【作者】 姜薇薇；

【导师】 孙乃纪；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 企业管理， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 近年来，员工表达建议的行为(学术界称之为建言行为)持续受到关注。建言行为是指员工为改善组织现状而主动表达建议的行为(Premeaux&Bedeian，2003；Van Dyne,1998)。研究证明，建言行为可为组织带来积极影响。例如，建言行为是组织创新过程关键的“第一步”(LePine et al,1998);有利于团队学习(Edmondson,1999)；改善与创新工作流程(Argyris&Schon,1978)；实现组织危机预警(Schwartz&Wald,2003)；提升员工的工作产出，如工作满意度、组织承诺等（Tangirala&Ramanujam,2008）。相反，缺乏建言行为，则可能导致严重的组织问题(Fuller J B et al,2007)。建言行为对组织的积极效应与价值已得到共识。但是，在管理实践中，员工却往往“知而不言”，宁愿保持沉默而不轻易表达建议。上述现象得到管理者的关注，并引发学术界对建言行为影响因素的讨论。已有研究从员工个体因素、领导因素、组织情境因素、文化价值观因素等对建言行为的产生展开丰富的讨论。然而，上述讨论并不足以全面涵盖建言行为的可能影响因素。正如已有研究所揭示，员工表达建议可能心存顾虑（例如担心冒犯权威、破坏人际和谐等），因此需要员工承担个人风险。本研究认为，当员工做出表达建议的决策，表示员工宁愿承担个人风险而希望组织从中获益，这意味着员工具有较为强烈的“利组织”动机（员工基于工具性动机，即为从组织中获取好处，而刻意表现出建言行为不在本研究范围之内）。基于社会交换理论，员工的“利组织”行为可视为对组织的“回报”，同时也意味着员工受到组织的“积极对待”。因此，从组织对员工“积极对待”的视角讨论建言行为的产生是合理的可能路径。“组织支持感”能够很好的描述员工感知到的组织的“积极对待”。因此，本研究尝试从组织支持感视角讨论员工建言行为的产生。根据文献回顾，仅有个别研究曾对二者之关系展开讨论，例如，有研究将建言行为视为组织公民行为的一个维度（并没有将建言行为视为独立的构念），讨论组织支持感与“组织公民行为-建言”之关系(如Farh et al,2007)；也有研究讨论不当督导与建言行为之关系时，将组织支持感视为中介变量(如李锐等，2009)。上述研究虽能够证实组织支持感对建言行为的影响，但是，并没有解释二者之间的作用机制，同时，也鲜有其他研究对此予以关注。根据社会交换理论，组织支持感可描述员工对组织的“积极对待”的感知，从而能够预测员工的回报行为（如建言行为或其他角色外行为）。具体而言，如果能够解释组织支持感对员工的回报行为（如建言行为）的作用机制，不仅有助于深层次的了解员工建言的内部动机，同时有助于了解组织支持感因何而发挥效用。为更好的解释上述问题，本研究基于文献回顾与分析，从心理所有权视角解释组织支持感对建言行为的作用机制，构建“组织支持感-心理所有权-建言行为”的理论模型。此外，领导成员交换可视为描述员工与上级互动的重要变量。Lord et al(2001)认为，领导者能够塑造并影响下属的工作情境。该观点也得到其他学者的认同(Shao et al,2011)。尤其在华人组织内，员工同直接领导之间的关系，是影响员工的工作情境的主要因素(郑伯埙,1999)。由上级为主导而形成的工作情境可能影响员工对组织的态度与感知。因此，领导成员交换可能成为“组织支持感-心理所有权”之关系的权变因素。但尚未有研究对此进行讨论和验证。此外，由于中西方的文化差异显著，中国情境下的建言行为可能与西方情境下的建言行为在职能和机制方面均有所不同。例如，中国传统文化影响下的本土变量可能使组织支持感与建言行为的关系有所不同。“传统性”这一构念，作为能够很好的体现中国人传统价值观的变量(Hui et al.，2004)，对于组织支持感与建言行为之关系可能起到权变作用，因此，有必要针对上述理论关系进行理论分析与实证检验。针对上述问题，本研究在构建“组织支持感-心理所有权-建言行为”模型基础上，探讨了领导成员交换与传统性在上述关系模型中的调节作用。本研究通过与7家企业的10名员工进行深度访谈，以及遍布中国20多个城市的779份有效调查问卷的收集，采用描述性统计分析、方差分析、因子分析和回归分析等方法，对上述理论模型进行了实证检验。本研究得到如下结论：1.组织支持感对建言行为及各维度具有正向影响。具体包括：组织支持感对建言行为、促进性建言、抑制性建言均具有正向影响。2.心理所有权及其各维度对组织支持感与建言行为及其各维度之关系起到中介作用。具体包括：心理所有权对组织支持感与建言行为之关系起到中介作用（完全中介）；心理所有权对组织支持感与促进性建言之关系起到中介作用（部分中介）；心理所有权对组织支持感与抑制性建言之关系起到中介作用（完全中介）；心理所有权的各维度，自我效能、责任感、归属感、自我身份分别对组织支持感与建言行为及各维度（促进性建言、抑制性建言）之关系起到中介作用（部分中介）。3.领导成员交换及各维度对组织支持感与心理所有权之关系起到正向调节作用。具体包括：领导成员交换对组织支持感与心理所有权之关系起到正向调节作用；领导成员交换的各维度，情感、忠诚、贡献、专业尊敬，分别对组织支持感与心理所有权之关系起到正向调节作用。并且，根据数据分析结果，专业尊敬维度的调节效应最强，而忠诚维度的调节作用最弱。4.传统性对组织支持感与建言行为、促进性建言具有正向调节作用，而对组织支持感与抑制性建言之关系的调节作用则不显著。本研究的理论贡献在于：1.丰富了建言影响因素的研究。从理论层面来看，基于社会交换理论，讨论组织支持感对于建言行为的预测作用是可行的，并且具有良好的解释力。2.推动心理所有权理论的研究进展。首先，识别出心理所有权对组织支持感与建言行为之关系的中介作用。其次，验证了领导成员交换对于组织支持感与心理所有权的正向调节作用。这为讨论心理所有权的产生路径提供了新的理论思考。此外，在心理所有权的测量方面，选取多维度的心理所有权量表，针对心理所有权的各个维度（自我效能、责任感、归属感、自我身份）对组织支持感与建言行为之关系的中介作用进行验证。上述研究推动了心理所有权在构念、测量及产生路径等层面的实证研究进展。3.识别出文化价值观因素对于中国情境下建言行为的影响。本研究验证了传统性对于组织支持感与建言行为、促进性建言的调节作用。但是，传统性对于组织支持感与抑制性建言的调节作用并不显著。该结果充分证实促进性建言与抑制性建言的区别。从而说明，将建言行为区分为促进性建言与抑制性建言具有理论意义。本研究结论能够为管理实践带来如下启示：1.组织应当关注能够促进员工建言的因素。例如，管理者应当关注员工对组织的支持感知，重视员工社会情感需求的满足。2.管理者应当重视员工对组织的所有权情感。因为员工心理所有权的形成意味着员工“主人翁意识”的建立，能够使员工像企业的所有者一样思考与行动。3.本文的研究结果表明，员工表达促进性建议与抑制性建议，需要克服不同程度的心理压力。抑制性建议的表达，需要员工消除更多的心理顾虑。管理者应当为员工提供更多的支持，帮助其消除顾虑，使其能够畅所欲言。