研究發現大致相同，但職務不同則領導行為有所不同。
十一、六位高領導效能學務長指出合適擔任學務長的因素，應分別具備(一) 強烈擔任學務長的意願；(二) 1.正直真誠；2.以身作則；3.協調溝通；4.積極學習四項領導特質；及(三) 1.塑造學務願景；2.與學術單位合作；3.激勵表揚成員；4.慎選組長；5.善於危機處理；6.傾聽學生聲音，建立溝通模式；7.善用資源，提高時間管理效能；8.對成員工作要求一視同仁；9.鼓勵進修與參訪，以提升學務效能；10.肯定教育部政策等領導行為。
研究主要建議：一、對學務長而言：（一）提升學務長領導能力；（二）掌握學務長工作重點與理念；（三）做好時間管理；（四）慎選組長；（五）參與領導知能研習。二、對校長而言：慎選合適的學務長，以利學務工作的推動。三、對學務成員而言：全心投入，成為學務團隊的示範者。四、對專業組織而言：提供學務長領導經驗交流與傳承的平台。
對未來研究的建議：一、以學務長的角度為研究對象。二、以女性學務長為研究對象。三、以不同學校性質、隸屬、規模及座落為研究焦點，探討需要何種合適的學務長。四、個案研究。

關鍵字

學生事務長 ； 領導特質 ； 領導行為 ； 領導效能

並列摘要

The study of relationship among leadership attributes, leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness of deans of student affairs in the colleges of ROC

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship among leadership attributes, leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness of deans of students in national colleges. Quantified questionnaire and qualitative interview were conducted in 52 from 104 national colleges to a stratified sampling of 860 selected student affair staff in 2004. 730 questionnaires were collected back. The percentage of submission was 86%. 712 questionnaires were effective, 91% of which were usable. The data was analyzed by t-test, one-way ANOVA analysis, Pearson correlation analysis, canonical correlation analysis, and multiple stepwise regression analysis. Qualitative interviews were also given to 6 effective deans of students. The conclusions of this study are as follows:
1. Deans of students were appreciated by whose staff for their “loyalty” in leadership attributes, “feature-developments in student affairs” in leadership behaviors, and “dealing with people” in leadership effectiveness. However, improvements are considered required in term of their “observation accuracy” in leadership attributes, “ responsiveness to requests for help” in leadership behaviors, and “rewarding” in leadership effectiveness.
2. Deans of students were appreciated by whose staff for their “personality” in leadership attributes, “idealized influence-attributed and active management-by-exception” in leadership behaviors, and “leadership satisfaction” in leadership effectiveness. However, improvements are considered required for their “interpersonal relationship” in leadership attributes, “laissez-faire leadership” in leadership behaviors, and “job satisfaction” in leadership effectiveness.
3. Honesty and sincerity are the core leadership attributes of deans of students.
4. If deans of students want their leadership behaviors to be effective, they should use transformational leadership and transactional leadership. If they adopt passive management-by-exception and laissez-faire leadership, they achieve lower leadership effectiveness.
5. The relationship of leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness is transformational behaviors>active management-by-exception>contingent reward>passive management-by-exception>laissez-faire. It is similar to leadership effectiveness under Full Range of Leadership Model.
6. “Title and division,” “school nature” and “school scale” cause obvious differences in leadership attributes, leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness.
7. The product-moment correlation between “ leadership attributes ” and “leadership behaviors”reveals highly positive relation with various aspects in leadership attributes, transformational leadership, active management-by-exception and contingent reward as well as transactional leadership ； however, passive management-by-exception and laissez-faire reveal low negative relation.
8. In the canonical correlation analysis of “leadership attributes”, “leadership behaviors” and “leadership effectiveness” of deans of students, leadership attributes of deans of students explained 49.58% of the total variance of leadership effectiveness. Leadership behaviors of deans of students explained 55.96% of the total variance of leadership effectiveness.
9. Predict by “leadership attributes,” and “leadership behavior” of deans of students for “leadership effectiveness,” the accuracy percentage of prediction reached 63.1%. Among all the aspects of “leadership attributes” and “leadership behaviors,” intellectual simulation was the strongest predictor of “leadership effectiveness.”, the accuracy percentage of prediction reached 62.7%. Among all the aspects of “leadership attributes,” “attribute of organization management” was the strongest predictor of leadership effectiveness, the accuracy percentage of prediction reached 61.3%. Among all the aspects of “leadership behaviors,” intellectual simulation was the strongest predictor of “leadership effectiveness.”, the accuracy percentage of prediction reached 62.1%.
10. Leadership of deans of students approximately coincides with the findings of the research. However, various job duties of deans of students result in different leadership behaviors.
11. Reasons why 6 effective deans of students are suitable for their positions are as follow：A. Strong intension to take the position of dean of students. B. They are equipped with four leadership attributes. 1. Being honest and sincere; 2. Acting as role model; 3. Being good at coordinating and communicating; 4. Being active in study. C. To possess leadership behaviors as 1. Shaping student affairs vision; 2. Cooperating with academic affair divisions; 3. Encouraging and praising staff; 4. Choosing group leaders carefully; 5. Handling emergences well; 6. Listening to students and building communication patterns; 7. Make good use of resource to improve time management; 8. Treat all the staff equally, 9. Encouraging staff to study and visit to enhance student affairs; 10. Affirming policies of Ministry of Education.
The main suggestions of this study: A. For dean of students:1.To reinforce his own abilities in exercising leadership.2.To focus on his responsibilities and philosophy.3.To do a good time management.4.To select his staffs carefully.5.To consistently participate seminars about leadership knowledge and skills. B. For presidents:To select right and capable dean of students who can fulfill his responsibilities capably and successfully. C. For student affair’s staffs:To commit themselves to dean of students and become as paradigms. D. For the professional organization:To act as a platform for dean of students to exchange and share their knowledge and experiences. Suggestions to further researches: A. To conduct the research from the viewpoints of dean of students. B.To research the female dean of students. C. To explore the best dean of students, basing upon the characteristics, organization structure, scale and environment of schools. D. Case study.

並列關鍵字

deans of student ； leadership attributes ； leadership behaviors ； leadership effectiveness

參考文獻

陳昭雄（2003）。私立大專院校訓輔工作成效影響因素之研究。載於林至善(主編)，學生事務與社團輔導第四輯。台北市：東吳大學。

黃昆輝（1992）。教育行政學。台北市：東華。

范熾文（2002）。國立校長領導行為、教師組織承諾與學校組織績效之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士學位論文，未出版，台北市。

孫德修（2002）。我國政府機關主管領導行為、向下影響策略與領導效能關係之研究。國立彰化師範大學工業教育學系博士論文，未出版，彰化市。

張昭仁（2001）。國小校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。