在現代組織中，若員工覺得能自在且坦率地發表建議、意見或顧慮，組織就更有機會面對挑戰，因此激勵員工提出建言，成為研究者與實務管理者均關注的議題。本研究認為在人員剛加入組織時，就對建言抱持著良好的信念，將對其後續之建言行為有正向幫助。然而，過往的研究鮮少探討新進人員對於建言的信念與行為關係，本研究採用內隱建言信念中的「假定之目標認同」、「致職涯負面結果」與「面面俱到而後言」做為影響三種不同建言行為 （建議焦點建言、問題焦點建言與意見焦點建言）的前因，以理性行為理論，加入建言意圖作為內隱建言信念與建言行為間之中介變數，同時探討當新進員工知覺到同事建言期待時，是否能調節前述之中介關係。本研究透過兩個時間點的問卷資料收集方式，檢驗前述模式對建言行為的同時效果 （N = 144）與延遲效果 （N = 113）。迴歸分析結果顯示，新進人員之內隱建言信念並不會直接影響建言行為，但對不同時間點的三種建言行為，會分別有不同的解釋力。同時，其知覺之同事建言期待會對兩種內隱建言信念與建言意圖的關係有顯著的調節效果。但本研究也發現在調節式中介效果分析中，知覺同事建言期待亦會調節兩項內隱建言信念經由建言意圖，進而影響建言行為的間接效果。最後此研究亦針對新進員工之建言行為，提出相關管理意涵與未來研究建議。

Nowadays, if employees can speak out freely in the organization, the organization has a better chance to face challenges. Therefore, motivating employees to voice has become an essential topic of concern to both researchers and practitioners. This study suggests that when newcomers joined the organization, if they held reasonable beliefs about voice, they would more intend to voice. However, previous research rarely explores the relationship between beliefs and behavior about voice of newcomer. This study examines the relationship between self-protective voice belief (i.e., presumed target identification, negative career consequences of voice, need solid data or solutions to speak up) and voice behavior (i.e., suggestion-focused voice, problem-focused voice, opinion-focused voice). Based on Theory of Reasoned Action, this study investigates the mediating role of voice intention and the moderating role of perceived coworkers' voice expectations and explores the moderated mediation model. This study tested the research model via an online questionnaire at two-time points to differentiate concurrent effect（N = 144）and lagged effect（N = 113）on voice behavior. The results of hierarchical regression analyses show that the self-protective voice belief of newcomers does not directly relate to their voice behaviors, but they have different effects for the three types of voice behavior at different time points. Also, voice intention does not mediate the negative relationship between two dimensions of self-protective voice belief and three dimensions of voice behavior. However, this study found that the perceived coworkers' voice expectation moderates the two dimensions of self-protective voice belief through voice intention, and then shows the indirect effect of voice behavior. This study provides several practical implications and future directions for the researchers to study the voice behavior of newcomers.

國立中山大學研究生學位論文審定書 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iii
目錄 iv
圖次 vi
表次 vi
第一章 緒論 1
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 員工建言行為之定義回顧 5
一、員工建言行為 5
二、單一向度的建言行為 6
三、多重向度的建言行為 7
四、小結 8
第二節 新進人員內隱建言信念對建言行為之影響 9
一、內隱建言信念 9
二、內隱建言信念與建言行為的關係 11
第三節 建言意圖對內隱建言信念與建言行為間關係的中介效果 13
一、 理性行為理論 14
二、建言意圖的中介效果 15
第四節 知覺同事建言期待的調節效果 16
第三章 研究方法 20
第一節 研究對象 20
第二節 研究程序 20
第三節 研究工具 22
第四節 分析程序 25
第四章 研究結果 26
第一節 相關分析 26
第二節 驗證性因素分析 26
第三節 假設檢定 28
第五章 研究結論與建議 46
第一節 研究結果討論 46
第二節 管理意涵 47
第三節 研究限制與發展 48
參考文獻 52
附錄 56
附件一、問卷調查表-第一次問卷 56
附件二、問卷調查表-第二次問卷 60

一、 中文文獻
楊承穎（2012）。內隱建言信念會讓員工產生沉默行為嗎？建言氣候知覺與感受建言義務的干擾角色。國立彰化師範大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
郭智涵（2013）。建言或諫言？探討員工正、負向心情與庫促進性／預防性建言行為的關係：環境知覺與領導風格的干擾效果。國立中山大學人力資源管理所碩士論文
宋淑鈺（2013）。LMX對情感性承諾與建言行為影響之研究：工作不安全感之調節作用。國立中山大學人力資源管理所碩士論文
楊美娟（2014）。權威性領導對情感性承諾與建言行為之影響：工作不安全感的中介與調節作用。國立中山大學人力資源管理所碩士論
楊宗斌（2019）。3/4發端午獎金！送員工：傳統粽、甜點 65%曾向老闆提建言！八成二遇過職場小人。Yes123求職網。取自：https://www.yes123.com.tw/admin/white_paper/article.asp?id=20190618181150

