樊景立組織公民行為量表、組織公平量表

1、Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Scale英文名稱：Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Scale中文名稱：組織公民行為量表作 者： Farh, J. L., Earley, .PC., & Lin, S. C.出 處：Farh, J. L., Earley, .PC., & Lin, S. C“. Impetusfor action: A cultural analysis of justice and o rganizational citizenship behavior

2、in Chinese society. Ad” ministrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42, 421-444.簡 介：條 目：部屬的工作行為：以下列敘述來描述他(她 )的行為您是否同意？請逐項閱讀后填答。1 非常不同意5 有點同意2 相當不同意 6 相當同意3 有點不同意 7 非當同意4 不能確定Identification with the company 認同組織Eager to tell outsiders good news about the company and clarify their misunderstandin gs 主動對外介紹或

3、宣傳公司優(yōu)點，或澄清他人對公司的誤解。Willing to stand up to protect the reputation of the company.努力維護公司形象，并積極參與有關(guān)活動。Makes constructive suggestions that can improve the operation of the company.主動提出建設(shè)性的改善方案，供公司有關(guān)單位參考。Actively attends company meetings.以積極的態(tài)度參與公司內(nèi)相關(guān)會議。Altruism toward colleagues協(xié)助同事Willing to assist new

4、 colleagues to adjust to the work environment.主動幫助新進同仁適應(yīng)工作環(huán)境。Willing to help colleague solve work-related problems.樂意協(xié)助同仁解決工作上的困難。Willing to cover work assignments for colleague when needed.主動分擔或代理同事之工作。Willing to coordinate and communicate with colleagues.主動與同事協(xié)調(diào)溝通。Impersonal harmony不生事爭利(人際和睦)Ofte

5、n speaks ill of the supervisor or colleagues behind their backs. (R)經(jīng)常在背后批評主管或談?wù)撏轮[私。(R)Uses illicit tactics to seek personal influence and gain with harmful effect on interpersonal harmony in the organization. (R)在公司內(nèi)爭權(quán)奪利，勾心斗角，破壞組織和諧。(R)Uses position power to pursue selfish personal gain. (R)假公濟私，

6、利用職權(quán)謀取個人利益。(R)Takes credits, avoids blames, and fights fiercely for personal gain. (R)斤斤計較，爭功諉過，不惜抗爭以獲得個人利益。(R)Protecting company resources公私分明Conducts personal business on company time (e.g., trading stocks, shopping, going to b arber shops). (R)利用上班時間處理私人事務(wù)，如買股票，跑銀行，逛街，購物，上理容院 等。(R)Uses company re

7、sources to do personal business (e.g., company phones, copy machines , computers, and cars). (R) 利用公司資源處理私人事務(wù)，如：私自利用公電話，復(fù)印機，計算機，公務(wù)車 等。(R)Views sick leave as benefit and makes excuse for taking sick leave. (R)經(jīng)常借口請假，視為福利。(R)Conscientiousness敬業(yè)守法Often arrives early and starts to work immediately.上班時經(jīng)常

8、提早到達，并著手處理公務(wù)。Takes one s job seriously and rarely makes mistakes.工作認真，并且很少出差錯。Complies with company rules and procedures even when nobody watches and no evide nce can be traced.即使無人注意或無據(jù)可查時，亦隨時遵守公司規(guī)定。Does not mind taking new or challenging assignments.從不挑選工作，盡可能接受新的或困難的任務(wù)。Tries hard to self-study to

9、 increase the quality of work outputs.為提升工作品質(zhì)，而努力自我充實。信 度：效 度：備 注：Organizational Justice Scale英文名稱：Organizational Justice Scale中文名稱：組織公平量表作 者： Jason A. Colquitt出 處： Colquitt, J. A. (2001). "On the Dimensionality of Organizational Justice: A Const ruct Validation of a Measure."Journal of Ap

10、plied Psychology 86(3): 386-400條 目：Procedural justiceThe following items refers to the procedures used to arrive at your (outcome). To what extent:1 .Have you been able to express your views and feelings during these procedures?2 .Have you had influences over the (outcome) arrived at by those proced

