• 沒有找到結果。

領導風格對員工創造力之影響 — 以台灣公立博物館為例

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "領導風格對員工創造力之影響 — 以台灣公立博物館為例"

Copied!
155
0
0

加載中.... (立即查看全文)

全文

(1)The Influences of Leadership Styles on Employee’s Creativity — the Cases of Public Museums in Taiwan. by Pung-Hsiang Hsu. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION Major: International Workforce Education and Development. Advisor: Shir-Tau Tsai, Ph. D. National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan February, 2009.

(2) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to deliver my most appreciation to my advisor Dr. Shir-Tau Tsai. With his guidance and support while paying his time and knowledge, my thesis can be more and more complete step by step. My gratitude also goes to my thesis committee members Dr. Chih-Chien Lai and Dr. Jieh-Horng Tseng who carefully corrected my thesis and provided me precious suggestions. Besides, I also would like to deliver my thanks to my interviewees. It is their abundant content during the interviews forms the results of this study. Without their kind contribution, this thesis can not be accomplished. The past two years is the most fruitful journey in my life. I have gained many opportunities from others and thus gone through a variety of experiences and expanded my sight. Sometimes I would feel that “creativity” field seems to be my minor during my graduate period. I especially want to thank Dr. Lien-An Hsu in the Center for Creativity and Innovation Studies, NCCU. He is the first person who leads me into to creativity studies. I learned many about how to research and gain many creativity-related knowledge there. It is the beginning of my interest in the creativity studies, and consequently I conducted this study afterward. My gratefulness would also be delivered to Dr. Shu-Min Lin in the College of Creativity, NCCU. With her allowance, I participated in some activities there and understood how a unit for stimulating students’ creativity made all the things happen. I also want to appreciate Dr. Ming-Fai Hui in the Hong Kong Institute of Education who gave me the opportunity to assist in the preparation and practice of creative teaching. Besides, I would like to thank Dr. Ming-Fen Li in the Department of Adult and Continuing Education, NTNU. I gained much information and knowledge about creativity through her courses. All of them not only encouraged and supported me but also played the roles of pushers to make me step toward the fulfillment of this study. I sincerely thank you with my deepest faith..

(3) ABSTRACT Organizational environment would influence employee’s creativity; nevertheless, supervisor’s leadership is the one of the most powerful elements in it. Consequently, supervisor’s leadership style is one of the effective factors in the organizational background that determines employee’s creativity. Employees tend to more easily produce creative ideas when they are encouraged, supported, trusted and authorized by supervisors. There are two main purposes in this study. First, it is to distinguish what types of leadership supervisors in the public museums, including National Science and Technology Museum, National Museum of Natural Science, and National Palace Museum, in Taiwan belong to. Second, it is to study how supervisors in these museums influence employees’ creativity. These three museums not only play important roles of educating people with natural science, technology and abounding Chinese heritage but also push the creative industry forward in Taiwan. It is significant to understand the influence of leadership on this upcoming industry. After the literature review and case study, in-depth interviews were conducted with supervisors and their subordinates in the above-mentioned museums. In the conclusion of this study, supervisors in the public museums in Taiwan have a mutual leadership style – supportive and participative. Although the supervisors with this mutual leadership style do not value employees’ personal creativity development much, they would either inspire or at least not influence subordinates’ creativity, depending on the level of authorization and communication. This type of supervisors would greatly give opportunities for employees to deliver creative ideas by different ways. Nevertheless, whether employees are willing to propose creative ideas or not depends more on their locus of control under this mutual leadership style. And fortunately, the employees would carry out innovative ideas and products in the end under their supervisors’ leading. Keyword: museum, supervisor, employee, leadership style, creativity. I.

(4) 摘要 組織環境會影響員工的創造力,而主管的領導風格又是環境中影響員工行事 最大的變數之一;因此,在組織環境中主管的領導風格對員工創造力有著強大的 影響力。當員工受到主管鼓勵、支持、信任及授權的情況下容易產生更多的創意。 本研究有兩項主要的目的。首先,分析國立科學工藝博物館、國立自然科學 博物館、及國立故宮博物院中主管所屬之領導風格。其次,研究上述博物館中主 管如何影響員工的創造力。此三家博物館不僅以自然科學、科技及中華文物教育 大眾,此外也在台灣文化創意產業的推進上扮演了重要的角色。因此,充分了解 領導者在此新興產業上的影響是非常重要的。 本研究在進行文獻分析後,對上述博物館中的主管及其直屬部屬進行個案研 究中的深度訪談。此研究總結,在本研究個案的公立博物館中主管有一共同的複 合領導風格-支持及參與式領導。雖然此複合領導風格的主管鮮少重視員工個人 的創造力發展,但他們仍會激發或至少影響員工的創造力,而影響的多寡則取決 於其授權及相互溝通的程度。此類型的主管會以不同的形式給予員工表達創意的 機會。然而,在此複合領導風格的帶領下,員工是否願意提出他們的創意則取決 於其內外控取向。最後,本研究中的個案員工在其主管支持及參與式的領導下都 能有創新的想法及產出。. 關鍵字:博物館、主管、員工、領導風格、創造力. II.

(5) TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT (English).…………..……………..………………………..…………....I ABSTRACT (Chinese)…………..……………..………………………..…………...II TABLE OF CONTENTS…………...………….…………………………......……..III LIST OF TABLES………………………….......…………………………………....V LIST OF FIGURES……………………..…….………………………..…………...VI CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION……………….....…………………….…………1 Research Background and Motive…………....…………………………………1 Research Purpose…….…………………………….……………………………4 Statement of Question………….…………………..……………………………5 Research Delimitation and Limitation…….….…………………………………6 Definitions of Term…..……………………….…………………………………7 CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW………….………………………………9 Creativity………………………………………..………………….………9 Creative Person……………………………..………..………………..…10 Creative Process…………………………….……………………………16 Creative Product…………………………………………………………21 Creative Place/Press………………………………..……………………23 Leadership Style………………………………………………………………29 Definition of Leadership……………...….…….………………………29 Leader…………………………………………………….………………32 Leadership Theories and Styles………………..………………………33 Relationship between Leadership and Creativity………………….………53 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……………….……………59 Research Framework………………..……………..…………………………59 Research Method…...……………………………………………….…………60 Research Subject………………………………………………………………62 Data Collection……………………………………………….………………64 Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………66 Procedure of Data Coding…………….…………..…………………………68 Research Procedure………………...…………………………………………71 CHAPTER IV. FINGDINGS AND DISCUSSION…………………...…….…73 Supervisors’ Leadership Styles in Taiwanese Museums………………....….…73 Influence of Supervisors’ Leadership Styles on Employees’ Creativity…….…94 Attention Supervisors Pay on Employees’ Creativity Development………..…98 Opportunities Supervisors Give for Employees to Deliver Creative Ideas…..103 III.

