變革管理者與犬儒主義者互動關係對變革績效影響之研究－混沌理論觀點_

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

論文基本資料
摘要
外文摘要
參考文獻

題名：	變革管理者與犬儒主義者互動關係對變革績效影響之研究－混沌理論觀點
作者：	郭元慶
作者(外文)：	Yuan-Ching Kuo
校院名稱：	國立嘉義大學
系所名稱：	企業管理學系
指導教授：	吳美連
學位類別：	博士
出版日期：	2012
主題關鍵詞：	混沌理論；變革模式；變革管理者的角色；犬儒主義；Chaos Theory；Change Models；Roles of Change Manager；Cynicism
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:0 共同引用:0 點閱:0

變革管理是組織經常使用的管理活動，本研究藉由混沌理論所強調的「積極回饋（positive feedback）」、「奇異吸引子（Strange attractor）」、「自組織（self organization）」等特性，探討變革管理者在變革過程中，面臨不同的變革模式、犬儒主義者對變革的影響等因素下，如何扮演適當的角色，以增進變革的績效。具體而言，本研究的研究目的為：1.從混沌理論觀點探討企業如何面對經營環境的挑戰及啟動變革。2.從混沌理論的觀念與特性來描述與解釋組織變革的動態模式。3.探討變革管理者在動態的變革模式中所應該扮演的角色。4.檢視變革管理者與組織犬儒者的角色互動關係。
本研究採用質性研究方法中的個案研究法，透過分析一家營造企業自2004年底迄2011年的變革歷程，以深度訪談進行初級資料的搜集、並廣泛蒐集與該企業有關的次級資料，透過整理、歸納的方式，針對「以混沌理論觀點面對經營環境的挑戰及啟動變革」、「混沌理論觀點的變革模式」、「變革管理者對犬儒主義者的因應」、「變革管理者在變革過程中扮演的角色」等主題提出研究結果並進行討論，主要的研究結論包括：
一、混沌理論的「積極回饋」、「奇異吸引子」、「自組織」的特性可以解釋企業面臨動態的環境下如何啟動變革。
二、由混沌理論的觀點，可以解釋企業在不同的變革階段所選擇之適當變革模式，例如在「危機處理」階段，可以使用「高計畫、激進」的變革模式；在「業務創新」階段，可使用「低計畫、激進」的變革模式；在「主題式變革」階段，可使用「高計畫、漸進」的變革模式；在「強化競爭力」階段，則可使用「低計畫、漸進」的變革模式。
三、變革管理者面對組織內的犬儒主義者，可以採用1.親力親為，以身作則，果斷下決策；2.建立共識；3.積小勝為大勝；4.公正無私、賞罰分明、用人唯才、杜絕派系；5.把適當的人在適當的時間擺在適當的位子上；6.訂定明確目標；7.具體的獎勵；8.多元的人才培訓計畫等方式來降低犬儒主義者對變革的負面影響。而本研究的研究結果顯示，企業可多運用任務型導向的方法來降低犬儒主義者對變革的負面影響。
四、變革管理者在不同的變革階段、使用不同的變革模式，必須扮演不同的角色，例如在「危機處理」階段，企業採取「高計畫、激進」的變革模式，變革管理者可以扮演「資訊蒐集者、溝通者、執行者」等角色。另外，本研究亦提出變革管理者為降低犬儒主義者對變革的負面影響而採取的各項管理方法中，各可以扮演那方面的角色。
除了以上研究結論外，本研究並提出相關的研究發現及實務上的管理意涵，以做為學術及實務上的參考。
關鍵字：混沌理論（Chaos theory）、變革模式（Change models）、變革管理者的角色（Roles of Change Manager）、犬儒主義（Cynicism）

