) 1 中国人民大学商学院, 北京 100872
2 北方工业大学经济管理学院, 北京 100144
收稿日期:2018-07-09出版日期:2020-02-25发布日期:2019-12-24通讯作者:罗文豪E-mail:whluo1988@hotmail.com基金资助:* 国家社会科学基金重点项目(15AJY007);国家自然科学基金(71640015);北京市教委基本科研项目(110052971921/073)How can leader’s voice endorsement promote employee voice: An integrated mechanism based on the goal self-organization perspective
ZHANG Kai1, SHI Jinjing1, LUO Wenhao2() 1 School of Business, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China
2 School of Economics and Management, North China University of Technology, Beijing 100144, China
Received:2018-07-09Online:2020-02-25Published:2019-12-24Contact:LUO Wenhao E-mail:whluo1988@hotmail.com摘要/Abstract
摘要： 文章探讨了领导者建言采纳促进员工建言的理论基础、作用机制及其对发展建言研究的意义。通过引入个体心理的自组织目标系统理论, 整合了员工建言研究的动机视角和认知视角, 构建了建言的目标自组织观点。在此基础上, 分析和检验了工作意义感和建言效能感在领导者建言采纳促进员工建言的关系中所起的中介作用。通过问卷调查收集了来自73位领导者与236位员工的纵向数据, 结果显示：(1)领导者的建言采纳对员工的促进性/抑制性建言均具有显著的促进作用; (2)工作意义感和建言效能感在领导者建言采纳与员工建言行为的关系中起到完全中介作用。研究结果发展了对建言行为形成机制的认识, 促进了建言研究的理论发展, 并对管理实践有着积极的启示。
图/表 4
图1建言采纳促进员工建言的整合机制模型
图1建言采纳促进员工建言的整合机制模型表1研究变量的验证性因子分析结果
| 模型拟合指标 | 因子 | χ2 | df | Δχ2 | CFI | TLI | RMSEA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M0 (五因子) | VE, WM, VEF, PMV, PHV | 173.99** | 80 | - | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.07 |
| M1 (四因子) | VE, WM, VEF, PMV+PHV | 269.84** | 84 | 95.85** | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.10 |
| M2 (四因子) | VE, WM+VEF, PMV, PHV | 828.84** | 84 | 654.85** | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.20 |
| M3 (三因子) | VE, WM+VEF, PMV+PHV | 917.66** | 87 | 743.67** | 0.79 | 0.74 | 0.20 |
| M4 (二因子) | VE, WM+VEF+PMV+PHV | 1506.20** | 89 | 1332.21** | 0.64 | 0.57 | 0.26 |
| M5 (一因子) | VE+WM+VEF+PMV+PHV | 2234.75** | 90 | 2060.76** | 0.45 | 0.36 | 0.32 |
表1研究变量的验证性因子分析结果
| 模型拟合指标 | 因子 | χ2 | df | Δχ2 | CFI | TLI | RMSEA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M0 (五因子) | VE, WM, VEF, PMV, PHV | 173.99** | 80 | - | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.07 |
| M1 (四因子) | VE, WM, VEF, PMV+PHV | 269.84** | 84 | 95.85** | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.10 |
| M2 (四因子) | VE, WM+VEF, PMV, PHV | 828.84** | 84 | 654.85** | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.20 |
| M3 (三因子) | VE, WM+VEF, PMV+PHV | 917.66** | 87 | 743.67** | 0.79 | 0.74 | 0.20 |
| M4 (二因子) | VE, WM+VEF+PMV+PHV | 1506.20** | 89 | 1332.21** | 0.64 | 0.57 | 0.26 |
| M5 (一因子) | VE+WM+VEF+PMV+PHV | 2234.75** | 90 | 2060.76** | 0.45 | 0.36 | 0.32 |
表2各研究变量的均值、标准差和相关系数
| 变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.性别 | 1.40 | 0.49 | - | |||||||
| 2.年龄 | 27.85 | 4.54 | -0.06 | - | ||||||
| 3.受教育程度 | 1.97 | 0.76 | 0.06 | -0.11 | - | |||||
| 4.建言采纳 | 4.28 | 1.03 | -0.07 | 0.16* | -0.08 | (0.95) | ||||
| 5.工作意义感 | 4.28 | 1.14 | -0.28** | 0.12 | -0.07 | 0.33** | (0.95) | |||
| 6.建言效能感 | 4.35 | 1.02 | -0.06 | -0.06 | 0.11 | 0.32** | 0.46** | (0.93) | ||
| 7.促进性建言 | 5.00 | 0.85 | -0.07 | 0.08 | -0.07 | 0.23** | 0.42** | 0.48** | (0.94) | |
| 8.抑制性建言 | 4.93 | 0.90 | -0.12 | 0.15* | -0.09 | 0.24** | 0.51** | 0.48** | 0.81** | (0.90) |
表2各研究变量的均值、标准差和相关系数
| 变量 | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.性别 | 1.40 | 0.49 | - | |||||||
| 2.年龄 | 27.85 | 4.54 | -0.06 | - | ||||||
| 3.受教育程度 | 1.97 | 0.76 | 0.06 | -0.11 | - | |||||
| 4.建言采纳 | 4.28 | 1.03 | -0.07 | 0.16* | -0.08 | (0.95) | ||||
| 5.工作意义感 | 4.28 | 1.14 | -0.28** | 0.12 | -0.07 | 0.33** | (0.95) | |||
| 6.建言效能感 | 4.35 | 1.02 | -0.06 | -0.06 | 0.11 | 0.32** | 0.46** | (0.93) | ||
| 7.促进性建言 | 5.00 | 0.85 | -0.07 | 0.08 | -0.07 | 0.23** | 0.42** | 0.48** | (0.94) | |
| 8.抑制性建言 | 4.93 | 0.90 | -0.12 | 0.15* | -0.09 | 0.24** | 0.51** | 0.48** | 0.81** | (0.90) |
图2假设模型的路径分析结果 注：N = 236; **p < 0.01 (双尾检验); 括号中的数值为标准误(SE)。
图2假设模型的路径分析结果 注：N = 236; **p < 0.01 (双尾检验); 括号中的数值为标准误(SE)。参考文献 42
| [1] | Azizli N., Atkinson B. E., Baughman H. M., & Giammarco E. A . (2015). Relationships between general self-efficacy, planning for the future, and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 82(5), 58-60. |
| [2] | Bandura A . (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc. |