(6) Supervisors’ Influence on Employees’ Willingness to Propose Creative Ideas106 Innovative Outcomes Employees Have Done………………….………….…109 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGETIONS...............……..………..115 Research Conclusion………..……………………………….……………..…115 Research Suggestion………….…………….……………….………………..129 REFERENCES………...…………………………………..............……..……….131 APPENDIX A. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS..............................……..……..…137 APPENDIX B. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR LEADERSHIP STYLES………139 APPENDIX C. EXAMPLE OF TRANSCRIPT.................................……..…141 APPENDIX D. CODING TABLE...................................................…..………..145. IV.

(7) LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1. Table 2.2. Table 2.3. Table 2.4. Table 3.1. Table 3.2. Table 3.3. Table 3.4.. Characteristics of Creative People……………..……...……………...13 Definition of Leadership………………………..……………………..30 Four Main Behavioral Theories………………...……………………...36 Four Main Contingency Theories……………...………………………42 Interview Related Information………...…………………………….…64 Formation of Keyword Codes……...……………………………..…69 Formation of Main Categories……...…………………………….…70 Formation of Research Theme……...…………………………….…70. V.

(8) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1. Figure 2.2. Figure 2.3. Figure 2.4. Figure 2.5. Figure 2.6. Figure 2.7. Figure 2.8. Figure 2.9. Figure 2.10. Figure 3.1. Figure 3.2. Figure 4.1. Figure 4.2. Figure 4.3. Figure 5.1. Figure 5.2. Figure 5.3. Figure 5.4. Figure 5.5. Figure 5.6.. Creatrix Model………………….……………….………..………...16 Creative Problem Solving (CPS) Phases…..…………….…….……...19 The Componential Theory of Creativity…..……….....……………20 Framework of Systematic Theory………….………….……………..24 Mode of Leader’s Innovative Thinking……..………….…………….33 Ohio State University’s Categories of Leadership Behavior……...….38 Managerial Grid……………………………………….…………..….40 Fiedler Contingency Model……………………………………..…...44 Path-Goal Theory…………………………………………………...46 Hersey & Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Theory (SLT)……….48 Research Framework………………………………………….......….59 Research Procedure…………………………………..……….......….71 Questionnaire Result in Museum A…………………………….......….81 Questionnaire Result in Museum B…………………………….......….89 Questionnaire Result in Museum C…………………………….......….94 Supervisor’s Mutual Leadership Styles in Taiwanese Museums..........117 Influence of Supervisors’ Leadership Styles on Employees’ Creativity …………………………………………………………………….......118 Attention Supervisors Pay on Employees’ Creativity Development....120 Opportunities Supervisors Give for Employees to Deliver Creative Ideas…………………………………………………………………..122 Supervisors’ Influence on Employees’ Willingness to Propose Creative Ideas…………………………………………………………………..124 Innovative Outcomes Employees Have Done………...........................126. VI.

(9) CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. This chapter includes research background and motive, research purpose, statement of question, research delimitation and limitation, and definitions of term. They will be illustrated as follows.. Research Background and Motive. The economist Schumpeter (1934) has ever pointed out that the core of the economic growth is innovation and the propellant of innovation is entrepreneur. This kind of saying has been valued gradually nowadays in the 21st century. The innovative ability in the enterprise has been the decisive factor of whether it can dominate over the market, and the competitiveness in the market actually is the contest of creativity performance. In this changeful generation, innovation has been the eternal topic of enterprise development; only to innovate, enterprises can operate and exist for a long time (Dess & Pickens, 2000; Tushman & O’Reilly, 1997). Porter (1990) aimed at ten countries which succeeded with different industries to study competitiveness and finally concluded that the successful factor is to “continuously innovate.” When he visited Taiwan in 1997, he indicated that the economic problem in Taiwan is the lack of innovation. Michael Porter approved that Taiwanese corporations are rapid followers, but it has to make great efforts if they want to create new brands or unique products. He clearly made people realized that the growth driver of Taiwan depends on innovation. If corporations pursue competitive advantages, they have to constantly improve the quality and procedures and provide new products, new services or new management mode, etc. so as to,. 1.

(10) under the globalization, handle the great pressure from the competitors inside or outside the country (Andriopoulos & Lowe, 2000; Cummings & Oldham, 1997). In the book “Management Challenges for the 21st Century,” Drucker (1999) considered that the most valuable assets of a 20th-century company were its production equipment. However, the most valuable asset of a 21st-century institution, whether business or non-business, will be its knowledge workers and their productivity. He also thought that to constantly innovate is the part of knowledge worker’s job, task and responsibility. Consequently, in the recent years, a plenty of big companies set “innovation” as one of their corporate values, expecting to motivate employees to engage themselves in innovation internally and form a good corporate image externally. In the academic field, the studies on creativity are increasing year by year. Our Ministry of Education also regards creativity as the education focus in the future, promulgating “White Paper on Creative Education” in 2002 and advancing the creativity cultivation works in each educational unit to increase the national competitiveness. The importance of innovation is undoubted, and creativity is the basis of innovation (Amabile, 1988). The innovative performance comes from employee’s creativity. However, creativity is not only inherent; in addition to the innate personalities, the acquired environment also plays a decisive role (Amabile,1988; Woodman, Sayer & Griffin, 1993). Amabile et al. (1996) considered that there are some factors in the organizations which can increase and decrease creativity, and managers should create the climate which can improve employee’s creativity. In King & Anderson’s (1990) study, they considered that the creativity of members in the organization would be influenced by several organizational power, including leadership, group cohesiveness, group longevity, group composition and group structure. Similarly, Payne’s (1990) research revealed that leading behavior, accessible 2.

(11) resources, group norms, group cohesiveness, ways of communication and group composition are the key factors of influencing creativity. Sternberg & Lubart (1995) also proposed the factors which influence employee’s creativity such as working context, limitations of operation, supervision, competition, cooperation, role play, organizational structure and climate, and the social environment. These environmental factors have certain impact on employee’s creativity. Nevertheless, most of these influential factors are dominated by leaders; leaders shape the organizational environment where the employees are working in by directing, assisting, evaluating, providing resource or co-working with employees. (James & James, 1989;Amabile, Schatzel, Moneta & Kramer, 2004). In the workplace, leaders are endowed with the dominant role, which make them become the principle situational factors and greatly influence the generation of follower’s creativity (Scott & Bruce, 1994; Tierney, Farmer & Graen, 1999). The influence of leader’s leadership styles on employee’s creativity is undoubted. However, in the creativity studies, it usually lacks the understanding and discussion of how leader’s leadership styles or behavior have special impact on others’ creativity (Zhou & Oldham, 2001). Consequently, this has shaped my motive, and this study will clarify this important issue and discuss the related problems.. 3.

