员工投入现象的本质、特征和机制研究
|
摘要
无论对于员工自身工作体验和绩效，还是组织整体绩效，员工投入都是重要影响因素。旨在对员工投入现象进行探索性本土化质性研究，着重研究员工投入现象的本质、角色投入和任务投入的区别与联系、员工角色投入现象的特征及机制。
针对已有研究投入概念界定颇有分歧,任务投入与角色投入缺乏明确区分以及投入机制理论框架纷杂的研究现状，以现象学心理学研究方法论为指引，不带理论预设开放性地探索员工投入现象。通过半开放式深度访谈方法搜集员工对其亲身工作经历体验的回顾性叙述，探索员工投入现象的本质、特征和机制。采用目的性理论抽样方法，借鉴案例研究方法的对比抽样法、多类别抽样法和嵌套抽样法，于2011年7-12月期间分三轮对在广东省两家民营企业和两家私立大学不同部门从事技术员、管理人员、秘书、文员、教师等不同职务工作的70名员工进行深度访谈。通过访谈质性数据分析与相关理论文献的交互印证，提出投入概念界定和理论观点。
就投入状态分析投入现象本质和投入概念内涵，指出员工投入奠基性研究Kahn（1990）的投入概念界定的贡献与不足，修正投入概念界定，并首次提出自我反投入形式。借鉴心理学意向理论和自我决定理论，分析投入内涵成分及其结构关系，首次提出投入承诺概念。辨析任务投入与角色投入的区别与联系，指出已有主要投入概念界定的适用边界。基于质性数据分析，提出反映员工角色投入现象描述性特征的角色投入策略分类模型和角色扮演表现分类模型。借鉴角色理论、身份认同理论、调节定向理论和自我调节理论，解释角色投入机制，提出员工角色投入机制静态和动态模型。
获得以下研究发现：投入是反映员工基于是否做好工作的主观意愿选择如何对工作付出个人时间和精力的行为概念，可分为自我投入、自我不投入和自我反投入等三种形式。投入承诺是反映员工对是否做好相关工作的自我目标及其是否为此付出努力的承诺，可分为自我投入承诺、无自我投入承诺和自我反投入承诺三种形式，是引发员工投入行为的直接心理前因，对投入行为有主导性影响。任务投入与角色投入是两类相关却属于不同层面的现象，员工的角色投入状态一般比任务投入更稳定，更能从整体上反映员工工作投入状况。员工在组织中的各种角色扮演受其角色投入承诺和角色扮演期望参照标准共同影响，角色投入策略可分为自我导向型和规范遵从型两大类以及自我表达型等六小类。综合角色投入行为特征和角色规范遵从性等主客观评价标准，员工角色扮演表现可分为规范遵从型和非遵从型两大类以及角色先锋等六小类。员工角色投入机制包括员工在涉及双方权利义务关系的角色互动中的自我体验、角色关系感知、角色认同、角色投入承诺和角色投入策略的基本心理关联机制，并受员工自我调节定向的调节性影响。员工在角色互动中无法实现基本自我目标时能够动态调整其自我目标及其认知、态度和行为以尽量适应现实环境要求和满足自我基本需要。
How employees engage themselves at work affect their work experience and performance,and also the performance of their organizations. This research aims to explore the employeeengagement phenomena with focus on its essence, the differences and relations between roleengagement and task engagement, the descriptive characteristics and mechanisms of roleengagement.
With regard to the current employee engagement research state of having diverging andeven conflicting conceptualizations and theoretical frameworks with lack of distinctionbetween task engagement and role engagement, this research adopts the phenomenologicalresearch methodology, and aims to explore the employee engagement phenomena withouttheoretical assumptions. By using semi-structured in-depth interviews to collect informants’narrative of their lived working experiences, this reseach explores the essence of theemployee engagement phenomena, the descriptive characteristics and psychologicalmechanisms of the role engagement phenomena. Using the purposeful theorectical samplingmethods of extreme, multi-category and nestling cases of case-study research,70informantsworking on different job positions such as technicians, administrators, secretary, clerks, andteachers at two private colleges and two private companies located in Guangdong Provincewere interviewed during three waves of data collection between July and December in2011.Based on qualitative data analysis and reiteration between data and literature, constructs andtheory are defined and proposed.
The essential meaning of the engagement construct is analyzed, and the definition byKahn (1990), which is the seminal paper of employee engagement research, is reevaluatedand then a redefinition of engagement is proposed with the addition of a new form ofengagement. By applying intention theory and self-determination theory of psychology, theessential elements of engagement and their relations are analyzed and the new construct ofengagement commitment is proposed. The differences and relations of task engagement androle engagement are distinguished, and the conceptual boundaries of major currentengagement conceptualizations are defined. Based on qualitative data analysis, roleengagement strategy typology model and role performance typology model are proposed toreflect the descriptive characteristics of the role engagement phenomena. By applying roletheory, identification theory, self-regulatory theory and self-regulation theory to explainingthe mechanisms of role engagement phenomena, static and dynamic models of roleengagement are proposed.
The followings are the main findings of this research: The engagement construct is abehavior construct reflecting whether employees are willing to perform their work and howthey invest their time and efforts at work, and can be divided in the three pure forms ofself-engagement, self-disengagement, and self counter-engagement. Engagement commitmentis a motive construct reflecting whether employees are self-committed to do their work welland to make efforts for it, and can be divided into the three forms of self-engagementcommitment, self-engagement noncommitment, and self counter-engagement commitment.Engagement commitment is the proximal antecedent of employee engagement behavior, andthus has major effect on the latter. Task engagement and role engagement are two related butdistinct phenomena of different levels with role engagement more stable than taskengagement and thus more representative of employee work engagement. Employees’ roleengagement strategy is both affected by role engagement commitment and the referent roleexpectations, and thus can be divided into a typology of self-oriented role engagementstrategies and normative role engagement strategies. Similarly, role performance can bedivided in the two categories of conformant and non conformant role performance. The basicmechanism of role engagement can be depicted by a model consisting self perception, rolerelation perception, role identification, role engagement commitment, role engagementstrategy, and role performance, with regulatory locus as a moderator. When realizing theimpossibility in fulfilling self-goals in role interaction, employees can adjust their self-goalsand consequently realign the perception, attitudes, and behavior to meet environmentdemands and satisfy their own needs.
