1. 1 J

2. I(93 5 )/()( )( )( )( ) ()( )( )( )( ) ()(((( )))) ()( )( )( )( ): :J ` 93437020 95 6 23 1. 2. 3. 3. IIJ 69 2000 14 1197 22 4. IIIAbstractThe government opens the financial holding company since 2000 to set up, up to nowaltogether had 14 to approve the establishment registration, establish of holdings because ofunderneath all is more than two and finance related of subsidiary, all face how promote abusiness more effect, cost to reduce to decline and cross marketing and so on threemanagements subject. The finance industry greatest property is a talented person, under thenowadays to cope with the aggressive competition and struggle environment, should let theemployee approve goal and actions of the company, has the firm ownership feeling, thecreation achievements performance, with company coexistent co-prosperity. Therefore thisresearch aim is for the purpose of discussing the employee to organize approval, theleadership effectiveness influence of the cognition upon the job satisfaction.This research takes the employee of the financial holding company as sample, theevidence of this research is based on the network questionnaire as to investigate a method.In this research, take back it valid the sample count to 1,197, and occupied at that time thepopulation of 22%.The major results of this finds are as following:(1) The employees age the position is high and low to approve to the organizations andthe job degree of satisfaction to the organization has the difference, nevertheless doesnot have the difference to the leadership effectiveness approves.(2) The employees sex educational background to approve to the organizations theleadership effectiveness approves and the job degree of satisfaction to the organizationdoes not have the difference.(3) The organization of the employee approves more high; its job degree of satisfactionis also higher.(4) The employee leadership effectiveness approves degree to the supervisor higher; itsjob degree of satisfaction is also higher.Several domestic financial institutions whole combine as the financial holding companyhave not yet quelled, this research raises the human resources management measure 5. IVcorrelation suggestion, expected the J financial holding company to carry on time theorganization transformation has is of help.Key words: organization approves, leadership effectiveness, job satisfaction 6. V 2006 6 7. VI . 1 . 3 . 3 5 14 21 31 32 32 34 36 37 43 Pearson ..50 51 ..53 ..56..61......67 8. VII2-1 . 62-2 . 172-3 .. 192-4 . 222-5 . 272-6 . 294-1 . 364-2 KMO Bartletts Test 374-3 . 384-4 . 394-5 KMO Bartletts Test 404-6 . 404-7 . 414-8 KMO Bartletts Test 424-9 . 424-10 . 434-11 . 444-12 . 454-13 . 464-14 t .. 474-15 .. 474-16 484-17 494-18 Pearson ... 504-19 . 514-20 . 52 9. VIII3-1 31 10. 1 20002002142000 11. 219971994 12. 3 J J J J 13. 4J 14. 5 Johnson, Johnson & Heimberg,1999Brown,1969; Cheney,1983identification1984Freud189919841990197919851989imitation1984 15. 6organizational identification2-12-1 Kanter 1968 (energy)(loyalty)(willingness)Patchen 1970 Hrebiniak &Alutto1972 (side-bets or investment)Porter & Smith 1976 Salancik 1977 16. 7Mowday 1982 (1):(2):(3): 1984 1988 Mael &Ashforth1989 (self)Dutton 1994 , 1999 (2003) 17. 8198419901994Inducement-Contribution Model March Simon1958intrinsic rewardsextrinsic rewardsMarch &Simon,1958Porter & Lawler,1968The Theory of Exchange 18. 