:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:競值途徑應用在國民中學校長領導行為、學校組織文化與學校組織效能關係之研究
作者:邱怡和
作者(外文):I-ho Chiu
校院名稱:國立屏東教育大學
系所名稱:教育行政研究所
指導教授:陳慶瑞
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2010
主題關鍵詞:學校組織效能結構方程模式競值途徑校長領導行為學校組織文化階層線性模式school organizational cultureSEMHLMprincipals’ leadership behaviorCompeting Values Approachschool organizational effectiveness
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(13) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:104
本研究旨在探討競值途徑(competing values approach, CVA)應用在國民中
學校長領導行為、學校組織文化與學校組織效能之關係。
本研究以台灣地區(不含澎湖縣、連江縣與金門縣)之公立國民中學為研究對象,抽取117所公立國民中學進行問卷調查,共計發出1132份問卷,收回審視整理後,有效問卷為856份。所使用的研究工具為「國民中學校長領導行為、學校組織文化與學校組織效能問卷」。
本研究之主要結論有:
(一)國民中學校長之競值領導行為具兼容並蓄、矛盾詭譎之現況,且以積極作為取向居多;(二)國民中學之競值組織文化側重組織「內部」、以「維持社會系統之運作」為主,且同時以積極強勢型取向居多;(三)國民中學之競值組織效能具有整體高度滿意的情形,且以高度整體型取向居多;(四)校長領導行為愈佳及領導行為複雜性愈高,將有助於強化學校組織文化的特色;且校長領導行為與學校組織文化之間具有相互影響之關係;(五)校長領導行為愈佳及領導行為複雜性愈高,將有助於提升學校組織效能;(六)學校組織文化之特性愈強及組織文化複雜性愈高,將能提升學校組織效能,且學校組織文化與學校組織效能之間具有相互影響之關係;(七)具有校長領導行為複雜度愈高、學校組織文化複雜度愈高之特性的學校,將能獲得良好的學校組織效能;(八)校長領導行為與學校組織文化趨同程度愈高,未必對提升學校組織效能有助益;(九)校長領導行為是學校競值組織文化與學校競值組織效能的重要預測因素;(十)競值途徑之架構在國民中學校長領導行為、學校組織文化呈現部分趨同、部分趨異之現象,但與學校組織效能無關;(十一)校長領導行為對學校組織效能的影響效果,在競值途徑之架構的左半部分,會受到整體層次的學校組織文化所調節;(十二)校長領導行為可透過學校組織文化之完全中介效果,正向影響學校組織效能。
本研究分別由實務應用方面與未來研究方面提出建議
一、在實務應用方面
(一)校長應學習展現多元化且兼容並蓄之領導行為,並提升領導行為複雜度,以有效推展校務;(二)學校應積極營造積極強勢取向之學校組織文化,以提升學校組織效能;(三)學校應兼顧與提升各種層面之學校組織效能,避免失之偏頗;(四)學校應鼓勵未兼任行政職務之教師積極參與校務,透過參與提升教師對學校的認同感;(五)學校應鼓勵不同年齡層與不同服務年資間的教師在專業認同方面之世代交替,提升中生代教師對學校的認同感;(六)校長應妥善使用競值途徑量表,藉以有效診斷學校組織之現況,以瞭解本身領導行為及強化學校組織文化特性與提升學校組織效能;(七)辦理校長甄試或遴選時,具備展現領導行為複雜度之個人特質應作為參考重要依據;(八)教育主管機關應積極辦理校長成長課程,提供校長具備多元領導能力與有效診斷並廣化學校組織文化面向之能力,以提升學校組織效能。
二、未來研究方面
(一)研究對象:納入私立國民中學等教育機構,並能納入學校中的專職行政人員、社區人士、學生家長,並藉以比較其與公立學校及教師的認知差異,以充分反映學校現況。(二)研究變項:建議納入「學校所處社區家長經社水準」作為跨層次研究之脈絡變項;此外,亦可增加溝通行為、行政決定、組織創新、組織變革等變項之探討;(三)研究方法:配合研究目的,若為深入探究個別學校之實況,建議採用晤談、觀察等方式進行質性資料的蒐集;或以組織生命週期論之觀點,蒐集縱貫性資料;此外,尚可待將來類似研究達到一定數量後,採用後設分析的研究方法;(四)統計分析方法:建議採用多層次分析方法,諸如「多層次結構方程模式(Multilevel structural equation modeling,MSEM)及「跨類別階層線性模式(Hierarchical Cross-Classified Linear Modeling,HCM)」進行分析,以驗證研究資料。
This purpose of this study is to investigate competing value approach (CVA) on the relationships among principals’leadership, school organizational culture and the school organizational effectiveness. This survey in Taiwan (not including Penghu, Matsu and Kinmen County) public junior high schools . There were 856 usable questionnaires with a 75.62% acceptable samples received from the survey of the target teacher of public junior high schools. Research tools used for the "The questionnaire of junior high school principals’ leadership, school organizational culture and organizational effectiveness."
