學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 公部門比私部門來的不創新？是刻板印象還是定義不同？
Is the Public Sector Less Innovative than the Private Sector？Is It a Stereotype or Difinition Difference？作者 張凱翔
Zhang, Kai-Xiang貢獻者 董祥開
Dong, Hsiang-Kai
張凱翔
Zhang, Kai-Xiang關鍵詞 公部門創新
公務人員
台灣文官調查
innovation of public sector
public servants
TGBS日期 2020 上傳時間 2-九月-2020 12:35:23 (UTC+8) 摘要 任何組織都需要在這不斷變化的世界中追求創新，方能保有競爭力，政府也不例外。在公領域中，由於公共問題涉及層面廣泛、利害關係人眾多、議題又相對複雜，要在這樣的環境下創新往往更加困難；再加上社會長期以來對公部門存有偏見，也讓公部門的創新不易被認同與肯定，從新聞或網路社群討論中，都可見大眾不認為公部門是一個積極創新的地方，公務人員也幾乎成為保守的代名詞。然而政府的創新從未間斷，公務人員所付出的努力也從不比私部門員工來得少，舉凡「公共政策參與網路平台」、「我的E政府」、「自然人憑證愛心服務站」、「立體駝峰標線」等，皆是公部門著名的創新案例。本研究之主要目的即是在於，希望了解民眾對於公部門的創新作為的了解程度為何，以及對創新的認知上是否與公務人員有所不同，最後探討造成此種差異的可能因素。本研究分別使用第五次「台灣文官調查（Taiwan Government Bureaucrat Survey, TGBS-V）」以及對民眾的問卷調查資料進行分析。初步研究發現，一般大眾並不一定比公務人員創新，單論意願來講，兩者各有所長。一般大眾普遍不了解也不清楚公部門究竟做出了哪些創新的行為，因此不認為公部門有在為創新努力，且明顯比較偏向外顯的創新，傾向認為能實際「見到、用到」的改變才是創新，較不認為「內部流程的改變」也屬於創新的一種。本研究認為，上述現象可從增進了解著手，政府應該加強政策之溝通與行銷，讓民眾有更多獲取資訊的管道，同時也應適時適度地向民眾說明，流程上的創新是如何造成政策成果上的改善，讓民眾充分知情且對服務結果有感。
Every organization needs to seek innovation in this ever-changing world in order to remain competitive, and the government is no exception. In the public domain, due to the wide range of complex public issues, numerous stakeholders, it is often more difficult to innovate. In addition, society has long had prejudices against the public sector. It also makes it difficult for the innovation of the public sector to be recognized and affirmed. From news or Internet communities, it can be seen that the general public does not think the public sector is innovative, and public servants have almost become synonymous with conservative.However, the government’s innovation has never stopped, such as "Public Policy Participation Network Platform", "My E Government", are all well-known innovation cases of the public sector. The main purpose of this research is to understand the general public`s understanding of public sector innovation, and whether the perception of innovation is different from that of public servants, and finally explore the factors that cause such differences. This research uses the fifth "Taiwan Government Bureaucrat Survey (TGBS-V)" and the survey data of the public to analyze.Preliminary studies have found that the general public is not necessarily more innovative than public servants. In terms of willingness alone, both have their own strengths. The general public generally do not understand what the public sector is doing, nor do they know what innovative behaviors the public sector has made. Therefore, they do not think that the public sector is working for innovation, and they are obviously biased towards outward innovation. They tend to think the changes that "saw and used" are innovations, and don`t think that "changes in internal processes" are also a kind of innovation. This study believes that the above phenomenon can be improved from the promotion of understanding. The government should strengthen policy communication and marketing, so that the people have more channels to obtain information. It should also explain to the people how the innovation in the process results in policy results. The improvement on the above, let the public fully know and feel the service results.參考文獻 李仲彬（2013）。政府創新的類型與分佈：我國政府1999-2010年間的觀察。公共行政學報，44，73-112。李仲彬（2013）。影響地方政府創新產出量的因素。東吳政治學報，31（1），105-160。李仲彬（2016）。從哪來的創新想法？地方政府創新來源與創新政策特質的分析。公共行政學報，50，1-42。李仲彬（2018）。與生俱來與後天培養：影響公務人員創新態度與行為的因素分析。公共行政學報，54，1-40。李美枝（2002）。社會心理學：理論研究與應用。台北：文笙。余伯泉、李茂興譯（2003）。社會心理學。台北：弘智。陳啓光、曾淑芬（2002）。論政府機關人員創新能量之提升。研考雙月刊，26(5)，20-29。陳皎眉、王叢桂、孫蒨如(2014)。社會心理學。台北：雙葉書廊。陳敦源、蘇孔志、簡鈺珒、陳序廷（2011）。論資排輩還是工作表現？年資因素對於我國公務人員績效考評影響之研究。文官制度季刊，3（1），53-91。陳嘉彌（1996）。中等學校教師接受創新程度之分析。教育研究資訊，4(3)，86-103。張潤書（2013）。行政學。台北：三民。董祥開、林嚴凡（2019）。公私部門轉換經驗對工作滿意度之影響：以公私部門工作差異認知為中介變項。行政暨政策學報，68，1-48。劉坤億、胡龍騰、曾冠球（2012）。政府服務創新類型與策略引導。研考雙月刊，36（5），91-104。Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. American Economic Review, 78(4), 678-690.Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.Anderson, N. R., & Gasteiger, R. M. (2008). Innovation and creativity in organizations: Individual and work team research findings and implications for government policy. In B. Nooteboom & E. Stam (Eds.), Micro-Foundations for Innovation Policy (pp. 249-272). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.Beckerman, W. (1956) . Distance and the pattern of Intra-European trade. Review of Economics and Statistics,38(1),31-40.Bellante, D., & Link, A. N. (1981). Are public sector workers more risk averse than private sector workers?. ILR Review, 34(3), 408-412.Boardman, C., Bozeman, B., & Ponomariov, B. (2010). Private sector imprinting: An examination of the impacts of private sector job experience on public manager`s work attitudes. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 50-59.Bordalo, P., Coffman, K., Gennaioli, N., & Shleifer, A. (2016). Stereotypes. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1753-1794.Borins, S. (2001). Encouraging innovation in the public sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 310-319.Boyne, G. A. (2002). Public and private management: What’s the difference? Journal of Management Studies, 39(1), 97-122.Bullough, E. (1912). Psychical distance as a factor in art and an aesthetic principle. British Journal of Psychology, 5(2), 87-118.Carlson, S. (1974). International transmission of information and the business firm. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 412 , 55-63.Carr, P. B., & Steele, C. M. (2010). Stereotype threat affects financial decision making. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1411-1416.Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi‐dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies 47(6), 1154-1190.Damanpour, F. (1992). Organizational size and innovation. Organization Studies, 13 (3), 375-402.Damanpour, F., Walker, R. M., & Avellaneda, C. N. (2009). Combinative effects of innovation types and organizational performance: A longitudinal study of service organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 46(4), 650-675.Dong, H. K. D. (2017). Individual risk preference and sector choice: Are risk-averse individuals more likely to choose careers in the public sector?.Administration & Society, 49(8), 1121-1142.Drucker, P. F. (1998). The discipline of innovation. Harvard business review, 76(6), 149-157.Edison, H., Bin Ali, N., & Torkar, R. (2013). Towards innovation measurement in the software industry. The Journal of Systems and Softwar, 86, 1390–1407.Evans, J., & Mavondo, F. T. (2002). Psychic distance and organizational performance: An empirical examination of international retailing operations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 515-532.Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in experimental social psychology, 23, 1-74.Fruhling, A. L., & Siau, K. (2007). Assessing organizational innovation capability and its effect on e-commerce initiatives. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47(4), 91-103.Geiger, S. W., & Cashen, L. H. (2002). A multidimensional examination of slack and its impact on innovation. Journal of Managerial Issues, 14 (1), 68-84.Goodsell, C. T.(1994). The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic, (3rd ed), Chatham, NJ, Chatham House Publisher, Inc.Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662-676.Hage, J. T. (1999). Organizational innovation and organizational change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25 (1), 597-622.Hewstone, M., Johnston, L., & Aird, P. (1992). Cognitive models of stereotype change:(2) Perceptions of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(3), 235-249.Hilton, J. L., & Von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 237-271.Horton, S., Baker, J., & Deakin, J. M. (2007). Stereotypes of aging: Their effects on the health of seniors in North American society. Educational Gerontology, 33(12), 1021-1035.Hughes, D. J., Lee, A., Tian, A. W., Newman, A., & Legood, A. (2018). Leadership, creativity, and innovation: A critical review and practical recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(5), 549-569.Inzlicht, M., & Kang, S. K. (2010). Stereotype threat spillover: how coping with threats to social identity affects aggression, eating, decision making, and attention. Journal of personality and social psychology, 99(3), 467.Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8 (1), 23-32.Johanson, J. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1975). The internationalization of the firm–four Swedish cases. Journal of Management Studies, 12, 305-322.Jensen, P. H., & Webster, E. (2009). Another look at the relationship between innovation proxies. Australian Economic Papers, 48 (3), 252-269.Johnston, L. C., & Macrae, C. N. (1994). Changing social stereotypes: The case of the information seeker. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(5), 581-592.Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1993). Definition and assessment of accuracy in social stereotypes. Psychological Review, 100(1), 109.Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Anglin, S. M., Chambers, J. R., Stevens, S. T., & Cohen, F. (2016). Stereotype accuracy: One of the largest and most replicable effects in all of social psychology. Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination, 2, 31-63.Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stephan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. In Kruglanski, A. W. & Higgins, E. T., (Eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (pp. 353–381). New York, NY : Guilford PressMacrae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 37.O`grady S. & Lane H. W. (1996). The psychic distance paradox. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(2), 309-333.Oke, A. (2007). Innovation types and innovation management practices in service companies. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(6), 564-587.Palmberg, C. (2004). The sources of innovations—looking beyond technological opportunities. Economics of Innovation & New Technology, 13 (2), 183-197.Perry, J. L., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public-private distinction in organization theory: A critique and research strategy. Academy of Ｍanagement Review, 13(2), 182-201.Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York . Free Press.Schumpeter, J. A. (1961). The Theory of Economic Development ; An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and The Business Cycle. New York. Oxford University Press.Sousa, C. M., & Bradley, F. (2006). Cultural distance and psychic distance: Two peas in a pod? Journal of International Marketing, 14(1), 49-70.Standing, C., D. Jackson, A. C. Larsen, Y. Suseno, R. Fulford, & D. Gengatharen (2016). Enhancing individual innovation in organisations: A review of the literature. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 19(1), 44-62.Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440.Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83-95.Von Hippel, W., Jonides, J., Hilton, J. L., & Narayan, S. (1993). Inhibitory effect of schematic processing on perceptual encoding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 921.Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(5), 961-977.Windrum, P., & Koch, P. M. (Eds.). (2008). Innovation in Public Sector Services: Entrepreneurship, Creativity and Management. Cheltenham, U.K. Edward Elgar Publishing.Wilson, J. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do And Why They Do It. London. Hachette UK. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
107256022資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107256022 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 董祥開 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Dong, Hsiang-Kai en_US dc.contributor.author (作者) 張凱翔 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) Zhang, Kai-Xiang en_US dc.creator (作者) 張凱翔 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Zhang, Kai-Xiang en_US dc.date (日期) 2020 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-九月-2020 12:35:23 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-九月-2020 12:35:23 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-九月-2020 12:35:23 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0107256022 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131734 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 公共行政學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 107256022 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 任何組織都需要在這不斷變化的世界中追求創新，方能保有競爭力，政府也不例外。