(12) Research Purpose. Based on the research background and motive, this study takes the employees in the public museums in Taiwan as the research subjects. And because of the lack of related studies in Taiwan, this study is trying to build the tentative proposition for the future studies in terms of the influences of leadership styles on employee’s creativity. Concretely speaking, the research purposes are to:. 1. To study current supervisors’ leadership styles in the public museums in Taiwan. 2. To study the influences of supervisors’ leadership styles on employee’s creativity in the public museums in Taiwan. (1). Influence of supervisors’ leadership styles on employees’ creativity. (2). Attention supervisors pay on employees’ creativity development. (3). Opportunities supervisors give for employees to deliver creative ideas. (4). Supervisors’ influence on employees’ willingness to propose creative ideas. (5). Innovative outcomes employees have done. 4.

(13) Statement of Question. According to the research purposes, some critical and detailed questions were extended and wondered as follows, waiting for the exploration from the data collection and interview data.. 1. What kinds of leadership styles do supervisors in the public museums in Taiwan possess? 2. According to the concluded supervisor’s leadership styles in the public museums in Taiwan, do they inspire or restrain employee’s creativity? Or their leadership styles do not influence employee’s creativity at all? Why or why not? 3. According to the concluded supervisor’s leadership styles in the public museums in Taiwan, do they value employee’s creativity development or not? Why or why not? 4. According to the concluded supervisor’s leadership styles in the public museums in Taiwan, do they give employees opportunities to deliver their creative ideas? Why or why not? 5. According to the concluded supervisor’s leadership styles in the public museums in Taiwan, do they influence employees’ willingness to propose creative ideas? Why or why not? 6. What innovative outcomes employees have done under the concluded supervisor’s leadership styles in the public museums?. 5.

(14) Research Delimitation and Limitation. Research Delimitation (1) This study regards the theories of creative place and the contingency theories of leadership as the research cores. Consequently, other theories are not discussed in this study. (2) This study discusses the related issues of employees’ creativity through the angle of leader in the environment. In addition to the influential factor of leader, other situational factors which influence employee’s creativity are not discussed in this study. (3) In this case study, the analysis of influential factors of creativity focus on the divisions in the industry of museum. The contexts in the other industries or organizations are not discussed in this study.. Research Limitation (1) Because of time, it took only nine research subjects in this study in the three museums. For the following studies, research subjects and even case museums should be increased so that the research results could more firmly represent the fact in the public museums in Taiwan. (2) For the focus of the research purposes, this study only provides the results of influencing employee’s creativity through the leadership in the case museums. If the results could be further studied for their causes and effects, it could provide leaders solutions for promoting employees’ creativity.. 6.

(15) Definitions of Term. Creativity Creativity is the presentation of creating a novel, original, or important and useful idea, process or product (Oldham & Cummings, 1996).. Leadership Leadership is the interpersonal interaction by using any kind of method to influence a person or a group under the certain context and via the communication process of affecting others’ emotion, thought and behavior to lead group actions and achieve the certain goals.. Leader Leader is the person who can make important influences on the perception, thought, and behavior of a crowd (Gardner, 1996).. Contingency Theory of Leadership Contingency theory of leadership considers leading behavior should be adjusted with the followers’ traits and different situations to fulfill the effective leadership.. Museum A museum is a non-profit making, permanent institution in the service of society and of its development, and open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits, for purposes of study, education and enjoyment, material evidence of people and their environment. (International Council of Museums, 1989) 7.

(16) 8.

(17) CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW. This study reviews related literatures and theories depending on the research topic and purposes. This whole chapter is classified into three parts: creativity, leadership styles, and relationship between leadership and creativity.. Creativity. After English psychologist Golton’s first famous book “Hereditary Genius” was published in 1869, the relativity between heredity and genius triggered psychologists’ interests and started the studies on creativity in the academic field. Nevertheless, creativity studies in the psychological filed started from 1950. At the time, Guilford, the president of American Psychological Association (APA), gave an inaugural speech and indicated the importance of creativity. He mentioned the inefficiency of creativity studies and the lack of published information; therefore, he publicly appealed scholars to engage in the field of creativity studies. After half a century, there are a plenty of studies have appeared in the different domains in the world. Runco (2004) stated that, “Creativity is notoriously difficult to define and measure.” Because creativity is a complex concept and scholars study from different dimensions, the definitions of creativity have not come to a conclusion so far. Yamamoto (1965) used “a blind man's report on the elephant” to describe the phenomenon that scholars who studied creativity through different viewpoints and reached the totally different explanations. Taylor (1959) indicated that creativity is the ability to combine scattered or unrelated information into a new product. Koestler (1964) considered creativity as the ability to associate the unconnected frames of. 9.

(18) reference with each other. Oldham & Cummings (1996) defined creativity is the presentation of creating a novel, original, or important and useful idea, process or product. Wiles (1985) defined creativity as the ability to intentionally link different things or concepts into a new relationship. Rhode (1961) considered that creativity involves 4 Ps, i.e. Person, Process, Product and Place/Press. “Creative person” is to study the personalities of the person with high creativity; “creative process” is to study the mental process while using creativity; “creative product” is to study the characteristics of creative products; and “creative place/press” is to study the environment or press which can assist in developing people’s creativity. Recently, there are many researchers study creativity through a multi-dimensional perspective, emphasizing the interaction among multiple factors. However, among the various research perspectives, person, process, product and place/press are most frequently adopted by researchers.. Creative Person Creative personality is one of the main streams of creativity studies. A great deal of researchers believe that creativity is determined by certain personalities, and some researchers consider creative people have to possess some personalities so as to continuously innovate, produce creative products, propose innovative opinions, and have creative lives. There are some researchers engaged themselves to study creativity from the perspective of personalities of creative people. Guilford (1950) explored the creative person in his whole life, focusing on identifying what made certain people creative and designing vigorous and well-controlled studies of creative individuals. Torrance (1972) studied the thinking skills used by highly creative people. MacKinnon (1978) and his associates assessed creative people and conducted an intensive study of 10.

(19) creative people in a wide variety of occupations, such as artists, architects, educators, scientists, mathematicians, businessmen, etc. to understand the personalities of these creative people. Gardner launched Project Zero in 1985 at Harvard University. He has been studying cognitive skills among scientists and artists. The researchers in the project found that creativity is a combination of personality and personal values which shape individual’s intentional and continued efforts, combined with the use of imagery.. Kirton (1976, 2003) concentrated his research on styles of creativity. From the studies, he distinguished three decision-making styles: 1. Adaptors – people who use the existing systems to define and solve problems by introducing change that supports the current system. Adaptors work within a system of rules, procedures, boundaries and shared values. They like to resolve difficulties or make decisions which will be least unsettling. 2. Innovators – people who ignore the existing systems in their problem solving efforts. Innovators like to do things differently and even change the world. They work outside the system to improve it. 3. Middles – people who behave by steering in the middle. The involved characteristics of these people are: structured, secure, dependable, well-rounded, calculated risk-taker, resourceful and original, and generate innovative ideas that have practical uses.. Perkins (1981), co-director of Project Zero at Harvard University, developed the “Snowflake Model of Creativity.” He stated that creative people have six related but distinct psychological traits: 1. Commitment to personal aesthetics – to deal with disorganization, asymmetry, 11.