更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent years, behaviors of employees’ expressing opinions (named “voice behavior” inthe academic field) are becoming the focus continually. Voice behavior means that employeesexpress their own opinions about their organization or other elements,in order to improve thecurrent organization situation (Premeaux&Bedeian，2003；Van Dyne,1998). Researches showsthat,Voice behavior can bring positive impacts on organizations. For example, It is the key “firststep” for organizational innovation(LePine et al,1998);It is conducive to team learning(Edmondson,1999);It helps to make the improvement and innovation for work process (Argyris&Schon,1978); It helps to realize the early warning of organization crisis (Schwartz&Wald,2003);Also, it helps to improve the work outcome of employees, such as job satisfaction,organizational commitment and so on (Tangirala&Ramanujam,2008).On the contrary, lack ofvoice behavior may result in serious problems.The value of voice behavior and its positive effects on organizations have been admittedwidely. However, in management practices, employees often “know but not to say”. They wouldkeep silent and not to express their opinions. That is a problem. It draws the attention ofmanagers, and causes such hot discussions in the academic field. The existing literatures havediscussed from different perspectives, such as the individual perspective, leadership perspective,organizational contextual perspective, and cultural values perspective and so on. However, it isnot enough to cover all possible influencing factors. As some researches have shown, beforevoicing, employees may have so many worries (offending authorities, destroying interpersonalharmony and so on). Therefore, voice behaviors require employees to take personal risks. Theauthor believes that when an employee decides to voice, he or she prefers to take personal risksand has expects that the organization should benefit from his\her voice. This means that theemployee have a strong “motive of benefit the organizations”(voicing based on instrumentalmotive is not included in this study). Based on the theory of social exchange, behaviors of“benefit the organization” can be regarded as a way to reward the organization. It also means thatthe employee may have received “positive organization treatment”. Therefore, discussing voice behavior from the perspective of“positive organization treatment” is possible and reasonable.The construct “Perceived organizational support” can be very good to describe “positiveorganization treatment”which is perceived by employees. Therefore, this study discusses how topromote voice behavior from the perspective of “perceived organizational support”.Accordingto literature reviews, only a few study have discussed the relationship between “perceivedorganizational support” and “voice behavior”. For example, some research discusses therelationship between “perceived organizational support” and “OCB-voice” by regarding voicebehavior as one dimension of OCB(not an independent construct)(Farh et al,2007);Some otherresearch believes that “perceived organizational support” is a mediator between “abusivesupervision” and “voice behavior”(Li Rui et al,2009).Although studies above confirm that“perceived organizational support” has positive effects on “voice behavior”, they did not explainthe mechanism between the two. Meanwhile, few studies have focused on this issue. Accordingto social exchange theory,“perceived organizational support” means employees’ perceptionstowards “organizational positive treating”. Therefore,“perceived organizational support”canpredict