| [3] | Bunderson J. S., & Thompson J. A . (2009). The call of the wild: Zookeepers, callings, and the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 32-57. |
| [4] | Burris E. R . (2012). The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 851-875. |
| [5] | Cantor N., & Markus H . (1986). Motivation and self-concept. In R. M. Sorrentino, E. T. Higgins (Eds). Handbook of motivation and cognition, Volume 1: Foundations of social behavior (pp.96-121) . New York: Guilford Press. |
| [6] | Chen X . (2017). The dynamics of psychological goals: A new theory for observing and predicting human behavior. In K. Zhang (Ed). Dynamics of psychological goals: A self- organization theory of motivation and personality (pp.3-5). Quebec: Royal Collins Publishing Group INC. |
| [7] | Detert J. R., & Edmondson A. C . (2011). Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted rules of self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 461-488. |
| [8] | Duan J. Y., & Wei Q. J . (2012). The structure of voice efficacy and its role in the formation mechanism of employee voice behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44(7), 972-985. |
| [ 段锦云, 魏秋江 . (2012). 建言效能感结构及其在员工建言行为发生中的作用. 心理学报, 44(7), 972-985.] | |
| [9] | Duan J. Y., Zhang C., & Tian X. M . (2016). Review on the relationship between leadership and employee voice. Human Resource Development of China, (5), 16-26. |
| [ 段锦云, 张晨, 田晓明 . (2016). 员工建言行为的发生机制:来自领导的影响. 中国人力资源开发, (5), 16-26.] | |
| [10] | Dweck C. S., & Leggett E. L . (1988). A Social-cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273. |
| [11] | Hackman J. R., & Oldham G. R . (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279. |
| [12] | Hagedoorn M., van Yperen N. W., van de Vliert E., & Buunk B. P . (1999). Employees' reactions to problematic events: A circumplex structure of five categories of responses, and the role of job satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(3), 309-321. |
| [13] | Haken H . (1988). Information and self-organization (Guo, Z. A. et al., Trans.). Chengdu: Sichuan Educational Press. |
| [ 哈肯 . (1988). 信息与自组织(郭治安等译). 成都: 四川教育出版社.] | |
| [14] | Harzing A. W . (2006). Response styles in cross-national survey research: A 26-country study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6(2), 243-266. |
| [15] | Kelso J. A . (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Boston: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. |
| [16] | Klaas B. S., Olson-buchanan J. B., & Ward A . (2012). The determinants of alternative forms of workplace voice : An integrative perspective. Journal of Management, 38(1), 314-345. |
| [17] | Li Y. P., Zheng X. Y., & Liu Z. H . (2017). The effect of perceived insider status on employee voice behavior: A study from the perspective of conservation of resource theory. Chinese Journal of Management, 14(2), 196-204. |
| [ 李燕萍, 郑馨怡, 刘宗华 . (2017). 基于资源保存理论的内部人身份感知对员工建言行为的影响机制研究. 管理学报, 14(2), 196-204.] | |
| [18] | Liang J . (2014). Ethical leadership and employee voice: Examining a moderated-mediation model. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 46(2), 252-264. |
| [ 梁建 . (2014). 道德领导与员工建言: 一个调节-中介模型的构建与检验. 心理学报, 46(2), 252-264.] | |
| [19] | Liang J., Farh C. I. C., & Farh J. L . (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71-92. |
| [20] | Liu W., Zhu R., & Yang Y . (2010). I warn you because I like you: Voice behavior, employee identifications, and transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 189-202. |
| [21] | MacKinnon D. P., Lockwood C. M., & Williams J . (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99-128. |
| [22] | Morrison E. W . (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373-412. |
| [23] | Morrison E. W . (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 173-197. |
| [24] | Ng T. W., & Feldman D. C . (2012). Employee voice behavior: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(2), 216-234. |
| [25] | Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J. Y., & Podsakoff N. P . (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. |