(20) 2. Excel in finding problems – to identify problems; to generate and explore a large number of options for problem solving; to choose the best solution and pursue it. 3. Mental mobility – to find new perspectives and approaches to problems; to think in opposites and contraries; to think in metaphors and analogies and challenge assumptions as a matter of course; instead of accepting the situation as it is, the creative people ask “what if?” 4. Willingness to take risks – to accept failure when it comes as a part of creative process. If we consider every idea must be meaningfully successful, we will never feel free to “play” with it. 5. Objectivity – to seek advice, ideas, and critical thoughts from other people. Creative person is not a self-absorbed loner. 6. Intrinsic motivation – to contribute to personal enjoyment or satisfaction. We must feel the “passion” in the pursuit of the goal.. Creative people may not possess all six, but the more traits they have, the more creative they tend to be (Gee, 1985; McAleer, 1989). There are also other characteristics of creative people proposed by other scholars shown in Table 2.1.. 12.

(21) Table 2.1. Characteristics of Creative People Author. Year. Characteristics of Creative People. Mackinnon. 1975. clever, imaginative, brave, original, artistic, clear thought, insightful, various interests, versatile, individualistic, concentrative and complex. Barron & Harrington. 1981. value the perspectives of aesthetics, wide interests, like complex works, vigorous, able to judge independently, high autonomy, intuitive, confident, and able to resolve and adapt the inner contradictions and value conflicts. Shallcross. 1981. Openness to experiences, independent, confident, willing to take a risk, humorous, like to participate in intellectual activities, excited and enjoyed about trials, sensitive to problems or keys, not afraid of failures, against tradition, courageous, flexible, partial to complexity, goal-oriented, self-controlled, original, self-dependent, persistent, curious, observing, self-confirmed, accept chaos, highly motivated, tolerant to ambiguity, and tend to create. Pearlman. 1983. motivated, willing to face the obstacles, concentrate on interested phenomena, think vaguely and complexly, and playful. VanGundy. 1984. curiosity, optimism, self confidence, concentration, self awareness, discipline, impulsiveness, independence, humor, persistence, commitment, flexibility, openness to ideas, ability to use imagery, ability to defer judgment, ability to play with ideas, willingness to test assumptions, willingness to take risks, and tolerance for ambiguity. Sharma. 1986. high intelligence, high academic achievement, self-acceptance, inductive thinking, open to new experience, sensitive, persistence and original (table continues). 13.

(22) Table 2.1. (continued) Author. Year. Characteristics of Creative People. Tradiff & Sternberg. 1988. imaginative, concentrative, special personal experiences of development, strong tolerance of ambiguity, willing to conquer the obstacles, willing to grow, willing to tolerate the frustrations, intrinsic motives, and take proper adventures. Hayes Cropley. 1989 engage in work, independent, original and flexible 1992 tolerant, risk-taking, open attitude, persistent, and persuasive 1993 tolerant for ambiguity, willing to conquer the obstacles, willing to grow, willing to take a risk, and believe in self 2002 confident, believe in their thoughts, critical perspectives, inventive, passionate, like to take challenges, and sometimes depressed. Sternberg & Lubart. Hoff & Carlsson. Source: arranged by this study. Byrd proposed Creatrix Model in 1986. To quote one or two articles is to reproduce; to quote over ten is to research. Actually, to copy or to create could be judged by the levels of two dimensions, self-orientation and imagination (Byrd, 1989). Everyone can judge themselves or others by different situations that which categories they belong to. Among the eight categories, innovator, practicalizer and synthesizer are highly creative. Eight categories represent different creative personalities (see Figure 2.1). 1. Innovator Edison was highly self-oriented and imaginative on the technology creation made him become a real innovator. 2. Challenger If one is highly self-oriented in the certain field but lack of imagination, one would become a challenger. However, if one is consistently highly self-oriented, 14.

(23) no matter professional or not, one would not definitely be a challenger and could be a stubborn or selfish one. 3. Practicalizer High self-orientation but fair imagination. Practicalizers could make others’ invention more practical. 4. Synthesizer High imagination but fair self-orientation. To associate ten unrelated things together and add the self opinions would be a great synthesizer. Synthesizers are also the talents graduate institutes want to cultivate. 5. Modifier Fair self-orientation and imagination. When modifiers are aware of differentiated things, they would change them with their own perspectives and knowledge. They improve things from the original statuses of things, consequently, the demand of imagination if low. 6. Planner Fair imagination but low self-orientation. The person with this kind of personality usually plays the role of planner in the organization. They generally receive the orders from the superiors and think by the fixed way. 7. Dreamer High imagination but low self-orientation. Dreamers always have plenty of ideas. Nevertheless, these ideas depend on the insightful superiors if dreamers are in the bureaucratic organizations which emphasize the hierarchical relations. 8. Reproducer Low self-orientation and imagination. Reproducers like to take others’ creations as models and reproduce the existing products.. 15.

(24) Figure 2.1. Creatrix Model Source: Byrd, 1986. Creative Process Creative process lays emphasis on the psychological operation of cognitive process, which is the process of using mental mode to solve the problems. It includes creating methods, making connections, or adding new ideas on the existing knowledge. Mednick (1962) took association theory to explain creativity. He thought creativity is to take those associated elements to form a new combination during the thinking process in order to match the specific demand or purpose. Torrance (1966) considered creativity is a series of processes used to solve problems. These processes are to discuss the loopholes, doubts and defects within the resources, and then propose relevant speculations and assumptions. Finally it can solve the problems by seeking the evidence and revising. De Bono (1971) thought creativity is a kind of lateral. 16.

(25) thinking. Cates (1979) also regarded creativity as an ability of lateral thinking which contains these characteristics: flexible, illogic and breaking through the constraint of traditional thinking and old concepts. In Haustein’s opinion (1981), he took creativity as an ability to discover new and useful ideas. He further indicated that creativity is a thinking ability used by human beings directly or indirectly improve the lives according to the goals. Albrecht (1987) considered creativity as a process to produce new and useful ideas.. From the perspective of psychology, Guilford (1968) pointed out that creativity is the basic ability which contains fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration: 1. Fluency – the ability which could continuously come up with ideas. 2. Flexibility – the ability which can break through the restricted thoughts with diversity. 3. Originality – the ability which can produce unconventional or novel ideas. 4. Elaboration – the ability which can supplement new ideas on the original concepts.. In Wallas’ work “Art of Thought” published in 1926, he presented one of the first models of the creative process which contains four steps: 1. Preparation – preparatory work on a problem which focuses the individual's mind on the problem and explores the problem's dimensions. 2. Incubation – the period when the problem is internalized into the unconscious mind. Nothing appears to be happening externally. 3. Illumination or insight – the period when the creative idea bursts forth from its preconscious process into conscious awareness. 4. Verification – the period when the idea is consciously verified, elaborated, and 17.