在公領域中，由於公共問題涉及層面廣泛、利害關係人眾多、議題又相對複雜，要在這樣的環境下創新往往更加困難；再加上社會長期以來對公部門存有偏見，也讓公部門的創新不易被認同與肯定，從新聞或網路社群討論中，都可見大眾不認為公部門是一個積極創新的地方，公務人員也幾乎成為保守的代名詞。然而政府的創新從未間斷，公務人員所付出的努力也從不比私部門員工來得少，舉凡「公共政策參與網路平台」、「我的E政府」、「自然人憑證愛心服務站」、「立體駝峰標線」等，皆是公部門著名的創新案例。本研究之主要目的即是在於，希望了解民眾對於公部門的創新作為的了解程度為何，以及對創新的認知上是否與公務人員有所不同，最後探討造成此種差異的可能因素。本研究分別使用第五次「台灣文官調查（Taiwan Government Bureaucrat Survey, TGBS-V）」以及對民眾的問卷調查資料進行分析。初步研究發現，一般大眾並不一定比公務人員創新，單論意願來講，兩者各有所長。一般大眾普遍不了解也不清楚公部門究竟做出了哪些創新的行為，因此不認為公部門有在為創新努力，且明顯比較偏向外顯的創新，傾向認為能實際「見到、用到」的改變才是創新，較不認為「內部流程的改變」也屬於創新的一種。本研究認為，上述現象可從增進了解著手，政府應該加強政策之溝通與行銷，讓民眾有更多獲取資訊的管道，同時也應適時適度地向民眾說明，流程上的創新是如何造成政策成果上的改善，讓民眾充分知情且對服務結果有感。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Every organization needs to seek innovation in this ever-changing world in order to remain competitive, and the government is no exception. In the public domain, due to the wide range of complex public issues, numerous stakeholders, it is often more difficult to innovate. In addition, society has long had prejudices against the public sector. It also makes it difficult for the innovation of the public sector to be recognized and affirmed. From news or Internet communities, it can be seen that the general public does not think the public sector is innovative, and public servants have almost become synonymous with conservative.However, the government’s innovation has never stopped, such as "Public Policy Participation Network Platform", "My E Government", are all well-known innovation cases of the public sector. The main purpose of this research is to understand the general public`s understanding of public sector innovation, and whether the perception of innovation is different from that of public servants, and finally explore the factors that cause such differences. This research uses the fifth "Taiwan Government Bureaucrat Survey (TGBS-V)" and the survey data of the public to analyze.Preliminary studies have found that the general public is not necessarily more innovative than public servants. In terms of willingness alone, both have their own strengths. The general public generally do not understand what the public sector is doing, nor do they know what innovative behaviors the public sector has made. Therefore, they do not think that the public sector is working for innovation, and they are obviously biased towards outward innovation. They tend to think the changes that "saw and used" are innovations, and don`t think that "changes in internal processes" are also a kind of innovation. This study believes that the above phenomenon can be improved from the promotion of understanding. The government should strengthen policy communication and marketing, so that the people have more channels to obtain information. It should also explain to the people how the innovation in the process results in policy results. The improvement on the above, let the public fully know and feel the service results. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景、動機 1第二節 研究目的與問題 3第三節 研究流程 4第二章 文獻檢閱 6第一節 創新 6第二節 偏見、刻板印象 14第三節 心理距離 20第三章 研究設計 24第一節 研究架構與假設 24第二節 資料蒐集與分析方法 26第三節 變項測量與操作化 30第四章 研究分析與討論 35第一節 樣本特性 35第二節 信度分析與效度分析 38第三節 各變項敘述統計 41第四節 研究分析 53第五章 結論與建議 81第一節 研究結論 81第二節 實務建議 85第三節 研究限制與後續研究建議 87參考文獻 89 zh_TW dc.format.extent 4117800 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107256022 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公部門創新 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公務人員 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 台灣文官調查 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) innovation of public sector en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) public servants en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) TGBS en_US dc.title (題名) 公部門比私部門來的不創新？是刻板印象還是定義不同？ zh_TW dc.title (題名) Is the Public Sector Less Innovative than the Private Sector？Is It a Stereotype or Difinition Difference？ en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李仲彬（2013）。政府創新的類型與分佈：我國政府1999-2010年間的觀察。公共行政學報，44，73-112。李仲彬（2013）。影響地方政府創新產出量的因素。