9 Homans1958Blau1964Waldman1972Psychological ContractSchein1970Organizational PsychologySimon1945Barrett1970the exchange modelthe socialization modelthe accommodation model 19. 10Martin Patchen,1953 Simon1975 20. 11Simon1975Kaplan1976Martain Patchen1970198419901994200020012002200220032004198419902002 21. 121984199019942002200319841990198419901994198419901994198419901994200219842000Need-satisfactionHackman &Oldham, 1975AutonomyVarietyFeedbackChallengeParticipationStraussTannenbaum 1961 22. 13Brown1969Patchen1970HallSchenider1972Steers1977 23. 14 1991(1992)Henery(1959)Giffiths(1967)Mahoney(1969)Mott(1972) 24. 15Poter1961Alderfer(1972)MaslowFiedler(1967)Reddin(1970)Vroom & Yetton(1974)House(1971)Bass(1985)Bass & Avolio(1997) 25. 16 Yukl (1994) (1993)(trade-off) (2001)2-2(2000) 26. 172-2 Fleishman(1953) Halpin & Winer(1957) Fiedler(1967) Hersey & Blanchard(1977) Reddin(1970) House(1971) Vroom & Yetton(1973) Dansereau,Graen& Haga(1975) Yukl(1989) (2004) 27. 181987199119901993199550 51 30 4150 51 50 51 4150 3140 1988199719974 5 1997 28. 191988Venkatraman & Ramanujam(1986)20002-32-3 NegandhiEshghi &Yune(1985) Demirag(1987) Bird & Beechler(1994) Youndt,eral. 29. 20(1996) (1997) (1998) 2000Kerr & Jermier(1978)Hunt & Osborn(1982)Szilagyi & Wallace(1987)19931997(1986)(1987)(1987)(1994)Fulk &Wendler(1982)Schriesheim & Denisi(1981)Downey(1975)Evans(1970) 30. 21 Mayo, Roethisberger, Whitehead (1927-1932)(2002)(job satisfaction)Hoppock 1935 (2002)Hoppock 1977:(overall satisfaction)(expectation discrepancy)Porter Lawler (frame of reference) 31. 22(dimension)(2003)Vroom Smith, Kendall, Hulin 2-42-4 Hoppock Locke Reilly,Chatman,Caldwell Spector Porter & Lawler 32. 23 Smith,Kendall,Hulin (2003)...(content theories)(process theories)(reinforcement theories)(2000)(2003) 33. 24(content theory)Maslow Herzberg Alderfer ERG () Maslow Maslow (physiological needs)(safety needs)(social needs)(ego needs)(self-actualization)(2003)() Herzberg Herzberg (motivation-hygiene theories)(motivator)(work itself)(achievement)(recognition)(promotion)(respoinsibility)(hygiene factor)(supervision-technique)(salary)(personal relationship)(work conditions)(1998268)() Alderfer ERG Alderfer Maslow (existence) 34. 25(relatedness)(growth)1.2.3.Alderfer (process theory)(expectancy theory)(equity theory)() 1.2.3.(2003)() 35. 26() Adams Festinger Homan(reinforcement theory)Skinner 36. 272-52-5 (1996)(1998)40-5028166-10(2000)206-1011-15(2002)3626-30 37. 28(2002) (2003)(job satisfaction)(Black &Gregersen,19972003)(2001)(199920032001)2-6 38. 292-6 1999 2001 2002 2002 2002 2002 39. 30,2003 (2004) 40. 31 3-1 3-1 H1H3H2H1H1 41. 32 1-11-21-31-4 1984Likert12345 42. 33Yukl (1994) (2000)Likert12345 ...Likert12345 (nominal scale)12130230-4034012311-829-12313 43. 34 JJ5400JCronbachs 0.7Devellis (1991)Nunnally(1978)0.6tt-testtt1.2.3.t 44. 35one-way ANOVATurkey Pearson Product-Moment Correlation, stepwise multiple regression(stepwise) 45. 36 4-1 494 41.27% 2152 39.77% 703 58.73% 3259 60.23% 1197 100.00% 5411 100.00%30 491 41.02% 30 2193 40.53%30()~40 559 46.70% 30()~40 2423 44.78%40 () 147 12.28% 40 () 795 14.69% 1197 100.00% 5411 100.00%() 107 8.94% () 780 14.42% 1007 84.13% 4328 79.99%() 83 6.93% () 303 5.60% 1197 100.00% 5411 100.00%~ 809 67.59% ~ 3887 71.84%~ 337 28.18% ~ 1407 26.00% 51 4.26% 117 2.16% 1197 100.00% 5411 100.00%1450 26.8%119758.73%41.27%30 30 ()~40 87.90%84.13%~67.59% 46. 37 KMO & Bartletts Test10 KMO Bartletts Test4-24-2 KMO Bartletts TestKaiser-Meyer-Olkin 0.948Bartlett 7541.052 45 0.000KMO Bartletts Test KMO 0.948 0.5Bartletts 7541.052P-value