|
基于焦点小组访谈的过资质员工绩效考核周期影响因素研究
|
Abstract:
本研究通过实施三轮焦点小组访谈(每轮涉及9~10名来自不同行业和职位的过资质员工,总计35名参与者),深入探讨了影响资质过剩员工绩效考核周期的多个因素。研究发现,员工技能水平、工作经验、组织绩效评估标准、反馈机制、任务复杂性和压力,以及组织文化和制度均显著影响绩效考核周期。特别是,员工技能水平和工作经验与期望的绩效考核周期正相关,而组织绩效评估标准和反馈机制直接影响实际考核周期。此外,组织文化和制度也在研究中被揭示为重要因素,如某些强调定期和频繁反馈的组织文化可能会影响考核周期的设定。这些因素间存在复杂交互作用,如高技能员工在面对复杂任务时可能期望更长的考核周期,这与组织现行制度可能相冲突。基于以上发现,本研究探讨了如何根据员工特征和任务需求调整考核周期及反馈机制的管理策略。例如,建议根据员工的技能水平和工作经验设定灵活的考核周期,或者根据任务复杂性和压力调整反馈的频率和深度。这些策略不仅丰富了资质过剩员工绩效考核的理论体系,而且为人力资源管理和组织实践提供了具体的操作指南。
This study investigates the multiple factors influencing the performance evaluation cycle for over-qualified employees, through three rounds of focus group interviews involving a total of 35 partici-pants from diverse industries and positions (9~10 participants per round). The findings reveal that employee skill levels, work experience, organizational performance evaluation criteria, feedback mechanisms, task complexity and pressure, as well as organizational culture and systems, signifi-cantly impact the performance evaluation cycle. Specifically, employee skill levels and work expe-rience are positively correlated with the expected evaluation cycle, while organizational perfor-mance evaluation criteria and feedback mechanisms directly affect the actual evaluation cycle. Furthermore, organizational culture and systems are also revealed as crucial factors, as certain cultures emphasizing regular and frequent feedback may influence the establishment of evaluation cycles. These factors interact in complex ways, for instance, highly skilled employees may expect longer evaluation cycles when facing complex tasks, which may clash with the existing organiza-tional systems. Based on these findings, this study explores management strategies for adjusting evaluation cycles and feedback mechanisms according to employee characteristics and task re-quirements. For example, it suggests implementing flexible evaluation cycles based on employee skill levels and work experience, or adjusting the frequency and depth of feedback according to task complexity and pressure. These strategies not only enrich the theoretical framework of perfor-mance evaluation for employees with excess qualifications, but also offer practical guidelines for human resource management and organizational practices.
[1] | 白雨森, 武晓宇(2023). 情绪-认知视角下高资质员工的正向引导之策. 中小企业管理与科技, (5), 39-41. |
[2] | 丁秀玲, 王慧, 赵李晶(2019). 员工资质过剩的成因、影响及管理策略——高质量发展语境的审视. 江海学刊, (2), 238-242. |
[3] | 李翠翠, 张皓月(2023). 拔尖创新技术技能人才培养: 内涵价值、多元困境及发展路径. 职业技术教育, 44(28), 28-34. |
[4] | 李朋波, 陈黎梅, 褚福磊, 等(2021). 我是高材生: 资质过剩感及其对员工的影响. 心理科学进展, 29(7), 1313-1330. |
[5] | 林世豪, 李漾, 黄爱华, 等(2022). 资质过剩感对员工创造力的内在机制研究——基于资源保存视角. 科学学与科学技术管理, 43(4), 174-192. |
[6] | 刘琳琳, 李倩(2022). 资质过剩感对员工组织公民行为的影响研究. 当代经理人, (3), 30-38. |
[7] | 刘松博, 程进凯, 马晓颖(2023). 资质过剩感对员工组织公民行为的正面影响——领导涌现的中介作用. 软科学, 37(4), 101-108. https://doi.org/10.13956/j.ss.1001-8409.2023.04.14 |
[8] | 刘松博, 潘静洲, 唐贵瑶, 等(2021). “大材小用”也有积极效应? 团队集体主义取向对资质过度感和创造力关系的调节作用. 管理评论, 33(4), 205-214. https://doi.org/10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2021.04.017 |
[9] | 刘玥(2023). 拔尖人才培养的现状与对策探索——评《创新人才培养机制研究》. 中国高校科技, (10), 109. |
[10] | 屈卫国, 王涵莎(2021). 资质过高研究综述. 心理学进展, 11(9), 2062-2069. |
[11] | 王苗苗, 张捷, 毕砚昭, 等(2021). 怀才不遇还是游刃有余: 资质过剩研究述评. 武汉理工大学学报(信息与管理工程版), 43(2), 168-173+179. |
[12] | 王瑞永, 邱天郁, 吴华(2022). 资质过剩感对员工反生产行为的影响研究——经济剥夺感和社会剥夺感的中介作用. 财经理论研究, (6), 64-75. https://doi.org/10.13894/j.cnki.jfet.2022.06.009 |
[13] | 向常春, 陈晓梅, 王旭(2023). 对高材生“另眼相待”有效吗?——资质过剩感与时间侵占行为的关系研究. 管理现代化, 43(3), 92-99. https://doi.org/10.19634/j.cnki.11-1403/c.2023.03.011 |
[14] | 阎琨, 吴菡, 张雨颀(2023). 构建中国拔尖人才培养体系: 现状、方向和路径. 中国高教研究, (5), 9-16. |
[15] | 张建平, 张光磊, 刘善仕, 等(2023). 团队情境中资质过剩感的积极效应: 综合组成型和汇编型方式的视角. 心理科学进展, 31(10), 1828-1842. |
[16] | 钟竞, 彭柯, 罗瑾琏(2021). “大材”何以活用: 公平视角下资质过剩感对员工创新行为的影响研究. 科学学与科学技术管理, 42(5), 142-155. |
[17] | 钟竞, 彭柯, 罗瑾琏(2022). 特质-情境视角下资质过剩员工的工作行为模式及形成机制研究. 中国人力资源开发, 39(4), 110-126. https://doi.org/10.16471/j.cnki.11-2822/c.2022.4.007 |
[18] | Dar, N., Ahmad, S., & Rahman, W. (2022). How and When Overqualification Improves Innovative Work Behaviour: The Roles of Creative Self-Confidence and Psy-chological Safety. Personnel Review, 51, 2461-2481.
https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-06-2020-0429 |
[19] | Dilshad, R. M., & Latif, M. I. (2013). Focus Group Interview as a Tool for Qualitative Research: An Analysis. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 33, 191-198. |
[20] | Erdogan, B., & Bauer, T. N. (2021). Overqualification at Work: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8, 259-283.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-055831 |
[21] | McLafferty, I. (2004). Focus Group Interviews as a Data Collecting Strategy. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48, 187-194.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03186.x |
[22] | Wu, X., & Ma, F. (2022). How Chinese Employees’ Voice Behavior Is Motivated: The Role of Perceived Overqualification. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article ID: 736043. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.736043 |