以文找文

Change Management is the administration activity to be used often by organizations, and by the characteristics such as “positive feedback”, “strange attractor” and “self organization” in the Chaos Theory, to make investigations of how the change managers play a proper role during the process of changes when facing with different change models, and under the factors with effects on change from the cynical employees in this thesis, in order to improve the performance of changes. Specifically speaking, the research purposes of the study are: 1.From the perspective of Chaos Theory, to make investigation on how the businesses deal with the challenges in the operation environments as well as to start changes. 2. From the concepts and characteristics of Chaos Theory, to describe and explain the dynamic models of organizational changes. 3.To make investigations of what roles should be played by the change managers in the dynamic change models. 4.To make examinations of the interactive relationships with roles between change manager and organization cynical employees.5.To make examinations of the impact on the effectiveness of change for change managers adopt dynamic models of change and play the different roles.
With adoption of Case Study from the Qualitative Methods in this thesis, through analysis of change progress from a construction company during the period between 2004 and 2011, to work on the collections of preliminary data with in-depth interview, as well as to extensively gather the secondary data related to the company, moreover, by way of compilation and summarization, to offer the research outcomes for topics such as “Facing Challenges of Business Environments And To Activate Changes With the Perspectives of Chaos Theory”, “Perspectives of Chaos Theory in Change Model”, “How the Change Managers respond to the cynical employees”, and “The Role of Change Managers to Be Played During the Process of Changes”, as well as to make discussions of them, furthermore, the major research conclusions are to consist of the followings:
1. Using the characteristics of Chaos Theory as “positive feedback”, “strange attractor” and “self organization”, to illustrate how the business start changes when facing a dynamic environment.
2. From the perspectives of Chaos Theory, to illustrate that in the different stages of changes, a business should make changes with selections of proper change models, for example, in the stage of “Crisis Solving”, it might use a change model of “High Planning and Radicalization”; in the stage of “Business Innovation”, it might use a change model of “Low Planning and Radicalization”; in the stage of “Topic Change”, it might use a change model of “High Planning and Step By Step”; and in the stage of “Strengthening Competitiveness”, it might use a change model of “Low Planning and Step By Step”.
3. When facing with the cynical employees within an organization, the change managers can adopt ways in order to reduce the negative effects on changes from the cynical employees, including:1.To attend things personally, to set himself as an example to others, and to decisively make any decisions; 2.To set up a common consensus; 3.The accumulations of small victory to win; 4. To be impartial, to give reward or punishment without bias, to hire employees for their talents, as well as to inhibit the formations of small factions; 5. To put employees where they are fitted at a right time; 6. To set up definite goals; 7.With definite awards; and 8.Diverse talent training plans. With indications of the research outcomes in this thesis, the businesses can make more applications of task-oriented methods for lowering the negative effects on changes from the cynical employees.
4. In the different stages of changes, with adoption of different change models, the change managers must play various kinds of roles, for example, in the stage of “Crisis Solving”, when the corporation adopts a change model of “High Planning and Radicalization”, the change manager can play roles such as ”information collector, communicator, and executor”. Besides this, in this thesis, there are also roles of different kinds can be played by the change managers in the various management methods, which are adopted to reduce the negative effects on changes from the cynical employees.
Other than above research conclusions, there are also suggestions of management meanings related to research findings as well as in practices with the research conclusions of this thesis, and they can work as references both academically and in practices.
Keywords: Chaos Theory, Change Models, Roles of Change Manager, and Cynicism

以文找文

中文部份：
方崇雄譯（2008），Cummings, T.G., & Worley, C.G.著，組織發展與變革，台北市：華泰文化。
江烘貴（2006），「複雜調適系統觀點的組織變革－以台灣菸酒公司個案為例」，國立中山大學企業管理學系未出版博士論文。 new window

吳明清（1991），教育研究－基本觀念與方法分析，台北市：五南。
吳錦錫（2009），「組織變革與文化重塑最適模式之研究－以Ｇ公司為例」，國立彰化師範大學工業教育與技術學系未出版博士論文。 new window

吳復新、孫本初、許道然（2010），組織變革管理與技術，臺北縣：空大。
李華夏譯（2000），Ormerod P.著，蝴蝶效應經濟學：一項關於社會與經濟行為的新理論。台北市：聯經。
李芳齡譯（2001），Senge,P.M., Kleiner,A., Roberts,C., Ross,R., Roth,G., & Smith,B.著，第五項修練Ⅲ：變革之舞－持續「學習型組織」動力的挑戰與策略（下），台北市：天下遠見。
李芳齡譯（2001），Pace,S., & Hildebrandt,J.著，「重結果，快行動命中核心的企業變革」，EMBA世界經理文摘，184，頁30-44。
李宏才（2003），「混沌理論應用在國小校長危機管理之研究」，國立政治大學教育系未出版博士論文。 new window

