威權領導是華人企業組織中特色最為鮮明的一種領導風格，且威權領導至今依然被許多成功的華人企業領導者所用，然而，以往有關威權領導的實徵研究多指出威權領導容易導致負面效果，有鑑於此，近年來，許多學者試圖釐清威權領導在研究與實務間的矛盾。本研究所探討的發展取向源自於發展式領導理論模型中的領導者動機，指出若領導者若以發展部屬為動機，使部屬將威權領導視為「磨練」、「為我好」的展現，將會帶來正向的部屬行為反應，因此。本研究試圖以發展取向作為威權領導與部屬反應間的調節變項，推論領導者發展取向能使部屬對威權領導的詮釋方式產生正向的變化。
本研究採情境實驗研究取徑，操弄發展取向和威權領導之高低程度情境，並以隨機分流網址的方式發放研究問卷，總計回收135份有效問卷，透過變異數分析方式，檢驗威權領導和發展取向的主要效果，並瞭解兩者間交互作用關係，以對發展式領導理論與威權領導的適用範圍作更進一步的探究。本研究發現：領導者展現發展取向能夠提升部屬任務績效與對主管公民行為，不論威權領導高或低的領導者，在展現發展取向時，皆會使部屬在任務績效的表現上及對主管公民行為上呈現正向的影響。對於高威權領導者來說，若希望能夠提升部屬任務績效與對主管公民行為，展現發展取向能夠獲得較好的結果。

Leader authoritarianism is one of the most distinctive leadership styles in Chinese organizations and has so far been used by many successful Chinese leaders. However, most of the extant literature pointed out that it would lead to negative results on subordinates’ outcomes. In the light of this, present studies have tried to clarify the contradiction between research and practice. Deriving from the developmental leadership model, development orientation is believed to bring positive subordinate reactions. Hence, this study attempts to find out the positive impact of leader authoritarianism and uses development orientation as a moderator between leader authoritarianism and subordinates’ responses. It proposed that when leaders adopt development orientation, it will transfer subordinates’ interpretation of leader authoritarian toward positive direction.
This study adopts a scenario experiment, manipulating the situation in the research questionnaires, which have been distributed by means of random assigned URL and result in 135 valid samples from various industries. To extend the theoretical framework of developmental leadership and explore the scope of leader authoritarianism, this study uses ANOVA analysis to test the interacting effect of development orientation and authoritarianism. The results indicate that leader’s development orientation can cause positive impact on subordinates’ task performance and supervisor-directed OCB, regardless of the leaders with high or low authoritarianism. Based on the results, this study suggested that leaders with high authoritarianism show development orientation if they want to improve subordinates’ task performance and supervisor-directed OCB.

論文審定書 i
致謝 ii
摘要 iii
Abstract iv
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 1
第二章 文獻探討 4
第一節 威權領導 4
第二節 領導者發展取向 8
第三節 研究假設 9
第三章 研究方法 12
第一節 研究設計 12
第二節 研究樣本與受試對象 13
第三節 研究工具 15
第四節 操弄檢核 22
第四章 研究結果 24
第一節 威權領導的主要效果 24
第二節 領導者發展取向的主要效果 25
第三節 領導者發展取向與威權領導的交互作用 26
第四節 研究結果摘述及假設檢定 28
第五章 討論與建議 30
第一節 理論貢獻 30
第二節 管理意涵 31
第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 32
參考文獻 34
附錄一「發展高威權高」情境腳本問卷 39
附錄二「發展高威權低」情境腳本問卷 45
附錄三「發展低威權高」情境腳本問卷 51
附錄四「發展低威權低」情境腳本問卷 57

