حاوی مطالب متنوع وجالب خواندنی برای تقویت زبان انگلیسی
تقویت مهارت Reading با سرعت باور نکردنی
شامل جداول ،عکس های مرتبط با هرموضوع
یادگیری اصطلاحات ولغات کاربردی از طریق خواندن داستانها ،متون علمی وجالب روز دنیا
قابل استفاده برای اساتید ودانشجویان رشته های مختلف زبان انگلیسی
بخوانید ولذت ببرید واگر مفید بود قسمت های بعدی را هم دانلود فرمایید.
حاوی مطالب متنوع وجالب خواندنی برای تقویت زبان انگلیسی
تقویت مهارت Reading با سرعت باور نکردنی
شامل جداول ،عکس های مرتبط با هرموضوع
یادگیری اصطلاحات ولغات کاربردی از طریق خواندن داستانها ،متون علمی وجالب روز دنیا
قابل استفاده برای اساتید ودانشجویان رشته های مختلف زبان انگلیسی
بخوانید ولذت ببرید واگر مفید بود قسمت های بعدی را هم دانلود فرمایید.
این مجموعه شامل 45 مقاله در ارتباط با بهره وری می باشد .
فایل کلیه مقالات pdf ، لیست مقالات در یک فایل اکسل جداگانه و حجم فایل زیپ دانلودی 19.7 MB می باشد .
152 بهره وری و نقش آن در رشد و توسعه صنعت بیمه
153 اندازه گیری بهره وری واحدهای تولیدی
154 تحلیل مقایسه ای کارایی بخش صنایع بزرگ در استان های ایران با استفاده از روش تابع مرزی تصادفی
155 نقش انضباط کاری در میزان بهره وری کارگاه ها و کارخانجات
156 نقش مهندسی مجدد (BPR) در رشد و بهره وری شرکتهای بیمه
157 تاثیر نابهنگامی در کارایی و اثربخشی
158 مقایسه کارایی اقتصادی بانکهای خصوصی و دولتی در ایران با استفاده از روش تحلیل پوششی (فراگیر) دادهها
159 انسان، علم، نظام تکنولوژیکی - اطلاعاتی و بهره وری
160 معمای بهره وری؛ مدیران و رشد اقتصادی کشورها
161 اندازه گیری عملکرد سازمانها (با استفاده از مدل تعالی کانجی)
162 عوامل مؤثر بر بهره وری
163 اثر بهبود کیفیت زندگی کاری بر بهره وری کارکنان: بررسی موردی مجتمع آموزش عالی قم
164 مفاهیم مبهم بهره وری و عملکرد
165 بحثی اجمالی در خصوص جایگاه بهره وری در کارخانجات خصوصی شده
166 افزایش بهره وری و بهبود عملکرد در شرکت های بیمه با تاکید بر بازار لندن
167 بررسی تاثیر سرمایهگذاری عمومیدر زیرساختهای کشاورزی بر رشد بهرهوری بخش کشاورزیایران
168 مدیریت بهره وری در سازمانها
169 سهم مشارکت کارگران در افزایش بهره وری (روابط «مدیریت - نیروی کار» برای بهبود بهره وری)
170 بازنگری در بهره وری
171 نقش انسجام در ارتقای بهرهوری سازمانها
172 ارگونومی و بهره وری
173 مدیریت توسعه در مالزی
174 افزایش بهره وری در بخش خدمات
175 بکارگیری مدلهای نوین HACCP جهت تضمین امنیت غذایی و افزایش بهرهوری در صنایع تبدیلی
176 میزگرد: مدیریت، فرهنگ کار بهره وری
177 مدیریت بهره وری و ارتقای کیفیت زندگی شغلی
178 مدیریت بهرهوری و کیفیت
179 شاخص های اندازه گیری بهره وری در مراکز تحقیقاتی
180 حساب و کتاب بهره وری، سرچشمه رشد (بهترین روش محاسبه بهره وری، استفاده از معیار بهره وری کل عوامل تول
181 تاثیر بهره وری بر ارتقا و بازدهی عملیات
182 بهره وری و توسعه صنعتی؛ نگرشی نظام گرا