11、ures?3 .Have those procedures been applied consistently?4 .Have those procedures been free of bias?5 .Have those procedures been based on accurate information?6 .Have you been able to appeal the (outcome) arrived at by those procedures?7 .Have those procedures upheld ethical and moral standards?Dist

12、ributive justiceThe following items refer to your (outcome). To what extent:1.Dos your (outcome) reflect the effort you have put into your work?2.Is your (outcome) appropriate for the work you have completed?3.Does your (outcome) reflect what you have contributed to the organization?4.Is your (outco

13、me) justified, given your performance?Interpersonal justiceThe following items refer to (the authority figure who enacted the procedure). To what extent:1 .Has (he/she) treated you in a polite manner?.2 .Has (he/she) treated you with dignity?3 .Has (he/she) treated you with respect?4 .Has (he/she) r

14、efrained from improper remarks or comments?Informational justiceThe following items refer to (the authority figure who enacted the procedure). To what extent:1 .Has (he/she) been candid in (his/her) communication with you?2 .Has (he/she) explained the procedures thoroughly?3 .Were (his/her) explanat

15、ions regarding the procedures reasonable?4 .Has (he/she) communicated details in a timely manner?5 .Has (he/she) seemed to tailor (his/her) communications to individuals specific needs?信 度：效 度：備 注：Procedural Justice英文名稱：Procedural Justice中文名稱：程序公平作 者： Farh, J.-L., P.C. Earley, et al.出 處 ： Farh, J.-L

16、., .PC. Earley, et al. (1997). "Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and." Administrative Science Quarterly 42(3): 421.簡 介：條 目： Farh, J.-L., P. C. Earley, et al. (1997). "Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and." Administrative Science Quarterly 42(3)

17、: 421.The sample for this study consisted of employees drawn from eight companies in the electronics industry of Taiwan. All eight companies were locally owned and were members of the 500 largest companies in Taiwan. Thirty to forty matching questionnaires were distributed to supervisors and subordi

18、nates in each company. The sample consisted mainly of low to mid-level managers, engineers, salespersons, and clerical staff.Participation1 .Managers at all levels participate in pay and performance appraisal decisions;2 .Through various channels, my company tries to understand employees opinions re

19、garding pay and performance appraisal policies and decisions.3 .Pay decisions are made exclusively by top management in my company; others are excluded from this process; (R)4 .My company does not take employees o pinions into account in designing pay and performance appraisal policies. (R) Cronbach

20、 alpha was .71 7-point scale (1=strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree)Appeal MechanismThe company has a formal appeal channel;The company imposes a time limit within which the responsible parties must respond to the employee appeal;Employees questioncosncerning pay or performance appraisal are usually

21、 answered promptly and satisfactorily. Cronbach alpha was .81 7-point scale (1=strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree)信 度： Cronbach alpha was .71 7-point scale (1=strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree) 效 度： 備 注：Justice Scale英文名稱：Justice Scale中文名稱：公平問卷作者： Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H.出 處：Niehoff, B

22、. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556. 簡 介： 條 目：Sample: The employees and general managers of a national movie theater management company that

23、operated 11 theaters in a large southwestern city were studied. The employees (N = 213) averaged 19.9 years of age and nearly two years of experience working in the theaters. A majority had completed high school, but only 17 percent had completed college. Each theater was under the authority of a ge

24、neral manager; thus, 11 general managers took part in the study. The number of employees per theater varied from 15 to 45. At each location, a group of assistant managers aided the general manager in the operation of the theater, but there were no direct lines of authority between these assistants a

25、nd specific employees. In fact, the vice president for human resources described the assistant managers as a pool of assistants who could be assigned to any shift on any day. The one constant at each theater was that each general manager had ultimate responsibility for the operation and was on-site

26、for most of the theater's hours of business. The assistant managers were not included in the data forthis study.The employees completed a survey describing their perceptions of distributive and procedural justice and the monitoring behaviors of their general manager. Since the assistant managers

27、 worked various shifts but the general managers remained on-site for most of the working hours, we considered the general managers the appropriate referents for the measurement of leader monitoring behaviors. The general managers provided data for the measures of organizational citizenship behavior;

28、 some general managers assessed OCB for 15 employees, and some assessed 45 employees.All surveys were completed on company time. Since data were being collected from two sources, employees and general managers, we asked all participants to put their names on the surveys but took precautions to insur

29、e confidentiality. Each employee received an envelope in which to seal the completed survey and mailed it directly to us. In total, 213 out of 260 employee surveys were returned for a response rate of 81 percent. Conversations with the company's vice president for human resources suggested that

30、the demographic characteristics of the respondents reflected those of the general population of employees at the theaters.All items used a seven-point response format.Distributive justice1. My work schedule is fair.2. I think that my level of pay is fair.3. I consider my work load to be quite fair.4

31、. Overall, the rewards I receive here are quite fair.5. I feel that my job responsibilities are fair. Formal procedures1. Job decisions are made by the general manager in an unbiased manner.2. My general manager makes sure that all employee concerns are heard before job decisions are made.3. To make

32、 job decisions, my general manager collects accurate and complete information.4. My general manager clarifies decisions and provides additional information when requested by employees.5. All job decisions are applied consistently across all affected employees.6. Employees are allowed to challenge or

33、 appeal job decisions made by the general manager.Interactional justice1. When decisions are made about my job, the general manager treats me with kindness and consideration.2. When decisions are made about my job, the general manager treats me with respect and dignity.3. When decisions are made abo

34、ut my job, the general manager is sensitive to my personal needs.4. When decisions are made about my job, the general manager deals with me in a truthful manner.5. When decisions are made about my job, the general manager shows concern for my rights as an employee.6. Concerning decisions made about

35、my job, the general manager discusses the implications of the decisions with me.7. The general manager offers adequate justification for decisions made about my job.8. When making decisions about my job, the general manager offers explanations that make sense to me.9. My general manager explains ver

36、y clearly any decision made about my job.信 度： The CFI for the three justice dimensions was .92. This scale was based on one u sed by Moorman (1991) and had reported reliabilities above .90 for all three dimensions.效 度：備 注：OCB Scale英文名稱：OCB Scale中文名稱：組織公民行為問卷作者： Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H.出

37、處： Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.簡 介：條 目： Sample: The employees and general managers of a national movie theater management c

38、ompany that operated 11 theaters in a large southwestern city were studied. The employees (N = 213) averaged 19.9 years of age and nearly two years of experience working in the theaters. A majority had completed high school, but only 17 percent had completed college. Each theater was under the autho

39、rity of a general manager; thus, 11 general managers took part in the study. The number of employees per theater varied from 15 to 45. At each location, a group of assistant managers aided the general manager in the operation of the theater, but there were no direct lines of authority between these

40、assistants and specific employees. In fact, the vice president for human resources described the assistant managers as a pool of assistants who could be assigned to any shift on any day. The one constant at each theater was that each general manager had ultimate responsibility for the operation and

41、was on-site for most of the theater's hours of business. The assistant managers were not included in the data for this study.The employees completed a survey describing their perceptions of distributive and procedural justice and the monitoring behaviors of their general manager. Since the assis

42、tant managers worked various shifts but the general managers remained on-site for most of the working hours, we considered the general managers the appropriate referents for the measurement of leader monitoring behaviors. The general managers provided data for the measures of organizational citizens

43、hip behavior; some general managers assessed OCB for 15 employees, and some assessed 45 employees.All surveys were completed on company time. Since data were being collected from two sources, employees and general managers, we asked all participants to put their nameson the surveys but took precauti

44、ons to insure confidentiality. Each employee received an envelope in which to seal the completed survey and mailed it directly to us. In total, 213 out of 260 employee surveys were returned for a response rate of 81 percent. Conversations with the company's vice president for human resources sug

45、gested that the demographic characteristics of the respondents reflected those of the general population of employees at the theatersAltruism1. Helps others who have heavy work loads.2. Helps others who have been absent.3. Willingly gives of his/her time to help others who have work related problems

46、.4. Helps orient new people even though it is not required.Courtesy1. Consults with me or other individuals who might be affected by his/her actions or decisions.2. Does not abuse the rights of others.3. Takes steps to prevent problems with other workers.4. Informs me before taking any important act

47、ions.Sportsmanship1. Consumes a lot of time complaining about trivial matters. (R)2. Tends to make "mountains out of molehills" (makes problems bigger than they are).(R)3. Constantly talks about wanting to quit his/her job. (R)4. Always focuses on what's wrong with his/her situation, r

48、ather than the positive side of it. (R)Conscientiousness1. Is always punctual.2. Never takes long lunches or breaks.3. Does not take extra breaks.4. Obeys company rules, regulations and procedures even when no one is watching.Civic virtue1. Keeps abreast of changes in the organization.2. Attends fun

49、ctions that are not required, but that help the company image.3. Attends and participates in meetings regarding the organization.4. "Keeps up" with developments in the company.Items denoted with ( R ) are reverse scored.信 度： The reliabilities were over .70 for each dimension, and all items

50、 used a seven-p oint response format.效 度：備 注：ognition-and affect-based trust英文名稱：cognition-and affect-based trust中文名稱：基于情感和認知的信任作 者：Kok-Yee Ng 他國燕)and Roy Y. J. Chua蔡泳瑜)出 處：簡 介：條 目： Do I contribute more when I trust more? Differential effects of cognition-and affect-based trustKok-Yee Ng 隨國燕)and Roy

51、 Y. J. Chua蔡泳瑜)基于 McAllister (1995) 的信任量表基于情感的信任1. 你能夠與他們自由地分享想法、感受和希望。2. 你能夠與他們自由地談?wù)撃阍诠ぷ髦杏龅降睦щy，并且知道他們愿意傾聽。3. 如果你告訴他們你的問題，你知道他們會給你提供建議并向你表示關(guān)心。4. 他們傾向于在工作關(guān)系中投入大量的感情?；谡J知的信任1. 他們是認真對待團隊工作的人。2. 他們愿意為團隊工作做出重要的貢獻。3. 你可以信賴他們?nèi)プ鰣F隊中主要部分的工作。4. 他們是能夠完成團隊工作的人信度：The multivariate analysis of the survey data confi

52、rm the reliability and validity.效度：The multivariate analysis of the survey data confirm the reliability and validity.備 注：Trust英文名稱：Trust中文名稱：信任作 者： Brockner, J., P. A. Siegel, et al.出 處：Brockner, J., P. A. Siegel, et al. (1997). "When trust matters: The moderating effect of outcome." Admin

53、istrative Science Quarterly 42(3): 558.簡 介：條 目：Brockner, J., P. A. Siegel, et al. (1997). "When trust matters: The moderating effect of outcome." Administrative Science Quarterly 42(3): 558.Participants were 354 employees whose median age was 32 years. Their median levelof education comple

54、ted was“ some college or technical school” and their mediof total household income for the previous year was $30000-$50000. The racial/ethnic background of the group was 57 percent white, 30 percent black, 9 percent Hispanic, and 4 percent Asian. To take part in the study, participants had to meet t

55、wo criteria; (1) they had to be currently working for at least 20 hours per week, and (2) they had to have a supervisor.I can usually trust my supervisor to do what is good for me;Management can be trusted to make decisions that are also good for me;I trust the management to treat me fairly.Response

56、s could range from “ disagree strongly ” (1) to “ agree strongly ” The coefficient alpha was .75 信 度： The coefficient alpha was .75 效 度：備 注：Trust in Leader文名稱：Trust in Leader Measurement Scale 中文名稱： 對領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的信任作 者： Kurt T Dirks出 處：Kurt T Dirks, Trust in leadership and team performance: evidence from NCAA

57、 basketball, Journal of applied psychology, 2000, vol. 85, No. 6, 1004-1012 簡 介： 條 目：Most team members trust and respect the coach. (. 93)I can talk freely to the coach about difficulties I am having on the team and know that he will want to listen. (. 84)If I shared my problems with the coach, I kn

58、ow he would respond constructively and caringly. (.90)I have a sharing relationship with the coach. I can freely share my ideas, feelings, and hopes with him (. 86)I would feel a sense of loss if the coach left to take a job elsewhere. (. 96)The coach approaches his job with professionalism and dedication. (. 87)Given the coach's past performance, I see no reason to doubt his comoetence. (. 87)I can rely on the coach not to make my job (as a player) more difficult by poor coa