摘要
　　本研究的主要目的，係以「競值途徑」架構來了解國民中學校長領導角色與學校組織文化的現況及其關係，並探討分析兩者在不同背景變項是否有所差異。最後根據研究結果，提出具體建議，以供有關機關推動及進行國民中學組織變革及發展之參考。
為達成上述目的，本研究採文獻探討及問卷調查法。在文獻探討方面，主要是探討組織文化的基本概念、理論基礎、研究途徑以及競值途徑架構下的組織文化和領導角色。而在問卷調查方面則根據競值途徑的架構，分就組織文化及領導角色兩個層面，編製「國民中學學校組織環境調查問卷」，進行調查研究。最後綜合文獻探討及問卷調查的結果，提出具體建議。
本研究調查對象為台灣地區桃園縣市的公立國民中學，共抽取45所公立國民中學的主任、組長、導師及專任教師作為樣本，發出746份問卷，實得有效問卷603份。問卷統計處理係採用SPSS for Windows 9.0統計套裝軟體進行統計分析。
綜合文獻探討與問卷調查結果，本研究獲得以下結論：
一、四種類型的組織文化(凝聚共識文化、成長調適文化、理性主導文化及層級節制文化)都有其價值性與必要性，相互間沒有孰是孰非或何者較優，何者較劣的情形，組織中總是蘊含矛盾詭譎的現象，其結構應重均衡的發展。
二、學校組織文化是社會建構的概念，為社會的產物，受組織內與組織外環境的影響，因此，學校組織文化不但反應了學校成員的信念，同時也必須相容於其所處社區環境的需求、教育政策或法令的要求，符應變遷，配合變革，永續發展。
三、學校組織的革新與發展，兼重領導與管理的層面，而卓越的領導者不只扮演一兩種領導者角色，而是兼具有多重角色的身分。
四、國民中學學校組織文化就競值途徑架構而言，側重學校組織內部和諧氣氛的維持，並強調以法令規章來辦理行政，對於目標和成果的追求較為薄弱，對於革新的訴求較缺乏強烈的動力。
五、國民中學校長領導角色就競值途徑架構而言，較強調控制，並趨向結構化與正式化、指導性與工作任務取向及墨守成規與拘謹的領導型態。
六、國民中學教師知覺學校組織文化與校長領導角色，不因教育背景而有差異，但會因性別、擔任職務及任教年資等變項而有所差異。
七、國民中學學校組織文化，不因學校所在地(都市、鄉鎮)而有差異，但會因學校規模大小及創校年齡而有所差異。
八、國民中學校長領導角色，會因學校所在地(都市、鄉鎮)、學校規模大小及創校年齡而有所差異。
九、國民中學校長領導角色與學校組織文化呈正相關。
十、國民中學教師所知覺的男性校長在整體學校組織文化與校長領導角色與女性校長有所差異。
根據研究結論，提出下列各項建議：
一、對教育行政機關的建議：
(一)適度調整學校規模的大小。
(二)發展與建立各項學校教育指標，將學校教育目標具體化，並以之作為實施學校評鑑的規準，進而協助學校組織的變革與發展。
(三)重視校長人才的養成，審慎遴薦校長人選，規劃適當的課程，增進校長的領導素養與熟悉組織事務的運作。
二、對學校行政的建議
(一)學校校長宜以競值途徑之量表進行學校組織與自我領導風格之診斷，藉以洞察學校組織文化，調整自我領導風格，配合組織的特質與情境之變遷，導引學校組織的變革及健全的發展。
(二)導引學校組織變革，使組織能講求績效及迎接挑戰和革新，校長在行政運作及領導模式轉化之因應措施為：兼具多種領導角色，建立學習型組織，正視組織弔詭相斥現象的存在，發揮整合領導的功能。
(三)暢通校內溝通管道，採取參與式的決策模式，以提高教師參與學校事務的意願與機會。
(四)策劃進修活動，提倡研究風氣，增設任務編組， 針對相關主題，遴選適當人選，分組進行研究發展的工作。

A Study of the Relationships between Principals’ Leader Roles and School Culture in Junior High School of Taoyuan County
Ching-Tsai Lo
Abstract
Based on the “Competing Values Framework”, the main purposes of this study are to reveal both the current situations and the relationships between principals’ leader roles and school culture in junior high school , and to explore if there is any level of significance among the variables. With the outcome of the research , proposals and re- commendations are thus to be offered for the implementation of organization reform and development in junior high school.
To accomplish these purposes, this study has adopted the approaches of literature review as well as questionnaire. In the literature review, the researcher went through the study of organizational culture and the roles of leadership( including definitions, theo- retical foundations, approaches to culture assessment, especially based on the compet- ing values framework).In the aspects of questionnaire surveys, the researcher compiles “Questionnaire for school organization milieu in junior high school” for data collecting. According to the outcome of the study, the researcher offers tangible suggestions.
The population of the study is the public junior high school teachers of Taoyuan county in Taiwan. 45 schools have been sampled and 746 copies of the questionnaire dispatched. 603 copies of effective samples are actually acquired .Data of questionnaire has been proceeded for statistical analysis under the statistic packaging soft- ware “SPSS for Windows 9.0”.
Based upon data of literature review and questionnaire, some conclusions have been reached as follows:
1. All four culture types ( rational culture, development culture, consensual cul- ture and hierarchical culture)are valuable and necessary, and none is better or worse than the others. Paradoxes often exist in cultural profiles ,and the need for balanced culture is emphasized.
2. School culture is a concept which is constructed out of a society. It shows not only the beliefs of the school members but also needs to have some compati- bility with the demands of its environments and the policies or regulations of education.
3. Both leaderships and managements are needed for innovations and develop- ments of school organizations. A master leader plays multi-leader roles in stead of one or two.
4. The school culture in junior high school tends more to the maintenance of internal harmonic atmosphere. Administrations are based on regulations, but the purchase of outcomes and targets are weak as well as innovations.
5. The principal’s leader roles in junior high school stress more on control. The leadership style is structured and formal, directive and task-oriented, as well as conservative and cautious.
6. There are significant differences between school culture and leader roles based on different background variables including sex, official positions, teaching years, except for academic background.
7. There are significant differences on school culture in junior high school based on school sizes and school years, except for the locations of school( urban or countryside ).
8. There are significant differences on principal’s leader roles in junior high school based on school sizes, school years, and the location areas of school.
9. It shows positive correlations between principal’s leader roles and school cul- ture in junior high school.
10. There are significant differences on school culture in junior high school based on the sexual status of school principals.
According to the results of this study, following proposals are offered:
1.As to the educational authorities, they should
(1) adjust the size of the school.
(2) develop and establish all kinds of school educational criteria to concrete the school educational goals. Thus school evaluations can base on these criteria to help to reform and develop school organization.
(3) emphasize on the training as well as the choices of school principals, and develop appropriate curricula to enhance the abilities of school principals.
2.As to the administration in junior high school, some suggestions are offered as follows:
(1) In order to diagnose school culture and leadership styles, school principals may apply the assessment instrument based on competing value framework. In this way, they can realize the real meanings of their school culture and adjust their leadership styles to lead reform and well develop in school organizations.
(2) School principals should play more leader roles, create a learning organization, realize the exit of organization paradoxes, and lighten the functions of connec- tive leadership.
(3) School principals should freely flow the intercommunications in school, adopt the participation decision making model to provide more opportunities, and encourage the members willingly to participate in the school affairs.
(4) School principals should pursue further educational activities, establish an adhocracy group, and enroll suitable members to deal with research studies.

參考書目
一、 中文部份
王如哲、林明地、張志民、黃乃熒、楊振昇(民88)。教育行政。高雄：麗文。
王修本譯(1990)。追求卓越的管理。台北市：天下文化。
王可、楊崇明、宋專茂等譯(民80)。學校行政。台北：五南。
江岷欽(民84)。組織分析。台北：五南。
李亦園(民85)。文化與修養。台北：幼獅。
李長貴(民64)。組織社會心理學。台北：台灣中華
吳清山(民81)。學校效能研究。台北：五南。
林明地、楊振昇、江芳盛譯(民89)。教育組織行為。台北：:楊智文化。
邱馨儀(民84)。國民小學學校組織文化與教師組織承諾關係之研究。台北市立師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
胡瓊文(民88)。學校組織成員特性、組織文化與組織變革支持度之研究----以台北市國民小學為例。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
陳奎(民77)。教育社會學。台北：三民。
陳慧芬(民86)。國民小學組織文化之研究----一所台中市國民小學的個案分析。　
國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
陳慧芬(民87)。組織文化的意義與功能。台中師院學報第十二期，頁2-21。　
陳千玉譯(民85)。組織文化與領導。台北：五南。
陳聖謨(民84)。高級中學組織文化予教師組織承諾關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳聖謨(民84)。組織文化與學校行政革新。教育資料與研究第七期，頁61-69。
秦夢群(民79)。教育行政理論與應用。台北：五南。
黃昆輝(民77)。教育行政學。台北：東華。
黃政傑(民76)。教育研究極須擺脫量化的支配。載於中國學會主編，教育研究
方法論。台北：師大書苑。頁131-140。
黃素惠(民86)。高級中等教育階段學校文化之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
黃安邦編譯(民79)。社會心理學。台北：五南。
郭為藩(民64)。自我心理學。台南：開山書店。
許士軍(民72)。管理學。台北：東華。
張明輝(民80)。巴納德組織理論與教育行政。台北：五南。
張明輝(民88)。學校教育與行政革新研究。台北：師大書苑。
張慶勳(民86)。學校組織轉化領導研究。高雄：復文。
張春興(1991)。現代心理學。台北：東華。
張德銳(民83)。教育行政研究。台北：五南。
張德銳(民83)。教育行政研究。台北：五南。
張鈿富(民85)。教育概論。台北：三民。
張鐸嚴、楊龍立(民77)。研究資料統計處理。載於賈馥茗、楊深坑主編，教育研究法的探討與應用。台北：師大書苑。頁167-187。
馮斯民譯(民76)。尖端領導。台北：桂冠。
彭德中譯(民79)。改造企業文化。台北：遠流。
廖春文(民84)。二十一世紀教育行政領導理念。台北：師大書苑。
蔡振生譯(民81)。學校組織行為分析。台北：五南。
蔡樹培(民83)。人際關係與組織管理。台北：五南。
鄭彩鳳(民85)。競值途徑應用在高中職校長領導角色、學校組織文化與組織效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博士論文。
鄭彩鳳(民87)。學校行政----理論與實務。高雄：麗文。
鄭懷超譯(民89)。領導。台北：天下文化。
盧盛忠、余凱成、徐　昶、錢冰鴻(民86)。組織行為。台北：五南。
謝文全(民76)。教育行政----理論與實際。台北：文景。
謝文全(民84)。學校行政。台北：五南。
籃采風、廖榮利(民83)。組織行為學。台北：三民。
譚潔芝(民79)。組織文化對組織運作的影響。國立台灣政治大學研究所碩士論文。
羅虞村(民75)。領導理論研究。台北：文景。
韓經綸譯(民83)。組織行為學導論。台北：五南。
譚家瑜譯(民81)。新領導力 。台北:天下文化。
繆敏志(民82)。組織文化之探討。國立政治大學學報，第六十七期，下冊，頁133-162。
二、 英文部分
Bryman, A. (1986). Leadership And Organizations, London:Routedge & Kegan Paul.
Beck, B. & Moore, L. F(1985).Linking the Host Culture to Organizational Variables.
In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, and J. Martin (Eds.).Or- ganizational Culture. London:Sage.
Cameron,K.S.& Quinn, R.E.(1999).Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Cameron, K.S. ( 1986 ). “Effectiveness as Paradox: Consensus and Conflict in Concep- tions of Organizational Effectiveness”Management Science，32(5),pp.533-539.
Fairholm, G. W. (1994). Leadership and the Culture of Trust. London: Praeger.
Fine, M. G. (1995). Building Successful Multicultural Organizations：Challenges and
Opportunities. London：Quorum.
Frost,P.J., L.F.Moore, M.R.Louis, C.C.Lundberg, J.Martin,(Eds.),(1985). Organization- al Culture . Newbury Park:Sage.
Maanen, J. V. (1979). Reclaiming Qualitative Methods for Organizational Research: A
Preface. Administrational Science Quartery. 24, pp.520-526.
Martin, J. (1991).A personal Journey: From Integration to Differentiation to Fragment- ation to Feminism. In P.J.Frost, L.F.Moore, M.R.Louis, C.C.Lundberg & J.Martin, (Eds.), Reframing Organizational Culture. Newbury Park: Sage.
Ott, J.S.(1989). The Organizational Culture Perspective. CA: Dorsey Press..
Ouchi, W. G. and Wilkins, A. L. (1988). Organizational Culture. In A. Westoby (Ed.),
Culture and Power in Educational Organizations. Open University Press.
Pheysey, D. C. (1993). Organizational Cultures: Types and Transformations, London: Routledge..
Peterson,R. A. (1979). Revitalizing the culture concept. American Review of Sociology, 5,pp.137-166.
Pettigrew,A.M.(1979).“On Studying Organizational Cultures.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, pp.570-581.
Quinn,R.E.& McGrath, M.R. (1985). “The Transformation of Organizational Cultures: A Competing Value Perspective”. In P.J.Frost, L.F. Morre, M.R.Louis, C.C.Lund- berg, J. Martin(Eds.), Organizational Culture .Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
Quinn,R.E.(1988). Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Com- peting Demands of High Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Quinn,R.E.& McGrath, M.R.(1982).“Moving Beyond the Single-solution Perspective : The Competing Values Approach as Diagnostic Tool.”The Journal of Applied Be- havioral Science, 18(4), pp.463-472.
Quinn, R.E. & Hall, R.H.(1983). “Environments, Organizations, and Policymakers:To- ward an Integrative Framework.” In R. H. Hall and R. E. Quinn (Eds.). Organiza- tional Theory and Public Policy. London:Sage.
Quinn,Ｒ. E.(1984). Applying the Competing Values Approach to Leadership:Toward an Integrative Framework. In J. G. Hunt, D. M. Hosking, C. A. Schriesheim & R. Stewart,(Eds.),Leaders And Managerial：International Perspectives on Manage- rial Behavior and Leadership ,pp.82-9. New York:Pergamon Press.
Reichers, A.E. & Schneider,B.(1990). Climate and Culture：An Evolution Constructs. In Schneider,B.(Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture. San Franciso: Jossey- Bass.
Sackmann, S.A.(1991). Culture Knowledge in Organizations. CA: Sage.
Schein,E.H.(1992).Organizational Culture and Leadership (2nd ed). San Francisco,CA: Jossey- Bass.
Schein,E. H.(1985). “How Culture Forms, Develops, and Changes.” In R. H. Kilmann, M.J.Saxton,R.Serpa & associates, Gaining Control of the Corporate Culture, San Franciso: Jossey-Bass.
Schein, E.H.(1990).Organizational Culture, in American Psychologist, February,1990, p113 .
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1996). Leadership For The Schoolhouse: How is it different?Why is it important? San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Shafritz, J.M. & Ott, J.S.(1987).Classics Of Organization Theory.Chicago:The Dorsey Press.　
Smith,P.B. and Peterson,M.F.(1988).Leadership, Organizations and Culture: An Event Management Model, London: Sage.
Smircich,L.(1983). “Concepts of Cuture and Organizational Analysis.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 28,pp. 339-358.
Smircich, L. (1985). “Is the Concept of Culture a Par adigm for Understanding Organi- zation and Ourselves?” In P. J. Frost, L. F. Morre, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, J. Martin(Eds.), Organizational Culture .Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
Storm, P. M.(1984). A Further Consideration of Competing Values. In J.G. Hunt, D.M. Hosking, C. A.Schriesheim & R. Stewart,(Eds.), Leaders And Managerial: Inter- national Perspectives on Managerial Behavior and Leadership, New York: Perga- mon Press.　
Siehl, C. & Martin, J.(1987). The role of symbolic management: How can manager ef- fectively transmit organizational culture? In J. M. Shafritz & J. S. Ott(Eds.), Clas- sics Of Organization Theory. Chicago:The Dorsey Press.