Title

「框架效應」對企業員工創新企劃案接受傾向之影響

Authors

陳宇秩

Key Words

框架效應 ; 創新 ; Framing Effects ; Innovative

PublicationName

臺灣師範大學創造力發展碩士在職專班學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2012年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

潘裕豐

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究在探討框架效應中的正面框架與負面框架對企業員工創新企劃案的傾向影響,就實驗問卷結果得知框架效應對企劃接受傾向存在著影響性。本研究藉由研究一驗證在不同情境類型、屬性框架底下,企業員工對傳統企劃案與創新企劃案的選擇傾向;研究二驗證在不同目標框架與屬性框架下,企業員工對創新企劃案接受度的順序。藉此了解正面框架、負面框架對企劃案接受傾向的影響。研究一與研究二皆採實驗取向的研究方式進行,實驗模擬情境並仿照Tversky與Kahneman 於1981年所做的實驗模擬情境,以確保本研究實驗的信度與效度。 研究一的實驗結果顯示框架效應對企業員工創新企劃案的傾向影響如下: 一.屬性框架的正面語詞會讓企業員工從傳統企劃案與創新企劃案兩者的比較中,較傾向選擇傳統企劃案。 二.屬性框架的負面語詞會讓企業員工從傳統企劃案與創新企劃案兩者的比較中,較傾向選擇創新企劃案。 研究二的實驗結果顯示框架效應對企業員工創新企劃案的傾向影響如右:在目標框架與屬性框架的交叉呈現下,企業員工對創新企劃案接受度的順序為「正面目標表述+正面屬性語詞」>「負面目標表述+正面屬性語詞」>「正面目標表述+負面屬性語詞」>「負面目標表述+負面屬性語詞」 本研究最終亦將這些研究究結果提出建議,以供業界在提企劃案的過程中能有所參考與運用。

English Abstract

he purpose of this research is to explore the impact of positive frame and negative frame on the tendency towards acceptance of innovative proposals within the enterprise, and based on the result of experiment questionnaire, the framing effects do exhibit the influence. In order to find out the different impact by positive frame and by negative frame, this research is composed of two studies: Study 1: Test and verify, under various situations and attribute framing, the tendency towards accepting conventional vs. innovative proposals within the enterprise; and Study 2: Test and verify, under various goal framing and attribute framing, the sequence of accepting innovative proposals within the enterprise. Both Study 1 and Study 2 are conducted by experiment-oriented approach, and experiment simulations follow the simulations model of Tversky and Kahneman (1981) to assure the reliability and validity of this research. The experiment of Study 1 shows the following results:  The positive wordings of attribute framing will make enterprise staff tend to choose conventional proposals over innovative proposals.  The negative wordings of attribute framing will make enterprise staff tend to choose innovative proposals over conventional proposals. The experiment of Study 2 shows that, under the crossing of goal framing and attribute framing, the sequence of accepting innovative proposals within the enterprise is as follows: “positive goal expressions + positive wordings”, “negative goal expressions + positive wordings”, “positive goal expressions + negative wordings”, and “negative goal expressions + negative wordings”. This research eventually provides recommendations to enterprises for reference and application in the process of tendering proposals.

