한국산학기술학회논문지 (Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society)

  • 제13권12호
  • /
  • Pages.5786-5799
  • /
  • 2012
  • /
  • 1975-4701(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-4688(eISSN)
한국산학기술학회 (The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

지식근로자의 직무특성이 조직 몰입도에 미치는 영향 -공유리더십을 조절 변수로

A Study on the effect of Knowledge workers's Job Characteristics on Organizational Commitment -Shared Leadership as a Moderating variable

  • 투고 : 2012.11.16
  • 심사 : 2012.12.06
  • 발행 : 2012.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

지식경제시대 기업이 직면한 가장 중요한 과제는 기업의 핵심 자원인 지식근로자에 대한 관리이다. 최근 관심이 폭증하는 조직 몰입도는 자신이 근무하는 기업에 애착을 갖고 기업의 성공을 위해 시간, 두뇌, 에너지 등을 얼마나 자발적으로 투자하는가를 나타내는 개념으로 조직 몰입도를 향상시키는 것은 지식근로자의 관리와 활용에 중요한 시사점을 제공해준다. 본 연구에서는 선행연구를 기반으로 지식근로자의 직무특성을 선행요인으로 하여 조직 몰입도에 미치는 영향을 공유리더십(Shared Leadership)을 조절변수로 도출하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 본 연구는 지식근로자에 대한 Drucker(1999)의 정의에 따라 국내 기업에 종사하는 화이트칼라 임직원들을 대상으로 온라인 서베이를 시행하였다. 업종별로는 유통업이 60.2%로 가장 많았고 그 다음이 24.3%로 제조업이 많았다. 직급별로는 주임, 대리의 직급이 37.5%, 과장, 차장 직급이 36.9%로 비슷한 수준으로 응답에 참여하였다. 근속년수 별로는 1년에서 5년 미만이 31.7%로 가장 많았고 10년에서 20년 미만이 25.9%로 그 다음으로 많았다. 직종별로는 일반사무직이 31.5%로 가장 많았다. 연구결과, 직무특성 중 자율성, 피드백은 조직 몰입도에 긍정적 영향을 미쳤다. 공유리더십은 조절변수로 독립변수인 직무특성의 자율성, 피드백 그리고 문제해결과 종속변수인 조직 몰입도에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 하지만 직무복잡성에는 유의한 영향을 미치지 못하는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 직무특성이 조직몰입에 미치는 영향관계에서 공유리더십은 직무특성의 피드백과 문제해결에 긍정적인 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났지만 자율성과 직무복잡성에는 영향을 주지 않는 것으로 나타났다.

In this era of the knowledge-based economy, the most important issue that we faced is the management of the knowledge workers who is the main source of enterprise. There has been a big issue on the organizational commitment recently which is the idea of how much employees have a positive affection to the enterprise they work for and also how much time, knowledge and energy employees are willing to invest for their company success. Improving this concept would provide a meaningful implication in managing the knowledge workers. This research which is based on previous studies, it aims to control the effect on the organizational commitment by Shared Leadership which puts the job characteristics of knowledge workers into a dominant factor. As a result of the study, among the several job characteristics, autonomy and a feedback had a positive effect on the organizational commitment. Shared Leadership as a moderating variable, has shown an affirmative effect on autonomy, a feedback, and problem solving as an independent variable and on the organizational commitment as a dependent variable. However, related to the job complexity, it did not show a notable influence. Also, the Shared Leadership has shown a favorable impact on the feedback and problem solving, but barely effected on autonomy or job complexity.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. JaehyunMin & YoungchanLee & SunyeaJung, Performance evaluation for knowkedge worker of knowledge management organization, 2000
  2. YoungchulChang, Management system and HRD for knowledge management, Jibmundang, 2001
  3. Drucker,P.F. (2000). The Essential Drucker(vols. I-III).
  4. Drucker,P.F. (2000). The Essential Drucker(Vols. I-III).
  5. A Van den Broeck & M Vansteenkiste & H De Witte, and Willy Lens, Explaining the relationships between job characteristics, burnout, and engagement: The role of basic psychological need satisfaction. Work & Stress, 22(3): 277-294, 2008, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393672
  6. Bolino,M.C.,W.H.Turnley.,& J.M. Bloodgood, "Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations." Academy of Management Review,27,pp. 505-522, 2002, Article(CrossRefLink)
  7. Carson, J. B., Marrone, J. A. & Tesluk, P. E., shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1217-1234, 2007, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.2307/20159921
  8. Chalofsky, N., Meaningful workplaces. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010
  9. Davenport, T. H., Thinking for a Living: How to Get Better Performance and Results from Knowledge Workers: Harvard Business School Press, 2005
  10. Drucker, P.E., The Essential Drucker on the Individual, New York: Big Apple Tuttle-Mori Agency, Inc. Knowledge Workers, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2001
  11. Edersheim, E., The Definitive Drucker: Challenges For Tomorrow's Executives - Final Advice From the Father of Modern Management: McGraw-Hill, 2006
  12. Gagne M.; Deci E. L., Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4):331-362, 2005, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322
  13. Latham G P., Pinder C.C, Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annu. Rev. Psychol, 56:485-516, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142105
  14. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B., The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3-30, 2008, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x
  15. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P., Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422, 2001, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
  16. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E., The Work Design Questionnaire(WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1321-1339, 2006, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321
  17. Pearce, C. L., Conger, J. A & Locke, E. A., leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 19: 622-228, 2008, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.005
  18. Pearce, C. L., Manz, C. C, & Sims, H. P., The Roles of Vertical and shared leadership in the Enactment of Executive Corruption: Implications for Research and Practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 19:353-359, 2008, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.03.007
  19. Pearce, C. L. & Manz, C. C., The new silver bullets of leadership: The Importance of self and leadership in knowledge work. Gallup Leadership Summit, Omaha, 2008
  20. Purvanova, R. K., Bono, J. E. & Dzieweczynski, J., Transformational leadership, job characteristics, and organizational citizenship performance. Human Performance, 19, 1-22, 2006, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1901_1
  21. Rich, B. L., & LePine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R., Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617-635, 2010, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.51468988
  22. Saar Langelaan, Bakker A.B., Lorenz J. P. van Doornen, and Wilmar B Schaufeli., Burnout and work engagement: Do individual differences make a difference?. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(3): 521-532, 2006, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.07.009
  23. Sanders, M. G., Missteps in team leadership: The experiences of six novice teachers in three urban middle schools. Urban Education, 41: 277-304, 2006, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085906287903
  24. Saks, A. M., Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619,2006, Article(CrossRefLink) https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169
  25. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Work engagement: An emerging psychological concept and its implications, Research in social Issues in Management", Vol, 5: Managing Social and Ethical Issues in Organizations. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers, 2006
  26. Shirom, A., Explaining vigor: On the antecedents and consequences of vigor as a positive affect at work. In C. L. Cooper & D. Nelson (Eds.), Positive Organizational Behavior (pp. 86- 100). London: Sage, 2007, Article(CrossRefLink)

피인용 문헌

  1. An Effect of Procedural Justice on Organizational Commitment : The Mediating Effect of Pay Satisfaction vol.41, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.11627/jkise.2018.41.3.097