東吳政治學報，31（1），105-160。李仲彬（2016）。從哪來的創新想法？地方政府創新來源與創新政策特質的分析。公共行政學報，50，1-42。李仲彬（2018）。與生俱來與後天培養：影響公務人員創新態度與行為的因素分析。公共行政學報，54，1-40。李美枝（2002）。社會心理學：理論研究與應用。台北：文笙。余伯泉、李茂興譯（2003）。社會心理學。台北：弘智。陳啓光、曾淑芬（2002）。論政府機關人員創新能量之提升。研考雙月刊，26(5)，20-29。陳皎眉、王叢桂、孫蒨如(2014)。社會心理學。台北：雙葉書廊。陳敦源、蘇孔志、簡鈺珒、陳序廷（2011）。論資排輩還是工作表現？年資因素對於我國公務人員績效考評影響之研究。文官制度季刊，3（1），53-91。陳嘉彌（1996）。中等學校教師接受創新程度之分析。教育研究資訊，4(3)，86-103。張潤書（2013）。行政學。台北：三民。董祥開、林嚴凡（2019）。公私部門轉換經驗對工作滿意度之影響：以公私部門工作差異認知為中介變項。行政暨政策學報，68，1-48。劉坤億、胡龍騰、曾冠球（2012）。政府服務創新類型與策略引導。研考雙月刊，36（5），91-104。Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. American Economic Review, 78(4), 678-690.Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.Anderson, N. R., & Gasteiger, R. M. (2008). Innovation and creativity in organizations: Individual and work team research findings and implications for government policy. In B. Nooteboom & E. Stam (Eds.), Micro-Foundations for Innovation Policy (pp. 249-272). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.Beckerman, W. (1956) . Distance and the pattern of Intra-European trade. Review of Economics and Statistics,38(1),31-40.Bellante, D., & Link, A. N. (1981). Are public sector workers more risk averse than private sector workers?. ILR Review, 34(3), 408-412.Boardman, C., Bozeman, B., & Ponomariov, B. (2010). Private sector imprinting: An examination of the impacts of private sector job experience on public manager`s work attitudes. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 50-59.Bordalo, P., Coffman, K., Gennaioli, N., & Shleifer, A. (2016). Stereotypes. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1753-1794.Borins, S. (2001). Encouraging innovation in the public sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 310-319.Boyne, G. A. (2002). Public and private management: What’s the difference? Journal of Management Studies, 39(1), 97-122.Bullough, E. (1912). Psychical distance as a factor in art and an aesthetic principle. British Journal of Psychology, 5(2), 87-118.Carlson, S. (1974). International transmission of information and the business firm. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 412 , 55-63.Carr, P. B., & Steele, C. M. (2010). Stereotype threat affects financial decision making. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1411-1416.Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi‐dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies 47(6), 1154-1190.Damanpour, F. (1992). Organizational size and innovation. Organization Studies, 13 (3), 375-402.Damanpour, F., Walker, R. M., & Avellaneda, C. N. (2009). Combinative effects of innovation types and organizational performance: A longitudinal study of service organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 46(4), 650-675.Dong, H. K. D. (2017). Individual risk preference and sector choice: Are risk-averse individuals more likely to choose careers in the public sector?.Administration & Society, 49(8), 1121-1142.Drucker, P. F. (1998). The discipline of innovation. Harvard business review, 76(6), 149-157.Edison, H., Bin Ali, N., & Torkar, R. (2013). Towards innovation measurement in the software industry. The Journal of Systems and Softwar, 86, 1390–1407.Evans, J., & Mavondo, F. T. (2002). Psychic distance and organizational performance: An empirical examination of international retailing operations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 515-532.Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in experimental social psychology, 23, 1-74.Fruhling, A. L., & Siau, K. (2007). Assessing organizational innovation capability and its effect on e-commerce initiatives. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47(4), 91-103.Geiger, S. W., & Cashen, L. H. (2002). A multidimensional examination of slack and its impact on innovation. Journal of Managerial Issues, 14 (1), 68-84.Goodsell, C. T.(1994). The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic, (3rd ed), Chatham, NJ, Chatham House Publisher, Inc.Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662-676.Hage, J. T. (1999). Organizational innovation and organizational change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25 (1), 597-622.Hewstone, M., Johnston, L., & Aird, P. (1992). Cognitive models of stereotype change:(2) Perceptions of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(3), 235-249.Hilton, J. L., & Von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 237-271.Horton, S., Baker, J., & Deakin, J. M. (2007). Stereotypes of aging: Their effects on the health of seniors in North American society. Educational Gerontology, 33(12), 1021-1035.Hughes, D. J., Lee, A., Tian, A. W., Newman, A., & Legood, A. (2018). Leadership, creativity, and innovation: A critical review and practical recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(5), 549-569.Inzlicht, M., & Kang, S. K. (2010). Stereotype threat spillover: how coping with threats to social identity affects aggression, eating, decision making, and attention. Journal of personality and social psychology, 99(3), 467.Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8 (1), 23-32.Johanson, J. & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1975). The internationalization of the firm–four Swedish cases. Journal of Management Studies, 12, 305-322.Jensen, P. H., & Webster, E. (2009). Another look at the relationship between innovation proxies. Australian Economic Papers, 48 (3), 252-269.Johnston, L. C., & Macrae, C. N. (1994). Changing social stereotypes: The case of the information seeker. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(5), 581-592.Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1993). Definition and assessment of accuracy in social stereotypes. Psychological Review, 100(1), 109.Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Anglin, S. M., Chambers, J. R., Stevens, S. T., & Cohen, F. (2016). Stereotype accuracy: One of the largest and most replicable effects in all of social psychology. Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination, 2, 31-63.Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stephan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. In Kruglanski, A. W. & Higgins, E. T., (Eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (pp. 353–381). New York, NY : Guilford PressMacrae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 37.O`grady S. & Lane H. W. (1996). The psychic distance paradox. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(2), 309-333.Oke, A. (2007). Innovation types and innovation management practices in service companies. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(6), 564-587.Palmberg, C. (2004). The sources of innovations—looking beyond technological opportunities. Economics of Innovation & New Technology, 13 (2), 183-197.Perry, J. L., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public-private distinction in organization theory: A critique and research strategy. Academy of Ｍanagement Review, 13(2), 182-201.Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York . Free Press.Schumpeter, J. A. (1961). The Theory of Economic Development ; An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and The Business Cycle. New York. Oxford University Press.Sousa, C. M., & Bradley, F. (2006). Cultural distance and psychic distance: Two peas in a pod? Journal of International Marketing, 14(1), 49-70.Standing, C., D. Jackson, A. C. Larsen, Y. Suseno, R. Fulford, & D. Gengatharen (2016). Enhancing individual innovation in organisations: A review of the literature. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 19(1), 44-62.Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440.Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83-95.Von Hippel, W., Jonides, J., Hilton, J. L., & Narayan, S. (1993). Inhibitory effect of schematic processing on perceptual encoding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 921.Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(5), 961-977.Windrum, P., & Koch, P. M. (Eds.). (2008). Innovation in Public Sector Services: Entrepreneurship, Creativity and Management. Cheltenham, U.K. Edward Elgar Publishing.Wilson, J. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do And Why They Do It. London. Hachette UK. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202001484 en_US
