健全的金融業對國家產業的發展與人民的消費、理財，脣齒相依。近幾年因受金融自由化政策的衝擊，台灣的銀行業競爭十分激烈，在這樣的背景之下，金融銀行業者除了堅持自身價值，以及用有效率的方式運用既有資源外，唯有積極自行提升服務創新品質才能自立於競爭之林。近年個案K銀行更將創新視為重要目標，以老字號的銀行孕育出創新活力。
本研究旨在探討知覺組織支持、個人與工作適配、心流經驗、創新行為與時間壓力之間的關聯性，並以心流經驗為中介變項，運用層級迴歸來分析心流經驗在知覺組織支持、個人與工作適配與創新行為之間的中介效果，以及以時間壓力為調節變項，分析心流經驗與創新行為之間是否具有調節效果。而本研究之對象為K銀行人員，採用抽樣方式以獻上問卷網站、郵寄、E-mail及委託發送問卷來蒐集調查資料，總共回收了382個有效樣本。
研究結果發現：(1)知覺組織支持對心流經驗有正向影響，(2)個人與工作適配對心流經驗有正向影響，(3)心流經驗對創新行為有正向影響，(4)知覺組織支持對創新行為有正向影響，(5)個人與工作適配對創新行為有正向影響，(6)心流經驗對知覺組織支持影響創新行為具有部分中介效果，(7)心流經驗對個人與工作適配影響創新行為具有部分中介效果，(8)時間壓力對心流經驗影響創新行為不具調節效果。本研究結果期望能運用於人力資源管理實務，藉由給予員工鼓勵與支持的環境、讓每個職位找到最適員工及培養員工內在工作動機來增進員工的創新行為。

Nowadays, duo to some factors such as globalization and competitions, there is an increased motivation to improve efficiency and effectiveness of organizations. Organizations need to do some adjustment to survive. Making continual improvements gives organization sustainability. Bank K has been devoted to build innovation for years and brought new energy into this old brand.
This study aims to examine the correlation among perceived organizational support, person-job fit, flow, innovation behavior and time pressure. Flow is served as the mediation variable. Time pressure is the moderator variable to analyze the effects between flow and innovation behavior. The object of this study is the employees of Bank K. The empirical data are collected by E-mail and mail. The total of the valid samples are 382.
The results showed: (1) perceived organizational support has a positive impact on flow. (2) person-job fit has a positive impact on flow. (3) flow has a positive impact on innovative behavior. (4) perceived organizational support has a positive impact on innovative behavior. (5) person-job fit has a positive impact on innovative behavior.. (6)The mediation of flow in perceived organizational support effecting on innovative behavior is only partial. (7)The mediation of flow in person-job fit effecting on innovative behavior is only partial. (8) time pressure has no moderating effects on flow influencing innovative behavior. We hope that the results can be applied in the recruitment selection and management.

一、中文部分
2013天下經濟論壇／文化部長龍應台：台灣文化軟實力飽滿，需要持續深植（2013）。天下雜誌。取自http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5046284&page=2
孔貞貽（2011）。服務業員工創新行為之研究。國立臺北大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。
毛筱豔、簡元瑜（2010）。員工積極上行溝通與個人－工作契合度之關係－以主管－部屬交換關係為干擾變數。北商學報，17，63-72。
王保進（1999）。視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究。台北市：心理。
李安悌（2004）。團隊成員的認定、領導型態、正義知覺對自我管理行為與創新行為之影響。國立彰化師範大學工業教育與技術學系博士論文，未出版，彰化市。
李佳怡（2000）。知覺組織支持對員工工作態度影響之研究。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
李潢漳（2009）。個人組織適配、個人與工作適配對組織承諾、工作滿意度、離職傾向之研究--以中部製造業某集團為例。中興大學高階經理人碩士在職專班論文，未出版，台中市。
林昆玄、馬于雯（2010）。國軍連輔導長知覺組織支持與工作心流經驗對工作績效之影響效果。復興崗學報，99，19-44。
紀乃文、陳皓怡、楊美玉、鄭妃君與蔡維奇（2008）。個人－工作適配量表發展：多元構面觀點。管理學報，25(5)，577-598。
張定綺譯（1993）。快樂從心開始。台北：天下。
莊璦嘉、林惠彥（2004）。個人與環境適配對工作態度與行為之影響。台灣管理學刊，5(1)，123-148。
郭生玉（2005）。心理與教育研究法。台北市：精華。
陳泳丞（2013）。跨產業談創新：從變局到新局。台北市：商訊。
陳瑞鈺（1997）。外商公司駐台人員之人力資源實務認知與離職傾向關係之研究-心理契約之探討。淡江大學國際貿易研究所碩士論文，未出版，新北市。
黃金十年與國家願景（2011）。行政院國家經濟委員會。取自http://www.ndc.gov.tw/m1.aspx?sNo=0017181&ex=1&ic=
黃培文（2007）。工作適性的組織、群體及職務層次對工作滿意的同時效果一以台灣旅館業餐飲部員工為例。中山管理評論，15(2)，465-498。
黃曼琴（1991）。應用中介模式探討Type A/B 人格特質為中介變項對工作壓力與工作滿足、工作績效之影響。人力資源學報，創刊號，59-74。
蔡欣縈（2012）。團隊成員正向情感、個人與工作適配、幸福感對工作績效影響之研究。國立臺灣師範大學科技應用與人力資源發展學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
蔡啟通、高泉豐（2004）。動機取向、組織創新氣候與員工創新行為之關係：Amabile 動機綜效模型之驗證。管理學報，21(5)，571-592。
蔡啟通（2008）。內在動機與員工創新行為之關係─Amabile三元交互效果及Shin中介效果之驗證。管理學報，25(5)，549-575。
二、外文部分
Amabile, T.M. (1996). Unlimited genius. Success, 43(7), 36-37.
Amabile, T. M., Hadley, C. N., & Kramer, S. J. (2002). Creativity under the gun. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 52-61.
Andrews, J. (1996). Creative ideas take time: Business practices that help product managers cope with time pressure. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 5 (1), 6-18.
Bakker, B. (2008). The work-related flow inventory: Construction and initial validation of the WOLF. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(3), 400-414.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 875-884.
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Person organization fit, job choice decisions and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 294-311.
Collins, M. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation and creativity. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety: The experience of play in work and games. SF: Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: Harper Collins.
Drach-Zahavy, A., & Freund, A. (2007). Team effectiveness under stress: A structural contingency approach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28 (4), 423-450.
Edwards, J. R. (1991). Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. International review of industrial and organizational psychology, (6), 283-357.
Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational Support, Discretionary Treatment, and Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812-820.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71 (3), 500-507.
Fullagar, C. J., Knight, P. A., & Sovern, H. S. (2013). Challenge/skill balance, flow, and performance anxiety. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 62 (2), 236-259
Hsu, M. L. A., & Fan, H. L. (2010). Organizational innovation climate and creative outcomes: Exploring the moderating effect of time pressure. Creativity Research Journal, 22(4), 378-386.
Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Muller, K. E., & Nizam, A. (1998). Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxberry Press.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281–342.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: Mcgraw-Hill.
Ohly, S., Sonnentag, S., & Pluntke, F. (2006). Routinization, work characteristics and their relationships with creative and proactive behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27 (3), 257-279.
O'Reilly, A. A. (1977). Personality-job fit: Implications for individual attitudes and performance. Organizational Behavior and Performance, 18(1), 36-46.
Salanova, M., Bakker, A. B., & Llorens, S. (2006). Flow at work: Evidence for an upward spiral of personal and organizational resources. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 1-22.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A., (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceptions of organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82-111.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 293-321.
Zedeck, S. (1971). Problems with the use of moderator variables. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 295-310.