二、英文文獻
Abelson, M. A. J. H. C. M. R.（1986）. Strategic management of turnover: a model for the health service administrator. 11（2）, 61-71.
Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R.（1991）. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions: sage.
Ajzen.（1991）. The theory of planned behavior. 50（2）, 179-211.
Ashford, S. J., Sutcliffe, K. M., Christianson, M. K. J. V., & organizations, s. i.（2009）. Speaking up and speaking out: The leadership dynamics of voice in organizations. 175-202.
Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. J. R. i. o. b.（1995）. Labeling processes in the organization. 17, 413-461.
Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., Wilson, D. C., Volpone, S. D., & Killham, E. A.（2011）. Does voice go flat? How tenure diminishes the impact of voice. Human Resource Management, 50（1）, 147-158. doi:10.1002/hrm.20403
Brown, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit” In KA Bollen and JS Long (Eds). Testing structural equation models.
Bandura, A. J. P. r.（1977）. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. 84（2）, 191.
Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. J. T. L. Q.（2007）. The influence of leaders' and other referents' normative expectations on individual involvement in creative work. 18（1）, 35-48.
Chiu, C.-y., Dweck, C. S., Tong, J. Y.-y., Fu, J. H.-y. J. J. o. P., & Psychology, S.（1997）. Implicit theories and conceptions of morality. 73（5）, 923.
Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. J. A. o. m. j.（2007）. Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? , 50（4）, 869-884.
Detert, J. R., Burris, E. R., & Harrison, D. A. (2010). Debunking four myths about employee silence. Harvard business review, 88(6), 26.
Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. J. A. o. m. j.（2011）. Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted rules of self-censorship at work. 54（3）, 461-488.
Drucker, P.（2018）. The effective executive: Routledge.
Duan, J., Li, C., Xu, Y., & Wu, C. h. J. J. o. O. B.（2017）. Transformational leadership and employee voice behavior: A Pygmalion mechanism. 38（5）, 650-670.
Ducharme, L. J., Martin, J. K. J. W., & occupations.（2000）. Unrewarding work, coworker support, and job satisfaction: A test of the buffering hypothesis. 27（2）, 223-243.
Dutton, J. E., & Ashford, S. J. J. A. o. m. r.（1993）. Selling issues to top management. 18（3）, 397-428.
Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. J. J. o. m. s.（2003）. Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. 40（6）, 1359-1392.
Edmondson, A. C.（2003）. Speaking up in the operating room: How team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams. Journal of Management Studies, 40（6）, 1419-1452. doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00386
Farmer, S. M., Tierney, P., & Kung-Mcintyre, K. J. A. o. m. J.（2003）. Employee creativity in Taiwan: An application of role identity theory. 46（5）, 618-630.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I.（1977）. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.
Francis, J., Eccles, M. P., Johnston, M., Walker, A., Grimshaw, J. M., Foy, R., . . . Bonetti, D.（2004）. Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual for health services researchers. In: Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. J. P. r.（1995）. Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. 102（1）, 4.
Harris, L., Cooper‐Thomas, H., Smith, P., & Smollan, R.（2020）. Reclaiming the social in socialization: A practice‐based understanding of newcomer adjustment. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 31（2）, 193-211. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21384
Hirschman, A. O.（1970）. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states（Vol. 25）: Harvard university press.
Klaas, B. S., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Ward, A.-K. J. J. o. m.（2012）. The determinants of alternative forms of workplace voice: An integrative perspective. 38（1）, 314-345.
Lebel, R., Wheeler-Smith, S., & Morrison, E.（2011）. Employee voice behavior: Development and validation of a new multi-dimensional measure. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, San Antonio, Texas.
LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. J. J. o. a. p.（2001）. Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. 86（2）, 326.
Levy, S. R., Chiu, C.-y., Hong, Y.-y. J. G. P., & Relations, I.（2006）. Lay theories and intergroup relations. 9（1）, 5-24.
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. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0176
Lin, X., Lam, L. W., & Zhang, L. L. J. A. P. J. o. M.（2019）. The curvilinear relationship between job satisfaction and employee voice: Speaking up for the organization and the self. 1-21.
Liu, W., Zhu, R., & Yang, Y. J. T. l. q.（2010）. I warn you because I like you: Voice behavior, employee identifications, and transformational leadership. 21（1）, 189-202.
Lussier, R., & Achua, C.（2004）. Leadership, theory, application skill development 2 nd ed. In: Engan MN: Thomson-West.
Maynes, T. D., & Podsakoff, P. M. J. J. o. A. P.（2014）. Speaking more broadly: An examination of the nature, antecedents, and consequences of an expanded set of employee voice behaviors. 99（1）, 87.
Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. J. J. o. m. s.（2003）. An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why. 40（6）, 1453-1476.
Morrison.（1994）. Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of the employee's perspective. Academy of management journal
37（6）, 1543-1567.
Morrison.（2011）. Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 5（1）, 373-412.
Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. J. A. o. M. r.（2000）. Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. 25（4）, 706-725.
Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. J. J. o. O. B.（2012）. Employee voice behavior: A meta‐analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. 33（2）, 216-234.
Parker, L. E. J. J. o. a. p.（1993）. When to fix it and when to leave: relationships among perceived control, self-efficacy, dissent, and exit. 78（6）, 949.
Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. J. J. o. m.（2010）. Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. 36（4）, 827-856.
Qian, J., Li, X., Wang, B., Song, B., Zhang, W., Chen, M., & Qu, Y. J. F. i. p.（2018）. A role theory perspective on how and when Goal-Focused leadership influences employee voice behavior. 9, 1244.
Ross, M. J. P. r.（1989）. Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal histories. 96（2）, 341.
Sedikides, C., Anderson, C. A. J. P., & Bulletin, S. P.（1992）. Causal explanations of defection: A knowledge structure approach. 18（4）, 420-429.
Starzyk, A., Sonnentag, S., Albrecht, A. G. J. J. o. O., & Psychology, O.（2018）. The affective relevance of suggestion‐focused and problem‐focused voice: A diary study on voice in meetings. 91（2）, 340-361.
Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. J. A. o. M. j.（1998）. Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. 41（1）, 108-119.
Vaughan, D.（1996）. The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA: University of Chicago press.
Zhou, J., & George, J. M. J. A. o. M. j.（2001）. When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. 44（4）, 682-696.