李宏毅（2007），「組織變革認知、工作滿意與離職傾向之關係研究－以興中紙業公司為例」，佛光大學管理學研究所碩士在職專班未出版碩士論文。
李芳齡譯（2008），Senturia,T., Flees,L. & Maceda,M.著，「成功變革的四大步驟」， EMBA雜誌，262，頁52-66。
李芳齡譯（2011），Litre,P., Bird,A., Carey,G. & Meehan P.著，「破除變革管理的3大迷思」，EMBA雜誌，294，頁56-67。
余明助（2006），「組織變革不確定感與員工工作態度關係之研究－以組織溝通和員工信任為中介變數」，人力資源管理學報，6（2），pp.89-110。 new window

林佩璇（2000），「個案研究及其在教育研究上的應用」，中正大學教育研究所主編“質的研究方法”，高雄市：麗文文化。
林泓遠（2001），「混沌理論在股價上的實證研究」，國立中山大學財務管理研究所位出版碩士論文。
林思伶譯（2005），Wheatley M.J.著，領導與新科學，台北市：梅霖文化。
林德穎（2008），「組織變革認知與組織承諾之研究－以台灣郵政股份有限公司台東郵局為例」，國立台東大學區域政策與發展研究所公共事務管理在職專班未出版碩士論文。
林俊宏譯（2010），Miller, P.著，群的智慧：向螞蟻、蜜蜂、飛鳥學習組織運作絕技。台北市：天下遠見。
周旭華譯（2000），Kotter J.P.、Strebel P.等箸，變革，台北市：天下遠見。
胡平（2005），犬儒病，紐約：博大出版社。
侯嘉政、陳宜伸、張宏榮（2010），「企業動態能力、組織變革策略與組織變革績效之探索性研究」，經營管理論叢，6（1），頁23-47。 new window

徐聯恩（1996），企業變革系列研究，台北市：華泰。
孫麗珠、陳樹衡譯（2000），Brown S.L.& Eisenhardt K.M.著，邊緣競爭－遊走在混沌與秩序邊緣的競爭策略，台北市：商周。
秦夢群、黃貞裕（2001），教育行政研究方法論，台北市：五南。
張簡英翔（2007），「銀行員工面對組織變革知覺對組織公民行為影響之研究－以組織犬儒主義、組織政治知覺為中介變項」，國立高雄應用科技大學人力資源發展系碩士班未出版碩士論文。
郭進隆譯（1994），Senge,P.M.著，第五項修練－學習型組織的藝術與實務，台北市：天下文化。
陳木金（1999），「混沌理論對學校組織變革因應策略之啟示」，學校行政，1，頁61-68。 new window

陳曉開譯（2004），Rieley,J.B.著，組織變革10解（Gaming the system），台北市：台灣培生教育。
陳俊元（2006），「組織變革認知、組織溝通、工作滿足與組織承諾之研究－以台糖公司為例」，國立中山大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。
陳紀良（2007），「產業技術與市場需求之混沌秩序研究－以台灣行動通訊產業為例」，國立中央大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
曾威揚（2005），「生物系統中的自組織現象」，全球變遷通訊雜誌，45，頁24-27。
楊幼蘭譯（2005），Luecke R.著，變革管理，台北市：天下遠見。
廖月娟、陳琇玲譯（2001），Senge,P.M., Kleiner,A., Roberts,C., Ross,R., Roth,G., & Smith,B.著，第五項修練Ⅲ：變革之舞－持續「學習型組織」動力的挑戰與策略（上），台北市：天下遠見。
劉介宇（2006），「一個發生財務危機企業其資金缺口「混沌現象」之模擬」，管理科學研究，3（2），頁1-23。 new window

蔡敏玲、余曉雯譯（2003），Clandinin,D.J., & Connelly M.著，敘說探究：質性研究中的經驗與故事，台北市：心理。
劉信吾（2007），組織管理與心理學，台北市：心理。
蔡宜均、林文政（2009），「組織犬儒主義與多源評量受評者自我發展意圖之關聯性探討－以評量溝通及回饋建議為調節變數」，2009.11.18中央大學人力資源管理研究所第15屆企業人力資源管理實務專題研究成果發表會論文。
潘淑滿（2003），質性研究：理論與應用，台北市：心理。
謝安田、梁素君、宋玉麒（2004），「組織社會化與組織犬儒主義關係之研究」，行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫。
蕭瑞麟（2006），不用數字的研究：鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究，台北市：台灣培生教育。