reward behaviors of employees (such as voice behavior or other extra-role behaviors).Specifically, if we can explain the mechanism between “perceived organizational support” andvoice behavior, it will not only contribute to understand voice motives deeply,but also contributeto understand how “perceived organizational support” take effects.To explain this problem better, based on literature reviews, this research will explain themechanism of how “perceived organizational support” have effects on “voice behavior” from theperspective of psychological ownership. This research will build the theoretical model of“perceived organizational support-psychological ownership-voice behavior”. In addition,leader-member exchange can be regarded as an important variable describing the interaction ofemployees and their superior. Lord et al (2001) confirmed that leaders can shape and influencethe work-situation of their subordinates. This result has also been approved by other scholars(Shao et al,2011). Especially in Chinese organizations, the relationship between leaders and theirsubordinates becomes the main factors affecting the work-situation of employees (Zheng Boxun,1999). The work-situation dominated by leaders may affect the employees’ attitudes andperceptions to the organization. Therefore, leader-member exchange may become thecontingency factor of the relationship between “perceived organizational support”and“psychological ownership”. But there is no any other discussion about this issue in the existingliterature. In addition, because of significant cultural differences, the function and mechanism of voicebehavior in China context and in Western context may be different. For example, sometraditional culture variables may make the relationship between “perceived organizationalsupport”and “voice behavior” different. As one of variables which can reflect the Chinesetraditional values well (Hui et al.,2004),“Traditionality” may play a moderating role in therelationship of “perceived organizational support-voice behavior”. So it is necessary to verifythe model from theoretical perspective and empirical perspective.In view of the issues above, this study discusses moderating effects of LMX andTraditionality in the model of “Pos-psychological ownership-voice behavior”.In-depth interview was carried out by10employees of7companies, and over779validquestionnaires from20cities in China were collected. This study verifies the theoretical modelby means of some methods such as Descriptive analysis, ANOVA analysis, factor analysis andregression analysis.The following are the conclusions of this study:1. Perceived organizational support has apositive impact on voice behavior and its dimensions. Specifically: POS has a positive impact onvoice behavior, promotive voice and prohibitive voice.2. Psychological Ownership and itsdimensions play a mediating role in the relationship of POS-voice behavior(and itsdimensions).That is: Psychological ownership plays a full mediator role between POS andvoice behavior; Psychological ownership plays a part mediator role between POS and promotivevoice; Psychological ownership plays a full mediator role between POS and prohibitive voice;Dimensions of psychological ownership, self-efficacy, sense of responsibility, sense of belonging,self-identity play a part mediator role in the relationship of POS-voice