The main conclusions of this study are:
(1) The current situation of junior high school principals’ competing-values leadership behavior is all-embracing, yet contradictory and treacherous, and the orientation of positive conduct is the majority; (2) Junior high school’s competing-values organizational culture lays special emphasis on the “Internal Part” of the organization, mainly based on “maintaining the operations of social system”; meanwhile, the positive and strong orientation is the majority; (3) A high degree of overall satisfaction is found in junior high school’s competing-values organizational effectiveness, and the highly integral orientation is the majority; (4) The principals with better leadership behavior and higher complexity of leadership behavior will be helpful to strengthening the properties of school organizational culture; also, mutual influential relationship is found between a principal’s leadership behavior and a school organizational culture; (5) The principals with better leadership behavior and higher complexity of leadership behavior will be helpful to the enhancement of school organizational effectiveness; (6) Stronger properties of school organizational culture and higher complexity of organizational culture will be able to enhance school organizational effectiveness; also, mutual influential relationship is found between school organizational culture and school organizational effectiveness; (7) The schools with properties of higher complexity of principal’s leadership behavior and higher complexity of school organizational culture will obtain good school organizational effectiveness; (8) The higher convergency between principal’s leadership behavior and school organizational culture is not necessarily helpful to the enhancement of school organizational effectiveness; (9) Principal’s leadership behavior is the important predictive factor in school’s competing-values organizational culture and school’s competing-values organizational effectiveness; (10) The framework of competing values approach shows the phenomena of partial convergency and partial divergence in junior high school principals’ leadership behavior and school organizational cultures, but is not correlative with school organizational effectiveness; (11) In the left half part of the framework of competing values approach, the influential effect of principal’s leadership behavior on school organizational effectiveness is moderated by overall level of school organizational culture; (12) The principal’s leadership behavior can pose positive influence on school organizational effectiveness, through the complete mediated effect of school organizational culture.
The suggest:
1. In the aspect of practical applications:
(1) A principal should learn to demonstrate diversified and all-embracing leadership behavior, and enhance complexity of leadership behavior, so as to conduct school administration effectively; (2) A school should actively construct the school organizational culture with positive and strong orientation, so as to enhance school organizational effectiveness; (3) A school should encompass and enhance all levels of school organizational effectiveness, for fear of biased phenomena; (4)A school should encourage the teachers who do not concurrently serve administrative positions to participate in school administration actively; through such participation, the teachers can enhance their identification with the school;(5) A school should urge the alternation of generation in the aspect of professional identity among the teachers of different age level and different service seniority, for enhancing the middle-generation teachers’ identification with the school; (6) A principal should take advantage of the Competing Values Approach Scale well, so as to diagnose the current situation of school organization effectively, in order to understand his/her own leadership behavior, strengthen properties of school organizational culture, and enhance school organizational effectiveness; (7) When a principal selection or examination is performed, the possession of the personal trait that demonstrates complexity of leadership behavior should be viewed as an important basis for reference; (8) The education authority should actively holds programs for principals’ growth, to provide principals with the possession of diversified leadership capacity and the ability to effectively diagnose and expand the dimensions of school organizational culture, so as to enhance school organizational effectiveness.
2. In the aspect of future studies:
(1) Research Subjects: The educational institutions such as private junior high schools can be included, while full-time administrative personnel in schools, community personages, and students’ parents can be also included, so as to compare the cognitive difference between them and public schools and teachers, for fully reflecting the current situation in schools. (2) Research Variables: The “Social-economic levels of the parents in the community in which the school is located” is suggested to be included as the contextual variable for cross-level researches. Besides, the explorations of the variables, such as communication behavior, administrative decision, organizational innovation, and organizational change, can also be added. (3) Research Method: To fit in with research purposes, if a further exploration of the real situation in individual schools is made, the methods such as interview and observation are suggested to be adopted, for undertaking the collection of qualitative data; or, longitudinal data can be collected, based on the perspective of the “Organizational Life Cycles” theory. In addition, after similar researchers amount to certain quantities in the future, the research method of meta-analysis can be adopted. (4) Statistical Analysis Method: the proposed multi-level analysis, such as "multi-level structural equation model (MSEM) and" Cross-type hierarchical linear model (HCM) ", to verify the research data.