吳宗祐、周麗芳、鄭伯壎（2008）。主管的權威取向及其對部屬順從與畏懼的知覺對威權領導的預測效果。本土心理學研究，（30），65-115。
吳宗祐、徐瑋伶、鄭伯壎（2002）。怒不可遏或忍氣吞聲：華人企業主管威權領導與部屬憤怒反應。本土心理學研究，18，3-49。
吳宗祐（2008）。主管威權領導與部屬的工作滿意度與組織承諾：信任的中介歷程與情緒智力的調節效果。本土心理學研究，（30），3-63。
周婉茹、周麗芳、鄭伯壎、任金剛（2010）。專權與尚嚴之辨：再探威權領導的內涵與恩威並濟的效果。本土心理學研究，（34），223-284。
周婉茹、鄭伯壎、連玉輝（2014）。威權領導：概念源起，現況檢討及未來方向。 中華心理學刊，56（2），165-189。
林姿葶、鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2014）。家長式領導：回顧與前瞻。本土心理學研究，42，3-82。
林姿葶、鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2014）。家長式領導二十年: 問題與解答。本土心理學研究，（42），147-177。
許金田、胡秀華、淩孝綦、鄭伯壎、周麗芳（2004）。家長式領導與組織公民行爲的關係：上下關係品質之中介效果。交大管理學報，2，119-149。
樊景立、鄭伯壎（2000a）。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。
樊景立、鄭伯壎（2000b）。家長式領導：再一次思考。本土心理學研究，13，219-226。
鄭伯壎（1995）。家長權威與領導行為之關係：一個台灣民營企業主持人的個案研究。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊，79，105-159。
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、黃敏萍、周麗芳（2002）。家長式領導及其效能：華人企業團隊的證據。 香港華人心理學報，3，85-112。
鄭伯壎、謝佩鴛、周麗芳（2002）。校長領導作風、上下關係品質及教師角色外行為：轉型式與家長式領導的效果。本土心理學研究，（17），105-161。

Bellah, R. N. (1970). Father and son in Christianity and Confucianism. In R. N. Bellah (Ed.), Beyond belief: Essays on religion in a post-traditional world, 76-99. New York: Harper & Row.

Chan, S. C. H., Huang, X., Snape, E., & Lam, C. K. (2013). The Janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates’ organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 108–128.

Cheng, B. S., Boer, D., Chou, L. F., Huang, M. P., Yoneyama, S., Shim, D., & Tsai, C.Y. (2014). Paternalistic leadership in four East Asian societies: Generalizability and cultural differences of the triad model. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(1), 82-90.

Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.

Cheng, B. S., Huang, M. P., & Chou, L. F. (2002). Paternalistic leadership and its effectiveness: Evidence from Chinese organizational teams. Journal of psychology in Chinese societies (Hong Kong), 2002, 3.1: 85-112.

Chen, C. C., & Farh, J. L. (2008, June). Developments in understanding Chinese leadership: Pateralism and its elaborations, moderations, and alternative. Paper presented at the 2008 International Association for Chinese Management Research (IACMR) Biannual Conference, Guangchou, China.

Chen, C. C., & Farh, J. L. (2010). Developments in understanding Chinese leadership: Paternalism and its elaborations, moderations, and alternatives. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), Oxford handbook of Chinese psychology, 599-622. New York: Oxford University Press.

Chen, XP., Eberly, M. B., Chiang, T. J., Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2014). Affective trust in Chinese leaders: Linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of Management, 40(3), 796–819.

Dorfman, P. W., & Howell, J. P. (1988). Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited. Advances in international comparative management, 3(1), 127-150.

Farh, J. L., Cheng, B., Chou, L. F., & Chu, X. (2004). Authority and Benevolence: Employee’s Responses to Paternalistic Leadership in China. In Academy of Management Annual Meeting, August 6-11, New Orleans.

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 UK.

Farh, J. L., Liang, J., Chou, L. F., & Cheng, B. S. (2008). Paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations: Research progress and future research directions. In C. C. Chen & Y. T. Lee (Eds.), Leadership and management in China: Philosophies, theories, and practices. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Huang, X., Xu, E., Chiu, W., Lam, C., & Farh, J. L. (2015). When authoritarian leaders outperform transformational leaders: Firm performance in a harsh economic environment. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1(2), 180-200.

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

Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill.

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. Journal of American Academy of Business, 10(2), 127–137.

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise, New York (McGraw-Hill Book Company) 1960.

Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of management, 34(3), 566-593.

Redding, S. G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Wang, A. C. (2017). Developmental leadership: How Chinese leaders integrate control and care to cultivate subordinates. Paper accepted for presentation at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Georgia.

Wei, S.Y. (2018). Leaders’ development orientation: Scale development and validation.

Westwood, R. I. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: The cultural basis for “paternalistic headship” among the overseas Chinese. Organization Studies, 8, 445-480.

Whitley, R. (1992). Business systems in East Asia: Firms, markets and societies. London: Sage.

Wu, M., Huang, X., Li, C., & Liu, W. (2012). Perceived interactional justice and trust‐in‐supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership. Management and Organization Review, 8(1), 97-121

Wu, T. Y., Hsu, W. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2002). Expressing or suppressing anger: Subordinate’s anger responses to supervisors’ authoritarian behaviors in a Taiwan enterprise. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 18, 3-49.

Yang, K. S. (1995). Chinese social orientation: An integrative analysis. In T. Y. Lin, W.S. Tseng & Y. K. Yeh (Eds.), Chinese societies and mental health: 19–39. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.