针对已有研究投入概念界定颇有分歧,任务投入与角色投入缺乏明确区分以及投入机制理论框架纷杂的研究现状，以现象学心理学研究方法论为指引，不带理论预设开放性地探索员工投入现象。通过半开放式深度访谈方法搜集员工对其亲身工作经历体验的回顾性叙述，探索员工投入现象的本质、特征和机制。采用目的性理论抽样方法，借鉴案例研究方法的对比抽样法、多类别抽样法和嵌套抽样法，于2011年7-12月期间分三轮对在广东省两家民营企业和两家私立大学不同部门从事技术员、管理人员、秘书、文员、教师等不同职务工作的70名员工进行深度访谈。通过访谈质性数据分析与相关理论文献的交互印证，提出投入概念界定和理论观点。
就投入状态分析投入现象本质和投入概念内涵，指出员工投入奠基性研究Kahn（1990）的投入概念界定的贡献与不足，修正投入概念界定，并首次提出自我反投入形式。借鉴心理学意向理论和自我决定理论，分析投入内涵成分及其结构关系，首次提出投入承诺概念。辨析任务投入与角色投入的区别与联系，指出已有主要投入概念界定的适用边界。基于质性数据分析，提出反映员工角色投入现象描述性特征的角色投入策略分类模型和角色扮演表现分类模型。借鉴角色理论、身份认同理论、调节定向理论和自我调节理论，解释角色投入机制，提出员工角色投入机制静态和动态模型。
获得以下研究发现：投入是反映员工基于是否做好工作的主观意愿选择如何对工作付出个人时间和精力的行为概念，可分为自我投入、自我不投入和自我反投入等三种形式。投入承诺是反映员工对是否做好相关工作的自我目标及其是否为此付出努力的承诺，可分为自我投入承诺、无自我投入承诺和自我反投入承诺三种形式，是引发员工投入行为的直接心理前因，对投入行为有主导性影响。任务投入与角色投入是两类相关却属于不同层面的现象，员工的角色投入状态一般比任务投入更稳定，更能从整体上反映员工工作投入状况。员工在组织中的各种角色扮演受其角色投入承诺和角色扮演期望参照标准共同影响，角色投入策略可分为自我导向型和规范遵从型两大类以及自我表达型等六小类。综合角色投入行为特征和角色规范遵从性等主客观评价标准，员工角色扮演表现可分为规范遵从型和非遵从型两大类以及角色先锋等六小类。员工角色投入机制包括员工在涉及双方权利义务关系的角色互动中的自我体验、角色关系感知、角色认同、角色投入承诺和角色投入策略的基本心理关联机制，并受员工自我调节定向的调节性影响。员工在角色互动中无法实现基本自我目标时能够动态调整其自我目标及其认知、态度和行为以尽量适应现实环境要求和满足自我基本需要。
How employees engage themselves at work affect their work experience and performance,and also the performance of their organizations. This research aims to explore the employeeengagement phenomena with focus on its essence, the differences and relations between roleengagement and task engagement, the descriptive characteristics and mechanisms of roleengagement.
With regard to the current employee engagement research state of having diverging andeven conflicting conceptualizations and theoretical frameworks with lack of distinctionbetween task engagement and role engagement, this research adopts the phenomenologicalresearch methodology, and aims to explore the employee engagement phenomena withouttheoretical assumptions. By using semi-structured in-depth interviews to collect informants’narrative of their lived working experiences, this reseach explores the essence of theemployee engagement phenomena, the descriptive characteristics and psychologicalmechanisms of the role engagement phenomena. Using the purposeful theorectical samplingmethods of extreme, multi-category and nestling cases of case-study research,70informantsworking on different job positions such as technicians, administrators, secretary, clerks, andteachers at two private colleges and two private companies located in Guangdong Provincewere interviewed during three waves of data collection between July and December in2011.Based on qualitative data analysis and reiteration between data and literature, constructs andtheory are defined and proposed.
The essential meaning of the engagement construct is analyzed, and the definition byKahn (1990), which is the seminal paper of employee engagement research, is reevaluatedand then a redefinition of engagement is proposed with the addition of a new form ofengagement. By applying intention theory and self-determination theory of psychology, theessential elements of engagement and their relations are analyzed and the new construct ofengagement commitment is proposed. The differences and relations of task engagement androle engagement are distinguished, and the conceptual boundaries of major currentengagement conceptualizations are defined. Based on qualitative data analysis, roleengagement strategy typology model and role performance typology model are proposed toreflect the descriptive characteristics of the role engagement phenomena. By applying roletheory, identification theory, self-regulatory theory and self-regulation theory to explainingthe mechanisms of role engagement phenomena, static and dynamic models of roleengagement are proposed.
The followings are the main findings of this research: The engagement construct is abehavior construct reflecting whether employees are willing to perform their work and howthey invest their time and efforts at work, and can be divided in the three pure forms ofself-engagement, self-disengagement, and self counter-engagement. Engagement commitmentis a motive construct reflecting whether employees are self-committed to do their work welland to make efforts for it, and can be divided into the three forms of self-engagementcommitment, self-engagement noncommitment, and self counter-engagement commitment.Engagement commitment is the proximal antecedent of employee engagement behavior, andthus has major effect on the latter. Task engagement and role engagement are two related butdistinct phenomena of different levels with role engagement more stable than taskengagement and thus more representative of employee work engagement. Employees’ roleengagement strategy is both affected by role engagement commitment and the referent roleexpectations, and thus can be divided into a typology of self-oriented role engagementstrategies and normative role engagement strategies. Similarly, role performance can bedivided in the two categories of conformant and non conformant role performance. The basicmechanism of role engagement can be depicted by a model consisting self perception, rolerelation perception, role identification, role engagement commitment, role engagementstrategy, and role performance, with regulatory locus as a moderator. When realizing theimpossibility in fulfilling self-goals in role interaction, employees can adjust their self-goalsand consequently realign the perception, attitudes, and behavior to meet environmentdemands and satisfy their own needs.
引文
[1]布朗.自我[M].陈浩莺译.北京：人民邮电出版社,2009.
[2]陈向明.质的研究方法与社会科学研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社，2000.
[3]崔光辉.现象的沉思：现象学心理学[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2009.
[4]戈夫曼.日常生活中的自我呈现[M].冯钢译.北京:，北京大学出版社，2008.
[5]胡塞尔.纯粹现象学通论[M].李幼蒸译.北京：商务印书馆，1992.
[6]胡塞尔.欧洲科学的危机与超越论的现象学[M].王炳文译.北京：商务印书馆，2008.
[7]洛尔，施瓦茨.全力以赴-高效能人士的精力管理手册[M].肖亭译.北京`：中信出版社，2009.
[8]迈尔斯，休伯曼.质性资料的分析：方法与实践[M].张芬芬译.重庆：重庆大学出版社，2008.
[9]金盛华.自我概念及其发展[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),1996(1):30-36.
[10]黎坚，庞博,张博，杜涵.自我调节：从基本理论到应用研究[J].北京师范大学学报,2011,6:5-13.
[11]李锐,凌文辁.工作投入研究的现状[J].心理科学进展,2007，15（2）:366-372.
[12]李永鑫,张阔.投入:工作倦怠研究的新视角[J].中国健康心理学杂志,2007，15(6):569-571.
[13]李原.企业员工的心理契约—概念、理论及实证研究[M].上海：复旦大学出版社，2006.
[14]梅洛-庞蒂.知觉现象学[M].杨大春，张尧均译.北京：商务印书馆，2005.
[15]倪梁康.现象学运动的基本意义—纪念现象学运动一百周年[J].中国社会科学,2000(4):69-78.
[16]斯皮格伯格.现象学运动[M].王炳文，张金言译.北京：商务印书馆，2011.
[17]孙敏.西方组织认同互动视角研究前沿探析[J].外国经济与管理，2011a，33（5）：49-56.
[18]孙敏.西方科学观演变探析[J].科学学研究,2011b,29(6):808-813.
[19]索科拉夫斯基.现象学导论[M].高秉江，张建华译.武汉：武汉大学出版社，2009.
[20]特纳，斯戴茨.情感社会学[M]孙俊才译.上海：上海人民出版社,2007.
