工時安排彈性化對員工工作態度、工作行為與組織績效之影響

全文

(1)

(2)

(3) The Effects of Flexible Working Time Arrangements on Employee Attitudes, Behavior, and Organizational Effectiveness NSC87-2416-H011-012 86 8 ! 1 !" 87 7 ! 31 # $%&:'() *+,-./0123456 c? lm no pqr

(4)

(5) s(Bosch, 1995) ^ 56.

(6) Etuvwx-ylz{ ^

(7) ! "#$%&'()* s|} ^sU~ ^ s 01-d2 U +,

(8) -./-01234

(9) -4

(10) 56

(11) 56Id 5

(12) 7 89:;<=>?@ 6-[E ABCD-EFG

(13) HIJ u2'wx-%&+,?. 7KLMNOPQ%R S 56y-J T@ 89-U -VWX

(14) H- ¡¢kc 56 £¤¥¦J §¨©ª.

(15) « ^ ¬¢wx-%&. 56

(16) ®¯

(17) 56

(18) wxEtuv- «° s¢± ;89: This research posits to clarify the effects yl

(19) ²³ (')23´ ^µ- ¬%&kc² of the implementation of flextime on emplyees’ reactions to working time ¶ arrangement, work behaviors, work attitudes ·¸EX¹º»-¼½¥¾d¿ and performance. Utilizing a ÀP2ÁÂGÃÄ3Å quasi-experiment design to examine (Z)Æ¥ ^'ÇÈÉ%& emplyees’ responses, as predicted, significant "Ês-ËÌAB²r3´. improvements were observed in the working sAB.Í

(20) ÎÏ ÐÑ § time reactions (schedule satisfaction, less ¥¦(Organizational Development Structural stress and fatigue) and organizational Intervention)(Golembiewski et al., 1978)-Ò commitment. However, no significant effects of flexitime on work behavior(absenteeism, WÓÔÕÖ×¨HØÙUJÚÛ leave tendency, coordination and job H-I32|^ÜÝØÞ ¢±involvement), job satisfaction and work eßkc pàá performance. Keywords: Hours of work, Flexitime, Z Employee Attitudes, Employee Behavior, âã¢±kc

(21) Fä Performance GÔÕ-

(22) å:æ?. mç èéqênëìí? îÌ YZ[\]- ^ 56_ ^56è

(23) ïðí (ñòóô `ab cd(efghi-jk ã1õö÷øùú? ² ^¡û. 789:.

(24) Rïü

(25) ný þ-bIef i :æ? KL®-íy1 õöef?

(26) 8Å I-²

(27) äG¨ w Gz{³

(28) 34 s ~^Q%¨. Ë¡ ^ nê=

(29) Shepard III , Cliffton Kruse(1996)ÔÕ³ ¨? 1²E

(30) +,. -¾ J1f-q?. =¦-:æ !- 1 "-1ûR#$-Q%U&'J(?. -I)*+KLMNi©v, µi-Ãý,0.©/-. Ëí? ²(01nê=2f

(31) 3 -íJnê=ef4ã-+,å 5ª1uU16Ã7

(32) ]8 © /-9ýiË¡¨:® q;< &'9ý=m>|-IE3 ´ ¨©- ?u4 29ý@ cABC

(33) × è-E )z{ .ÍA" Dc

(34) '

(35) EF? ' GIH-IJ fGGKL¯æ /M3=l ÇN²M

(36) -14R I 24 O ÇNnê-=E'P ´ Q

(37) D-² . è-E1?R ST 56. AB0Ø-eÕ U#³01234

(38) -. s

(39) :4 IH³(1)V. s

(40) wG-åef 56

(41) 89:æ<=ëì:;>?¦ W(2)² wG-å:æKL* +MNi

(42) Q%R STW(3)² wG-åE1 f

(43) 8ÅABCDW(4)²w G-åE1f

(44) 1 X/-bI YABZ~ EØ )./-[ý \X 1 q]. !" Æ¥ ¬%&-ç "#$ (Quasi-Experimental Field Design)]^ ¶- A BQ|p_')*` a+,-b+,c ³+,dÜe 600 -86 \Ãf 30 gh-icfe 16 gh-?®jklÕe 8%-m ej 63%- nopq¦@ r-no\s 32 t-no\Ã 3 \+,V b+,2 87 \^uv cwUx~ (70 y) . s-J( z{|'GF}è é ^sgrÌ+,

(45) ´9ûR~ôP 3

(46) % & ^:® s

(47) :® s¶

(48) '1U 1-Ò 1: s.