behavior(and itsdimensions).3. Leader-Member Exchange and its dimensions play a positive moderate rolebetween perceived organizational support and psychological ownership. That is: LMX plays apositive moderate role between POS and psychological ownership; each dimension ofleader-member exchange, including emotion, loyalty, contribution, and professionalrespect,plays a positive moderate role between perceived organizational support andpsychological ownership. In addition, the data shows that, professional respect has the strongestmoderating effect, and loyalty has the weakest moderating effect.4.Traditionality plays apositive moderate role in the relationship of “POS-voice behavior”and “POS-promotive voice”.But the moderating effect of Traditionality in the relationship of “POS-prohibitive voice” is notsignificant. Theoretical contribution of this study lies in the following points:1. This study enriches theresearch about Influencing factors of voice behavior. From a theoretical point of view, based onsocial exchange theory, discussing the prediction of POS on voice behavior is feasible, and hasgood explanatory power.2. This study promotes the progress of psychological ownership theory.First of all, this study Identify “psychological ownership” as a mediator between POS and voicebehavior. Secondly, this study verifies LMX’s positive moderating effect in the relationship of“POS-psychological ownership”. This provides the theoretical thinking for discussion aboutnew generating path of psychological ownership. In addition, in the measurement ofpsychological ownership, this study selects the multi-dimension scale of psychologicalownership, and confirms that, each dimension of psychological ownership (self-efficacy, sense ofresponsibility, sense of belonging, self-identity) mediates the relationship of POS and voicebehavior. The discussions above promote empirical progress of psychological ownership inconstructs, measurements and generating paths.3. This study identifies the cultural value as aninfluencing factor of voice behavior in Chinese context. This study tested that Traditionalitymoderates the relationship of “POS-voice behavior”, and “POS-promotive voice”. However, themoderating effect of Traditionality in the relationship of “POS-prohibitive voice” is notsignificant. It proves that promotive voice and prohibitive voice may be different. Therefore,dividing voice behavior into promotive voice and prohibitive voice is meaningful in theory.The conclusions of this study can bring the following implications for managementpractice:1. Factors which can promote voice behavior should be paid close attention inorganizations. For example:managers should pay attention to Perceived organizational supportof employees, and satisfy their social emotional needs.2. Managers should pay attention toownership feeling towards organizations of employees. Because Psychological Ownership meansestablishment of “sense of ownership”and it will make employees think and act like owners ofthe organization.3. Results of this study show that, promotive voice and prohibitive voice meandifferent degree of psychological stress which employees confront. Prohibitive voice requiresemployees to eliminate more psychological worries. Managers should provide more support forthe employees, help them to eliminate worries for voice, so that they can voice freely.更多还原