中文部分

丁福慶(2004)。國民小學學校組織文化與學校效能之研究-以雲嘉地區為例。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
王保進(2002)。視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究。台北:心理。
王保進(2004)。多變量分析:套裝程式與資料分析。台北:高等教育。
王順合(1992)。組織文化與組織效能之關係。政治作戰學校政治研究所碩士論文,未出版。
朱柔若譯(2002)。社會研究方法----質化與量化取向。台北:揚智文化。
江岷欽(1989)。組織文化研究途徑之分析。行政學報,21,65-92。new window
江岷欽(1991)。組織文化在行政管理上之意義。研考學報,15,16-23。
江岷欽(1992)。競值途徑在組織研究上之應用。行政學報,24,25-93。new window
江岷欽(1993)。組織分析。台北:五南。
江岷欽(1994)。競值途徑在組織研究之應用。中國行政,55,29-66。new window
江岷欽(1995)。公共組織理論。台北:五南。
江岷欽(1996)。組織分析(第二版)。台北:國立空中大學。
江澈(2006)。現代領導理論、組織效能、組織創新對私立高級中學有效經營的影響。立法院院聞,34(10),46-81。
江澈(2007)。私立高級中學校長競值領導、教師專業承諾、組織創新與組織效能關係之研究─私立高中有效經營模式之建構。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。new window
江滿堂(2008)。國民小學校長多元領導型態、團體動力、學校組織文化特質與學校效能關係之研究。國立屏東教育大學教育行政研究所博士論文,未出版。new window
余民寧(2006)。潛在變項模式:SIMPLIS的應用。台北:高等教育。
吳昆基(2003)。領導方式、組織文化對組織績效與公共工程重建績效影響之研究。南華大學管理研究所碩士論文,未出版。
吳明隆(2003)。SPSS統計應用學習實務。台北:知城。
吳明隆(2008)。結構方程模式----AMOS的操作與應用。台北:五南。
吳明隆、涂金堂(2005)。SPSS與統計應用分析。台北:五南。
吳佩玲譯(2003)。如何成為領導者。台北:天下文化。
吳勁甫(2003a)。校長領導與學校效能關係之探討----研究結果的回顧。學校行政雙月刊,27,52-62。
吳勁甫(2003b)。競值架構應用在國民小學校長領導行為與學校組織效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版。new window
吳勁甫(2005)。學校競值組織效能量表之發展。初等教育學刊,22,39-62。new window
吳勁甫(2006)。競值架構應用在國民小學校長領導行為與學校組織效能關係之研究。教育政策論壇,9(2),155-185。new window
吳勁甫(2007)。競值架構應用在國民小學校長領導行為之衡量。學校行政雙月刊,52,163-192。new window
吳勁甫(2008)。競值架構應用在國民小學校長領導行為、學校組織文化與組織效能關係之研究。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。new window
吳勁甫(2009)。競值架構應用在國民小學學校組織文化之衡量。教育研究與發展期刊,5(3),37-71。new window
吳清山(1998a)。學校效能研究。台北:五南。new window
吳清山(1998b)。參與管理在學校行政上的應用。國教研究,4,56-60。
吳培源(1994)。台灣省高級中學校長領導型態、學校氣氛與學校效能關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版。new window
吳璧如(1990)。國民小學組織文化與組織效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版。
吳璧如(2002a)。集體教師效能感初探。教育資料與研究,49,72-78。new window
吳璧如(2002b)。組織文化與組織氣候理論。載於張銀富(主編),學校行政----理論與應用。台北:五南。
何雍慶(2007)。應用競值架構探討組織文化、主管影響力與新產品發展基校之關係。中華管理評論國技學報,10(3),1-32。取自http://cmr.ba.ouhk.
edu.hk/cmr/webjournal/v10n3/CMR106C06.pdf
宋雯榮(2008)。高雄市國小校長競值領導行為、組織創新氣氛與學校效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版。
李明譯(2003)。執行力。台北市:天下文化。
李茂能(2006)。結構方程模式軟體AMOS之簡介及其在測驗編製上之應用----Graphics & Basic。台北:心理出版社。
李皓光(1995)。國民小學學校效能評量指標之研究。國立台中師範院初等教育學系碩士論文,未出版。
李翠萍(1992)。組織文化與組織效能之研究----競值途徑之應用。私立東海大學公共行政研究所碩士論文,未出版。
林志成(1997)。陰陽權變組織文化理論之初步建構----以我國國民小學為例。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。new window
林志成(2000)。多元派典的教育行政領導研究與實務。初等教育學報,7,1-26。
林明地譯(1998)。學校領導:平衡邏輯與藝術。台北:五南。
林明地(2002a)。校長學:工作分析與角色研究取向。台北:五南。
林明地(2002b)。學校領導:理念與校長專業生涯。台北:高等教育。
林信榕(2007)。校長領導與學校文化探究。台北:師大書苑。new window
林俊瑩、吳裕益(2007)。家庭因素、學校因素對學生學業成就的影響----階層線性模式的分析。教育研究集刊,53(4),107-144。new window
林清山(1992)。心理與教育統計學。台北:東華。
林清山(2000)。多變量分析統計法(第五版)。台北:東華。
林淑芬(2001)。競值架構在國中校長領導行為及學校組織文化應用之研究。國立暨南大學教育政策與教育行政學系碩士論文,未出版。
林鉦棼(2005)。組織公民行為之跨層分析:層級線性模式的應用。管理學報,22(4),503-524。
林鉦棼、彭台光(2006)。多層次管理研究:分析層次的概念、理念和方法。管理學報,23(6),649-675。
林耀堂(2004)。思維模式在學校組織弔詭領導的應用—以阿多諾的「非同一性思維」深化並提昇「競值途徑」為例。國立臺北師範學院學報,17(2),131-152。new window
河野豐弘(1992)。改造企業文化。台北:遠流出版社。
邱怡和(1998)。Hersey & Blanchard 情境領導理論適用性研究----以高屏地區國民小學為例。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
邱皓政(2003)。結構方程模式:LISREL的理論、技術與應用。台北:雙葉書廊。
邱皓政(2006a)。量化研究與統計分析----SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析(第三版)。台北:五南。
邱皓政譯(2006a)。多層次模型分析導論。台北:五南。
邱皓政(2007)。脈絡變數的多層次潛在變數模式分析:口試評分者效應的多層次結構方程模式應用。中華心理學刊,49(4),383-405。new window
邱皓政、溫福星(2007)。脈絡效果的階層線性模型:以學校組織創新氣氛與教師創意表現為例。教育與心理研究,30(1),1-35。new window