[21]汪玲,林晖芸,逄晓鸣.特质性与情境性调节定向匹配效应的一致性[J].心理学报,2011,43（5）:553560.
[22]王明辉,凌文辁.员工组织社会化研究的概况[J].心理科学进展,2006,14(5):722-728.
[23]王彦峰，秦金亮.工作倦怠和工作投入的整合[J].心理科学进展,2009,17(4):802–810.
[24]谢立中.日常生活的现象学社会学分析[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
[25]杨善华.感知与洞察：实践中的现象学社会学[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2012.
[26]杨天平,胡旭苗.教育管理现象学[M].重庆：重庆大学出版社,2010.
[27]张彬,陈加洲.工作投入、工作卷入与工作嵌入的研究综述[J].华东经济管理，2009（12）:130-133.
[28]张祥龙.现象学导论七讲——从原著阐发新意[M].修订版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[29]张轶文，甘怡群.中文版Utrecht工作投入量表（UWES）的信效度检验[J].临床心理学杂志,2005,13(3):268-271.
[30] Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior [J].Organizational behavior and humandecision processes,1991,50:179-211.
[31] Ajzen, I. Nature and operation of attitudes [J]. American review of psychology,2001,52：27-58.
[32] Eccles, J. S.&Wigfield, A. Motivational beliefs, values, and goal [J]. American reviewof psychology,2002,53:109-132.
[33] Ashforth, B. E.,&Humphery, R. H. Emotional labor in service roles: the influence ofidentity.[J].Academy of management journal,1993,18(1):88-115.
[34] Ashforth, B. E.,&Mael, F. Social identity theory and the organization [J].Academy ofManagement Review,1989,14:20-39.
[35] Ashforth, B. E, Harrison, S. H., and Corley, K. G. Identification in organizations: Anexamination of four fundamental questions [J], Journal of Management,2008,34(3):325-374.
[36] Ashforth, B. E. Kreiner, G. E.&Fugate, M. All in a day’s work: boundaries and microrole transitions [J]. Academy of Management Review,2000,25(3):472-491.
[37] Ashforth, B. E. Role transitions in organizational life: an identity-based perspective [M].Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. New Jersey,2001.
[38] Ashforth, B. E., Sluss, D. M.&Harrison, S. H. Socialization in organizational contexts[J]. International review of industrial and organizational psychology,2007,22:1-69.
[39] Bakker, A.B, Schaufeli, W.B, Leiter, M.P, Taris, T.W. Work engagement: An emergingconcept in occupational health psychology [J]. Work&Stress.2008,22(3):187-200.
[40] Bakker, A.B.&Demerouti, E. Towards a model of work engagement [J]. CareerDevelopment International,2008,13:209-223.
[41] Bakker, A.B., Schaufeli, W.B. Positive organizational behavior: engaged employees inflourishing organizations [J]. Journal of organizational behavior,2008,29:147-154.
[42] Bandura, A.&Simon, K. M. The role of proximal intentions in self-regulation ofrefractory behavior [J]. Cognitive theory and research,1977,1(3):177-193.
[43] Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory of self-regulation [J]. Organizational behavior andhuman decision processes,1991,50(2):248-288
[44] Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective [J]. Annual review ofpsychology,2001,52:1-26.
[45] Biddle, B. J. Recent development in role theory [J]. Annual review of sociology,1986,12:67-92.
[46] Brewer, M. B., and Gardner, W. Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity andself-representations [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1996,71:83–93.
[47] Britt, T. W.&Bliese, P. D. Testing the stress-buffering effects of self engagementamong soldiers on a military operation [J]. Journal of personality,2003,71(2):245-265.
[48] Britt, T. W. Engaging the self in the field: testing the triangle model of responsibility[J].Personality and social psychological bulletin,1999,25:698-708.
[49] Britt, T. W., Bartone, P. T.,&Adler, A. B. Deriving benefits from stressful events: therole of engagement in meaningful work hardiness [J]. Journal of occupational healthpsychology,2001:6(1):53-63.
[50] Brown，S. P. A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement.[J].Psychological Bulletin,1996:120(2),235-255.
[51] Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F.,&Schaufeli, W. B. The jobdemands–resources model of burnout [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2001,86:499–512.
[52] Dyne, L. V., Ang, S.&Botero, I. C. Conceptualizing employee silence and employeevoice as multidimensional constructs [J]. Journal of management studies,2003,40(6):1359-1392.
[53] Eisenberger, R. Huntington, R. Hutchison, S.&Sowa, D. Perceived organizationalsupport [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,1986,71(3):500-507.
[54] Eisenhardt, K. M. Building theories from case study research [J]. Academy ofManagement Review,1989,14(4):532-550.
[55] Elsbach, K. D.&Bhattacharya, C. B. Defining Who You Are By What You’re Not:Organizational Disidentification and The National Rifle Association [J].Organizationscience,2001,12(4):393-413.
[56] Elsbach, K.D. An expanded model of organizational identification [J].Research inOrganizational Behavior,1999(21):163–200.
[57] Embree, Lester. Reflective Analysis: A First Introduction into PhenomenologicalInvestigation [M]. Zeta Books.2006.
[58] Farh, J. L. Zhong, C. B.&Organ, D. W. Organizational citizenship behavior in thePeople’s Republic of China [J]. Organization Science,2004,15(2):241-253.
[59] Gagné, M.&Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and work motivation [J]. Journal oforganizational behavior,2005,26(4):331-362.
[60] Giorgi, Amedeo.&Giorgi, Barbro. Phenomenology. In J.A.Smith (Ed.) Qualitativepsychology: a practical guide to research methods [M]. London: Sage Publications Inc,2003.
[61] Giorgi, Amedeo. The Phenomenological Movement and Research in the HumanSciences [J]. Nursing Science Quarterly,2005,18(1):75-82.
[62] Giorgi, Amedeo. The Descriptive Phenomenological Method In Psychology: AModified Husserlian Approach [M]. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press,2009.
[63] Giorgi, Amedeo. The Theory, Practice, and Evaluation of the PhenomenologicalMethod as a Qualitative Research Procedure [J]. Journal of PhenomenologicalPsychology1997,28(2):235-260.
[64] Gollwitzer, P. M.&Sheeran, P. Implementation intentions and goal achievement: ameta-analysis of effects and processes [J].Advances in experimental social psychology,2006,38:69-119.
[65] Gollwitzer, P. M. Goal achievement: the role of intentions [J].European review of socialpsychology,1993,4:141-185.
[66] Gonzalez-Roma, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B.&Lloret, S. Burnout andengagement: Independent factors or opposite poles?[J] Journal of Vocational Behavior,2006,68:165-174.
[67] Grant, A. M.&Ashford, S. J. The dynamics of proactivity at work [J].Research inorganizational behavior,2008,28:3-34.
[68] Greenberg, J.&Scott, K. S. Why do workers bite the hands that feed them? Employeetheft as a social exchange process [J]. Research in organizational behaviour,1996,8:111-156.
[69] Hall, D. T.&Chandler, D. E. Psychological success: when the career is a calling [J]..Journal of Organizational Behavior,2004,25:1–22.
[70] Harter J K, Schmidt F L, Hayes T L. Business-unit-level relationship betweenemployee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2002,87(2):268-279.
