Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0620118-161741 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0620118-161741
論文名稱
Title
教練對運動員的生活照顧行為展現與其效應:理論模式的建構
Coaches' life consideration behavior toward athletes and its effects:Building a theoretical model
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
55
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2018-07-05
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2018-07-25
關鍵字
Keywords
仁慈領導、生活照顧、sensemaking、運動員、教練、扮演、創作編寫、自我詮釋、觀察覺知
life consideration, Benevolent Leadership, sensemaking, coach, athletes
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5753 次,被下載 100
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5753 times, has been downloaded 100 times.
中文摘要
生活照顧在華人組織中是一常見的行為,自家長式領導以來就一直為華人領導概念中一重要的面向,然而實際上生活照顧如何發揮影響效果鮮少被進行獨立的探討,即使曾以量化方式進行討論,但並未從中得知生活照顧具體影響主管及部屬之歷程,因此本研究以質化訪談的方式找尋生活照顧行為並將其分為兩個面向以進行後續影響效果之歸納。訪談對象以相處時間極長而易於觀察非專業面向之關係存在之體育面中的教練與運動員為主軸,藉由運動員之口述來分類教練對其之生活照顧行為,並以sensemaking架構將運動員感受到之生活照顧舉動轉化為對教練行為之詮釋、自身想法改變及雙方關係轉變之歷程。

研究發現當教練執行生活照顧行為時,運動員傾向認為教練對待自己如同親人或摯友般因而樂意回饋教練的照顧,在運動表現上或日常生活上都將表現更為優異;然而當運動員企盼教練在某些關鍵時刻點給予生活照顧但教練卻沒達成運動員期待之事時,雙方關係將一直停留在工具性關係成分較高的混合性關係中。最後亦討論本研究之理論與實務貢獻和研究限制。
Abstract
Life consideration is a common behavior in Chinese organizations. However, it is seldom being discussed in how it brings influence in practice and how necessary it is in Chinese world. Even though life consideration being quantitative discussed once, it did not reveal that life consideration has a specific impact on the process of the supervisor and the subordinate. Therefore, we focus on using qualitative research to find the life consideration between supervisor and the subordinate and figure out follow-up influence. As for interviewees, we focus on coaches and athletes because they not only interact with each other during training period, but also in the life time. As a result, it is easy to observe life consideration between coaches and athletes. We are going to classify coaches' life consideration behaviors by athletes' oral dictation, using the sensemaking framework to transform the life consideration perceived by athletes into the interpretation of coach’s behaviors, the change of their own ideas, and the relationship between coaches and athletes.

This research found that most of the athletes tend to believe that coaches treat themselves as family or close friends when coach did life consideration behavior to them. Then, athletes are willing to perform better performance than before, they are also willing to give a hand to coach while the coach encountered some trouble.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書 i
致謝 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
圖次 vii
表次 vii
第一章 研究背景與動機 1
第二章 文獻探討 4
第一節 仁慈領導 4
第二節 Sensemaking 6
第三章 研究方法 10
第一節 研究設計 10
第二節 研究樣本 11
第三節 研究程序及資料收集 13
第四節 資料分析 14
第四章 研究發現 16
第一節 次標籤分類 16
第二節 Noticing 觀察覺知 17
第三節 Interpreting 詮釋 19
第四節 Authoring 創作編寫 24
第五節 Enacting 扮演 25
第五章 討論 29
第一節 Sensemaking理論模型 29
第二節 觀察覺知與自我詮釋 30
第三節 自我詮釋與創作編寫 33
第四節 創作編寫與扮演 35
第六章 結論與建議 37
第一節 理論貢獻 37
第二節 實務貢獻 38
第三節 研究限制與未來建議 39
參考文獻 40
附錄-訪談題目 47
參考文獻 References
周宜龍. (2009). 自我效能, 環境不確定性知覺與部屬效能: 鼓舞與仁慈領導之調節. 元智大學管理研究所學位論文, 1-75.

林姿葶, & 鄭伯壎. (2012). 華人領導者的噓寒問暖與提攜教育: 仁慈領導之雙構面模式. 本土心理學研究, (37), 253-302.

姜定宇, 丁捷, & 林伶瑾. (2012). 家長式領導與部屬效能: 信任主管與不信任主管的中介效果. 中華心理學刊, 54(3), 269-291.

許義雄. (1989). 運動教練的角色-就人本主義觀點談起. 中華體育季刊, 3(3), 60-62.

許金田, 胡秀華, 凌孝綦, 鄭伯壎, & 周麗芳. (2004). 家長式領導與組織公
民行為的關係: 上下關係品質之中介效果, 交大管理學報, 2 (24), 119-149.

陳嵩, 陳光偉, & 李佩芬. (2011). 垂直人際信任對部屬工作績效之影響: 上司家長式領導的角色. 管理學報, 28(1), 1-29.

楊國樞. (1998). 家族化歷程, 泛家族主義及組織管理. 海峽兩岸之組織與管理.台北: 遠流出版公司.

樊景立, & 鄭伯壎. (2000). 華人組織的家長式領導: 一項文化觀點的分
析. 本土心理學研究, (13), 126-180.

蔡俊賢. (2002). 連續十週保齡球教學效果探討. 大專體育學術專刊, 110-121.

鄭志富, & 方明營. (1994). 大專院校足球教練領導行為與運動員滿意度關係之研究. 未出版碩士論文, 國立台灣師範大學體育研究所, 台北市.

鄭伯壎. (1995a). 差序格局與華人組織行為. 本土心理學研究, (3), 142-
219.

鄭伯壎. (1999). 華人人際關係研究的困境與出路. 本土心理學研究, (12), 203-214.