Topic Category 教育學院 > 創造力發展碩士在職專班
社會科學 > 教育學
Reference
  1. 伍家德(1990)。 企業技術政策與新產品發展績效相關之研究。國立政治
    連結:
  2. 林信惠、陳勇達、吳金山、鄭菲菲(2007)。框架效應對電子議價影響之研究。交大管理學報,27,249-273。
    連結:
  3. 張春興 (1993)。現代心理學。台北市:東華書局。
    連結:
  4. 屈碧雰(2003)。員工提案制度、企業文化與組織創新關係之研究。元智大學管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
    連結:
  5. 許通晏(2007)。參與者之血型在創意思考會議上的影響。大同大學工業設計學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
    連結:
  6. 黃雯蓉(2001)。組織特性與工作特性對員工創造力的影響 --以行銷相關工作為例。國立成功大學企業管理碩士論文,未出版,台南市。
    連結:
  7. Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
    連結:
  8. Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 77-87.
    連結:
  9. Amabile, T. M., & Gryskiewicz, N. D. (1989). The creative environment: Work environment inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 2(2), 231-253.
    連結:
  10. Amabile, T. M., Mueller, J. S., Simpson, W. B., Hadley, C. N., Kramer, S. J., & Fleming, L. (2003). Time pressures and creativity in organization: A longitudinal field study. HBS Working Paper, 02-73.
    連結:
  11. Andrews, F. M., & Farris, G. F. (1967). Supervisory practices and innovation in scientific teams. Personnel Psychology, 20(4), 497-575.
    連結:
  12. Bargatzky, T. (1989). Innovation and the integration of socialcultural systems . In S.E.van der Leeuw & R.Torrence(Ed.),Whats New?(pp.16-32).Mass:Unwin Hyman Inc.
    連結:
  13. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.
    連結:
  14. Damanpour, F. (1996), Organizational complexity and innovation: Developing and testing multiple contingency Models, Management Science; 42,5; ABI/INFORM Global,693.
    連結:
  15. Donnelly,J.H.&Etzel,M.T.(1967).Degrees of product newness and early trial.Journal of Marketing Research,10,295-300.
    連結:
  16. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm.Journal of communication, 43, 51-58.
    連結:
  17. Interactions with Risk-Taking Propensity, Cognitive Style and Sex
    連結:
  18. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(3), 496-510.
    連結:
  19. Fliegal,F.C.&Kivlin,J.E.(1996).Attributes of innovations as factors in diffusion .American Journal of Sociology,72,235-248.
    連結:
  20. Gamson, W. A. (1992). Media images & the social construction of reality.Annual review of sociology.
    連結:
  21. Gerhards, J., & Rucht. D. (1992). Mesomobilization: Organizing and Framing in Two Protest Campaigns in West Germany. American Journal of Sociology,98, 555-595.
    連結:
  22. George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 513-524.
    連結:
  23. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching : mass media in the making &unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley : University of California Press.
    連結:
  24. Katz,E.(1961).The social interary of technical change:two studies in diffusion of an innovation. Human organization,20,70-82.
    連結:
  25. Kaufman.S.,Smith.J.(1997).Implementing change in existing locally unwanted land uses:A case study.Journal of Planning Education and Research,16(3).188-200.
    連結:
  26. Krishnamurthy Parthasarathy,Patrick Carter and Edward Blair(2001).Attribute Framing and Goal Framing Effects in Health Decisions,Organizational Behavior and Huaman Decision Processes(85:2),382-399.
    連結:
  27. Levin, I.P., Schneider, S.L., & Gaeth, G.J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: Atypology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188.
    連結:
  28. Marteau, T.M. (1989). Framing of information: Its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 89-94.
    連結:
  29. Martin, T. J. (1995). Ten commandments for managing creative people. Fortune, 131(3), 135-136.
    連結:
  30. Meyerowitz, Beth, E. & Chaiken, Shelly (1987), The Effect of Message Framing on Breast Self-Examination Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, March, pp. 500-510.
    連結:
  31. Neale, M.A. & Bazerman, M. H.(1985). The Effects of Framing and Negotiator Overconfidence on Bargaining Behaviors and Outcomes, Academy of Management Journal, 28(1), 34-49.
    連結:
  32. Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607-634.