[71] Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L.,&Killman, E. A. Employee engagement, satisfaction, andbusiness-unit-level outcomes: a meta-analysis[R].Omaha, NE: The Gallup Organization,2003.
[72] Hatch, M J, and Schultz, M. Organizational identity [M]. New York: Oxford UniversityPress,2004.
[73] Higgins E. T. Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect [J]. Psychologicalreview,1987,94(3):319-340.
[74] Higgins E. T. Beyond pleasure and pain [J]. American Psychologist,1997,52(12):1280-1300.
[75] Higgins E. T. Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle[J].Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,1998,30:1-46.
[76] Higgins, E. T., Friedman, R. S., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Ayduk, O. N.,&Taylor, A.Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versusprevention pride [J]. European Journal of Social Psychology,2001,31:3–23.
[77] Hochschild, A. R. Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure [J]. Americanjournal of sociology,1979,85:551-575.
[78] Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., and White, K. M. A Tale of Two Theories: a CriticalComparison of Identity Theory with Social Identity Theory [J]. Social PsychologyQuarterly:1995,58(4):255-268.
[79] Johnson, R. E.,&Chang, C.-H. Relationships between organizational commitment andits antecedents: Employee self-concept matters [J].Journal of Applied SocialPsychology,2008a,38:513–541.
[80] Johnson, R. E.,&Chang, C.-H.Development and validation of a work-based regulatoryfocus scale [A]. Paper presented at the23rd Annual Society for Industrial andOrganizational Psychology Conference, San Francisco,2008b.
[81] Johnson, R. E., Chang, C. H.&Yang, L. Q. Commitment and motivation at work: therelevance of employee identity and regulation focus [J]. Academy of managementreview,2010,35(2):226-245.
[82] Judge, T. A.&Bono, J. E. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem,generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with jobsatisfaction and job performance: a meta—analysis [J]. Journal of applied psychology,2001,86(1):80-92.
[83] Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A.&Durham, C. C. The dispositional causes of job satisfaction:a core evaluation approach [J]. Research in organizational behavior,1997,19:151-188.
[84] Kahn W. A. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement atwork [J]. Academy of Management Journal,1990,33(4):692-724.
[85] Kahn, W. A. To be fully there: Psychological presence at work [J]. Human Relations,1992,45:321–349.
[86] Kanfer, R.&Ackerman, P. L. Motivation and cognitive abilities: anintegrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition [J]. Journal ofApplied Psychology,1989,74:657-690.
[87] Koestner, R.&Losier, G. F. Distinguishing reactive versus reflective autonomy [J].Journal of personality,1996,64(2):465-494.
[88] Koestner, R., Gingras, I., Abutaa, R., Losier, G. F., Didio, L.,&Gagné, M. To followexpert advice when making a decision: an examination of reactive versus reflectiveautonomy [J]. Journal of personality,1999,67(5):851-872.
[89] Kreiner, G. E.&Ashforth, B. E. Evidence toward an expanded model of organizationalidentification [J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2004,25:1–27.
[90] Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., et al. Employee engagement: a literature review [R].Kingston business school working paper,2008, series No.19.
[91] Leung, K. Chiu, W. H.&Au, Y. F. Sympathy and support for industrial actions: ajustice analysis [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,1993,78:781-787.
[92] Lind, E. A. Kanfer, R. Earley, P. C. Voice, control, and procedural justice: instrumentaland noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgements [J]. Journal of personality andsocial psychology,1990,59:952-959.
[93] Lind, E. A. Kulik C. T. Ambrose, M.&de Vera-Park M. W. Individual and corporatedispute resolution: using procedural fairness as a decision heuristics [J]. Administrativescience quarterly,1993,38:224-251.
[94] Locke, E. A.&Latham, G. P. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting andtask motivation [J]. American psychologist,2002,57(9):705-717.
[95] Louis, M. R. Surprise and sense-making: what new-comers experience in enteringunfamiliar organization settings [J]. Administrative science quarterly,1980,25:226-251.
[96] Macey, W.H.&Schneider, B. The meaning of employee engagement [J]. Industrial andOrganizational Psychology,2008,1:3-30.
[97] Marcus, B&Schuler, H. Antecedents of counterproductive behavior at work: a generalperspective [J]. Journal of applied psychology,2004,89(4):647-660.
[98] Margolis, Joshua D.&Andrew Molinsky. Navigating the bind of necessary evils:psychological engagement and the production of interpersonal sensitive behavior[J].Academy of Management Journal,2008,51(5):847-872.
[99] Maslach, C.&Leiter, M.P. The truth about burnout: How organizations cause personalstress and what to do about it [M]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass,1997.
[100] Maslach, C.&Leiter, M.P. Early predictors of job burnout and engagement [J]. Journalof Applied Psychology,2008,93:498-512.
[101] Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B.&Leiter, M.P. Job burnout [J]. Annual Review ofPsychology,2001,52:397-422.
[102] Maxwell. J. A. Qualitative research design: an interactive approach [M].2ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,2005.
[103] May, D. R., Gilson, R. L.,&Harter, L. M. The psychological conditions ofmeaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work[J]. Journal of Occupational&Organizational Psychology,2004,77:11–37.
[104] Merton, Robert. K. The Role-Set: Problems in Sociological Theory [J].The BritishJournal of Sociology,1957,8(2):106-120.
[105] Meyer J. P.&Gagné, M. Employee engagement from a self-determination theoryperspective [J].Indulstrial and organizational psychology,2008,1:60-62.
[106] Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E.,&Vandenberghe, C. Employee commitment and motivation:A conceptual analysis and integrative model [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2004,89:991–1007.
[107] Meyer, J. P.&Maltin, E. R. Employee commitment and well-being: a critical review,theoretical framework and research agenda [J]. Journal of vocational behavior,2010,77:323-337.
[108] Miller, D. T. Disrespect and the experience of injustice [J]. Annual review ofpsychology,2001,52:527-553.
[109] Mischel, W., Ayduk, O. Berman, M. G., Casey, B. J., Gotlib, I. H., Jonides, J., Kross, E.,Theresa, T., Wilson, N. L., Zayas, V.,&Shoda, Y.‘Willpower’ over the life span:decomposing self-regulation[J]. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience,2010,6(2):252-256.
[110] Morgan, G. Paradigms metaphors, and puzzle solving [J].Administrative sciencequarterly,1980,25(4):605-623.
[111] Morrison E. W.&Robinson, S. L. When employees feel betrayed: a model of howpsychological contract violation develops [J].Academy of management review,1997,22(1):226-256.
[112] O’Reilly，C. Corporations, culture, and commitment: motivation and social control inorganizations [J]. California management review,1989, summer.
[113] Peterson, Mark F. et al. Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: a21-nation study.Academy of Management Journal,1995,38(2):429-452.
[114] Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B.&Bachrach, D. G. Organizationalcitizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature andsuggestions for future research [J]. Journal of management,2000,26(3):513-563.
[115] Pratt, M G. To be or not to be? Central questions in organizational identification [A]. InD A Whetten, and P C Godfrey (Eds.). Identity in organizations: Building theorythrough conversations [M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,1998.
[116] Pratt, M. G. The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing identification amongAmway distributors [J].Administrative Science Quarterly,2000,45:456-493.