(49) H "A4 s

(50) ~. - 70 y-ÊsAzrbï+,J( 34 s

(51) ~ - 140 y ð2 3 -¿EMNÕ Z3-¨©-2¶Eb "A 54 -ÊsA 101 ²|wG-J^ ST\ ³(1) s

(52) ( 89< =>?¦)- Dunham, Piierce & Castaneda(1987) U Dunham & Herman (1975)W(2) (KLiMNOP Q%R ST)- Dunham & Pierce (1986) Lodahl & Kejner (1965)W(3). ( 8Å ABCD)- Minnesota Job Satisfaction Questionnaire U Porter, Steers, Mowday & Boulain (1974)W(4) -]y9

(53) # $%& $ôA _²3´ ^µ|

(54) º» J-ÓôA

(55) c ·¸ S|(·-zå MACOVA-T pre-intervention measures-\ \Ã | covariates W ¸ - z å .

(56) MANOVA

(57) $w)- t ô A²$|(\s p q ¡)ABn¢|(\Ã-ÃN £) S|( )

(58) º»ÎHX]ôA²

(59) |èVX¹ º » ¨ © - u¨ ¤ | » (MANOVA)"0ØU# X 2 X]|no¥çºU MANOVA

(60) ÎH-yl./\³.

(61) -(1)[¦IH-01234

(62) -4 EX¹(Wilk’s § ¨©ªª-«¬©®@W¯7°@¯±1²G]³4 56

(63) 7´µ¶·’¸ § ¨©ª¹-«¬©®@-J¿z{³ 89 7º¨®®©»-«¬©®@:;<=7º¨®¼©½¼«¬©®@->?7º¨®©»¾-«¬©®@A BCD7º¨°©ª½-«¬©®@|-EFG

(64) HW7»@4

(65) 7´µ¶·’¸¯ §¨©¹ª-«¨©»¿@7KLMNOPQ%R ST@ 897º¨©ª¹-«¨©¿®@U 7º¨©°-«¨©ª°@|-3 4 01-VWX

(66) ' ()*%+, À²#$è=mÁÂ -Ã² yÄ=Å=U ^Æ×¨. -E ÇÁ`³ (')ý,ÈÏ

(67) :,wG ²

(68) ÈÏ¿-ð2|1u É-q||^

(69) ØÙÊËÌÍ Î¨©1±ÏE

(70) èÐÕ'Á[

(71) ý,ST-¾ÑÏ|^ý,è

(72) ¨ HØÙ (Z)brbwG ð2

(73) _~·4 34 . s

(74) ôP ¨+,Òu ub+,ûR

(75) Ó-V +, b%&-¨©ÊsA

(76) b c ·¸ÔEX -ÕEÖì ()ÃÄ×ØwG ÙÚ

(77) wx-ÚØ ÃÄ-XÛ·1Ô y -Ü Ý Þuß1yà.

(78) ÃÄ-ÊEqá

(79) âã à ÜÝà

(80) Á[ WZ·% äå^

(81) ØÙ-vvý è

(82) Ðæ-ÎHênÀç

(83) è} ÀEèK-å 56é·'>|AB

(84) êëìí

(85) ÐÑ¦î -¨©Æ¥p

(86) ¤ ï-\ ^'ÇÈÉ%&1ð -ÌAB²r sÎ Ï ÐÑ

(87) §¥¦-ÒWÓÔÕÖ ×¨HØÙUJÚÛH-I32Ü ÝØÞ ¢±-¼½¥¾d0Ø u2'wx-%&+,?. 56J H-I ¡¢kc 56 £¤¥¦J §¨©- ¡eßkc: sâ ã0ØñÓ