183 برقراری استانداردها در کشور های در حال توسعه iso نظامنامه های توسعه ی
184 مهندسی ارزش؛ ابزار قدرتمند بهره وری
185 بهرهوری در نیروهای مسلح
186 انضباط اجتماعی و اقتصادی برای ارتقاء بهره وری ملی
187 بهره وری (بخش دوم)
188 راههای افزایش کارایی
189 بهرهوری و رقابتپذیری شرکتهای برتر ایران
190 بررسی موردی شرکت (من پاوراسکاندیناویا): افزایش بهره وری و کیفیت از طریق مدیریت ارزشی
191 توکل و بهره وری
192 نظریه عامل: روشی برای کارایی درون سازمانی
193 نقش مدیریت و تکنولوژی در ارتقای بهرهوری
194 افزایش بهره وری در تشکیلات دولتی ایران
195 ارتقاع وجدان کاری زیر بنای بهره وری
196 رویکرد کثرتگرایانه در جوامع دینی و تاثیر آن بر افزایش بهرهوری ملی
پرسشنامه طرح واره یانگ
فرم کوتاه 75 سوالی
کامل کامل
پایایی و روایی کامل است
روش نمره گذاری دارد
تفسیر دارد
75 سوالی می باشد
فرم کوتاه پرسشنامه طرح واره ناسازگار اولیه یانگ (YSQ-SF)
پرسشنامه طرح واره های ناسازگار اولیه یانگ (YSQ) در سال 1990 توسط یانگ تدوین شد. این پرسشنامه 205 ماده ای بسیار وقت گیر است و از این رو استفاده از آن توام با مشکلاتی می باشد ( لی و دیگران ، 1991؛ به نقل از کالویت و دیگران، 2005). به منظور سهولت کاربرد، یانگ و برون در سال 1994 فرم کوتاه این پرسشنامه را تدوین کرد( کالویت و دیگران، 2005؛ کیرو و دیگران، 2004)و
این پرسشنامه 75 سوال دارد و برای سنجش 15 طرح واره ناسازگار اولیه شناختی طراحی شده است. جدول زیر 75 سوال مطرح شده در این پرسشنامه طرح واره های ناسازگار اولیه و ابعاد طرح واره مورد سنجش توسط این سوالات را نمایش می دهد.
سال انتشار 2013
فایل مقاله انگلسی 9 صفحه pdf
فایل ترجمه word20 صفحه
Although previous research often showed a positive relationship between pay satisfaction and job satisfaction, we dispute the universality of this finding. Cluster-wise regression analyses on three samples consistently show that two types of individuals can be distinguished, each with a different job reward–job satisfaction relationship. For the first person type, job satisfaction relates to financial and psychological reward satisfaction, whereas for the second person type job satisfaction relates to psychological reward satisfaction only. In addition, between-person type differences were found for the work value financial security but not for recognition, which suggests that differences in work values may lie at the basis of between-person differences in the rewards–satisfaction relationship. Moreover, person types 1 and 2 differ in turnover intention and affective organizational commitment, which implies that differences in the rewards–satisfaction relationship relate to important organizational outcomes as well. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.