(26) then applied. Creative Problem Solving (CPS), the most significant way for people to experience the creative thinking process, is originally based on the work of Wallas (1926) and Osborn (1963) and is related to applied imagination. CPS means a step-based approach to define a problem and find solutions to it. Isaksen, Dorval and Treffinger (1994) had redefined a 6-phase category, which are illustrated below:. 18.

(27) Divergent Phase. Problem Sensitivity. Convergent Phase. Open to experience; explore situations and difficulties.. I. Mess Finding. Accept challenges; undertake systematic efforts and respond to them.. Gather large number of data; examine the situation from different perspectives, information, impressions, and feelings, etc.. II. Data Finding. Most important data are identified and analyzed.. III. Problem Finding. A problem statement on hand is chosen.. IV. Idea Finding. Ideas which seem to be most promising or interesting are selected.. Generate many possible statements of problems and sub-problems.. Develop and list many possible ideas to the problem statement.. Formulate many possible criteria for evaluating ideas.. V. Solution Finding. Consider all the possible sources of assistance or support; identify potential implementation steps.. VI. Acceptance Finding. Criteria are selected to evaluate, strengthen, and refine ideas.. Most promising solutions are focused and prepared for actions; specific plans are formulated to implement solutions.. Actions or New Challenges. Figure 2.2. Creative Problem Solving (CPS) Phases Source: modified from Isaksen, S., Dorval, K. B. & Treffinger, D. J. (1994). Creative Approaches to Problem Solving. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 19.

(28) Amabile's (1983) The Componential Theory of Creativity proposes that anyone of normal capability can be creative, and that the work environment influences the level and frequency of this creativity. Creative cognitive processing is central to creativity theories because this set of cognitive processes most immediately determines the creativity of work outcomes. Creative cognitive processing contains four basic elements (see Figure 2.3): 1. Identification and understanding of the problem or task, sparked by either an external or an internal stimulus 2. Preparation, including learning and remembering, which helps to build up, reactivate, and/or incubate relevant information for the particular problem at hand 3. Response generation, or coming up with ideas for solving the problem 4. Response validation and communication, involving articulating, testing, and trying out the most promising response possibilities.. After an individual has engaged in these processes, until the problem is solved or the task is completed, to the extent that the outcomes should be more creative.. Figure 2.3. The Componential Theory of Creativity Source: Amabile, 1983 20.

(29) In the figure above, there are three components that affect individual creativity: domain-relevant skills (expertise), creativity-relevant skills and task motivation: 1. Domain-relevant skills – related domain knowledge, required professional skills, or related domain talent. This kind of skill mainly depends on innate cognitive ability, innate perception and motion skills, and formal/informal education. 2. Creativity-relevant skills – appropriate cognitive styles, ways of thinking which produce creative ideas, or creative styles which assist in work. This kind of skill would be influenced by personalities, training, and experiences of generating creative ideas. 3. Task-motivation – the intrinsic motivation for doing the work as well as the work environment that encourages the work.. The Componential Model of Creativity (Amabile, 1983) suggests that creativity will be highest in that area where the three components share their greatest overlap with the individual’s strongest intrinsic interests and creative thinking processes.. Creative Product Creative products are the final results of creative activities as well as the concrete performance of creative abilities. Creative products could be tangible such as invention or saleable goods; nevertheless, creative products also could be intangible such as theory, new service or business mode, etc. Amabile (1988) considered creativity as the useful ideas with novelty and potential. This definition lays emphasis on the results of creative behaviors, which is also the more representative one in the modern times, judging the level of creativity by the quality of results such as thoughts or products.. 21.

(30) A great many scholars also defined “creativity” through the dimension of creative outcomes. Guilford (1985) regarded creativity as an ability to create new ideas or products or to combine the existing ideas or products into a new style. Sometime creativity is considered as the ability to create many ideas, especially those fresh and original (Cropley, 1992; Fledhusen & Treffinger, 1986; Gakkagher, 1975). In Gardner’s point of view (1989), he thought creativity is the ability that human beings utilize to resolve problems or make products by the methods which is original and accepted by cultures. Cropley (1992) considered creativity refers to someone’s thinking is bold and innovative. He sorted creativity as two kinds: one is to produce the products with creativity, and the other one is the different, original and innovative intentions. In addition, Sternberg & Lubart (1999) also agreed that creativity is the ability to produce work that is both novel (original and unexpected) and appropriate (useful and adaptive concerning task constraints). Amabile & Tighe (1993) indicated that in order to be regarded as creative, a product or feedback cannot be different just because of the reason of difference. It also has to be appropriate, correct, practical, valuable and meaningful. Other people also proposed the similar definitions (Albert, 1975; Besemer & Treffinger; 1980; Bowers, Farvolden & Mermigis, 1995; Ghiselin, 1963; Jackson & Messick, 1973; MacKinnon, 1962; Stenberg, 1985, 1988). Originality and novelty are the two of the criteria of judging creativity. However, what we have to notice is that so-called originality or novelty is not completely unconnected with the old products or ideas, rather, builds on the bases of the old products or ideas. Even if the theories created by scientists are regarded as the epoch-making revolution, the principle that theories are built on the bases seniors created will not be changed. Einstein considered that it is impossible to him to create the theory of relativity without the discoveries from previous physicists (Holton, 22.

(31) 1981). Consequently, to produce creative products is to gradually surpass the original ones, which is to modify the past rather than to exclude the past. Nevertheless, many extraordinary and creative masterpieces are identified as outstandingly creative for a long time after the works were completed. There are many products which are identified by society as practical or valuable in the end even be considered to be utterly useless when they appear in the beginning. For all the possibilities, we can not exclude that it is likely some creative products will never be discovered. Concerning the creative products, many scholars proposed the criteria of judgment to them. Mayer (1999) reviewed some definitions of creativity proposed by creativity researchers and indicated that most of the researchers consider newness/originality and appropriateness/usefulness are two main characteristics of creative products. Zhou & Oldham (2001) also indicated that originality and usefulness are the prerequisites of creative outcomes.. Creative Place/Press The climate which can benefit creativity refers to the place where we can enjoy challenges, time, freedom and resources to accomplish the tasks. Mao (2001) also considered that creative environment is the place where can promote and support individual motivation, cultivate personality, permit creative psychological process, and encourage the creative production. Rogers (1962) and Maslow (1968) emphasized the influence of environment on creativity. From their research they found that the ability of creativity is the instinct that everyone should possess; however, creativity is often buried under the mental defense, and only in the environment where can provide individuals mental safety and. 23.

