Upload
johnda
View
91
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
員工教育訓練規劃與成效評估 - 以高科技業為主. 組 別:第 四 組 指導老師:張甫任 副教授 組 長:陳晏賾 98147077 組 員:方雅琪 97147028 林宏達 97147092 王士銘 98147053 季宏儒 98147056 簡妤如 98147062 游文輝 98147083. 摘 要. 研究背景與動機. 台灣高科技產業面臨日益競爭且高度國際化的時代。 員工原先的知識已入不敷出,需要接受不同方向的教育訓練,才能應付如今的高科技產業。. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
98147077 97147028 97147092 98147053 98147056 98147062 98147083
300289
20095
(1977)TWI(1984)(1997)
(1984)Steiner&Kelly(1976)16(1996)
30028996.33%289100%
Chart3
0.143
0.21
0.307
0.197
0.073
0.033
(%)
Sheet1
(%)
20~2514.30%
26~3021%
31~3530.70%
36~4019.70%
41~507.30%
463.30%
()5.30%
21.30%
48.70%
()21%
110.70%
1~534.90%
6~1027.70%
11~1518.70%
168.00%
1~1010.00%
11~2020.10%
21~4017.30%
41~6017.30%
61~8011.80%
8123.50%
15.30%
22.70%
8.00%
12.00%
12.30%
12.70%
5.30%
8.00%
Sheet1
(%)
Sheet2
Sheet3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Chart5
0.107
0.349
0.277
0.187
0.08
Sheet1
(%)
20~2514.30%
26~3021%
31~3530.70%
36~4019.70%
41~507.30%
463.30%
()5.30%
21.30%
48.70%
()21%
110.70%
1~534.90%
6~1027.70%
11~1518.70%
168.00%
1~1010.00%
11~2020.10%
21~4017.30%
41~6017.30%
61~8011.80%
8123.50%
15.30%
22.70%
8.00%
12.00%
12.30%
12.70%
5.30%
8.00%
Sheet1
(%)
Sheet2
Sheet3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Chart6
0.053
0.213
0.487
0.21
Sheet1
(%)
20~2514.30%
26~3021%
31~3530.70%
36~4019.70%
41~507.30%
463.30%
()5.30%
21.30%
48.70%
()21%
110.70%
1~534.90%
6~1027.70%
11~1518.70%
168.00%
1~1010.00%
11~2020.10%
21~4017.30%
41~6017.30%
61~8011.80%
8123.50%
15.30%
22.70%
8.00%
12.00%
12.30%
12.70%
5.30%
8.00%
Sheet1
(%)
Sheet2
Sheet3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Chart7
0.1
0.201
0.173
0.173
0.118
0.235
Sheet1
(%)
20~2514.30%
26~3021%
31~3530.70%
36~4019.70%
41~507.30%
463.30%
()5.30%
21.30%
48.70%
()21%
110.70%
1~534.90%
6~1027.70%
11~1518.70%
168.00%
1~1010.00%
11~2020.10%
21~4017.30%
41~6017.30%
61~8011.80%
8123.50%
15.30%
22.70%
8.00%
12.00%
12.30%
12.70%
5.30%
8.00%
Sheet1
(%)
Sheet2
Sheet3
Chart8
0.153
0.227
0.08
0.12
0.123
0.127
0.053
0.08
Sheet1
(%)
20~2514.30%
26~3021%
31~3530.70%
36~4019.70%
41~507.30%
463.30%
()5.30%
21.30%
48.70%
()21%
110.70%
1~534.90%
6~1027.70%
11~1518.70%
168.00%
1~1010.00%
11~2020.10%
21~4017.30%
41~6017.30%
61~8011.80%
8123.50%
15.30%
22.70%
8.00%
12.00%
12.30%
12.70%
5.30%
8.00%
Sheet1
0
0
0
0
0
0
(%)
Sheet2
0
0
0
0
Sheet3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(2000)18(3)10-132007(1984)(1985)(1993)14562-71(1996)1999: (1999)(2001)(1994)20082010-(1996)-(1998)1647-12(1979)(1981)
(1988)6165-70(1994)-(1999)-(1988)(1989)(1992)-(1993)(2007)4(1)69-80(1977)(1990)(1995)13444-48(1997)- (2009)2009619A14(1999)1753-7(1994)12416-22(1988)
Boretsky, L.M.(1982), Supplier Involvement in Integrated Product Development, Academy of Marketing Science , 16(4),74-79.Bohun1984:A needs assessment methodology for staff training and development. Doctoral dissertation. Columbia University Teachers College, New York.Bushnell, S. D.(1990). Input, Process, output: A model for evaluating training. Training and Development Journal, 44(3),41-43.Clegg, W. H.(1987). Management training evaluation: An update. Training and Development Journal,41(2),65-71.Garavan, T. N.(1991). Strategic human resource development. International Journal of Manpower,12(6),21-34.Kirkpatrick, Conald L.(1959). Technique for evaluating training programs. Training and Development Journal, 13(11),3-9.Kirkpatrick, Conald L.(1960). Technique for evaluating training programs: part4-result. Journal of the ASTD,28-32.Kelly1997: A,T.Orgel, R.F,&Bear,D.M.(1984).Evalution:The bottom line is closer than you think, Training and Development Jounal,38(8),32-37Laird, D.(1986). Approach to training and development(2th ed.). MA: Addi-sion Wesley, Inc.McGehee & Thayer, (1961). Training in Business and Industry, N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons.
Milton Keynes (1992), Action Research for Educational Change. Open University:Gay, L. R.Nadler, L.(1984). The handbook of human resource development. New York :John Wiley &-Sons.Phillips: Phillips, J. J.(1983). Handbook of training evaluation and measurement methods. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company.Robbing, B. (1962). The student of bradcasting: His recruitment, training and future in broadcasting. Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 6(4), 344-348.Steiner & Kelly: Steiner, T. T. & F. Kelly (1976). A key factors approach to assessing management development,. Personnel Journal, 55, 344-361.Swierczek, F. & L. Carmichael(1985). The quantity and quality of evaluating training. Training and Development Journal, 39(1),95-99.Truskie, S. D.(1982). Getting the most from management development programs. Personnel Journal, 61,66-68.Van, Brief, &Schuler, Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981). Role conflict and role ambiguity:Integration of the literature and directions for future research. Human Relations, 34(1), 43-71.Weick, K. E. (1970). Managerial Behavior Performance and Effectiveness. NewYork: McGraw-Hall.
~END~