英文部分：

Abraham, R.(2000), “Organizational cynicism: Bases and consequences”. Genetic,Social and General Psychology Monographs, 126, pp.269-292.
Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. (2005), “From intended strategies to unintended outcomes: the impact of change recipient sensemaking”. Organization Studies OnlineFirst, pp.1-29.
Bamford, D. R., & Forrester, P. L.,(2003),”Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23(5), pp.546-564.
Beer, M.( 2005). “Transforming organizations: Embracing the paradox of E and O.” In Cummings T.G.(Ed.） Handbook of Organizations Development. pp.405-428. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bernerth,J.(2004). “Expanding our understanding of the change message.” Human Resource Development Review, 12(3), pp.36-52.
Bommer, W.H., Rich, G.A., & Rubin, R.S.(2005), “Changing attitudes about change: Longitudinal effects of transformational leader behavior on employee cynicism about organizational change” . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, pp.733-753.
Broner, C.(2003), “Cynicism about organizational change: Disposition or leadership’s creation? The reactions of K-12 educators undergoing change.”. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Walden University, Minnesota.
Brown, M., & Cregan, C.(2008), “Organizational change cynicism: the role of employee involvement”. Human Resource Management, 47(4), pp.667-686.
Bruch, H., & Sattelberger, T.(2001), “The turnaround at Lufthansa: Learning from the change process”. Journal of Change Management, 1(4),pp.344-363. new window

Burke W.W.(2002), Organizational Change – Theory and Practice, California: Sage Publications.
Burnes, B. (2004), “Emergent change and planned change – competitors or allies? The case of XYZ construction”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 24(9), pp.886-902.
Burns, J.S.(2002), “Chaos theory and leadership studies: Exploring uncharted seas”. Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, 9(2), pp.42-56.
Byrne, Z.S., & Hochwarter, W.A. (2008), “Perceived organizational support and performance- Relationships across levels of organizational cynicism”. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(1), pp.54-72. new window

Caldwell, R.(2003),“Change leaders and change managers：different or complementary？”. Leadership & Organization Development Journal，24，pp.285-293
Cartwright, S. & Holmes, N. (2006), “The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining employee engagement and reducing cynicism”. Human Resource Management Review, 16,pp.199-208.
Chew, M.M.M., Cheng, J.S.L., & Petrovic-Lazarevic, S. (2006), “Managers’ role in implementing organizational change: case of the restaurant industry in Melbourne”. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 2(1),pp.58-67. new window

Cole, M.S., Burch, H., & Vogel, B.(2006)，“Emotion as mediators of the relations between perceived supervisor support and psychological hardiness on employee cynicism”. Journal of Organizational Behaviour，27，pp.463-484。
Connell, J. & Waring, P.(2002), “The BOHICA syndrome: A symptom of cynicism towards change initiatives?”. The Journal of Strategic Change, 11,pp.347-356.
Cutler, I. (2000), “The cynical manager”. Management Learning, 31(3),pp.295-312.
Dean, J.W.Jr., Brandes,P., & Dharwadkar, R.(1998), “Organizational cynicism”. Academy of Management Review, 23(2),pp.341-352.
Dent, E.B., & Goldberg, S.G.(1999), “Challenging “Resistance to change””. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,35(1),pp.25-41. new window

Dooley, K.J., Johnson, T.L., & Bush, D.H.(1995), “TQM, Chaos and Complexity”. Human Systems Management, 14(4), pp.1-16.
Eijnatten, F.M., Putnik, G.D.(2004), “Chaos, complexity, learning, and the learning organization. Towards a chaordic enterprise.”. The Learning Organization, 11(6), pp.418-429.
Eisenhardt, K.M., & Sull, D.N.(2001) “Strategy as simple rules”. Harvard Business Review,79(1),pp.106-117. new window