(32) freedom will promote this kind of ability and recall it from the mental defense. Similarly emphasizing the environment perspective, Csikszentmihalyi (1988) believed that creativity can not be isolated from society, history and culture; rather it is the creation under interaction among three sub-systems: individual, field and domain. Consequently, the dynamic relationship among these three sub-systems determines the personal creativity and the occurrence of creative products. The knowledge in the personal learning domain would become the basis of personal creation; individual inner factors such as internal motivation, personality and cognitive ability, etc, would influence whether an individual would produce creative products; besides, if an individual would produce creative works will be promoted and restrained by their field. The gatekeepers in the field also play the role of recognizing creative products. Their judgment in the field is usually significant to the personal creativity.. Figure 2.4. Framework of Systematic Theory Source: Csikszentmihalyi & Wolfe (2000). New conceptions and research approach to creativity: implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent, p.84. 24.

(33) Csikszentmihalyi (1990) further indicated that if creativity refers to novel and valuable ideas or actions, it can not just take single individual as the criteria of creativity existence. Unless to refer to some criteria, otherwise, we would not know if and idea is novel or not, and only to go through the social judgment can the value of idea be determined. Obviously, Csikszentmihalyi emphasized that creativity is created by systematic interaction rather than just by separate individuals.. Callahan (1978) considered that during the interaction among teachers and students, the offer of a free climate without stress should be especially noticed, which is the indispensable factor for developing student creativity: 1. Provide a class climate without nervousness and the sense of oppress 2. Carry out some warm-up activities under a free environment without stress. According to the research, Amabile (1988) thought the supportive working environment benefits the development of creativity, such as autonomy of work, sufficient time of work, inter-departmental cooperation, adequate resources, etc. Sternberg and Lubart (1995) proposed that creative environment in the schools includes: 1. Less authoritative leadership, more encouragement for independence or cooperative learning 2. Do not compare students with each other, respect individuality 3. Enhance student’s confidence 4. Provide a relaxing environment. For example, decrease the limitations of rules or innovate the rules, cultivate the warm climate, give positive encouragement to good performers and avoid using the attitudes of control, criticism, indifference, connivance. 25.

(34) 5. Do not overvalue the factor of time, giving students enough time of thinking. Some creation needs a period of time to reorganize old experiences and incubate new methods.. Ekvall (1987, 1996) stated ten major dimensions of external climate which influence employees’ creativity: 1. Challenge – the degree of emotional involvement and ownership that each individual feels in the job. In a high-challenged climate, the individual feels personally motivated to contribute to the success of the company. They would feel that it is their company. 2. Freedom – the ability to function independently in the job. In a free climate, employees would be given freedom to make decisions and act on their minds. They can also set their own pace and schedule and manage the everyday activities. When there is a little freedom in the working environment, giving employees specific duties and leaves, and they will not intend to make waves. 3. Dynamism and liveliness – the activity level in the organization where enthusiasm and excitement take place. If a company is highly dynamic and new things occur often, the climate would be lively and full of positive energy; conversely, if a company lacks dynamism, there would be no surprises and without new projects or developments. 4. Trust and openness – the safety of the emotional environment. If a company promotes a high level of trust, everyone in the organization would feel free to propose ideas, opinions and concerns. These ideas would be received and treated with respect. Everyone in the company would, therefore, feels valued and important. Nevertheless, when this sense of trust and openness is missing, people would be reluctant to express their concerns. They would fear of being made fun 26.

(35) 5. Idea time – the amount of time people can and use for developing and elaborating new ideas. It allows informal thinking time over refreshments or other relaxing activities so that impulses and fresh ideas could occur. If a company does not recognize the value of idea time nor allow for it, employees’ time would always be booked, specified and planned for just routine works. 6. Playfulness and humor – the degree of relaxation, spontaneity and ease that is experienced in the working environment. Jokes, laughter and humor accompanied with special fun events would make the working climate a sense of family connectedness. In a working environment with low level of these qualities, the press would be too serious, formal, stiff, and even breathless occasionally. In this condition, everyone would feel uncomfortable and caged in. 7. Idea Support – the way that new ideas are treated. If the organization climate is positive and supportive, employees’ ideas would be welcomed. Bosses and teammates would receive with interest and provide positive and constructive comments. If idea support is lacking, every initial idea would meet with a list of reasons such as why it does not work, why it can not be tried, or why it makes no sense, etc. Eventually employees would gradually quit offering new ideas or making suggestions because they would think “they will not listen to me anyway.” 8. Debates – a healthy and essential part of psychological press. Creative people need encounters with new perspectives, exchange of viewpoints, and exposures to others’ ideas and experiences. Everyone in the company expects to contribute plenty of ideas and to give constructive input. Thereby, there should be a high level of psychological safety in disagreeing or presenting opposite viewpoints. An environment that restricts debate is usually an authoritarian one, in which people 27.

(36) 9. Risk-taking – the courage to leap into the great unknown. We need an ability of tolerating uncertainty for that even the failures are considered as the learning opportunities. Even if there is no guarantee for success, people would feel that they can take a gamble on some new ideas. In a low risk-taking climate, people would hesitate to try something new. 10.. Conflict – the tensions which may be personal, emotional or interpersonal. Personal tensions can be between individuals; emotional tensions can be anger or frustration; and interpersonal tensions can be competition for resources, etc. When conflict is high in an organization, the psychological press becomes extremely stressful. Employees’ turn-over rate would be high and morale would be low. If there is a low-level conflict, people would try to control their behavior, deal with their problems in a low-keyed and non-aggressive manner.. 28.

(37) Leadership Style. Team leader is the key factor which determines the team performance. An effective team leader is an effective manager and team member at the same time, who has to make the explicit goals and visions for the team, urge each team member to strive for the goals, and enjoy working with others (Parker, 1990). In the following parts, the definition of leadership, leader, and the relevant theories of leadership will be discussed.. Definition of Leadership Leadership is a kind of activity which can influence others, which could make members in the organization voluntarily contribute their efforts to achieve the organizational goals. Some scholars also think leadership is a kind of art or influence. There are many researches on leadership since long time ago, and the definitions of leadership are usually different because of the personal perspectives of researchers or the situation of the phenomenon (Yukl, 2002). Some definitions of leadership from the representative scholars are listed in following table:. 29.