袁世珮譯(1998)。皮納斯文化報告。台北市:美商麥格羅希爾。
徐志誠(2000)。臺灣中部地區國民小學教師對服務學校公辦民營模式態度之研究。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
孫瑞霙(2001)。領導型態與領導績效之探討:學校與企業之比較研究。人力資源管理學報,1(3),107-130。new window
孫瑞霙(2002)。競值架構下領導型態、組織文化與組織效能之研究----以台灣地區技職學院為例。國立台北大學企業管理學系博士論文,未出版。new window
孫瑞霙(2004)。技職院校組織文化現況之探討。中國技術學院學報,26,99-113。
孫瑞霙(2005)。技術學院校長領導行為與組織效能之研究--競值架構之觀點。德明學報,26,47-68。
徐志誠(2000)。台灣中部地區國民小學教師對服務學校公辦民營模式態度之研究。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
秦夢群、黃貞裕(2001)。教育行政研究方法論。台北市:五南。
秦夢群(2005)。教育領導新理論與研究取向之分析。教育研究月刊,136,106-118。new window
秦夢群(2006)。教育行政----理論部分(第五版)。台北市:五南。
秦夢群、濮世緯(2006)。學校創新經營理念與實施之研究。教育研究與發展期刊,2(3),123-150。new window
張永欽(2002)。台北市立國小校長領導行為塑造學校組織文化與學校效能之研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
張明輝(2000)。中小學學校行政領導的發展趨勢。師友,401,11-44。
張勉、張德(2004)。組織文化測量研究述評。外國經濟與管理,28(8),2-7。
張笠雲(1986)。社會變遷中各類社會支持系統功能的討論。加強家庭教育促進社會和諧學術研討會論文集。行政院研考會編印。
張德銳(1994)。教育行政研究。台北:五南。new window
張慶勳(1996)。國小校長轉化、互易領導影響學校組織文化特性與組織效能之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。new window
張慶勳(2002)。學校組織行為。台北:五南。new window
張慶勳(2003)。學校組織文化研究方法之評析。屏東師院學報,18,1-40。new window
張慶勳(2003)。論文寫作手冊。台北:心理出版社。
教育部(2009a)。九十七學年度縣市別各級學校校數統計。取自http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/b0013/location.xls
教育部(2009b)。九十七學年度台灣地區公立國民中學名錄。取自http://www.edu.tw/files/publication/B0013/97basic.xls
陳千玉譯(1996)。組織文化與領導(第二版)。台北:五南。
陳文慶(2008)。競值架構應用在國民小學學校組織文化與學校效能關係之研究。台北市立教育大學教育行政與評鑑研究所碩士論文,未出版。
陳木金(2002)。學校領導研究----從混沌理論研究彩繪學校經營的天空。台北:高等教育。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵(2005)。多變量分析方法----統計軟體應用(第四版)。台北:五南。
陳正昌、程炳林(1998)。SPSS、SAS、BMDP統計軟體在多變量統計上的應用(第二版)。台北:五南。
陳易昌(2006)。國民小學校長科技領導、組織學習與學校效能之研究。台北市立教育大學教育行政與評鑑研究所碩士論文,未出版。
陳明璋(1982)。組織效能及其決定因素關係之研究。國立政治大學學報,45,117-148。
陳春風(2007)。高雄縣國民小學校長領導能力、組織文化與學校效能關係之
研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版。
陳炳男(2005)從Schein、Martin與Quinn等文化觀點,對學校領導者的啟示。
朝陽人文社會學刊,3(2),99-130。
陳奎熹(1998)。現代教育社會學。台北:師大書苑。
陳順利(2007)。學校效能階層模式建構之探究。學校行政雙月刊,49,16-44。
陳慶瑞(1989)。費德勒權變領導理論研究。台北:五南。new window
陳慶瑞(1991)。國民小學校長領導效能之分析與評鑑:以闡述模式為例。國教天地,90,37-44。
陳慶瑞(1993)。費德勒權變領導理論研究----理論分析與擴展。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。new window
陳慶瑞(1995)。權變領導行為研究。台北:師大書苑。
陳麗玉(2007)。競值架構對我國高等教育評鑑國際化指標之啟示。教育行政與評鑑學刊,3,1-18。new window
陳耀茂編(2005)。共變異數構造分析AMOS使用手冊。台北:鼎茂圖書公司。
陳耀茂編(2006)。線性混和模式SPSS使用手冊。台北:鼎茂圖書公司。
許惠玲(2007)。桃園縣國小校長競值架構領導型態對教師快樂影響之研究。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
許嘉政(2004)。學校本位管理與學校組織文化特性關係之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
許嘉純(2009)。競值架構之校長領導效能與教師工作士氣關係之研究。國立暨南大學教育政策與教育行政學系碩士論文,未出版。
傅瓊儀、陸偉明、程炳林(2000)。以結構方程模式探討制握信念及社會支持在國中生壓力知覺的作用。教育心理學報,34(1),61-82。new window
黃乃熒(2000a)。弔詭管理及其在學校目標的應用。教育政策論壇,3(2),16-56。new window
黃乃熒(2000b)。後現代教育行政哲學。台北:五南。
黃志豪(2008)。競值架構應用在高雄市國小校長組織變革領導角色與組織效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版。
黃良穗(2007)。轉換型領導對組織績效之影響─以組織文化為中介變數。國立台北大學企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版。
黃芳銘(2006)。結構方程模式:理論與應用(第四版)。台北:五南。
黃俊英(2002)。多變量分析(第七版)。台北:中國經濟企業研究所。
黃開成(2006)。競值途徑模式在學校組織文化與組織效能之應用-以彰化縣國民中學為例。國立暨南大學教育政策與教育行政學系碩士論文,未出版。
黃馨慧(2006)。競值架構應用在國民小學校長領導行為與學校效能關係之研究。國立花蓮教育大學行政與領導研究所碩士論文,未出版。
曾祿喜(2009)。國民中學校長均衡領導與學校文化之研究。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文,未出版。
溫忠麟、侯杰泰、張雷(2005)。調節效應與中介效應的比較和應用。心理學報,37(2),268-274。
溫忠麟、張雷、侯杰泰(2006)。有中介的調節變量和有調節的中介變量。心理學報,38(3),448-452。
溫福星(2006)。階層線性模式:原理、方法與應用。台北市:雙葉書廊。
葉連祺(1998)。國內有關學校效能研究之後設分析。國民教育研究學報,4,265-296。new window
葉連祺(1998)。領導能力問卷(LCAI)中文版初步修正報告。中國測驗學會年刊,45(2),173-188。