    連結:
  33. Prochaska JO(1992). Strong and weak principles for progressing from
    連結:
  34. Popielarz,D.T.(1967).An exploration of perceived risk and willingness to try new products.Journal of Marketing Research,4,368-378.
    連結:
  35. Rich, J.M.(1992).Innovations in education : Reformers and their critics(6).Boston:Allyn and Bacon .The university of Texas at Austin.
    連結:
  36. Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M., & Teach, R. J. (1993). Putting creativity to work: Leader influence on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 55(1), 120-151.
    連結:
  37. Torrance, E. P.(1974). Torrence Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual. Lexington, MA: Ginn.
    連結:
  38. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychologyof choice. Science, 211,453-458.
    連結:
  39. Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-321.
    連結:
  40. Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2001). Enhancing creative performance: Effects of expected developmental assessment strategies and creative personality. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(3), 151-167.
    連結:
  41. Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 682-696.
    連結:
  42. 一、中文文獻
  43. 王振德 (1997)。創造力三面模式評介-兼論創造力的本質與研究取向。資優教育季刊,64,1-5。
  44. 王柏年(1999)。 高科技產業革新性人力資源管理制度與組織創新績效之關係研究。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
  45. 王堯興(2005)。國小資訊種子教師運用自由軟體融入教學關注階層、溝通媒介類型與教學創新接受度之相關研究。國立屏東教育大學教育科技研究所碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
  46. 王誌鴻(2000)。國民小學教師參與在職進修動機取向與其創新接受度相關之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義市。
  47. 王韋懿(2005)。產品設計企劃之研究。銘傳大學設計管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
  48. 陳惠君譯(2003)。企劃你的idea。台北市:博碩文化。原著:中野昭夫。
  49. 大學企業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
  50. 林煌凱(2002)。國中教師教學創新接受度與資訊科技融入教學關注階層之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
  51. 林妙玲(2004)。創造力訓練方案對企業人士提昇創造力成效之研究。實踐大學企業創新發展研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
  52. 徐作聖(1995)。 全球化科技政策與企業經營。台北:華泰。
  53. 張文娟譯(2001)。企劃案撰寫手冊。台北市:美商麥格羅希爾。原著:Hamprt,J.R.&Baugh,L.S.
  54. 張文菁(2001)。企業特性、人力資本、產業環境以及組織績效之相關性
  55. 研究。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
  56. 郭 泰(1993)。企劃案。台北市:五南。
  57. 陳文龍(1995)。產品企劃與機車設計。設計,62,10-13。
  58. 陳嘉彌(1997)。中等學校教師接受創新程度之分析。教育研究資訊,4.3,86-103。
  59. 陳明溥(1998)。創新推廣理論與資訊教育推展。臺灣教育,572,2-10。
  60. 陳定國(1997)。高階管理:企劃與決策。台北市:華泰。
  61. 葉玉珠 (2002)。高層次思考教學設計的要素分析。中山通識教育學報,1,75-101。
  62. 孫宇杰(2003)。員工分紅入股制度對企業創新績效的影響:以台灣高科技產業為例,真理大學管理科學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北縣。
  63. 彭炎祺 (2005)。「心智組態」與「框架效應」對衝突協商之影響。國立東華企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版,花蓮縣。
  64. 楊琬渝(2006)。旅行業從業人員工作特性與員工創造力關係之研究。中國文化大學觀光事業研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
  65. 蔡啟通(1997)。組織因素、組織成員整體創造性與組織創新之關係。國立台灣大學商學研究所博士論文,未出版,台北市。
  66. 廖川億(1996) 。研究發展團隊特性與創新績效關係之研究。國立中山大
  67. 學人力資源管理研究碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
  68. 廖昭昌(1989)。設計企中系統分析與創意工學相互為用說。機械工作雜誌,75,140-148。
  69. 蘇伯顯(1982)。企劃與管理。台北市:華視文化。
  70. 戴國良(2002)。企劃案管理實務:企劃案發想、撰寫到執行的最完整指南。台北市:商周。
  71. 二、英文文獻
  72. Carter,C.(1990).Majoring in the rest of your life.Career secrets for college students.N.J.:The Putnam Publishing Group.
  73. Fagley, N. S. & Miller, P. M.(1990). The Effect of Framing on Choice:
  74. Goffman (1974). Frame analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
  75. Mowen, M.M., & Mowen, J.C. (1986). An empirical examination of the biasing
  76. effects of framing on business decisions. Decision Sciences, 7, 596-602.
  77. Miles,M.B.(1964).Innovation in education.New York:Teachers Collenge,Colmbia Universtiy.
  78. precontemplation to action on the basis of twelve problem behavior. Health Psychology,13, 47-51.
  79. Rogers.E.M.(1983).Di Diffusion of innovation(3rded).New York:the free press.
  80. Rogers.E.M.(1995).Diffusion of innovation(4th).New York:the free press.
  81. Rogers.E.M.& Shoemaker,F.F.(1971).Communication of innovations .New York:The Free press.