(38) Table 2.2. Definition of Leadership Scholar. Year. Definition of Leadership. Hemphill & Coons. 1957. Leadership is the behavior of an individual when he is directing the activities of a group toward a shared goal.. Janda. 1960. Leadership is a special power relationship, wherein one group can stipulate another group’s behavior. Leadership is the interpersonal interaction in the certain context, which can lead group actions through the communication process and achieve some specific goals. Leadership is the interpersonal interaction. In this interaction process, a certain person makes others to believe that as long as doing the thing with his/her suggestion or expectation, the result of the behavior will be improved. Leadership is the process of influencing others’ thought, behavior and emotion when pursuing the shared goals. Leadership is the initiation and maintenance of structure in expectation and interaction. Leadership is the procedure of interpersonal interaction which influences a person or a group of people under a specific situation and makes them tend to achieve the group goals. Leadership is the phenomenon which being observed most and understood least in the world. Leadership is process, which guides and coordinates members’ activities in organization to achieve team goals through no forced affection. Leadership is the process which influences the organization activities toward goal achievement. Leadership is a kind of format of power, which represents the ability to transform intention into the reality. Leaders could be identified by their ability “to get extraordinary things done in organizations.”. Tannenbaum, 1961 Weschler & Massarik. Jacobs. 1970. Cummings. 1971. Stogdill. 1974. Hersey & Blanchard. 1977. Burms. 1978. Jago & Vroom. 1980. Rauch & Behling. 1984. Bennis & Nanus. 1985. Kouzes and Posner. 1987. (table continues) 30.

(39) Table 2.2. (continued) Scholar. Year. Definition of Leadership. Yukl. 1989. Leadership is an exercise of influence resulting in enthusiastic commitment by followers, as opposed to indifferent compliance or reluctant obedience.. Gardner. 1989. Jacobs & Jaques. 1990. Bass & Avolio. 1990. Koontz. 1990. Trice and Beyer. 1991. Schein. 1992. Drath & Palus. 1994. Robbins. 2000. Leadership is the process of persuasion or demonstration. By this process, it can trigger groups to pursue the goal which leader persists to do or shared by supervisors and subordinates. Leadership is the process to give members a meaningful goal, make them be willing to strive for achieving it, and gather these efforts together. Leadership is to give groups meaningful and directive goals so as to stimulate subordinates’ willingness and then achieve the goals. Leadership is a kind of influence, skill or procedure to affect others to voluntarily and passionately strive for the achievement of the whole goals. Leadership began to emphasize the effects that exceptional leaders can have on their subordinates and their organizations. Leadership is the ability to step outside the culture to start evolutionary change processes that are more adaptive. Leadership is the procedure of generating common consensus which connects members together and makes them understand and commit with one another. Leadership is the ability to influence a group toward the achievement of goals.. Source: modified from Gary A. Yukl (1998). Leadership in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.. 31.

(40) Synthesizing the above definitions of leadership from scholars, this study defines it as “leadership is the interpersonal interaction by using any kind of method to influence a person or a group under the certain context and via the communication process of affecting others’ emotion, thought and behavior to lead group actions and achieve the certain goals.”. Leader Leaders would influence team members through quite a few ways, including role paradigm, goal setting, resource allocation, encouragement and reward, etc, and in the meanwhile usually take responsibility for transmitting organizational values, shaping the mode of communication in a team, and building up the organization climate. Beside, organization structure and operation procedure are also influenced by leaders (Redmond, Mumford & Teach, 1993). Consequently, leaders have the most direct and strong influence on all team members’ performance and behavior, of course, including the performance of creativity (Witt & Boerkrem, 1989). Leaders themselves are not necessarily possess predominant creativity, but they have to know how to manage others’ creative ideas and inspire others’ maximum potential (Thorne, 1994). What leaders have to do is to extract the best parts from the good ideas, evaluate group members’ ability, analyze environment situation, weight all the gains and losses, and lead the organization to make the best innovative decision (Levicki, 2000). Bennis & Nanus (1985) considered that the ordinary leaders do the things right, but creative leaders do the right things; ordinary leaders only take charge of influencing the team to head toward the set goal, but creative leaders could expand their influence and surpass the ordinary leaders. Furthermore, creative can discover. 32.

(41) problems, resolve the problems by new methods, inspire the morale and shape the organization into a new style. They not only play the assistant role in employees’ creativity development, rather they are the key contributors in the participation of innovative outcomes. Compared to team members, creative leaders can more practically combine members’ ideas, discuss with members, and put into practice. The development of creativity in the organization will continuously occur in the cycle that employees propose ideas and leaders modify them and put them into practices (Mumford, Connelly & Gaddis, 2003). The mode is shown as follows:. Figure 2.5. Mode of Leader’s Innovative Thinking Source: Mumford, Connelly & Gaddis, 2003. Leadership Theories and Styles Reviewed with relevant literatures, most scholars categorized the leadership theories as trait theory, behavioral theory, contingency theory and modern theories of leadership. The following part, arranged chronologically, will have detailed. 33.

(42) introduction about the main theories in the different categories.. Trait Theory Leader’s trait theory prevailed between 1930 and 1940, emphasizing the studies of successful leaders’ personal traits and the influence of those traits on leadership efficacy. This theory attributes successful leadership to leader’s unique traits and ability. Stogdill (1948) summed up the results of 12 studies before 1948 and categorized leader’s traits into six dimensions: 1. Physical characteristics: age, appearance, height and weight. 2. Intelligence: intelligence quotient, ability, judgment, knowledge, determination and fluency of speaking. 3. Personality: aggressiveness, alertness, dominance, enthusiasm, extroversion, independence, creativity, integrity and confidence. 4. Social background: education, social status and mobility. 5. Social characteristic: administrative ability, charisma, spirit of cooperation, popularity, prestige, social ability, interpersonal skill, tact and diplomacy. 6. Task-related characteristics: need of achievement, need of responsibility, spirit of initiative, perseverance, enterprise and task-orientation.. There are also some studies of trait theory from different scholars listed as follows: 1. Davis (1972) pointed out four traits related to successful leaders: (1) Leaders usually have higher IQ than their followers do. (2) Leaders are usually more mature in emotion. They can deal with the sudden situations and get along with others peacefully. (3) Leaders usually have higher drive to accomplish the set goals. (4) Leaders usually adopt the employee-oriented way of leading and value the 34.

