本研究的目的是在探討公寓大廈管理維護業（以下簡稱樓管業）的「組織支援」對事務管理人員（以下簡稱總幹事）的工作投入及其工作績效的自我評量成果與總幹事在職場所面對的角色壓力、個人對於工作的投入與其工作績效的自我評量成果間之相關性與影響性。 本研究先邀請樓管業高階管理者為本研究之專家群，以二階段方式完成本研究：首先以結構化的問題訪問專家，以形成「組織支援自陳量表」，並修訂「工作績效」之現有量表，以該二份量表再邀請專家協助完成「專家效度測量」後，施行問卷前測並檢定其信度與效度；其次，採用分層抽樣法發放問卷，回收樣本則以Pearson相關分析及迴歸分析等方式進行分析，探討研究變項及構面間之相關性與影響性。調查之對象，係從內政部營建署網頁中選擇全台樓管業登記營業密度最高的台中地區，選擇現職服務於社區之總幹事。 研究結果發現，樓管業的「組織支援」對「工作投入」、「組織支援」對「工作績效」有顯著正向影響。總幹事的「角色壓力」對「工作投入」、「角色壓力」對「工作績效」有顯著負向影響，「工作投入」對「工作績效」則有顯著正向影響，但是，「工作投入」於「組織支援」與「工作績效」、「角色壓力」與「工作績效」之間並未產生中介效果。 The purpose of this study is to explore an affairs caretaker’s (hereinafter called secretary general) self-evaluation of “organization support” to his/her job involvement and job performance in building management & maintenance companies (hereinafter called building management for short), as well as the relevance and influence between role pressure faced by a secretary general and his/her self-evaluation of job involvement and job performance. Executive managers from building management & maintenance companies were invited to form expert group in this study. The study was made up of two stages. First, experts were interviewed with structuralized questions to create a “self-report inventory of organization support” and the existing rating scale of job performance was revised. On the basis of those two rating scales, the experts were invited to help complete “expert validity measurement.” Before the questionnaire survey was conducted, its reliability and validity was examined. Next, stratified sampling method was used to issue questionnaires. The samples retrieved were analyzed through Pearson correlation analysis and regression analysis to determine the relevance and influence between variables and dimensions. The subjects, collected from the website of Construction and Planning Agency, Ministry of Interior, were those who served as secretary generals in communities in greater Taichung area, which had the highest density of building management & maintenance companies registered with the government. It is found that “organization support” has a significantly positive influence on “job involvement” as well as “job performance.” A secretary general’s “role pressure” has a significantly negative influence on “job involvement” as well as “job performance.” We have seen that “job involvement” has an obvious positive influence on “job performance.” However, “job involvement” does not produce intermediary effects between “organization support” and “job performance”, as well as between “role pressure” and “job performance.”