鄭伯壎. (2005). 華人組織行為研究的方向與策略: 由西化到本土化. 本土心理學研究, (24), 191-245.

鄭伯壎, 周麗芳, & 樊景立. (2000). 家長式領導: 三元模式的建構與測
量. 本土心理學研究, (14), 3-64.

鄭伯壎, 任金剛, & 周麗芳. (2004). 家長式領導: 現代轉化及其影響機
制. 教育部華人本土心理學研究追求卓越計畫研究報告》. 台北: 國立台灣大學心理學系.

鄭伯壎, 林姿葶, 鄭弘岳, 周麗芳, 任金剛, & 樊景立. (2010). 家長式領導
與部屬效能: 多層次分析觀點. 中華心理學刊, 52(1), 1-23.

蘇英芳, & 黃賀. (2006). 魅力領導, 家長式領導, 德性領導與領導效應之研究. 中山管理評論, 14(4), 939-968.

Bernard, H. Research Methods in Cultural Anthropology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1988.

Bowers, D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 238-263.

Brown, A. D. (2000). Making sense of inquiry sensemaking. Journal of Management Studies, 37(1), 45–75.

Brown, A. D., & Jones, M. (2000). Honourable members and dishonourable deeds: Sensemaking, impression management and legitimation in the ‘Arms to Iraq Affair’. Human Relations, 53(5), 655–689.

Christianson, M. K., Farkas, M. T., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Weick, K. E. (2009). Learning through rare events: Significant interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum. Organization Science, 20(5), 846–860.

Clark, E., & Geppert, M. (2011). Subsidiary integration as identity construction and institution building: A political sensemaking approach. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2), 395-416.

Corbin, J. (2007). Strategies for qualitative data analysis. Journal of Qualitative Research, 67-85.

Cornelissen, J. (2012). Sensemaking under pressure: The influence of professional roles and social accountability on the creation of sense. Organization Science, 23(1), 118–137.

Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of management review, 9(2), 284-295.

Dansereau Jr, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational behavior and human performance, 13(1), 46-78.

Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct. Mineola, NY: Dover.

Drath, W. H., and Palus, C. J. (1994). Making common sense: Leadership as meaning-making in a community of practice. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999). Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A sensemaking perspective. Academy of management review, 24(2), 286-307.

Farh, L. J., Liang, J., Chou, L. F., & Cheng, B. S. (2008). Paternalistic leadership in Chinese Organizations: Research progress and future research direction. In Leadership and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices (p. 171).

Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In Management and organizations in the Chinese context (pp. 84-127). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Fleishman, E. A. (1953). The description of supervisory behavior. Journal of applied psychology, 37(1), 1.

Hammond, M., Clapp-Smith, R., & Palanski, M. (2017). Beyond (just) the workplace: A theory of leader development across multiple domains. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 481-498.

House, J. S. (1981). Work stress and social support. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing.

Hunt, J. G., Boal, K. B., & Dodge, G. E. (1999). The effects of visionary and crisis responsive charisma on followers: An experimental examination of two kinds of charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 423−448

Hwang, K. K. (1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American journal of Sociology, 92(4), 944-974.

James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Dover.

LaPierre, D., & Moro, J. (2002). Five Past Midnight: The Epic Story of the World’s Deadliest Industrial Accident.

Liang, S. K., Ling, H. C., & Hsieh, S. Y. (2007). The Mediating Effects of Leader-Member Exchange Quality to Influence the Relationships between Paternalistic Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 10(2), 127-137.

Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative science quarterly, 226-251.

Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of management journal, 48(1), 21-49.

Meyer, A. D. (1982). Adapting to environmentaljolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(4), 515–537.

Milliken, F. J. (1990). Perceiving and interpreting environmental change: An examination of college administrators' interpretation of changing demographics. Academy of management Journal, 33(1), 42-63.

Monin, P., Noorderhaven, N., Vaara, E., & Kroon, D. (2013). Giving sense to and making sense of justice in postmerger integration. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 256-284.

Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2006). Leader–member exchange (LMX), paternalism, and delegation in the Turkish business culture: An empirical investigation. Journal of international business studies, 37(2), 264-279.

Pye, L. W. (1985). Asian Power and Politics: The Cultural Dimensions of Authority.

Redding, G. (2013). The spirit of Chinese capitalism (Vol. 22). Walter de Gruyter.

Rudolph, J. W., Morrison, J. B., & Carroll, J. S. (2009). The dynamics of action-oriented problem solving: Linking interpretation and choice. Academy of Management Review, 34(4), 733-756.

Sabock, R. J. (1985). The coach. Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc., Marketing Director, Box 5076, Champaign, IL 61820.

Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization science, 4(4), 577-594.

Smircich, L., & Morgan, G. (1982). Leadership: The management of meaning. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 18(3), 257-273.

Sonenshein, S. (2007). The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking-intuition model. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1022-1040.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York, NY, US: Free Press.Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Wang, A. C., & Cheng, B. S. (2010). When does benevolent leadership lead to creativity? The moderating role of creative role identity and job autonomy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 106-121.

Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing.

Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations [1]. Journal of management studies, 25(4), 305-317.

Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative science quarterly, 628-652.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Sage.

Weick, K. E. (2010). Reflections on enacted sensemaking in the Bhopal disaster. The Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 537–550.

Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization science, 16(4), 409-421.

Westwood, R. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: The cultural basis for 'paternalistic headship' among the overseas Chinese. Organization studies, 18(3), 445-480.

Wicks, D. (2001). Institutionalized mindsets of invulnerability: Differentiated institutional fields and the antecedents of organizational crisis. Organization Studies, 22(4), 659–692.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code