(43) 2. Kirkpatrick & Locke (1991) identified six traits which are related to effective leaders: drive, desire of leading, honesty and integrity, confidence, intelligence, and professional knowledge. 3. Dubrin (1998) considered that the personal traits of effective and successful leaders are: self-cognition, self-analysis, confident, trustworthy, high tolerant, warm, humorous, enthusiastic, dominant, extroverted, decisive, and stable mood.. Nevertheless, in the early stages, hundreds of leadership studies have found out leaders’ traits are intangible and the results from a great deal of studies are lack of unity. Besides, the criterion of evaluation is hard to be established, and there is no trait which could guarantee leaders can definitely succeed; consequently, this kind of attributive trait theory is severely criticized (Hoy & Miskel, 1987). In addition, to study leaders’ success and failure by their traits neglects the personal factors of subordinates, the factors of interpersonal interaction, and the factors from the leading environment; for this reason, its influence gradually became weak after few-year prevalence, and what substituted is behavioral theory.. Behavioral Theory Because the results of trait theory found out that there is no identical personal trait from successful leaders, from the end of 1940s to the middle of 1960s the study of leadership laid emphasis on the behavioral styles shown by leaders, regarding leader’s behavior as the cause and leading efficacy as the effect to study their relationship. Table 2.3 provides four main behavioral theories, their leadership styles and brief conclusions of the studies as follows:. 35.

(44) Table 2.3. Four Main Behavioral Theories Theory. Year. Leadership Style. Brief Conclusion. 1. University of 1953 (1) autocratic style Iowa (2) democratic style (3) laissez-faire style. Democratic style brings higher job satisfaction.. 2. Ohio State University. High initiating structure and high consideration brings higher group performance and job satisfaction.. 1957. (1) initiating structure (2) consideration. 3. University of 1960 (1) production-oriented Michigan (2) employee-oriented. Employee-oriented leaders bring high group performance and high job satisfaction. 4. Managerial Grid Theory. 1964. (1) impoverished management Team management brings (2) task management the best performance. (3) middle-of-the-road management (4) country club management (5) team management. Source: arranged by this study. 1. University of Iowa (Lewin, White & Lippett, 1953) proposed the following three leadership styles: (1) Autocratic Style: leaders usually tend to the centralized and imperative ways of leading. They make decisions individually and seldom let employees to participate. (2) Democratic Style: leaders tend to let employees participate in decision making, encourage them to participate in the setting of working ways and goals, authorize some tasks, and train them by the given feedback. (3) Laissez-Faire Style: leaders usually give employees sufficient freedom to 36.

(45) In the Handbook of Leadership, Bass & Stogdill (1981) concluded that group members would have higher job satisfaction under the leadership of democratic style than that of autocratic style.. 2. Ohio State University did a series of studies in the end of 1940s. Hemphill and Coons (1950) first developed ”Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire, LBDQ” and then Halpin and Winer (1957) did the factor analysis and concluded the following two leadership styles with the results: (1) Initiating Structure: the level that leaders set requirements and rules to employees, e.g. working relation, working procedure, working goal, etc. (2) Consideration: the level that leaders establish good working relation with mutual trust and respect for employee’s thought. High consideration-oriented leaders are friendly, kind, and they would help employees to resolve the personal problems and treat every employee equally. They care about subordinate’s working comfort, working condition, working satisfaction, and welfare. Above-mentioned two leadership styles can be further categorized into four types from low initiating structure or low consideration to high initiating structure or high consideration as follows (see Figure 2.6): (1) Low initiating structure, low consideration: leaders are indifferent toward subordinates and works, which usually results in low morale and makes the organization goal can not be accomplished. (2) High initiating structure, low consideration: leaders care more about the working performance, treat subordinates more strictly, neglect subordinates’ 37.

(46) (3) Low initiating structure, high consideration: leaders care more about subordinates’ needs far than the working performance. (4) High initiating structure, high consideration: leaders not only pay attention to the achievement of works, but also care about subordinates’ needs. Working in the environment with mutual-trusted, respectful and harmonious climate would be easier to achieve organization goals.. Figure 2.6. Ohio State University’s Categories of Leadership Behavior Source: modified from Huang (2001). The researchers in the Ohio State University concluded that the leaders with high initiating structure and high consideration would result in higher group performance and job satisfaction. Nevertheless, the result of this leadership style is not always positive. Some exceptional cases pointed out that situational factor should also be included into the leadership theory.. 38.

(47) 3. University of Michigan (Kahn, Katz et. al., 1960) studied the leader’s behavioral characteristics related to working performance. The research result concluded two leadership styles: (1) Production-oriented: leaders emphasize working skills and task achievement and regard employees as the means of goal achievement. (2) Employee-oriented: leaders emphasize interpersonal relationship, care about employee’s personal needs, and accept the differences among members. The researchers in the University of Michigan concluded that employee-oriented leaders would result in high group performance and high job satisfaction and production-oriented leaders would result in low group performance and low job satisfaction. 4. Managerial Grid Theory (Blake & Mouton, 1964) derived the behavioral dimensions from the conclusion of above-mentioned early leadership studies, developing the two-dimension managerial grid for leadership styles. The horizontal axis is ”concern for production” and the vertical axis is “concern for people,” which are weighted from 1 (low) to 9 (high) to evaluate the concerned level of leaders on these two behavior. Although there are 81 possible leadership styles on this grid (see Figure 2.7), this theory only emphasize the following five types: (1) Impoverished Management (1, 1): achieve the working requirements with the minimum effort. This is the suitable way for the maintenance of organization members’ relationships. (2) Task Management (9, 1): the minimum interference in employee’s working status. It can reach high efficiency in operation. (3) Middle-of-the-road Management (5, 5): balance employee’s needs and 39.

(48) (4) Country Club Management (1, 9): care about employee’s needs and job satisfaction so as to build up a comfortable and friendly climate and rhythm. (5) Team Management (9, 9): organization and employees depend on one another and form the mutual-trusted and shared-interest relationship. It can reach high performance and high job satisfaction.. Figure 2.7. Managerial Grid Source: modified from Blake, R. R., Mouton, J. S., Barnes, L. B & Greiner L. E. (1964). Breakthrough in organization development. Harvard Business Review, November-December, 1964, p.136.. 40.

參考文獻

相關文件

Robinson Crusoe is an Englishman from the 1) t_______ of York in the seventeenth century, the youngest son of a merchant of German origin. This trip is financially successful,

fostering independent application of reading strategies Strategy 7: Provide opportunities for students to track, reflect on, and share their learning progress (destination). •

Strategy 3: Offer descriptive feedback during the learning process (enabling strategy). Where the

Now, nearly all of the current flows through wire S since it has a much lower resistance than the light bulb. The light bulb does not glow because the current flowing through it

volume suppressed mass: (TeV) 2 /M P ∼ 10 −4 eV → mm range can be experimentally tested for any number of extra dimensions - Light U(1) gauge bosons: no derivative couplings. =>

incapable to extract any quantities from QCD, nor to tackle the most interesting physics, namely, the spontaneously chiral symmetry breaking and the color confinement.. 

• Formation of massive primordial stars as origin of objects in the early universe. • Supernova explosions might be visible to the most

(Another example of close harmony is the four-bar unaccompanied vocal introduction to “Paperback Writer”, a somewhat later Beatles song.) Overall, Lennon’s and McCartney’s