Farazmand, A.(2003), “Chaos and transformation theories: A theoretical analysis with implications for organization theory and public management”. Public Organization Review: A Global Journal, 3, pp.339-372.
Farrell, M.A.(2000), “Developing Market-Oriented Learning Organization”. Australian Journal of Management, 25(2),pp.201-223.
Ferres, N., & Connell, J.(2004), “Emotional intelligence in leaders: An antidote for cynicism towards change?”. Strategic Change, 13, pp.61-71.
Jabri, M., Adrian, A. D., & Boje, D.(2008), “Reconsidering the role of conversations in change communication”. Journal of Organizational Change Management , 21(6), pp.667-685.
Jagodick, J., Courvisanos, J. & Yearwood, J. (2011), “ICT Chang Agents: Global Actors in Financial Services Technology Projects”. Asia Pacific Management Review, 16(2), pp.165-180.
Jensen, B. (1996), “ How to change behavior in change communication starts with emotional awareness, directed by measurable goals”. PR News, Potomac , May 27.
Johnson, J.L., & O’leary-Kelly, A.M.(2003), “The effects of psychological contract breach and organizational cynicism: Not all social exchange violations are created equal”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5),pp.627-647.
Kickert, W. J. M. (2010), “Managing emergent and complex change. The case of Dutch agencification.” . International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76, pp.489-515.
Kotter, J.P. (1990), A Force for Change: HowLleadership Differs from Mmanagement. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D. J., & Topolnytsky, L. (1998), “Employee cynicism and skepticism: reconceptualization and measurement of two bases for resistance to organizational change”. Unpublished manuscript.
Mohrman, Jr., A.M., Mohramn, S.A., Ledford, Jr.,G.E., Cummings,T.G., Lawler Ⅲ,E.E. & Associates (1989),Large-Scale Organization Change. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Plowman, D.A., Solansky, S., Beck, T.E., Baker, L., Kulkarni, M. & Travis, D.V. (2007), “The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization”. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, pp.341-356.
Porras, J. & Robertson, P. (1992), “Organizational development: Theory ,practice and research” , in M.D. Dunnette & L.M. Hough(Eds.). Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology(2nd.ed,3,pp.719-822). Palo Alto,CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Reichers, A.E.,Wanous, J. P. & Austin, J.T.(1997), “Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change”. Academy of Management Executive, 11(1), pp.48-59. new window

Robbins, D.K. & Pearce Ⅱ, J.A.(1992), “Turnaround: Retrenchment and recovery”. Strategic Management Journal, 13,pp.287-309.
Robbins, S.P., & Cenzo, A.D. (1998), Fundamentals of Management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Saka, A. (2003), “Internal change agents’ view of the management of change problem” . Journal of Organizational Change Management, 16(5), pp.480-496.
Sanford, C. (1992), “A Self-Organizing Leadership View of Paradigms”. in New Traditions in Business, J. Renesch, ed., San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Shepard H. A. (2001), “Rules of thumb for change agents”, The Organizational Behavior Reader, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Stacey, R.D. (1995), “The science of complexity: an alternative perspective for strategic change processes”. Strategic Management Journal, 16, pp.477-495.
Stanley, D. J., Meyer, J.P. & Topolnytsky, L. (2005), “Employee cynicism and resistance to organizational change”. Journal of Business and Psychology,19(4), pp.429-459.
Tatli, A., & Özbilgin, M. F. (2009), “Understanding diversity managers’ role in organizational change : Towards a conceptual framework”. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 26(3),pp.244-258.
Thiétart, R.A. & Forgues, B. (1995), “Chaos theory and organization” . Organization Science, 6(1), pp.19-31. new window

Van de Ven, A.H. & Poole, M.S. (1995), “Explaining development and change in organizations ” . Academy of Management Review,20, pp.510-540.
Vuuren, M. V. & Elving, W.J.L. (2008), “Communication, sensemaking and change as a chord of three strands”, Corporate Communications : An International Journal, 13(3), pp. 349-359.
Wanous, J. P. ,Reichers, A.E. & Austin, J.T. (2000), “Cynicism about organizational change. measurement, antecedents, and correlates”, Group & Organization Management, 25(2), pp.132-153.
Watt, J.D. & Piotrowski, (2008), “Organizational change cynicism: A review of the literature and intervention strategies”, Organization Development Journal, 26(3), pp.23-31.
Weick, K.E. & Quinn, R.E. (1999), “Organizational change and development”, Annual Review ofPsychology, 50, pp.361-386.
Werthimer, R. & Zinga,M.(1997), “Attending to the noise: applying chaos theory to school reform”. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Wheeler, L.(2006), “Thinking outside the bun : the manager’s role in sensemaking”, Development and Learning in Organizations, 20(5), pp.12-14.
Williams,G. P.(1997), Chaos Ttheory Tamed, Washington, DC.: Joseph Henry Press.
Wilson, D.C. (1992). A Strategy of Change. London: Routledge.

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	企業動態能力、組織變革策略與組織變革績效之探索性研究
2.	一個發生財務危機企業其資金缺口「混沌現象」之模擬
3.	組織變革不確定感與員工工作態度關係之研究--以組織溝通和員工信任為中介變數

無相關博士論文

無相關書籍

無相關著作

無相關點閱

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