| [26] | Preacher K. J., Zyphur M. J., & Zhang Z . (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15(3), 209-233. |
| [27] | Schultz, D. P. & Schultz, S. E . (2013). Theories of personality (10th Edition) . Boston: Cengage Learning. |
| [28] | Sniezek J. A., Schrah G. E., & Dalal R. S . (2004). Improving judgement with prepaid expert advice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17(3), 173-190. |
| [29] | Sun L. Y., Chen L., & Duan J. Y . (2017). Advice taking in decision-making: Strategies, influences and feature research. Advances in Psychological Science, 25(1), 169-179. |
| [ 孙露莹, 陈琳, 段锦云 . (2017). 决策过程中的建议采纳: 策略, 影响及未来展望. 心理科学进展, 25(1), 169-179.] | |
| [30] | van Dyne L., Ang S., & Botero I. C . (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359-1392. |
| [31] | Wang D., Gan C., Wu C., & Wang D . (2015). Ethical leadership and employee voice: Employee self-efficacy and self-impact as mediators. Psychological Reports, 116(3), 751-767. |
| [32] | Wang Y. Y., Ge J. Q., & Chai B. F . (2017). Comparative analysis on multiple mediating effects of ethical leadership on employee’s voice. Journal of Psychological Science, 40(3), 692-698. |
| [ 王永跃, 葛菁青, 柴斌锋 . (2017). 伦理型领导影响员工建言的多重中介效应比较研究. 心理科学, 40(3), 692-698.] | |
| [33] | Weiss M., Kolbe M., Grote G., Spahn D. R., & Grande B . (2017). We can do it! Inclusive leader language promotes voice behavior in multi-professional teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(3), 389-402. |
| [34] | Wu L. Z., Cao K. P., Chen Y. Y., & Tang G. Y . (2011). Transformational leadership and employee voice behavior: An examination of the mediating mechanisms. Chinese Journal of Management, 8(1), 61-66. |
| [ 吴隆增, 曹昆鹏, 陈苑仪, 唐贵瑶 . (2011). 变革型领导行为对员工建言行为的影响研究. 管理学报, 8(1), 61-66.] | |
| [35] | Yan C., & Wang S. H . (2018). The impact of authentic leadership on employee speaking-up behavior: The construction and test of a dual mediation model. Human Resource Development of China, 35(3), 18-28. |
| [ 闫春, 王思惠 . (2018). 真实型领导对员工上行建言行为的影响: 一个双重中介模型的建构与检验. 中国人力资源开发, 35(3), 18-28.] | |
| [36] | Zhang K . (2003). A self-organization goal theory of human motivation and its managerial implications. Journal of Renmin University of China, 18(2), 109-114. |
| [ 章凯 . (2003). 动机的自组织目标理论及其管理学蕴涵. 中国人民大学学报, 18(2), 109-114.] | |
| [37] | Zhang K . (2004). The self-organizing goal-information theory of interest. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 22(1), 62-66. |
| [ 章凯 . (2004). 兴趣的自组织目标-信息理论. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 22(1), 62-66.] | |
| [38] | Zhang K . (2014). Dynamics of psychological goals: A self- organization theory of motivation and personality. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press. |
| [ 章凯 . (2014). 目标动力学: 动机与人格的自组织原理 北京: 社会科学文献出版社.] | |
| [39] | Zhang K., Li P. B., Luo W. H., Zhang Q. H., & Cao Y. F . (2014). Strategies of integrating organizational and employees’ goals: A case study based on ZZJYT management in Haier Group. Management World,(4), 124-145. |
| [ 章凯, 李朋波, 罗文豪, 张庆红, 曹仰锋 . (2014). 组织-员工目标融合的策略: 基于海尔自主经营体管理的案例研究. 管理世界, (4), 124-145.] | |
| [40] | Zhang K., & Zhang B. Y . (1996). Impact of interest on text comprehension. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 28(3), 284-289. |
| [ 章凯, 张必隐 . (1996). 兴趣对文章理解的作用. 心理学报, 28(3), 284-289.] | |
| [41] | Zhang L. L., Yang F., & Gu Y. H . (2016). Inclusive leadership: Conception, measurement and relationships to related variables. Advances in Psychological Science, 24(9), 1467-1477. |
| [ 章璐璐, 杨付, 古银华 . (2016). 包容型领导: 概念、测量及与相关变量的关系. 心理科学进展, 24(9), 1467-1477.] | |
| [42] | Zhang Y., Huai M., & Xie Y . (2015). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice in China: A dual process model. Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 25-36. |
相关文章 1
| [1] | 李树文, 罗瑾琏. 领导-下属情绪评价能力一致与员工建言：内部人身份感知与性别相似性的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(9): 1121-1131. |
PDF全文下载地址:
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=4635
