上级何时采纳促进性或抑制性进言?——上级地位和下属专业度的影响

被引：45

作者：

魏昕 ^{[1
]}

张志学 ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] 对外经济贸易大学

[2] 北京大学

来源：

管理世界 | 2014年 / 01期

关键词：

采纳进言; 上级地位; 下属专业度; 促进性进言; 抑制性进言;

D O I：

10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2014.01.014

中图分类号：

F272.9 [企业行政管理];

学科分类号：

1201 ;

摘要：

上级是否采纳下属的进言,关系到组织的有效性和组织决策的质量。本研究结合社会说服和地位的理论,着眼于上级和下属两方面的因素及交互作用,研究不同类型的进言在什么情况下更有可能被采纳。实地研究和实验研究发现,对于促进性进言来说,下属专业度越高,上级越有可能采纳其进言。对于抑制性进言来说,只有当上级地位较高时,下属专业度与上级采纳进言之间存在显著的正相关;在上级地位较低时,二者之间呈现微弱的负相关。本研究不仅有助于理解进言结果这一重要却相对研究较少的领域,也对进言的前因、地位、说服等领域的研究有所裨益,并为员工主动行为的管理提供了实践启示。

引用

页码：132 / 143+175 +175

页数：13

共 17 条

[1]

The destructive nature of power without status[J] . Nathanael J. Fast,Nir Halevy,Adam D. Galinsky.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology . 2011 (1)

[2]

Silenced by fear:[J] . Research in Organizational Behavior . 2009

[3]

Source factors in persuasion: A self-validation approach[J] . Pablo Brinol,Richard E. Petty.European Review of Social Psychology . 2009

[4]

The dynamics of proactivity at work[J] . Adam M. Grant,Susan J. Ashford.Research in Organizational Behavior . 2008

[5]

Guanxi Dynamics: Shifts in the Closeness of Ties Between Chinese Coworkers[J] . Xiao‐PingChen,SiqingPeng.Management and Organization Review . 2008 (1)

[6]

EMPLOYEE SILENCE ON CRITICAL WORK ISSUES: THE CROSS LEVEL EFFECTS OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE CLIMATE[J] . SUBRAHMANIAMTANGIRALA,RANGARAJRAMANUJAM.Personnel Psychology . 2008 (1)

[7]

8 Social Hierarchy: The Self‐Reinforcing Nature of Power and Status[J] . Joe C. Magee,Adam D. Galinsky.The Academy of Management Annals . 2008 (1)

[8]

WHAT DO PROACTIVE PEOPLE DO? A LONGITUDINAL MODEL LINKING PROACTIVE PERSONALITY AND CAREER SUCCESS[J] . SCOTT E.SEIBERT,MARIA L.KRAIMER,J. MICHAELCRANT.Personnel Psychology . 2006 (4)

[9]

The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades’ Evidence[J] . ChanthikaPornpitakpan.Journal of Applied Social Psychology . 2006 (2)

[10]

Speaking Up in the Operating Room: How Team Leaders Promote Learning in Interdisciplinary Action Teams[J] . Amy C.Edmondson.Journal of Management Studies . 2003 (6)

← 1 2 →