(88) - ./01 Ahmadi, M. F. Raiszedeh, and W. Wells. 1986. “Traditional Versus Non-traditional Work Schedules: A Case Study of Employee Preference.” Industrial Management. April, 20-23. Bosch, G. 1995. “Synthesis Report.” In OECD ed., Flexible Working Time: Collective Bargaining and Government Intervention, Paris, pp. 17-40. Dalton, D.R., and D.J. Mesch. 1990. “The Impact of Flexible Scheduling on Employee Attendance and Turnover.” Administrative Science Quarterly, June, 25: 370-87. Dunham, R. B., J. L. Pierce, and M. B. Castaneda. 1987. “Alternative Work Schedules: Two Field Quasi-Experiments.” Personnel Psychology, 40: 215-42. Evans, M. G. 1973. “Notes on the Impact of Flexitime in a Large Insurance Company.” Occupational Psychology, December, 47: 237-40. Golembiewski, R. T., R. Hilles, and M. S. Kagno. 1974. “ A Longitudinal Study of Flex-time Effects: Some Consequences of an OD Structural Intervention. “ Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 10: 503-32..

(89) Golembieski, R.T., and C. W. Proehl,. 1978. “A Survey of the Empirical Literature on Flexible Work Hours: Character and Consequences of a Major Innovation.” Academy of Management Review, 3(4): 837-53. Golembiewski, R. T., S. Yeager, and R. Hilles. 1976. “ Some Attitudinal and Behavioral Consequences of a Flexitime Installation: One Avenue for Expressing Central Organization Design Values.” In R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, and D. P. Slevin eds., Management of Organization Design vol. 2, New York: North-Holland. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., M. S. Hopp, and C. R. Ommerstad. 1978. “Implementation and Evaluation of Flexible Work Hours: A Case Study.” Personnel Administrator, 23: 39-41. Graf, L. A. “The Impact of Flexitime on the First-line Supervisor’s Job: A Preliminary Investigation.” Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, 78: 185-9. Green, C. 1984. “Effects of Alternative Work Schedules: A Field Experiment.” Paper presented at the 44th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Boston. Harvey, B. H. and F. Luthans. 1979. “Flexitime: An Empirical Analysis of Its Real Meaning and Impact.” Business Horizons, 27: 31-6. Hicks, W. and R. J. Klimoski. 1981. “ The Impact of Flextime on Employee Attitudes.” Academy of Management Journal, June, 24: 333-41. Kim, J. S., and A. F. Campagna. 1981. “Effects of Flextime on Employee Attendance and Performance: A Field Experiment.” Academy of Management Journal, December, 24: 729-41. Narayanan, V. K., and R. Nath. 1982. “ A Field Test of Some Attitudinal and Behaviral Consequnces of Flexitime.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(2): 214-8. Narayanan, V. K., and R. Nath. 1982. “Hierarchical Level and the Impact of Flextime.” Industrial Relations, Spring, 21:216-30. Narayanan, V. K., and R. Nath. 1984.. “ The Influence of Group Cohesiveness on Some Changes Induced by Flexitime: A Quasi-Experiment.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 20(3): 265-76. Orpin, C. 1981. “Effects of Flexible Work Hours on Employee Satisfaction and Performance: A Field Experiment.” Journal of Applied Psychology, February, 66: 113-15. Owen, J. D. “Flex-time: Some Problems and Solutions.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Winter, 152-60. Pierce, J., and J. Newstrom. 1980. “Toward a Conceptual Clarification of Employee Responses to Flexible Working Hours: A Wok Adjustment Approach.” Journal of Management, March, 6: 117-34. Pierce, J., and J. Newstrom. 1982. “Employee Responses to Flexible Work Schedules: An Inter-Organization, Inter-System Comparison.” Journal of Management, March, 8: 9-25. Ralston, David A., W. P. Anthony, and D. J. Gustafson. 1985. “ Employees May Love Flextime, but What Does It Do to the Organization’s Productivity?” Journal of Applied Psychology, May, 70: 272-79. Ronen, S., and S. B. Primps. 1981. “The Compressed Work Week As Organizational Change: Behaviors and Attitudinal Outcomes.” Academy of Management Review, 6: 61-74. Schein, V. E., E. H. Mauer, and J. F. Novak. 1977. “Impact of Flexible Working Hours on Productivity.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 62: 463-65. Shepard, E. M. III, T. J. Clifton, and D. Kruse. 1996. “Flexible Work Hours and Productivity: Some Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry.” Industrial Relations, January, 35(1): 123-139. Walch, J. L., and D. Gordon. 1980. “Assessing the Impact of Flexitime on Productivity.” Business Horizons, 23: 61-5..