[117] Pratt, M. G., K. W. Rockmann, J. B. Kaufmann. Constructing professional identity: therole of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity amongmedical residents [J]. Academy of management journal,2006,49(2):235-262.
[118] Rhoades, L.&Eisenberger, R. Perceived organizational support: a review of theliterature [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2002,87(4):698-714.
[119] Rich, B. L., Lepine J. A.,&Crawford, E. R.Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effectson Job Performance [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2010,53(3):617–635.
[120] Robert, G. L., James, M. D., Aaron, M. S.,&Rosalie, J. H. Self-regulation at work [J].Annual review of psychology,2010,61:543-568.
[121] Robinson，S., Kraatz, M.&Rousseau, D. Changing obiligations and the psychologicalcontract: a longitudinal study [J]. Academy of management journal,1994,37(1):137-152.
[122] Ronbinson, S. L.&Bennett, R. J. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: amultidimensional scaling study [J]. Academy of Management Journal,1995,38,555-572.
[123] Rothbard, N. P. Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work andfamily roles [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,2001,46:655-684
[124] Rousseau, D.M. Why workers still identify with organizations [J]. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior,1998,19:217–233.
[125] Ryan, R. M.&Deci, E. L Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: doespsychology need choice, self-determination, and will?[J]. Journal of personality,2006,74(6):1557-1585.
[126] Ryan, R. M.&Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsicmotivation, social development, and well-being [J]. American psychologist,2000,55(1):68-78.
[127] Sackett, P. R. The structure of counterproductive work behaviors: dimensionality andrelationships with facets of job performance [J]. International journal of selection andassessment,2002,10(1,2):5-11.
[128] Saks, A.M. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal ofManagerial Psychology [J],2006,21(7):600-619
[129] Sanders, P.1982. Phenomenology: a new way of viewing organizational research [J].Academy of Management Review,7(3):353-360.
[130] Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B, Rhenen, W.V. How changes in job demands andresources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism [J]. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior.2009,30:893–917.
[131] Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B.&Salanova, M. The measurement of work engagementwith a short questionnaire: A cross-national study [J]. Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement,2006,66:701-716.
[132] Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V.&Bakker, A.B. The measurementof engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach [J].Journal of Happiness Studies,2002,3:71-92.
[133] Schein E. H. organizational socialization and the profession of management [J].Industrial Management Review，1968,9: l-16.
[134] Seijts, G.H.&D.Crim.What engages employees the most or, the ten C’s of employeeengagement. Ivey Business Journal,2006(3-4):1-5.
[135] Shah, J.,&Higgins, E. T. Expectancy x value effects: Regulatory focus as adeterminant of magnitude and direction [J].Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology,1997,73:447–458.
[136] Shah, J., Higgins, E. T.,&Friedman, R. S. Performance incentives and means: howregulatory focus influences goal attainment [J]. Journal of personality and socialpsychology,1998,74:285-293.
[137] Shamir, B.Meaning, self and motivation in organizations [J].Organization studies,1991,12(3):405-424.
[138] Sheeran, P. Intention-behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review [J].European review of social psychology,2002,12:1-30.
[139] Shore, L. M.&Barksdale, K. Examining degree of balance and level of obligation inthe employment relationship: a social exchange approach [J].Journal of OrganizationalBehavior,1998,19:731-744.
[140] Skinner, E. A.&Zimmer-Gembech, M. J. The development of coping [J]. Annualreview of psychology,2007,58:119-144.
[141] Sluss, D. M.&Ashforth, B. E. Relational identity and identification: defining ourselvesthrough work relationships [J]. Academy of Management Review,2007,32(1):9-32.
[142] Spreitzer, G. M. Lam, C. F&Quinn, R. W. Human Energy in Organizations:Implications for POS From Six Interdisciplinary Streams [A]. In: K. S. Cameron&G.M. Spreitzer, eds. Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship [C]. NewYork: Oxford University Press,2012,155-167.
[143] Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T.,&Shapiro, D. L. The future of work motivation theory.[J]Academy of management review,2004,29(3):379-387.
[144] Stets, J. E.&Burke, P. J. A Sociological Approach to Self and Identity [M]. In M. R.Leary&J. P. Tangey (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity New York: Guilford Press,2003:128-125.
[145] Stryker, S., and Burke, P. J. The past, present, and future of an identity theory [J].Social Psychology Quarterly,2000,63:284-297.
[146] Tsui, A. S.&Ashford, S. J. Adaptive self-regulation: a process view of managerialeffectiveness [J]. Journal of management,1994,20:93-121.
[147] Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W.,&Tripoli, A. M. Alternative approaches to theemployee-organization relationship: does investment pay off?[J]. Academy ofmanagement journal,1997,40:1089-1121.
[148] Tsui, A. S. Contributing to global management knowledge: A case for high qualityindigenous research [J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2004,21:491–513.
[149] Tsui, A. S. From homogenization to pluralism: International management research inthe Academy and beyond [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2007,50(6):1353-1364.
[150] Wallace, C.,&Chen, G. A multilevel integration of personality, climate, self-regulation,and performance [J]. Personnel Psychology,2006,59:529–557.
[151] Webb, T. L.&Sheeran, P. Does changing behavioral intention engender behaviorchange? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence [J]. Psychological bulletin.2006,132:249–268.
[152] Welbourne, T. M., Johnson, D. E.,&Erez, A. The role-based performance scale:validity analysis of a theory-based measure [J]. Academy of management journal,1998,41(5):540-555.
[153] Wertz, Frederick J. Phenomenological research methods for counseling psychology[J].Journal of Counseling Psychology,2005,52(2):167-177.
[154] Wrzesniewski, A.&J. E. Dutton. Crafting a job: revisioning employees as activecrafters of their work [J]. Academy of management review,2001,26(2):179-201.
[155] Wrzesniewski, A., J. E. Dutton&G. Debebe. Interpersonal sensemaking and themeaning of work [J]. Research in Organizational Behavior,2003,25:93-135.
[156] Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E.&Schaufeli, W.B. The role of personalresources in the job demands-resources model [J]. International Journal of StressManagement,2007,14:121-141.
[157] Zimmerman, B. J. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background,methodological developments, and future prospects [J]. American educational researchjournal,2008,45(1):166-183.
[2]陈向明.质的研究方法与社会科学研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社，2000.
[3]崔光辉.现象的沉思：现象学心理学[M].济南：山东教育出版社,2009.
[4]戈夫曼.日常生活中的自我呈现[M].冯钢译.北京:，北京大学出版社，2008.
[5]胡塞尔.纯粹现象学通论[M].李幼蒸译.北京：商务印书馆，1992.
[6]胡塞尔.欧洲科学的危机与超越论的现象学[M].王炳文译.北京：商务印书馆，2008.
[7]洛尔，施瓦茨.全力以赴-高效能人士的精力管理手册[M].肖亭译.北京`：中信出版社，2009.
[8]迈尔斯，休伯曼.质性资料的分析：方法与实践[M].张芬芬译.重庆：重庆大学出版社，2008.
[9]金盛华.自我概念及其发展[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),1996(1):30-36.
[10]黎坚，庞博,张博，杜涵.自我调节：从基本理论到应用研究[J].北京师范大学学报,2011,6:5-13.
[11]李锐,凌文辁.工作投入研究的现状[J].心理科学进展,2007，15（2）:366-372.
[12]李永鑫,张阔.投入:工作倦怠研究的新视角[J].中国健康心理学杂志,2007，15(6):569-571.
[13]李原.企业员工的心理契约—概念、理论及实证研究[M].上海：复旦大学出版社，2006.
[14]梅洛-庞蒂.知觉现象学[M].杨大春，张尧均译.北京：商务印书馆，2005.
[15]倪梁康.现象学运动的基本意义—纪念现象学运动一百周年[J].中国社会科学,2000(4):69-78.
[16]斯皮格伯格.现象学运动[M].王炳文，张金言译.北京：商务印书馆，2011.
[17]孙敏.西方组织认同互动视角研究前沿探析[J].外国经济与管理，2011a，33（5）：49-56.
[18]孙敏.西方科学观演变探析[J].科学学研究,2011b,29(6):808-813.
[19]索科拉夫斯基.现象学导论[M].高秉江，张建华译.武汉：武汉大学出版社，2009.
[20]特纳，斯戴茨.情感社会学[M]孙俊才译.上海：上海人民出版社,2007.
[21]汪玲,林晖芸,逄晓鸣.特质性与情境性调节定向匹配效应的一致性[J].心理学报,2011,43（5）:553560.
[22]王明辉,凌文辁.员工组织社会化研究的概况[J].心理科学进展,2006,14(5):722-728.
[23]王彦峰，秦金亮.工作倦怠和工作投入的整合[J].心理科学进展,2009,17(4):802–810.
[24]谢立中.日常生活的现象学社会学分析[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
[25]杨善华.感知与洞察：实践中的现象学社会学[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2012.
[26]杨天平,胡旭苗.教育管理现象学[M].重庆：重庆大学出版社,2010.
[27]张彬,陈加洲.工作投入、工作卷入与工作嵌入的研究综述[J].华东经济管理，2009（12）:130-133.
[28]张祥龙.现象学导论七讲——从原著阐发新意[M].修订版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[29]张轶文，甘怡群.中文版Utrecht工作投入量表（UWES）的信效度检验[J].临床心理学杂志,2005,13(3):268-271.
[30] Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior [J].Organizational behavior and humandecision processes,1991,50:179-211.
[31] Ajzen, I. Nature and operation of attitudes [J]. American review of psychology,2001,52：27-58.
[32] Eccles, J. S.&Wigfield, A. Motivational beliefs, values, and goal [J]. American reviewof psychology,2002,53:109-132.
[33] Ashforth, B. E.,&Humphery, R. H. Emotional labor in service roles: the influence ofidentity.[J].Academy of management journal,1993,18(1):88-115.
[34] Ashforth, B. E.,&Mael, F. Social identity theory and the organization [J].Academy ofManagement Review,1989,14:20-39.
[35] Ashforth, B. E, Harrison, S. H., and Corley, K. G. Identification in organizations: Anexamination of four fundamental questions [J], Journal of Management,2008,34(3):325-374.
[36] Ashforth, B. E. Kreiner, G. E.&Fugate, M. All in a day’s work: boundaries and microrole transitions [J]. Academy of Management Review,2000,25(3):472-491.
[37] Ashforth, B. E. Role transitions in organizational life: an identity-based perspective [M].Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. New Jersey,2001.
[38] Ashforth, B. E., Sluss, D. M.&Harrison, S. H. Socialization in organizational contexts[J]. International review of industrial and organizational psychology,2007,22:1-69.
[39] Bakker, A.B, Schaufeli, W.B, Leiter, M.P, Taris, T.W. Work engagement: An emergingconcept in occupational health psychology [J]. Work&Stress.2008,22(3):187-200.
[40] Bakker, A.B.&Demerouti, E. Towards a model of work engagement [J]. CareerDevelopment International,2008,13:209-223.
[41] Bakker, A.B., Schaufeli, W.B. Positive organizational behavior: engaged employees inflourishing organizations [J]. Journal of organizational behavior,2008,29:147-154.
[42] Bandura, A.&Simon, K. M. The role of proximal intentions in self-regulation ofrefractory behavior [J]. Cognitive theory and research,1977,1(3):177-193.
[43] Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory of self-regulation [J]. Organizational behavior andhuman decision processes,1991,50(2):248-288
[44] Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective [J]. Annual review ofpsychology,2001,52:1-26.
[45] Biddle, B. J. Recent development in role theory [J]. Annual review of sociology,1986,12:67-92.
[46] Brewer, M. B., and Gardner, W. Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity andself-representations [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1996,71:83–93.
[47] Britt, T. W.&Bliese, P. D. Testing the stress-buffering effects of self engagementamong soldiers on a military operation [J]. Journal of personality,2003,71(2):245-265.
[48] Britt, T. W. Engaging the self in the field: testing the triangle model of responsibility[J].Personality and social psychological bulletin,1999,25:698-708.
[49] Britt, T. W., Bartone, P. T.,&Adler, A. B. Deriving benefits from stressful events: therole of engagement in meaningful work hardiness [J]. Journal of occupational healthpsychology,2001:6(1):53-63.
[50] Brown，S. P. A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement.[J].Psychological Bulletin,1996:120(2),235-255.
[51] Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F.,&Schaufeli, W. B. The jobdemands–resources model of burnout [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2001,86:499–512.
[52] Dyne, L. V., Ang, S.&Botero, I. C. Conceptualizing employee silence and employeevoice as multidimensional constructs [J]. Journal of management studies,2003,40(6):1359-1392.
[53] Eisenberger, R. Huntington, R. Hutchison, S.&Sowa, D. Perceived organizationalsupport [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,1986,71(3):500-507.
[54] Eisenhardt, K. M. Building theories from case study research [J]. Academy ofManagement Review,1989,14(4):532-550.
[55] Elsbach, K. D.&Bhattacharya, C. B. Defining Who You Are By What You’re Not:Organizational Disidentification and The National Rifle Association [J].Organizationscience,2001,12(4):393-413.
[56] Elsbach, K.D. An expanded model of organizational identification [J].Research inOrganizational Behavior,1999(21):163–200.
[57] Embree, Lester. Reflective Analysis: A First Introduction into PhenomenologicalInvestigation [M]. Zeta Books.2006.
[58] Farh, J. L. Zhong, C. B.&Organ, D. W. Organizational citizenship behavior in thePeople’s Republic of China [J]. Organization Science,2004,15(2):241-253.
[59] Gagné, M.&Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and work motivation [J]. Journal oforganizational behavior,2005,26(4):331-362.
[60] Giorgi, Amedeo.&Giorgi, Barbro. Phenomenology. In J.A.Smith (Ed.) Qualitativepsychology: a practical guide to research methods [M]. London: Sage Publications Inc,2003.
[61] Giorgi, Amedeo. The Phenomenological Movement and Research in the HumanSciences [J]. Nursing Science Quarterly,2005,18(1):75-82.
[62] Giorgi, Amedeo. The Descriptive Phenomenological Method In Psychology: AModified Husserlian Approach [M]. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press,2009.
[63] Giorgi, Amedeo. The Theory, Practice, and Evaluation of the PhenomenologicalMethod as a Qualitative Research Procedure [J]. Journal of PhenomenologicalPsychology1997,28(2):235-260.
[64] Gollwitzer, P. M.&Sheeran, P. Implementation intentions and goal achievement: ameta-analysis of effects and processes [J].Advances in experimental social psychology,2006,38:69-119.
[65] Gollwitzer, P. M. Goal achievement: the role of intentions [J].European review of socialpsychology,1993,4:141-185.
[66] Gonzalez-Roma, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B.&Lloret, S. Burnout andengagement: Independent factors or opposite poles?[J] Journal of Vocational Behavior,2006,68:165-174.
[67] Grant, A. M.&Ashford, S. J. The dynamics of proactivity at work [J].Research inorganizational behavior,2008,28:3-34.
[68] Greenberg, J.&Scott, K. S. Why do workers bite the hands that feed them? Employeetheft as a social exchange process [J]. Research in organizational behaviour,1996,8:111-156.
[69] Hall, D. T.&Chandler, D. E. Psychological success: when the career is a calling [J]..Journal of Organizational Behavior,2004,25:1–22.
[70] Harter J K, Schmidt F L, Hayes T L. Business-unit-level relationship betweenemployee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2002,87(2):268-279.
[71] Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L.,&Killman, E. A. Employee engagement, satisfaction, andbusiness-unit-level outcomes: a meta-analysis[R].Omaha, NE: The Gallup Organization,2003.
[72] Hatch, M J, and Schultz, M. Organizational identity [M]. New York: Oxford UniversityPress,2004.
[73] Higgins E. T. Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect [J]. Psychologicalreview,1987,94(3):319-340.
[74] Higgins E. T. Beyond pleasure and pain [J]. American Psychologist,1997,52(12):1280-1300.
[75] Higgins E. T. Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle[J].Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,1998,30:1-46.
[76] Higgins, E. T., Friedman, R. S., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Ayduk, O. N.,&Taylor, A.Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versusprevention pride [J]. European Journal of Social Psychology,2001,31:3–23.
[77] Hochschild, A. R. Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure [J]. Americanjournal of sociology,1979,85:551-575.
[78] Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., and White, K. M. A Tale of Two Theories: a CriticalComparison of Identity Theory with Social Identity Theory [J]. Social PsychologyQuarterly:1995,58(4):255-268.
[79] Johnson, R. E.,&Chang, C.-H. Relationships between organizational commitment andits antecedents: Employee self-concept matters [J].Journal of Applied SocialPsychology,2008a,38:513–541.
[80] Johnson, R. E.,&Chang, C.-H.Development and validation of a work-based regulatoryfocus scale [A]. Paper presented at the23rd Annual Society for Industrial andOrganizational Psychology Conference, San Francisco,2008b.
[81] Johnson, R. E., Chang, C. H.&Yang, L. Q. Commitment and motivation at work: therelevance of employee identity and regulation focus [J]. Academy of managementreview,2010,35(2):226-245.
[82] Judge, T. A.&Bono, J. E. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem,generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with jobsatisfaction and job performance: a meta—analysis [J]. Journal of applied psychology,2001,86(1):80-92.
[83] Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A.&Durham, C. C. The dispositional causes of job satisfaction:a core evaluation approach [J]. Research in organizational behavior,1997,19:151-188.
[84] Kahn W. A. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement atwork [J]. Academy of Management Journal,1990,33(4):692-724.
[85] Kahn, W. A. To be fully there: Psychological presence at work [J]. Human Relations,1992,45:321–349.
[86] Kanfer, R.&Ackerman, P. L. Motivation and cognitive abilities: anintegrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition [J]. Journal ofApplied Psychology,1989,74:657-690.
[87] Koestner, R.&Losier, G. F. Distinguishing reactive versus reflective autonomy [J].Journal of personality,1996,64(2):465-494.
[88] Koestner, R., Gingras, I., Abutaa, R., Losier, G. F., Didio, L.,&Gagné, M. To followexpert advice when making a decision: an examination of reactive versus reflectiveautonomy [J]. Journal of personality,1999,67(5):851-872.
[89] Kreiner, G. E.&Ashforth, B. E. Evidence toward an expanded model of organizationalidentification [J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2004,25:1–27.
[90] Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., et al. Employee engagement: a literature review [R].Kingston business school working paper,2008, series No.19.
[91] Leung, K. Chiu, W. H.&Au, Y. F. Sympathy and support for industrial actions: ajustice analysis [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,1993,78:781-787.
[92] Lind, E. A. Kanfer, R. Earley, P. C. Voice, control, and procedural justice: instrumentaland noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgements [J]. Journal of personality andsocial psychology,1990,59:952-959.
[93] Lind, E. A. Kulik C. T. Ambrose, M.&de Vera-Park M. W. Individual and corporatedispute resolution: using procedural fairness as a decision heuristics [J]. Administrativescience quarterly,1993,38:224-251.
[94] Locke, E. A.&Latham, G. P. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting andtask motivation [J]. American psychologist,2002,57(9):705-717.
[95] Louis, M. R. Surprise and sense-making: what new-comers experience in enteringunfamiliar organization settings [J]. Administrative science quarterly,1980,25:226-251.
[96] Macey, W.H.&Schneider, B. The meaning of employee engagement [J]. Industrial andOrganizational Psychology,2008,1:3-30.
[97] Marcus, B&Schuler, H. Antecedents of counterproductive behavior at work: a generalperspective [J]. Journal of applied psychology,2004,89(4):647-660.
[98] Margolis, Joshua D.&Andrew Molinsky. Navigating the bind of necessary evils:psychological engagement and the production of interpersonal sensitive behavior[J].Academy of Management Journal,2008,51(5):847-872.
[99] Maslach, C.&Leiter, M.P. The truth about burnout: How organizations cause personalstress and what to do about it [M]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass,1997.
[100] Maslach, C.&Leiter, M.P. Early predictors of job burnout and engagement [J]. Journalof Applied Psychology,2008,93:498-512.
[101] Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B.&Leiter, M.P. Job burnout [J]. Annual Review ofPsychology,2001,52:397-422.
[102] Maxwell. J. A. Qualitative research design: an interactive approach [M].2ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,2005.
[103] May, D. R., Gilson, R. L.,&Harter, L. M. The psychological conditions ofmeaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work[J]. Journal of Occupational&Organizational Psychology,2004,77:11–37.
[104] Merton, Robert. K. The Role-Set: Problems in Sociological Theory [J].The BritishJournal of Sociology,1957,8(2):106-120.
[105] Meyer J. P.&Gagné, M. Employee engagement from a self-determination theoryperspective [J].Indulstrial and organizational psychology,2008,1:60-62.
[106] Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E.,&Vandenberghe, C. Employee commitment and motivation:A conceptual analysis and integrative model [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2004,89:991–1007.
[107] Meyer, J. P.&Maltin, E. R. Employee commitment and well-being: a critical review,theoretical framework and research agenda [J]. Journal of vocational behavior,2010,77:323-337.
[108] Miller, D. T. Disrespect and the experience of injustice [J]. Annual review ofpsychology,2001,52:527-553.
[109] Mischel, W., Ayduk, O. Berman, M. G., Casey, B. J., Gotlib, I. H., Jonides, J., Kross, E.,Theresa, T., Wilson, N. L., Zayas, V.,&Shoda, Y.‘Willpower’ over the life span:decomposing self-regulation[J]. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience,2010,6(2):252-256.
[110] Morgan, G. Paradigms metaphors, and puzzle solving [J].Administrative sciencequarterly,1980,25(4):605-623.
[111] Morrison E. W.&Robinson, S. L. When employees feel betrayed: a model of howpsychological contract violation develops [J].Academy of management review,1997,22(1):226-256.
[112] O’Reilly，C. Corporations, culture, and commitment: motivation and social control inorganizations [J]. California management review,1989, summer.
[113] Peterson, Mark F. et al. Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: a21-nation study.Academy of Management Journal,1995,38(2):429-452.
[114] Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B.&Bachrach, D. G. Organizationalcitizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature andsuggestions for future research [J]. Journal of management,2000,26(3):513-563.
[115] Pratt, M G. To be or not to be? Central questions in organizational identification [A]. InD A Whetten, and P C Godfrey (Eds.). Identity in organizations: Building theorythrough conversations [M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,1998.
[116] Pratt, M. G. The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing identification amongAmway distributors [J].Administrative Science Quarterly,2000,45:456-493.
[117] Pratt, M. G., K. W. Rockmann, J. B. Kaufmann. Constructing professional identity: therole of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity amongmedical residents [J]. Academy of management journal,2006,49(2):235-262.
[118] Rhoades, L.&Eisenberger, R. Perceived organizational support: a review of theliterature [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2002,87(4):698-714.
[119] Rich, B. L., Lepine J. A.,&Crawford, E. R.Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effectson Job Performance [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2010,53(3):617–635.
[120] Robert, G. L., James, M. D., Aaron, M. S.,&Rosalie, J. H. Self-regulation at work [J].Annual review of psychology,2010,61:543-568.
[121] Robinson，S., Kraatz, M.&Rousseau, D. Changing obiligations and the psychologicalcontract: a longitudinal study [J]. Academy of management journal,1994,37(1):137-152.
[122] Ronbinson, S. L.&Bennett, R. J. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: amultidimensional scaling study [J]. Academy of Management Journal,1995,38,555-572.
[123] Rothbard, N. P. Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work andfamily roles [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,2001,46:655-684
[124] Rousseau, D.M. Why workers still identify with organizations [J]. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior,1998,19:217–233.
[125] Ryan, R. M.&Deci, E. L Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: doespsychology need choice, self-determination, and will?[J]. Journal of personality,2006,74(6):1557-1585.
[126] Ryan, R. M.&Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsicmotivation, social development, and well-being [J]. American psychologist,2000,55(1):68-78.
[127] Sackett, P. R. The structure of counterproductive work behaviors: dimensionality andrelationships with facets of job performance [J]. International journal of selection andassessment,2002,10(1,2):5-11.
[128] Saks, A.M. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal ofManagerial Psychology [J],2006,21(7):600-619
[129] Sanders, P.1982. Phenomenology: a new way of viewing organizational research [J].Academy of Management Review,7(3):353-360.
[130] Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B, Rhenen, W.V. How changes in job demands andresources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism [J]. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior.2009,30:893–917.
[131] Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B.&Salanova, M. The measurement of work engagementwith a short questionnaire: A cross-national study [J]. Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement,2006,66:701-716.
[132] Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V.&Bakker, A.B. The measurementof engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach [J].Journal of Happiness Studies,2002,3:71-92.
[133] Schein E. H. organizational socialization and the profession of management [J].Industrial Management Review，1968,9: l-16.
[134] Seijts, G.H.&D.Crim.What engages employees the most or, the ten C’s of employeeengagement. Ivey Business Journal,2006(3-4):1-5.
[135] Shah, J.,&Higgins, E. T. Expectancy x value effects: Regulatory focus as adeterminant of magnitude and direction [J].Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology,1997,73:447–458.
[136] Shah, J., Higgins, E. T.,&Friedman, R. S. Performance incentives and means: howregulatory focus influences goal attainment [J]. Journal of personality and socialpsychology,1998,74:285-293.
[137] Shamir, B.Meaning, self and motivation in organizations [J].Organization studies,1991,12(3):405-424.
[138] Sheeran, P. Intention-behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review [J].European review of social psychology,2002,12:1-30.
[139] Shore, L. M.&Barksdale, K. Examining degree of balance and level of obligation inthe employment relationship: a social exchange approach [J].Journal of OrganizationalBehavior,1998,19:731-744.
[140] Skinner, E. A.&Zimmer-Gembech, M. J. The development of coping [J]. Annualreview of psychology,2007,58:119-144.
[141] Sluss, D. M.&Ashforth, B. E. Relational identity and identification: defining ourselvesthrough work relationships [J]. Academy of Management Review,2007,32(1):9-32.
[142] Spreitzer, G. M. Lam, C. F&Quinn, R. W. Human Energy in Organizations:Implications for POS From Six Interdisciplinary Streams [A]. In: K. S. Cameron&G.M. Spreitzer, eds. Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship [C]. NewYork: Oxford University Press,2012,155-167.
[143] Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T.,&Shapiro, D. L. The future of work motivation theory.[J]Academy of management review,2004,29(3):379-387.
[144] Stets, J. E.&Burke, P. J. A Sociological Approach to Self and Identity [M]. In M. R.Leary&J. P. Tangey (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity New York: Guilford Press,2003:128-125.
[145] Stryker, S., and Burke, P. J. The past, present, and future of an identity theory [J].Social Psychology Quarterly,2000,63:284-297.
[146] Tsui, A. S.&Ashford, S. J. Adaptive self-regulation: a process view of managerialeffectiveness [J]. Journal of management,1994,20:93-121.
[147] Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W.,&Tripoli, A. M. Alternative approaches to theemployee-organization relationship: does investment pay off?[J]. Academy ofmanagement journal,1997,40:1089-1121.
[148] Tsui, A. S. Contributing to global management knowledge: A case for high qualityindigenous research [J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2004,21:491–513.
[149] Tsui, A. S. From homogenization to pluralism: International management research inthe Academy and beyond [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2007,50(6):1353-1364.
[150] Wallace, C.,&Chen, G. A multilevel integration of personality, climate, self-regulation,and performance [J]. Personnel Psychology,2006,59:529–557.
[151] Webb, T. L.&Sheeran, P. Does changing behavioral intention engender behaviorchange? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence [J]. Psychological bulletin.2006,132:249–268.
[152] Welbourne, T. M., Johnson, D. E.,&Erez, A. The role-based performance scale:validity analysis of a theory-based measure [J]. Academy of management journal,1998,41(5):540-555.
[153] Wertz, Frederick J. Phenomenological research methods for counseling psychology[J].Journal of Counseling Psychology,2005,52(2):167-177.
[154] Wrzesniewski, A.&J. E. Dutton. Crafting a job: revisioning employees as activecrafters of their work [J]. Academy of management review,2001,26(2):179-201.
[155] Wrzesniewski, A., J. E. Dutton&G. Debebe. Interpersonal sensemaking and themeaning of work [J]. Research in Organizational Behavior,2003,25:93-135.
[156] Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E.&Schaufeli, W.B. The role of personalresources in the job demands-resources model [J]. International Journal of StressManagement,2007,14:121-141.
[157] Zimmerman, B. J. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background,methodological developments, and future prospects [J]. American educational researchjournal,2008,45(1):166-183.