員工沉默：多元動機觀點的驗證   全文下載

Employee Silence: Perspective and Examination of Multidimensional Constructs

員工沉默（employee silence）是指員工一種不表達的行動，刻意不主動告知與工作有關的問題、意見及資訊。近期學者指出這類組織中的無聲訊息有其重要性， 應當受到重視。本研究依據Van Dyne、Ang與Botero（ 2003） 的觀點，將員工沉默依其動機基礎，區分為默許性沉默（acquiescent silence）、防衛性沉默（defensive silence）、以及親社會性沉默（prosocial silence），檢視三類員工沉默的前置變項與後果變項，以增進對沉默議題的理解。本研究蒐集261筆臺灣組織企業從業人員問卷調查資料，因素分析顯示符合理論預期的三因素結構， 且結構方程模型分析結果顯示： 一、持續承諾（ continuance commitment）對默許性沉默的影響路徑顯著且為正向，而默許性沉默則對離職傾向的影響路徑顯著且為正向；二、不信任主管（distrust to supervisor）對防衛性沉默的影響路徑顯著且為正向，而防衛性沉默對工作滿意度的影響路徑顯著且為負向；三、工作團體認同（workgroup identification）則是與親社會性沉默的影響路徑顯著且為正向，而親社會性沉默則對工作績效的影響路徑顯著且為正向。最後，本研究進一步探討可能的貢獻與限制，並提出未來研究方向與實務意涵。

Employee silence is defined as the act of not speaking up and the intentional withholding by employees of problems, opinions or information related to the organization. Recent research has indicated that this silent information is critical to organizations and needs to be further investigated. Van Dyne, Ang, and Botero (2003) classified employee silence based on motivational bases into three dimensions: acquiescent silence, defensive silence, and prosocial silence. This multidimensional perspective is insightful but requires substantial supporting evidence. Accordingly, this study gathered employee data to validate the multidimensional perspective by investigating the antecedents and outcomes of the silence construct. Factor analysis of the results from a sample of 261 employees from various Taiwanese companies showed a presumed three-factor structure. Structural equation modeling indicated that: 1. the path from continuance commitment to acquiescent silence and the path from acquiescent silence to turnover intention were positive and significant; 2. the path from distrust to supervisor to defensive silence was positive and significant and the path from defensive silence to job satisfaction was negative and significant; 3. the path from workgroup identification to prosocial silence and the path from prosocial silence to job performance were both positive and significant. The limitations and practical implications of the study are discussed.