Job satisfaction is without doubt one of the most studied outcomes in organizational research (Spector, 1997). One of the reasons is probably its intuitive link with a wide range of important employee behaviors such as turnover, absenteeism, and performance (Schleicher, Hansen, & Fox, 2010). Therefore, the research on job satisfaction is widespread. Traditionally, job rewards are considered a major determinant of job satisfaction. For example, according to the equity model of Adams (1965) people compare their input/output ratio – which reflects the rewards they receive in return for the work they perform – to that of a comparison person to determine whether they feel satisfied in their job. Similarly, in the discrepancy model of Porter and Lawler (1968) people's job satisfaction is determined by a comparison of their current job conditions (including the rewards they receive) to their ideal job. Apart from its role in theories on job satisfaction, the centrality of job rewards is also obvious when screening instruments that are utilized to measure job satisfaction. In particular, the two most important instruments, the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) both include a subscale referring to satisfaction with job rewards (see Schleicher et al., 2010). From the above, one would conclude that job rewards are indispensable for job satisfaction. However, important theories on job satisfaction conjecture that job rewards do not (always) affect job satisfaction. In particular, Herzberg's (1959) two-factor theory conceptualizes pay as a hygiene factor rather than a satisfier. Hence, it is predicted that satisfaction with pay does not affect job satisfaction. A similar conclusion can be drawn from self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985 and Deci and Ryan, 2002), which posits that satisfaction results from intrinsic motivation, and that intrinsic motivation is not or even negatively influenced by extrinsic rewards (for example by providing financial rewards Gagné & Forest, 2008). In sum, conflicting views on the role of job rewards in relation to job satisfaction exist. In the present study, we argue that both views should not exclude one another. Rather, depending on the individual under consideration, the one or the other may apply. In other words, we suggest that there are individual differences in the link between job rewards and job satisfaction in that for some people extrinsic rewards do indeed relate to satisfaction, whereas for other people this is not the case. In what follows, we will elaborate on this point. First we distinguish between two categories of job rewards; second we argue why individual differences in the relationship between rewards and job satisfaction are expected on the basis of existing work on work values, and finally we argue that these individual differences relate to other job-outcomes as well. 1.1. Categories of job rewards Rewards are key components of the exchange relationship between employee and employer (Armstrong, 2010, Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005 and White and Drucker, 2000). Hence, rewards are used as a tool to guide behavior and performance in an attempt to attract and retain the best-qualified employees and keep them satisfied and motivated (Bellenger et al., 1984, Bratton and Gold, 2003 and Rynes et al., 2004). Because of this reason, the research and theorizing on rewards is widespread and has a long history (e.g., Currall et al., 2005, Heneman and Judge, 2000 and Williams et al., 2008). At the same time, the stream of research on rewards is heavily dominated by studies on the impact of financial rewards (often referred to as ‘pay’). This is somewhat surprising given that almost all major motivation and satisfaction theories explicitly stress the importance of alternative types of rewards (e.g., Adams, 1965, Deci and Ryan, 1985, Deci and Ryan, 2002, Herzberg, 1959 and Porter and Lawler, 1968). In line with these theories, the total reward management movement has recently conceptualized rewards as any valued outcome an employee receives from the employer in exchange for the employee's effort and contribution (Henderson, 2003). Total reward management hereby acknowledges that it is important to provide the appropriate financial rewards, but stresses the necessity to complement these with other reward types (Armstrong, 2010). To date, there are several total reward categorizations available (e.g., Christofferson and King, 2006, Milkovich and Newman, 2005 and Zingheim and Schuster, 2000), but the underlying categorization principle appears to be quite similar. In this study, we focus on two major categories of rewards, that is, financial and psychological rewards. Because several authors have long noted that not the working conditions themselves, but rather how these are experienced and valued (Porter and Lawler, 1968 and Vroom, 1964) are more influential (Steel, 2002), we study the satisfaction with these two types of rewards, rather than the rewards themselves. 