鄭伯壎、郭建志、任金剛(2001)。組織文化。台北:遠流出版社。new window
鄭彩鳳(1996a)。競值途徑應用在高中職校長領導角色、學校組織文化與組織效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。new window
鄭彩鳳(1996b)。競值途徑應用在學校組織行為分析之研究。教育研究,6,53-68。
鄭彩鳳(1998)。學校行政----理論與實務。高雄:麗文文化公司。
鄭彩鳳、吳勁甫(2003)。學校領導研究的新取向----競值架構的領導觀點。教育研究月刊,111,67-83。new window
鄭彩鳳(2005)。領導效能的涵義、研究途徑與發展方向。教育學苑,10,1-21。
鄭彩鳳(2007)。校長競值領導效能研究:理論、指標與衡量。台北:高等教育。
鄭彩鳳;吳慧君(2009)。國小校長競值領導效能評估、360度回饋態度與行為改變意圖關係之研究。教育政策論壇,12(2),177-217。new window
鄭燕祥(2001)。學校效能及校本管理:發展的機制。台北:心理出版社。new window
鄭燕祥(2003)。教育領導與改革:新範式。台北:高等教育。
蔡培村、武文瑛(2004)。領導學:理論、實務與研究。高雄:麗文文化事業股份有限公司。
蔡進雄(2000a)。國民中學校長轉型領導、互易領導、學校文化與學校效能關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版。new window
蔡進雄(2000b)。轉型領導與學校效能。台北:師大書苑。new window
潘慧玲(1999a)。學校效能相關概念的釐析。教育研究資訊,7(5),138-153。new window
潘慧玲(1999b)。學校效能研究領域的發展。教育研究集刊,43,77-102。new window
賴鈴文(2006)。高雄縣市國民小學校長領導行為、學校組織文化與組織變革態度關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學人力與知識管理研究所碩士論文,未出版。
閻瑞彥(2000)。基層領導型態與組織效能----競值途徑觀點下之研究。國立台北大學企業管理學系博士論文,未出版。new window
盧心雨(2001)。政府體育行政組織文化與組織效能之研究。國立台灣師範大學體育研究所碩士論文,未出版。
謝金青(1997)。國民小學學校效能評鑑指標與權重體系之建構。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版。new window
薛亞敏(2003)。非營利組織員工之組織文化及領導型態認知與其工作態度關聯性之探討。中原大學企業管理學系碩士論文,未出版。
濮世偉(2004)。國小校長轉型領導、學校文化取向與學校創新經營關係之研究。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文,未出版。
繆敏志(1993)。組織文化之探討。國立政治大學學報,67(下),133-162。
繆敏志(2001)。從組織文化相關量化研究評析競值架構。國立政治大學學報,83,157-195。
繆敏志(2002)。環境不確定性與組織文化類型、強度、均衡性及集群關係之研究。企業管理學報,55,83-111。new window
謝文全(2003)。教育行政學。台北:高等教育。
韓經綸譯(1994)。組織行為學導論。台北:五南圖書公司。
蕭文龍(2009)。多變量分析最佳入門:SPSS+LISREL。台北:碁峰資訊。
羅虞村(1999)。領導理論研究。台北:文景。
羅錦財(2001)。國民中學領導角色與學校組織文化之競值途徑研究----以桃園縣市為例。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版。



英文部分

Ansoff, H. I. (1979). Strategic management. London: Macmillan.
Baker, B. (2001). Do leaders matter?Educational Review, 53(1), 65-76.
Bass, B. M. (1981). Stodill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory in reaearch. New York, NY : Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Handbook of leadership : Theory research and managerial applications(3rd ed.). New York, NY : Simon and Schuster.
Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage ? Academy of Manggement Review, 11(3), 656-665.
Bedian, A. G. (1984). Organization : Theory and Analysis. New York : The Dryden Press.
Bensimon, E. M., & Neumann, A., & Birnbaum, R. (1989). Making sense of administrative leadership : The “L”word in higher education. ASTE-ERIC Higher Education Report 1.
Berrio, A. A. (2003). An organizational culture assessment using the competing values framework : A profile of Ohio State Univeristy Extension. Journal of Extension﹝On-line﹞, 41(2). Available at : http://www.joe.org/joe/2003april/a3.shtml.
Bobko, P., & Schwartz, J. P.(1984). A metric for integrating theoretically related but statistically uncorrelated constructs. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(1), 11-16.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness : A multi-frame, multi-sector analysis. Resource management, 30(4), 509-534.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations : Artistry, choice, and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Bossody, L., & Charan, R. (2002). Confronting Reality, Doing what matters to get things right. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Bryman, A.(1992). Charisma and leadership in organization. London : Sage Publications.