(90) +. +. + -. Field (1974). +. Golembiewski et. Al. (1975). +. Hartey (1976) Golembiewski, Yeager & Hilles (1976) Holley et. Al. (1976). + +. Magoon & Schnicker(1976) Zawacki & Johnson (1976) Golembiewski & Hilles (1977) Schien, Mauner & Novak (1977). ∆. Nollen & Martin (1978) Graf (1978) Harvey & Luthans (1979) Ronen & Primps (1980) Kim & Campagna (1981) Pierce & Newstrom (1980, 1982) Walch & Gordon (1980). w.

(91) ! . +. Evans(1973) Partridge (1973). . . +.

(92) . . . . . 2 1 3

(93) 45678 _ ({ | òãJ ó./) . : :. æ ; ã S 8 < > T 9 = ? ë ì. +. +. + +. +. +. + + +. + ∆. + +. +. + ∆. "#

(94) 94 $%& -. '(()*+, +) /012

(95) 34567

(96) 589:; -. <= 866 $%&= -. >?

(97) 58 $@A -. ! 150 $BC(DEF K567 GH5IJ +) LM

(98) 14 6N9 K567 390 $%&'O (PQRS O*5 T +) UV

(99) 5 WXYZN[ . ∆. + + + +. +. + +. +. +. + +. +. +. +. + ∆. +. 25 6\]^_5YZ -. ! ! "#

(100) `.

(101) Hicks & Klimoski (1981). ∆. +. Orpen (1981) Narayanan & Nath (1982). +. +. ∆. ∆. ∆. Ralston, Anthony & Gustafson (1985). +. Swart (1985). Dunham , Pierce & Castaneda (1987) Shepard III, Clifton & Kruse (1996). +. +. ∆. +. +. +. + +. abc( defg O"#

(102) )h ! hij klmn\] 72 $ 67 @o plqrstuv ;< wxvyO ! z(z{*|} 4 ~zY~ +) 2 6mn\]^_ hh ! ij 900 aBC"# -. ds = % (DE +) 2 a= p= ! 36 afb 11 K ! O}YZU Y Z COMPUSTAT. : +

(103) -

(104) ∆ ∆

(105) : !"# $"%&'()*+,.

(106) X 2

(107) "A |. Wilk’s Wilks’s >. . ÊsA. ^' ^Z ^ ^'. ^Z. F. ^ Univariate analysis F ô for interaction. 56

(108) . .89. 8.83***. 89. 2.59 (.96) 3.26 (.97). 3.70 (.98) 2.52 (.84). 3.35 (.91) 2.59 (.92). 2.50 (.92) 3.07 (1.06). 2.71 (.95) 3.45 (.81). 2.37 11.30*** (.76) 3.50 16.76*** (.92). 3.54 (.99). 2.57 (.90). 2.57 (.92). 3.55 (1.17). 3.51 (.83). 3.47 10.35*** (.87). 2.67 (.73) 2.56 (.84). 2.31 (.75) 2.17 (.80). 2.33 (.80) 2.20 (.88). 2.78 (.87) 2.56 (.89). 2.58 (.67) 2.50 (1.00). 2.76 (.98) 2.59 (1.04). 1.29. Q%R. 2.59 (.81). 3.24 (.97). 3.11 (.95). 2.88 (.85). 3.33 (.94). 2.96 (.97). 2.02. ST. 3.06 (.90). 3.43 (1.00). 3.37 (1.01). 3.04 (.76). 3.21 (.95). 3.06 (1.01). .92. 3.69 (.72). 3.81 (.80). 3.80 (.88). 3.77 (.69). 3.71 (.80). 3.42 (.98). 2.87†. 3.67 (.73). 3.74 (.81). 3.83 (.95). 3.65 (.77). 3.65 (.68). 3.57 (.85). .89. 3.17 (.97). 3.22 (.96). 3.20 (1.19). 3.19 (.90). 3.14 (.96). 3.27 (1.09). .20. <= >?¦. . .98. 1.13. KLè MNOP. ABCD. .99. 1.74. 1.54. 89 . qES| >. .88. 3.01***. O ¡¢’£¤¥¦ § ¥¤¨© ª«¬®« ¯°±, ²!³j. ¥´ †. p<.1; * p<.05; ** p<.01; *** p<.001.

(109)