領導行為、行政專業特質、信任與組織績效管理關係之研究

LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR, ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALISM, TRUST AND ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

邱吉鶴(Chi-Ho, Chiou)

指導教授 ： 黃營杉

國立臺北大學/商學院/企業管理學系/博士(2007年)

摘要

行政機關首長的領導行為對組織績效表現的影響關係，係為行政組織的重要管理主軸。而行政機關依照政府的體制與專責設置，依據法制體系訂定法律、命令及行政規則行使職權，公務員依法考詮任用，形成了與企業或非營利組織不同的專有制度與文化。本文之目的係藉由領導行為及績效管理的相關理論，探討行政首長在其特殊的體制下，採取何種領導行為，對於組織績效具有影響的效果。本文以行政院所屬二級機關薦任科員以上人員為研究對象，採用多階層抽樣法，選取12個機關，共發出720份問卷，回收有效問卷548份(76%)。本文參採House(1977)的路徑-目標理論架構，採用Kouzes and Posner(2003)提出的領導實務要領及Verweire and Berghe(2004)提出的整合性績效管理活動，探討行政首長採取的領導行為對組織績效的影響力。經實證結果發現，整體而言，在行政專業特質、首長値得信任或二者同時存在下，行政首長採取的領導行為對組織績效均具統計上顯著效果，其中又以採取挑戰舊習的領導行為最具影響力。同時本文重要發現及其意涵包括：1.行政首長背景不同，其領導行為具有差異，其中學者專家背景者分別優於行政體系及民代社運背景者；2.行政專業特質與領導行為對組織績效成正向影響關係，即行政機關的制度化及員工的專業化，有助於行政首長領導力及組織管理績效的提升；3.值得信任與領導行為對組織績效具交互影響關係，即當員工與首長信任程度愈高時，行政首長可降低其領導行為；4.員工對行政首長信任程度，會因行政首長背景而有差異，員工對學者專家及行政體系背景者信任程度優於民代社運背景者；5.行政機關績效管理會因首長背景而有差異，學者專家及行政體系背景者績效管理優於民代社運背景者。

關鍵字

行政機關 ； 領導行為 ； 行政專業特質 ； 值得信任 ； 組織績效管理

並列摘要

The impact of the leadership behavior of heads of public sector bodies on organizational performance is an important central feature of the management of administrative organizations. In keeping with government structure and the apportionment of responsibilities, public sector agencies carry out their duties according to laws, directives and administrative rules set out in the prevailing legal system, and public servants are selected according to legal processes. In both systemic and cultural terms, this differs from practices in corporations or non-profit organizations. Drawing on current theories of leadership behavior and performance management, the purpose of this paper is to observe the behaviors that heads of public sector bodies adopt in this system and their effect on organizational performance.

A multistage sampling method was used on data drawn from 548 responses (76%) to questionnaires distributed to 720 Officer-level and higher civil servants in 12 2nd-tier affiliates of the Executive Yuan.

In observing the influence of leadership behaviors of executive heads on organizational performance, reference is made to House’s path-goal theory (1977), the practices of leadership identified by Kouzes and Posner (2003) and the integrated performance management activities of Verweire and Berghe (2004). Outcomes showed that in general, where administrative professionalism or trustworthy leadership or both of these qualities were present, the leadership behaviors adopted by executive heads had a statistically significant impact on organizational performance, and that the most powerful influence was exerted through “challenging the process”. Other important findings include: 1. Where the backgrounds of executive heads differ, so do their leadership behaviors, and those with an academic background rated more highly than those from the civil service or from elected political representation. 2. Administrative professionalism and leadership behavior have a positive influence on organizational performance, so systematic organization of public agencies and professionalization of civil servants are helpful in enhancing the leadership of executive heads and organizational management performance. 3. Trustworthiness and leadership behavior have a negative influence on organizational performance; the higher the trust between staff and head, the more the head can reduce his leadership behavior. 4. The degree of trust of staff in the executive head varies according to the head’s background; staff show greater trust in heads from an academic or civil service background than in those who were elected political representatives. 5. Performance management in public agencies varied according to the head’s background; such management by heads from an academic or civil service background was rated higher than by those from a political background.

並列關鍵字

administrative agencies ； leadership behavior ； administrative performance characteristic ； trustworthy ； organizational performance management

參考文獻

林嘉誠（2004）。政府績效評估—行政機關績效評估制度的建置與回顧。台北：行政院研考會編印。

黃俊英（1998）。行銷思想。台北：華泰文化公司。

Berman, E.M.(2006).Productivity in Public and Nonprofit Organizations, CA：Sage.

Advisory Board Company(1997). Indicators for Performance Management, Unpudlished research.

Archer, S. and Otley, D.T. (1991). Strategy,Structure,Planning and Control Systems and Performance Evaluation-Rumenco Ltd., Management Accounting Research, 2:263-303.