1.2. Individual differences in the link between job rewards and job satisfaction While there are studies on the relationship between job rewards and employee behaviors and attitudes, they focus almost exclusively on general (or average) patterns. In other words, they do not take individual differences in this relationship into account. The few exceptions that have studied individual differences in (the perception of) job rewards have limited themselves to comparisons between a priori defined groups, such as men and women (e.g., Buchanan, 2005, Graham and Welbourne, 1999 and Keaveny and Inderrieden, 2000), people from different cultures (e.g., Fong & Shaffer, 2003), with different educational levels (Klein & Maher, 1966) or from different age groups (Clark, Oswald, & Warr, 1996). Consequently, our understanding of individual differences in the link between reward satisfaction and job satisfaction is limited at best. At the same time, traditional theories on job satisfaction and motivation do not agree on the role of various categories of rewards. In particular, for equity theory (Adams, 1965) and the discrepancy model of Porter and Lawler (1968) both financial and psychological rewards are expected to relate to job satisfaction, whereas Herzberg's (1959) two-factor theory and self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985 and Deci and Ryan, 2002) state that financial rewards do not satisfy people. We believe that this theoretical disagreement does not imply that one theoretical proposition has to be rejected in favor of the other. Rather, we believe that different theories may hold for different individuals. Therefore, we expect that financial reward satisfaction relates to job satisfaction for only a subset of employees (as there is disagreement as to the impact of this type of reward), whereas the relationship between psychological reward satisfaction and job satisfaction holds for every employee. In other words, we hypothesize that two person types exist, for the first person type both financial and psychological reward satisfaction relate to job satisfaction, whereas for person type two only psychological reward satisfaction does. 1.3. Work values as antecedents of individual differences in the reward satisfaction–job satisfaction relationship The literature on work values provides us with a framework to explain why the link between reward satisfaction and job satisfaction varies from individual to individual. Values are criteria or goals that serve as guiding principles in people's life, thereby transcending specific situations (Schwartz, 1999). Work values are more specific than general values in that they refer to people's working life. As such, they can be considered general and stable goals employees want to realize through working (Nord, Brief, Atieh, & Doherty, 1988). Because work values are relatively stable across time and situations, and because they differ between individuals by definition (e.g., De Cooman et al., 2008 and Kalleberg, 1977), they affect the way in which people differentially perceive their working situation. As such, work values can be conceived as antecedents of the predicted individual difference pattern. Whereas the literature on work values reports a wide variety of them (Zytowski, 1970), a commonly used differentiation is between intrinsic or self-actualization, extrinsic or material, and social or interpersonal work values (De Cooman et al., 2008 and Nord et al., 1988). Especially the latter two categories are relevant when studying financial and psychological rewards, and more specifically the work values financial security and recognition. In particular, for individuals who strongly value financial security, it may be logically hypothesized that financial reward satisfaction relates to job satisfaction. Otherwise, individuals who highly value recognition are expected to show a strong link between job satisfaction and psychological reward satisfaction. 1.4. Turnover intention and affective commitment as consequences of individual differences in the reward satisfaction–job satisfaction relationship Finally, we expect individual differences in the link between job rewards and job satisfaction to relate to two important job-related employee outcomes, that is, turnover intention and affective commitment. A first reason is that it has repeatedly been shown that satisfaction with the rewards one receives affects both turnover intention and affective commitment (De Gieter et al., 2008, DeConinck and Bachmann, 2005 and DeConinck and Stilwell, 2004). Second, from a theoretical point of view, turnover intention and affective commitment are considered a consequence and correlate of job satisfaction respectively (Schleicher et al., 2010 and Williams et al., 2006). In line with this reasoning, a recent meta-analysis showed high to very high correlations between turnover intention (r = − .65) as well as affective commitment (r = .60) and job satisfaction (Schleicher et al., 2010). Along the lines of SDT (Deci and Ryan, 1985 and Deci and Ryan, 2002), we suggest that individuals whose satisfaction is determined by satisfaction with their financial rewards are less intrinsically motivated. Therefore we expect these people to be less committed to the organization and to be more inclined to leave. In sum, this study examines individual differences in the relationship between satisfaction with financial as well as psychological rewards on the one hand and job satisfaction on the other hand. Concerning satisfaction with financial rewards, a large body of studies has shown that people are more satisfied with their job when they experience higher pay satisfaction (see Williams et al., 2006). