本研究探討主管悖論思維之期待與感知一致性對組織公民行為的影響，並從內隱領導理論的視角，分析關係認同與心理安全感在其中的中介與調節作用。悖論思維指的是領導者在面對看似相互矛盾的目標時，如何同時兼顧與平衡這些需求，以提升組織績效與員工行為表現。當部屬對主管具悖論思維的期待與實際感知一致時，將有助於提升組織公民行為，而關係認同則可能在此影響路徑中發揮關鍵的中介作用。此外，心理安全感可進一步調節部屬對主管悖論思維一致性的感知，影響關係認同與組織公民行為表現。
本研究採用問卷調查法，以台灣企業中不同產業的主管與部屬為研究對象，透過兩階段問卷蒐集數據，並以統計分析驗證研究假設。結果顯示，當部屬對主管悖論思維的期待與感知一致時，其組織公民行為顯著提高；關係認同在兩者之間發揮部分中介效果；而部屬的心理安全感則調節此關係，使高心理安全感者對主管悖論思維的接受度更高，進一步強化其對組織的認同與貢獻行為。
本研究的理論貢獻在於結合內隱領導理論與悖論思維，拓展對領導行為與員工行為關係的理解；實務貢獻則在於提供企業管理者具體的領導策略，幫助其在複雜多變的環境中更有效地管理組織與激勵員工，進而提升組織整體競爭力。

This study investigates the impact of congruence between employees' expectations and perceptions of supervisors' paradoxical thinking on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), analyzing the mediating and moderating roles of relational identification and psychological safety from the perspective of implicit leadership theory. Paradoxical thinking refers to a leader’s ability to simultaneously address and balance seemingly contradictory goals to enhance organizational performance and employee behaviors. When subordinates' expectations regarding supervisors' paradoxical thinking align with their actual perceptions, organizational citizenship behaviors are positively influenced. Relational identification potentially plays a critical mediating role within this relationship. Additionally, psychological safety further moderates the employees' perception of congruence in supervisors' paradoxical thinking, affecting relational identification and OCB.
This research employs a survey methodology, targeting supervisors and employees from diverse industries in Taiwanese enterprises. Data were collected through a two-stage questionnaire, and statistical analyses were conducted to verify the proposed hypotheses. The findings demonstrate that employees' organizational citizenship behaviors significantly improve when there is congruence between their expectations and perceptions of supervisors' paradoxical thinking. Relational identification partially mediates this relationship. Furthermore, employees' psychological safety moderates this relationship, with those experiencing higher psychological safety exhibiting greater acceptance of supervisors' paradoxical thinking, thereby strengthening their identification with and contributions to the organization.
The theoretical contribution of this research lies in integrating implicit leadership theory with paradoxical thinking, thereby enhancing understanding of the relationship between leadership behaviors and employee behaviors. Practically, it provides business managers with specific leadership strategies to manage organizations and motivate employees more effectively in complex and dynamic environments, ultimately improving organizational competitiveness.

黃芳銘(2015)。結構方程模式-理論與應用。台灣五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization science, 20(4), 696-717. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
Ashforth, B. E., Schinoff, B. S., & Rogers, K. M. (2016). “I identify with her,” “I identify with him”: Unpacking the dynamics of personal identification in organizations. Academy of management review, 41(1), 28–60. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0033
Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational research methods, 8(3), 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105278021
Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E. J. C. (1995). EQS for Windows user’s guide (Version 5.7). Multivariate software.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Sage.
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. E. (2010). "Learning behaviors in the workplace: The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety." Systems research and Behavioral science, 26(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.932
Cunha, M. P., Clegg, S. R., & Kamoche, K. (2023). Paradox theory and international business: Managing tensions and contradictions across borders. Journal of International business studies, 54(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-022-00561-4
Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the End-User Computing Satisfaction Instrument. MIS quarterly, 18(4), 453. https://doi.org/10.2307/249524
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational psychology and Organizational behavior, 1(1), 23-43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305
Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). From ideal to real: A longitudinal study of the role of implicit leadership theories on leader-member exchanges and employee outcomes. Journal of applied psychology, 90(4), 659–676. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.659
Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C., & Lord, R. G. (2017). Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review. The leadership quarterly, 28(1), 104–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.003
Epitropaki, O., Sy, T., Martin, R., Tram-Quon, S., & Topakas, A. (2013). Implicit leadership and followership theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership. The leadership quarterly, 24(6), 858–881.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Foti, R. J., Hansbrough, T. K., Epitropaki, O., & Coyle, P. T. (2017). Dynamic viewpoints on implicit leadership and followership theories: Approaches, findings, and future directions. The leadership quarterly, 28(4), 476–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.05.005
Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta‐analytic review and extension. Personnel psychology, 70(1), 113–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12183
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.005
https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600307
https://doi.org/10.2307/41165852
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010) Multivariate data analysis. 7th Edition, Pearson, New York.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Jia, Y., Cheng, J., & Halevy, N. (2020). Paradoxical leadership and employee voice: The role of psychological flexibility and trust in leader. Academy of management journal, 63(2), 479–507. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1014
Jing, R., Bai, Y., & Wu, G. (2021). When paradoxical leadership fosters team innovation: A cross-level mediation model of psychological safety and behavioral integration. Journal of business research, 124, 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.058
Junker, N. M., Stegmann, S., Braun, S., & van Dick, R. (2016). The ideal and the counter-ideal follower: Advancing implicit followership theories. Leadership & Organization development journal, 37(8), 1175–1192. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-12-2015-0276
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of management review, 25(4), 760-776. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3707692
Lewis, M. W., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. Journal of applied behavioral science, 50(2), 127-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314522322
Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J. L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of management journal, 55(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0176
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1984). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Academy of management review, 9(3), 456-460. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4279681
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315086450
Lord, R. G., Epitropaki, O., Foti, R. J., & Hansbrough, T. K. (2020). Implicit leadership theories, implicit followership theories, and dynamic processing of leadership information. Annual review of organizational psychology and Organizational behavior, 7, 15.1–15.26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012119-045418
Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of organizational behavior, 13(2), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202
Michel, J. W., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis of leader, person, and situation factors. Journal of leadership & Organizational studies, 18(2), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810385490
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of management journal, 61(1), 26–45. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0594
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2022). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of management journal, 65(1), 195–219. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2019.1297
Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological bulletin, 105(3), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430
Nasser, F., & Takahashi, T. (2003). The effect of using item parcels on ad hoc goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: A Monte Carlo study. Structural equation modeling, 10(4), 449–474. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM1004_1
Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017). Psychological safety: A systematic review of the literature. Human resource management review, 27(3), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of management, 22(2), 259–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639602200204
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of management, 26(3), 513–563.
Shao, R., Nijstad, B. A., & Täuber, S. (2020). Cultural differences in leadership categorization: The role of implicit leadership theories. Organizational psychology review, 10(3–4), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620930062
Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2007). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships. Academy of management review, 32(1), 9–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.23463672
Sluss, D. M., Ployhart, R. E., Cobb, M. G., & Ashforth, B. E. (2012). Generalizing newcomers' relational and organizational identifications: Processes and prototypicality. Academy of management journal, 55(4), 949–975. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0420
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of management review, 36(2), 381-403.
Sy, T. (2010). What do you think of followers? Examining the content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership theories. Organizational behavior and Human decision processes, 113(2), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.06.001
Topakas, A., Martin, R., & Epitropaki, O. (2011). Measurement of implicit leadership theories and their effect on leadership processes and outcomes [Doctoral dissertation, Aston university] https://publications.aston.ac.uk/id/eprint/18942
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California management review, 38(4), 8-30.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of management, 17(3), 601–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700305
Wheaton, B. (1987). Assessment of Fit in Overidentified Models with Latent Variables. Sociological methods & Research, 16(1), 118–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124187016001005
Zhang, Y., Waldman, D. A., Han, Y. L., & Li, X. B. (2015). Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences. Academy of management journal, 58(2), 538–566. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0995
Zhou, J., Yang, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Paradoxical leadership and employee innovation: Organization-based self-esteem and harmonious passion as sequential mediators. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 8716820. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.871682