組織公平、企業聲望認知與組織承諾之關係探討

The relationship among Organizational Justice, Perceived External Prestige, and Organizational Commitment

呂奇樺(Chi-Hua Lu)

指導教授 ： 黃同圳

國立中央大學/管理學院/人力資源管理研究所/碩士(2007年)

摘要

組織公平（organizational justice）向來為組織行為領域研究之重點，有研究指出公平是影響員工行為、反應最重要的因素，而組織公平可分為分配公平、程序公平、以及互動公平；此外組織公平對組織承諾、工作滿意、離職傾向、組織績效、及組織公民行為等皆有顯著之影響。《天下雜誌》連續出版台灣企業一千大之排名刊物，比較的公司跨及各個產業，然而企業聲望對於組織的效益為何？在人力資源管理的效益中，研究者指出企業聲望對於組織之人員招募有正面的影響；除此之外，企業聲望認知對於組織認同、組織承諾也有正面影響。故本研究欲瞭解組織公平、企業聲望認知與組織承諾之關係。
本研究結果顯示分配公平、程序公平、以及互動公平對企業聲望認知有顯著正向影響；分配公平、程序公平對組織承諾有顯著正向影響；程序公平比分配公平對組織承諾的影響效果強；分配公平與程序公平的交互作用對組織承諾產生影響；企業聲望認知對組織承諾有正向的影響關係；企業聲望認知對組織承諾的影響對行銷與採購部門員工之影響比非行銷與採購部門之員工來得大；企業聲望認知對組織公平與組織承諾間之關係具有部分中介效果。並且組織公平對組織承諾的影響再加入企業聲望認知後，其影響效果會增強；而影響組織承諾的總效果，最強的變項為程序公平，其次為企業聲望認知。
故建議個案公司先從建立提升程序公平的制度做起，並且在提升程序公平的
同時，也需同時提升員工之企業聲望認知，因為兩者並重下對組織承諾會產生加乘效果。對於個案公司而言，欲提升員工之企業聲望認知可從組織內部著手，即提升員工之組織公平知覺，組織亦可透過提升高階管理能力、創新能力、吸引人才能力、以及企業整體形象來提升企業聲望認知。

關鍵字

組織公平 ； 企業聲望認知 ； 組織承諾

並列摘要

Organizational justice is a main issue in organizational behavior field. Some researches indicate that justice is the most important factor which affects employees’ behavior and reaction to an organization. Organizational justice is composed of distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice; organizational justice significantly affects organizational commitment, work satisfaction, intention to leave, organizational performance, and organizational citizenship behavior.
《CommonWealth Magazine》continuously publishes issues about top 1000 enterprises in Taiwan in different industries. And what is the benefit of perceived external prestige (PEP) to organizations? In terms of benefit to human resource management, researchers supported that PEP had a positive effect on personnel recruiting in an organization, as well as on organizational identity and organizational commitment. Therefore, this research is intended to realize the relationship among organizational justice, PEP, and organizational commitment.
The results of this research support that
1. Distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice have a significantly positive effect on PEP.
2. Distributive justice and procedural justice have a significantly positive effect on organizational commitment.
3. Procedural justice has greater effect on organizational commitment than distributive justice.
4. The interaction between distributive and procedural justice has effect on organizational commitment.

5. PEP has a positive effect on organizational commitment.
6. The effect of PEP on organizational commitment in marketing and purchasing department is larger than in non-marketing and non-purchasing department.
7. PEP serves a partial mediator in the relationship between organizational justice and organizational commitment. In this way, the effect of organizational justice to organizational commitment would be enhanced whiling adding PEP. Procedural justice has the largest total effect on organizational commitment, and followed by the PEP.
We suggest the case company to enhance procedural justice first, as well as PEP at the same time because when the two components are existent at the same time, both of them will have a multiplying effect on organizational commitment. Case company can enhance PEP internally through organizational justice. Besides, case company can also enhance PEP directly through capability of higher level management, capability of innovation, capability of attracting appliers, and whole organizational reputation.

並列關鍵字

and Organizational Commitment ； Perceived External Prestige ； Organizational Justice

參考文獻

1. Adams, J. S. 1963. Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and social Psychology, 67, pp.422-436.

2. Adams, J. S. 1965.Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz(Ed.), Advances In Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2:267-299. New York: Academic Press.

3. Andrew Blair Staley, Barbara Dastoor, Nace R. Magner, and Chandler Stolp. The contribution of organizational justice in budget decision-making to federal managers’organizational commitment. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management; Winter 2003, 15, 4.

4. Ashforth, B. E., and Mael, F , A.(1989).Social identity and the organization. Academy of Management Review,14:20-39.

5. Baron , R. M. & Kenny, D.A. 1986. The moderator- mediator variable distinction in social psychological research：Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration.Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 51(6) :1173-1182.