LMX의 질이 부하의 자아개념과 조직시민행동에 미치는 영향 = (The) Effects of LMX quality on employees' self-identity and organizational citizenship behavior

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The study is foused on tracing the effects of LMX quality on employees and confirming of psychological process of its triggering employees' organizational citizenship behaviors.
The research model is based on the existing studies of LMX quality, self-identity(self-esteem or self-efficacy), and organizational citizenship behavior. It is supposed that the more employees perceive LMX quality, the higher their self-esteem or self-efficacy could be, the more organizational citizenship behaviors they could act. Still, because of possibilities of being more useful models than this one, I compare and analyze a theoretical model and another path model through analysis of covariance structures- the one which is used to analyze various structural formula models.
The study has analyzed 279 random samples surveyed on employees who work for company hiring more than ten ones in Cheju province.
After testing the research model, as you can see in the < Fig 4-1>, I've got the model that has the values like these : χ^(2) = 414.410, d.f. = 166, p value =0.000, GFI = 0.888, AGFI = 0.845, NFI = 0.885, CFI = 0.933, and RMR = 0.092. For standard level of model conformity, GFI, AGFI, NFI and CFI of structural formula model has to be above 0.9 and RMR below 0.5. All of the values of this structural formula model, except CFI, don't meet standard level of model conformity.
◁그림삽입▷(원문을 참조하세요)
So, after examining correlation of the values, I've established a proposal model, by adding to the model path coefficients of self-esteem and self-efficacy and removing path coefficients between LMX quality and self-efficacy since regression analysis and analysis of covariance structures found no direct relation between them. And then, I've done an analysis of covariance structures with it and compared the result with the research model. After analyzing the proposal model, as you can see in the < Fig 4-2>, I've got a model that has the values like these : χ^(2) = 265.467, d.f. = 166, p value = 0.000, GFI = 0.920, AGFI = 0.888, NFI = 0.933, CFI = 0.973, and RMR = 0.044.
Comparing these values with standard level of model conformity of the research model, it's found that the proposal model was superior to the research one. So I've chosen the former.
◁그림삽입▷(원문을 참조하세요)
According to the proposal model, it's revealed that the LMX quality could have a direct effect on employees' self-esteem and organizational citizenship behaviors. However it could affect employees' organizational citizenship behaviors partially by the medium of self-esteem and partially by the media of self-esteem and self-efficacy. But LMX quality didn't affect employees' organizational citizenship behaviors by the medium of self-efficacy.
I derived from this study some results as follows.
The first, leaders should not only display their leadership but try to foster friendly relationship with their employees.
The second, corporations should provide employees with new education programs to fulfill their positive egos.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• 제1장 서론 = 1
• 제1절 문제의 제기 및 연구목적 = 1
• 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 = 3
• 제3절 논문의 구성 = 3
• 제2장 이론적 배경 = 5
• 제1절 리더-부하의 교환관계(LMX) = 5
• 1. LMX의 개념 = 5
• 2. LMX의 발전단계 = 10
• 3. LMX의 결정요인 = 15
• 제2절 자아개념 = 19
• 1. 자아개념 = 19
• 2. 자긍심(self-esteem) 및 자기효능감(self-efficacy) = 21
• 제3절 조직시민행동 = 25
• 1. 조직시민행동의 개념 = 30
• 2. 조직시민행동의 구성요소 = 28
• 제4절 LMX, 자아개념, 조직시민행동의 관계 = 30
• 1. LMX와 자아개념의 관계 = 30
• 2. LMX와 조직시민행동의 관계 = 33
• 3. 자아개념과 조직시민행동간의 관계 = 39
• 제3장 연구의 설계 = 41
• 제1절 연구모형 및 가설의 설정 = 41
• 1. 연구모형 = 41
• 2. 연구가설 = 42
• 3. 변수의 조작적 정의 = 44
• 제2절 표본의 선정 및 설문지 구성 = 45
• 1. 표본의 선정 = 45
• 2. 설문지 구성 및 분석방법 = 46
• 제4장 실증분석 = 48
• 제1절 측정도구의 타당성과 신뢰성 분석 = 48
• 1. 신뢰성분석 = 48
• 2. 타당성분석 = 50
• 제2절 상관관계분석 = 54
• 제3절 가설검증 및 결과 = 55
• 1. LMX의 질과 자아개념의 관계 = 55
• 2. LMX의 질과 조직시민행동간의 관계 = 57
• 3. 자아개념과 조직시민행동간의 관계 = 58
• 4. LMX의 질, 자아개념, 조직시민행동간 구조모델 탐색 = 59
• 제5장 결론 = 62
• 제1절 연구결과의 요약 및 시사점 = 62
• 제2절 연구의 한계 및 향후 연구방향 = 64
• 참고문헌 = 66
• Abatract = 71
• <부록 : 설문지> = 75