Bryman, A.(1999). Leadership in organization In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Managing Organizations. (pp. 26-42). London : Sage Publications.
Buenger, R. L., Edward, D., Conlon, J. & Austin, J. (1996). Competing value in organization : Contextual influences and structural consequences. Organization Science, 7, 5, 557-576.
Bullis, R. C. (1992). The impact of leadership behavioral complexity on organizational performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.
Cameron, K. S.(1981). Domains of organizational effectiveness in colleges and universities. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 25-47.
Cameron, K. S.(1986). Effectiveness as paradox : Consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Management Science, 32, 5, 539-553.
Cameron, K. S., & Lavine, M. (2006). Making the impossible possible : Leading extraordinary performance-The rocky flats story. San Francisco, CA : Berrett-Koehler.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E.(1999). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture : Base on the competing values framework. Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E.(2006). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture : Base on the competing values framework.(Rev. ed.). San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E., DeGraff, J., & Thakor, A. (2006). Competing values leadership : Creating values in organization. Northampton, MA : Edward-Elgar.
Cameron, K. S., & Whetten, D. A. (1983). Organizationaleffectiveness. New York : Academic Press.
Campbell, J. P. (1977). On the nature of effectiveness. In P. S. Goodman, & J. M. Pennings(Eds.), New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. (pp. 13-55). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Cheng, Y. C.(1996). School effectiveness and school–based management : A mechanism for development. London : The Flamer Press.
Cheng, Y. C., & Cheung, W. M. (1996). Toward school–based management : Uncertainty, meaning, opportunity, and development. International Journal of Educational Reform, 8(1), 25-36.
Cheung, M. W. L., & Au, K. (2005). Applications of multilevel structural equation modeling to cross-cultural research. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(4), 598-619.
Cheung, M. W. L., & Chan, W. (2005). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling : A two-stage approach. Psychological Methods, 10(1), 40-64.
Cheung, M. W. L., Leung, K., & Au, K. (2006). Evaluating multilevel models in cross-cultural research. An illustration with social axioms. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(5), 522-541.
Chiang, M. C. (1990). Merging academic department : The impacts of organizational effectiveness and culture. Paper presenter in 17th annual conference of the northeast association of institutional research. New York : Albany.
Chiang, C. S. (1996). The effects of the leadership style of Taiwanese junior college presidents on teacher job satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida International University.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
Cooper, R. B., & Quinn, R. E. (1993). Implications of the competing values framework for management information systems. Human Resource Management, 32(1), 175-201.
Day, C., Harris, A., Hadfied, M., Tolley, H., & Beresford, J. (2000). Leading Schools in Times of Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Deal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate cultures : The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley.
Deal, T. E.(1985). The symbolism of effective schools. The Elementary School Jounnal, 85(5), 601-620.
Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture : The heart of leadership. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Daniels, T. D., & Spiker, B. K. (1991). Perspectives on organizational communication (2nd ed). DuBuqu, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown.
Denisom, B. G. (1984). Bring Corporate Culture to the Bottom Line. Organizational Dynamics, Auturmn, 13(2), 4-23.
DeGraff, J., & Quinn, S. E. (2007). Leading innovation : How to jump start your organization’s growth engine. New York : McGraw-Hill.
Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and performance : Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organization Science, 6(5) , 524-540.
Dyer, W. G. J., (1985). The cycle of cultural evolution in organizations. In Kilmann, R. H., Saxton, M. J., & Serpa, R.(Eds.), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Edward, R, L. (1986). Using multidimensional scaling to test the validity of behaviorally anchored rating scales : An organizational example involving the competing values framework. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Albany.
Faerman, S. R., & Quinn, R. E. (1985). Effectiveness : The perspective from organizational theory. The Review of Higher Education, 9(1), 83-100.
Faerman, S. R. (1993). Organizational change and leadership style. Journal of Library Administration, 19(3-4), 55-79.
Forgus, R., & Schulman, B. H. (1979). Personality : A cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Pretice-Hall.
Goldstein, H., Bonnet, G., & Rocher, T. (2007). Multilevel structural equation models for the analysis of comparative data on educational performance. Journal of Educational Behavioral Statistics, 32(3), 252-286.
Hall, R. H. (1983). Organization : Structure and process. Englewood Cliffs, N. J. : Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Hall, R. H. (1987). Organization : structure, processes and outcomes. NJ : Prentice-Hall.
Hart, S. L., & Quinn, R. E. (1991). Roles executive play : CEOs’behavioral complexity and firm performance. Orga-nizational behavior, 12, 21-25.
Harris, A. (1999). Teaching and learning in the effective school. Vermont, Brookfied : Ashgate.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., & Joson, D. (2000). Management of organizational behavior : Utilizing human resource(8th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice-Hall.
Hitt, M. A., Middlemist, R. D., & Mathis, R. L. (1983). Management concepts, and effective practice. New York : West-Publishing.
Hooijberg, R., Hunt, J. G., & Dodge, G. E. (1997). Leadership complexity and development of the leaderplex model. Journal of Management, 23(3), 375-408.
Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1992). Behavioral complexity and the development of effective managerial leaders. In R. L. Phillips, & J. G. Hunt(Eds.), Strategic leadership : A multi-organizational-level perspective(pp. 161-176). New York, NY : Quorum.
Hooijberg, R., & Schneider, M. (2001). Behavior complexity and social intelligence : How executive leadership use stakeholders to form a system perspective. In S. J. Zaccaro, & Kilmoski(Eds.), The nature of organizational leadership : Understanding the performance imperatives confronting today’s leaders (pp. 104-131). San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Hopwood, C. J. (2007). Moderation and mediation in structural equation modeling : Applications for early intervention research. Journal of Early Intervention, 29(3), 262-272.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2005). Educational administration : Theory, research, and practice(7th ed.). New York : McGraw-Hill.
James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brette, J. M. (2006). A tale of two methods. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 233-244.
Jones, W. T. (1961). The romantic syndrome : Toward a new method in cultural anthropology and the history of ideas. The Hague, NL : Martinus Wijhaff.
Lawence, K. A., & Quinn, R. E. (2002). An instrument for measuring behavior complexity in leadership. Unpublished working paper, University of Michigan Business School, Ann Arbor, MI.
Kilmann, R. H., Saxton, M. J., & Serpa, R. (1985). Five key issues in understanding and change culture. In R. Kilmann(Eds.), Gaining control of corporate culture. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Kim, K., Dansereau, F., Kim, I. S. & Kim, K. S. (2004). A multiple-level theory of leadership : The impact of culture as a moderator. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 11(1), 78-92.
Levine, D. U., & Lezotte, L. W. (1990). Unusually effective school: A review and analysis od research and practice. Madison, WI : National center for effective school research and development. (ERIC ED 330 032)
Lombarde, M. M., & McCall, M. W. (1978). Leadership : Where else can we do? (pp.1-12). Durham, NC : Duck University Press.
Lorch, J. (1986). Handbook of Organizational behavior. Englewook Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Louis, M. R. (1985). Surprise and sense-making : What new comers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational setting. Americative Science Quarterly, 25, 226-251.
Luthans, F., & Lockwood, D. I. (1984). Toward an observational system for measuring leader behavior in natural setting. In J. G. Hunt, D. M. Hosking, C. A. Schriesheim, & R. Stewart(Eds.), Managers and leaders : An international perspective. (pp. 117-141). Elmsford, New York : Pergamon.
Maccoby, M. (1996). Resolving the leadership paradox : The doctor dialogue. Research-Technology Management, 39(3) , 255-267.
MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Maeyer, S. D., Rymenans, R., Petrgem, P. V., Bergh, H. V. D., Rijlaarsdam, G. (2007). Educational leadership and pupil achievement : The choice of a valid conceptual model to test effects in school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improve, 18(2), 125-145.
Martin, R. (2007). The opposable mind : How successful leaders win through integrative thinking. Boston, MA : Harvard Business School Press.
Mazzarella, J., & Grunty, T. (1989). Portrait of a leader.(ERIC ED 309 505)
Meek, V. L.(1988). Organizational culture : Origins and weaknesses. Organization Studies, 9, 4, 453-473.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of management. New York : Harper and Row.
Mintzberg, H. (1975). The manager of job : Floklore and face. Harvard Business Review, July , 49-61.
Mitchell, J. T., & Willower, D. J. (1992). Organizational culture in a good high school. Journal of Educational Administration, 30(1), 6-16.
Mitroff, I. I., & Mason, R. O. (1982). Business policy and metaphysics : Some philosophical considerations. Academy of Management Review, 7(3), 361-371.
Morgan, G.(1983). Beyond Method : Social Research Strategies. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage.
Newman, C. B. (2001). The perceptions of elementary principals regarding the relationship between leadership and school culture. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Saint Louis Univeristy, St Louis, MO.
Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership : Theory and practice(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
Ott, J. S.(1989). The organizational culture perspective. Pacific Grove, CA : Book/Cole Publishing Company.
Ouchi, W. (1981). Theory Z : How American business can meet the Japanese challenge. Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley.
Owens, R. G., & Steinhoff (1989). Toward a theory of orangizational culture. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(1), 6-16.
Owens, R. G., & Valesky, T. C. (2007). Organizational behavior in education : Adaptive leadership and school reform(9th ed.). Boston, MA : Allyn and Bacon.
Perrow, C. (1979). Organizational Analysis: A Sociological View. Belmont Cal : Wadsworth.
Peter, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence : Lessons from American’s best-run companies. New York, NY : Harper & Row.
Peterson, K. D. (2005). School culture, school effectiveness, and school leadership. Chung Cheng Educational Studies, 4(5), 63-103.
Petrock, F. (1990). Corporate Culture Enhances Profits. HR Magazine, November, 64-66.
Pettigrew, A. M. (1979). On studying organizational cultures.Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 570-581.
Pinter, N. J. (1988). The study of administrator effects and effectiveness. In N. Boyan(Ed.), Handbook of research in educational administration(pp. 99-122). New York : Longman.
Purkey
Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562-578.
Quinn, R. E. (1984). Applying the competing values approach to leadership : Toward an integrative framework. In J.G. Hunt, D. M. Hosking, C.A. Schriesheim, & R.Stewart(Eds.), Leaders and manager : International perspectives on managerial behavior and leadership(pp. 10-27). New York : Pergamon Press.
Quinn, R. E. (1988). Beyond rational management : Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E. (1996). Deep change : Discovering the leader within. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E. (2004). Building the bridge as you walk on it : A guide for leading change. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E., & Cameron, K. S. (1983). Organizational life cycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness : Some preliminary evidence. Management Science, 29(1), 33-51.
Quinn, R. E., Faerman, S. R., Thompson, M. P., & McGrath, M. R. (2007). Becoming a master manager : A competing values approach(4th ed.). New York : John Wiley & Sons.
Quinn, R. E., Faerman, S. R., & Dixit, N. (1987). Perceived performation : Some archetypes of managerial effectiveness and effectiveness. New York : State Univeristy of New York at Albany. Institute for Government and Policy Studies.
Quinn, R. E., & Kimberly, J. (1984). Paradox, planning, and perseverance : Guidelines for managerial practice. In R. E. Quinn, & J. R. Kimberly(Eds.), Managing organizational transitions(pp. 295-313.). Homewood, IL : Dow Jones-Irwin.
Quinn, R. E., & McGraff, M. R. (1985). The transformation of organizational cultures : A competing values perspective. In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, & J. Martin(Eds.), Organizational culture(pp.315-344). Beverly Hills, CA : Sage.
Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1981). A competing values approach to organizational effectiveness. Public Productivity Review, 5, 122-140.
Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria : Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363-377.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M., Hart, S. L. (1992a). Challenging the assumptions of bipolarity : Interprentration and managerial effectiveness. In R. Fry(Ed.), Executive and organizational continuity(pp. 86-103). San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M., Hart, S. L. (1992b). Integrating the extremes : Crucial skills for managerial effectiveness. In S. Srivastva, & R. E. Fry(Eds.), Executive and organizational continuity(pp. 222-252). San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Becoming a master manager : A competency framework. New York, NY : Wiley.
Reimann, B. C. & Wiener, Y. (1988). Corporate Culture Avoiding the Elitist Trap. Business Horizons, 31 (2), 36-44.
Rice, D., & Harris, M. M. (2003). Leadership in community school : A frame analysis. Reclaiming Children and Young, 11(4), 216-220.
Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organization behavior(8th ed.). New York, NY : Prentice-Hall.
Rothenberg, A. (1979). The emerging goddess. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press.
Sathe, V. (1985). Culture and related corporate realities. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Scheerens, J. (1992). Effective schooling : Research, theory and practice. London : Cassell.
Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. New York : Elsevier Science.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture. Sloan Management Review, 25(2), 3-16.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership(3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Scott, W. R. (1977). Effectiveness of organizational effectiveness study. In Goodman, P. S., & Pennings, J. M.(eds.). New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. (pp.63-95). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Sergiovanni, T. J., Burlingame, M., Coombs, F. S., & Thurston, P. W. (1999). Education governance and administration(4th ed.). Boston : Allyn & Bacon.
Sergiovanni, T. J., Kelleher, P., McCarthy, M., & Wirt, F. (1999). Educational governance and administration(4th ed.). Boston : Allyn & Bacon.
Smart, J. C. (2003). Organizational effectiveness of 2-year college : The centrality of cultural and leadership complexity. Research in Higher Education, 44(6), 673-703.
Smart, J. C., & Hamm, R. E.(1993). Organizational culture and effectiveness in two-year college. Research in Higher Education, 34(1), 95-106.
Smart, J. C., Kun, G. D., & Tierney, W. G. (1997). The roles of institutional cultures and decision approach in promoting organizational effectiveness in two-year college. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(3), 256-281.
Smart, J. C., & St John, E. P. (1996). Organizational culture and effectiveness in higher education : A test of the “culture type” and “ strong culture” hypotheses. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(3), 219-241.
Smith, P. B., & Peterson, M. F. (1988). Leadership organizations and culture. London : Sage.
Sonnenfeld, J. (1989). The Hero’s Farewell : What Happens When CEO Retires. New York : Oxford University Press.
Spady, W., & Schwahn, C. (2001). Leading when everyone goes back to zero. Principal Leadership, 2(4), 10-16.
Starbuck, W. H. (1981). A trip to view the elephants and rattlesnakes in the garden of aston. In A. H. Van de Ven, & W. Joyce (eds.), Perspectives on organization design and behavior. (pp.167-199). New York : Wiely.
Starbuck, W. H. (1983). Organizations as action generators. American Sociological Review, 48, 91-102.
Steer, R. M. (1977). Organizational effectiveness : A behavioral view. Santa Monica, California : Goodyear.
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership : A study of literature. New York : Free Press.
Stonestreet, S. P. (2002). Perceived leadership practices and organizational commitment in the North American automobile industry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale-Davie, FL.
Thompson, M. D. (2002). Gender, leadership, and effectiveness : Testing the theoretical model of Bolman Deal and Quinn. Sex Roles, 42(11-12), 969-992.
Thorpe, G. (2006). Multilevel analysis of PISA 2000 reading results for the United kingdom using pupil scale variables. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(1), 33-62.
Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution : A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. In B. Staw, & L. Cummings(Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 171-222.
Vijay, S. (1993). Implications of corporate culture : A manager’s guide to action. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass .
Yang, S. C. (2005). Competing values leadership behavior as a critical indicator of school performance for private kindergartens in Kaohsiung City, Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Spalding University, Louisville, KY.
Yukl, G. (1994). Leadership in organizations(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G., & Lepsinger, R. (2004). Flexible leadership : Creating value by balancing
multiple challenge and choice. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations(6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE