1、<p><b>　　外文翻譯</b></p><p><b>　　原文1</b></p><p>　　The Rules of Employee Engagement</p><p>　　Employee engagement has been a topic of much conversation and s

2、tudy in the corporate world for the past several years. It’s a phrase that has captured the attention of workplace workers, line management, HR managers and the executive suite.</p><p>　　The Conference Board

3、 defines employee engagement as “a heightened emotional connection that an employee feels for his or her organization, that influences him or her to exert greater discretionary effort to his or her work..”</p>&l

4、t;p>　　Engaged employees have been shown to willingly contribute their time, talents and abilities to the success of an organization. They not only commit to achieving a company’s goals, engaged employees often, at the

5、ir own volition, extend their discretionary effort to go above and beyond their management’s acceptable performance standards. </p><p>　　There have been many studies on the benefit of employee engagement. Ac

6、cording to a Gallup study, 54% of employees are not engaged, 17% are actively disengaged, and only 29% can be considered as engaging their time and talents. </p><p>　　Gallup’s research also revealed how dise

7、ngaged employees adversely impact a company’s performance and profits. According to the research findings disengaged employees result in 27% more absenteeism, 31% more turnover, 51% less effective and 62% more accidents.

8、 Stephen Covey, in his book “The Speed of Trust,” indicated that these numbers conservatively cost American businesses between $250 billion and $350 billion annually. </p><p>　　Now for the good news. The res

9、earch findings also reported that engaged employees account for 12% higher customer satisfaction scores, 18% higher productivity, 12% higher profitability and 17% higher earnings per share. </p><p>　　How do

10、organizations capitalize on these results? There are many drivers but the strongest of all is the performance of leaders which carries the most influence on the actions, behaviors and, ultimately, the engagement of emplo

11、yees. At least four studies support some common drivers of engagement which correlates with leaders:</p><p>　　? Trust and integrity: How well do managers communicate and walk the talk?</p><p>　　

12、? Nature of the job: Is it mentally stimulating day-to-day?</p><p>　　? Career growth opportunities: Are there opportunities?</p><p>　　? Pride in the organization: How much selfesteem does the em

13、ployee feel by being associated with the organization?</p><p>　　? Employee development: Is the organization making an effort to develop the skills and knowledge of its employees?</p><p>　　? Rela

14、tionship with management: Does the employee value his or her relationship with management?</p><p>　　The responsibility for engaging employees falls squarely on an organization’s leadership team. Fortunately,

15、 there are a few low cost, low tech and high touch ways that leaders can build higher levels of engagement into their organizational culture.</p><p>　　1. Show that you care about your employees. On a regular

16、 basis, demonstrate a sincere interest in them not only as a person but in their health and safety.</p><p>　　2. Demonstrate genuine interest in their development. Improve engagement by demonstrating a sincer

17、e interest in your employees’ professional growth and development. Consider engaging in frequent, structured and realistic discussions about their development interests and plans.</p><p>　　3. Recognize achie

18、vements. Simply offering genuine praise and low-cost recognition earns higher levels of engagement. Praise and recognize employees whenever their behavior or actions tie into your organization’s goals and desired results

19、. However, make sure the recognition offered holds specific meaning for the individual.</p><p>　　Leaders have the responsibility to foster a culture of high engagement. If leaders practice the aforementioned

20、 actions on a regular basis, employees will recognize and appreciate their active engagement and be highly motivated to respond by becoming more engaged in return.</p><p>　　Author: Smith,Jim L.</p>&l

21、t;p>　　Nationality: American</p><p>　　Originate from: Quality,2010,49(6),p:16-16.</p><p><b>　　譯文1</b></p><p><b>　　員工敬業(yè)度的規(guī)則</b></p><p>　　在過去的幾年

22、中，員工敬業(yè)度已經(jīng)成為談論和研究的焦點。員工敬業(yè)度吸引了工作場所的工人，直線領導者，人力資源管理者和行政管理者的關注。</p><p>　　會議委員會對員工敬業(yè)度的定義為：“員工對他或她的組織感到高度的情感聯(lián)系，這能影響員工為工作付出更多的努力。”</p><p>　　敬業(yè)的員工已經(jīng)被證實他們自愿為一個成功的組織貢獻他們的時間、天賦和能力。敬業(yè)的員工不僅致力于在自己的能力范圍內(nèi)實現(xiàn)公司設定

23、的目標，通常他們會通過自己的努力完成一些超出管理者要求范圍外的事情。</p><p>　　已經(jīng)有很多研究證實員工敬業(yè)度的好處。根據(jù)蓋洛普咨詢公司的一項研究表明，54%的員工是不夠敬業(yè)的，17%的員工完全不敬業(yè)，只有29%的員工能被視為對工作是完全投入了他們的時間和才能的，即被稱為敬業(yè)。</p><p>　　蓋洛普的調(diào)查還表明，完成不敬業(yè)的員工會給公司的業(yè)績和利潤帶來負面的影響。研究表明，完

24、全不敬業(yè)的員工中有27%是容易出現(xiàn)曠工，31%以上的員工有離職傾向，51%的員工工作效率是在降低的，62%的員工容易引發(fā)事故。Stephen Covey，在他的著作《信任的速度》中表明，美國企業(yè)中由于員工不敬業(yè)而導致成本費用的增加，這個數(shù)字保守估計在2500億美元和3500億美元之間。</p><p>　　現(xiàn)在有一個好消息，研究的結(jié)果還表明，敬業(yè)的員工能提高12%的顧客滿意度，增加18%的生產(chǎn)率，提高12%的盈利

25、能力，還能使得每股盈利增加17%。</p><p>　　那么，組織如何利用這些結(jié)果呢？有很多驅(qū)動員工敬業(yè)度的方法但是最有效的方式是領導者的行為。這些領導者需要具備對員工的動作、行為有深刻的影響力，最終能提高員工敬業(yè)度。至少有四份研究報告能夠支持一些常見的員工敬業(yè)度的驅(qū)動因素與領導者有關：</p><p>　　信任與正直：怎樣管理員工溝通和言行一致？</p><p>

26、　　工作的性質(zhì)：工作是否每天都是具有激勵的？</p><p>　　職業(yè)發(fā)展機會：有機會嗎？</p><p>　　組織自豪感：當與組織聯(lián)系在一起時，你自豪嗎？</p><p>　　員工發(fā)展：組織是否為員工的技能和知識的發(fā)展做了努力？</p><p>　　關系管理：組織是否存在員工的價值關系管理？</p><p>　　一個

27、組織的領導班子有聘用員工的責任。幸運的是，可以運用一些低成本、低技術和高接觸的方式，幫助領導者建立更高層次的員工敬業(yè)度，并是他們參與到組織文化中。</p><p>　　1.表現(xiàn)出你關心你的雇員。定期對他們表現(xiàn)出真誠的興趣，主要關注他們的健康和安全。</p><p>　　2.對員工的發(fā)展展示真正的興趣。通過關心員工專業(yè)上的成長和發(fā)展提高他們的敬業(yè)度。對于從事頻繁性工作的員工，認真討論他們的發(fā)

28、展利益和計劃。</p><p>　　3.認可成果。簡單真誠的贊美和低成本的認可可以得到員工更高層次的參與。只要他們的行為是有利于組織的目標和期望的結(jié)果實現(xiàn)的，領導者可以及時贊美和認可員工的行為。但是，請一定要確保這種認可個人是有特殊意義的。</p><p>　　領導者有責任培養(yǎng)高度參的組織文化。如果領導者定期實踐上述的行動，員工會以積極參與和高度自我激勵作為回報。</p>&

29、lt;p>　　作者：Smith,Jim L.</p><p><b>　　國籍：美國</b></p><p>　　文獻出處：質(zhì)量,2010,49（6）,第16-16頁.</p><p><b>　　原文2</b></p><p>　　How leaders stimulate employe

30、e learning : A leader–member </p><p>　　exchange approach</p><p>　　Employee engagement in learning activities</p><p>　　Employee engagement in learning activities has become an increa

31、singly important topic in recent years. Demands made on employees to upgrade their job skills and knowledge are increasing continuously because organizations are faced with markets that are global, competitive, and techn

32、ologically based (Maurer & Tarulli, 1994). Therefore, employees who actively engage in learning activities are one of the most important sources of competitive advantage for organizations (Senge, 2006; Vera & Cro

33、ssan,</p><p>　　Like organizations, leaders, and employees each benefit from employee engagement in learning activities. Leaders benefit when they encourage employees to undertake tasks that lead to learning

34、because doing so helps attain strategic team goals (Jansen, Vera, & Crossan, 2009). Moreover, employee learning is associated with improved job performance (Arthur, Bennett, Edens, & Bell, 2003), and the acquisit

35、ion of new skills that serve as antecedents of job performance (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). Learni</p><p>　　There are many different ways for employees to engage in learning activities. Whereas organizatio

36、ns focused on formal training programmes in the past, they recognize now that valuable learning takes place within the daily work situation (Poell, van Dam, & van den Berg, 2004). Much employee learning is believed t

37、o occur through assignments that go beyond usual job responsibilities such as new and challenging tasks, job transitions, task-force assignments, temporary attachments to other work units</p><p>　　Because mu

38、ch learning occurs within the daily work situation, leaders are generally considere to be an important force behind employee engagement in learning activities (Sonnentag et al., 2004). There is clear evidence that suppor

39、t from the leader enhances participation in learning activities (Birdi et al., 1997; Colquitt, LePine, & Noe, 2000). Noe and Wilk (1993) found that employee perceptions of their supervisor’s support for development a

40、ctivity influenced employee engagement in learning act</p><p>　　Leader–member exchange and employee engagement in learning activities</p><p>　　LMX theory posits that leaders and members engage i

41、n a role development process during which differentiated role definitions develop between a leader and an individual employee (Graen & Cashman, 1975). Whereas low-quality relationships involve rudimentary exchanges t

42、hat typify the basic employment contract, high-quality relationships are characterized by mutual trust, respect, and loyalty between leader and employee. Based on the concepts of social exchange (Blau, 1964) and reciproc

43、ity (Gouldner</p><p>　　It is generally expected that high-LMX employees engage in more learning activities than do low-LMX employees (e.g., Driver, 2002; Maurer et al., 2002; Paparoidamis, 2005). Empirical e

44、vidence has indicated that employees in high-quality LMX relationships, in contrast to those in low-quality LMX relationships, receive greater opportunities for personal growth and more challenging work assignments (Grae

45、n & Scandura, 1987; Liden et al., 1997), are provided with higher levels of support (Kraimer, Wa</p><p>　　However, few studies have focused on the specific mechanisms and behaviours through which LMX imp

46、acts employee learning. We argue that two mechanisms within the LMX relationship might be at work. The first mechanism, which is related to the role making process, refers to a mediation effect of leader behaviours and h

47、olds that leaders will more actively stimulate and challenge high-LMX, compared to low-LMX employees, to engage in learning activities. The second mechanism, which is related to the n</p><p>　　Author：Chiao,C

48、ing-kae</p><p>　　Nationality：Taiwan，China</p><p>　　Originate from：Taiwan Development Perspectives，2007（3），291-301.</p><p><b>　　譯文2</b></p><p>　　領導如何激發(fā)員工的參與學

49、習：一個領導—成員交換的方法</p><p><b>　　員工參與學習活動</b></p><p>　　在最近幾年，員工參與學習活動已經(jīng)成為一個越來越重要的話題。當今，組織正面臨著經(jīng)濟全球化、競爭日益激烈的、以技術為導向的市場，要求員工需要不斷地提升他們的工作技能，增加他們的的知識(Maurer & Tarulli, 1994)。因此，員工積極參與學習活動是組

50、織獲得競爭優(yōu)勢最重要的來源之一(Senge, 2006; Vera & Crossan, 2004)。</p><p>　　組織、領導者和員工每一個都能在學習活動的參與中受益。當領導者鼓勵員工參與活動，讓他們承擔任務時，領導者就會從中獲利，因為員工的參與有助于組織實現(xiàn)戰(zhàn)略目標(Jansen,Vera, & Crossan, 2009)。此外，員工的參與和提高員工的工作績效 (Arthur, Ben

51、nett, Edens, & Bell, 2003)，獲取新的技能(Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009)都有相關性。對員工來說，學習也是至關重要的，因為他們需要及時了解當前的勞動力市場和就業(yè)保障，因為在這樣的就業(yè)形勢下，誰也不能保障能長期就業(yè)(Arthur & Rousseau, 1996)。此外，不斷學習是許多工作的重要組成部分，因為工作的要求在不斷地變化(Sonnentag et al., 200

52、4)。除了不可或缺的原因之外，員工參與學習活動是充滿挑戰(zhàn)和樂趣的，還能研究員工參與學習活動與積極的工作態(tài)度之間的關系，如工作滿意度，組織承諾，（核心人員）保持 (Mikkelsen, Saksvik, Eriksen, & Ursin, 1999) 。</p><p>　　員工參與學習活動有很多不同的方式。在過去，組織專注于正規(guī)的培訓，現(xiàn)在他們開始認識到寶貴的學習需要貫穿于日常的工作中(Poell,van

53、 Dam, & van den Berg, 2004)。許多員工的學習被認為是超越一般的崗位職責，如新的具有挑戰(zhàn)性的任務，工作的轉(zhuǎn)換，任務的分配，臨時到其他工作單位實習和完成項目工作(Birdi, Allan, & Warr, 1997; Maurer et al., 2002)。不能把學習當做是一個偶然的培訓需要，而是應該把學習看作是一個連續(xù)的過程，這個過程也許可能專注未來的任務和職業(yè)的發(fā)展(McCauley &

54、; Hezlett, 2001; Noe et al., 1997)。</p><p>　　因為許多員工參與學習是發(fā)生在日常工作中的，所以領導者通常被認為是員工參與學習活動的一個重要力量(Sonnentag et al., 2004)。研究數(shù)據(jù)明確表明，領導者的支持增強了員工參與學習活動(Birdi et al., 1997; Colquitt, LePine, & Noe, 2000)。Noe and

55、Wilk (1993)發(fā)現(xiàn)主管對員工的看法在員工參與學習活動中，有很大的影響作用。同樣，Colquitt et al.’s (2000) 薈萃分析研究表明，員工參與學習的動機與他們領導者的支持有關。盡管對這方面的研究已經(jīng)很多，但令人驚訝的是，很少有研究探討領導與員工之間的關系在員工學習成果中最底層的過程。目前，本研究的重點是領導—成員交換，解釋領導行為和員工學習的關系。</p><p>　　領導—成員交換與員工參

56、與學習活動的關系</p><p>　　領導—成員交換理論認為，領導者和下屬成員在各自的角色中發(fā)展著不同的相互依存關系（Graen & Cashman, 1975)。基于社會交換理論(Blau, 1964)和互惠理論(Gouldner, 1960)的概念認為，低質(zhì)量的領導成員交換關系只涉及到基于典型的、基本的雇傭合約上的最起碼的交流，而高品質(zhì)的領導成員交換的特點是領導者和員工之間相互信任、相互尊重以及相互忠

57、誠。在高水平的領導成員交換關系中，領導和下屬之間的社會交換行為發(fā)展到了一個更高的水平，包含了相互的信任，尊重和責任感(Graen & Uhl-Bien,1995)。因此，高質(zhì)量領導成員交換的員工，是那些對領導者盡心盡力，并能夠提高領導方式的有效性，這些員工又被稱為“值得信賴的助手”(Liden,Sparrowe, & Wayne, 1997)。研究表明，領導—成員交換理論認為員工和組織的產(chǎn)出，如工作績效，組織公民行為，工

58、作滿意度，組織承諾、保留和開放的組織變革，有著重要的關系。(e.g., Gerstner & Day, 1997; Hofmann, Morgeson, & Gerras, 2003; van Dam, O</p><p>　　這是一個普遍的預期，高質(zhì)量的領導—成員交換關系比低質(zhì)量的領導—成員交換關系從事更多的學習活動(e.g., Driver, 2002; Maurer et al., 2002

59、; Paparoidamis, 2005)。實證研究顯示，高質(zhì)量的領導—成員交換關系能夠得到更大的機會，得到更多的個人成長機會以及得到更具挑戰(zhàn)性的工作任務(Graen & Scandura, 1987; Liden et al., 1997)，提供更高成層次的支持(Kraimer, Wayne, & Jaworski, 2001)，并在其職業(yè)生涯中進步更加迅速(Scandura & Schriesheim, 19

60、94; Wayne, Liden, Kraimer, & Graf,1999)，而低質(zhì)量的領導—成員交換則恰恰相反。領導—成員交換的質(zhì)量也被研究證實是會影響員工的學習目標取向的(Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004)。</p><p>　　然而，很少有研究把重點放在通過具體機制和行為去研究領導—成員交換對員工學習活動的影響。我們認為，兩種機制內(nèi)的領導—成員關系可能是工作本身。第一種

61、機制，這是關系到?jīng)Q策過程中的機制作用，領導人更愿意積極地激勵和挑戰(zhàn)高質(zhì)量的領導—成員交換的員工，相比低質(zhì)量的領導—成員交換的員工，去從事學習活動。第二種機制，即有關互惠的準則，如果領導者和下屬采用綜合的互惠來交換，就形成高質(zhì)量的關系，如果采用負性的互惠來交換，則形成低質(zhì)量的關系。</p><p>　　作者：Xander M. Bezuijen, Karen van Dam, Peter T. van den Be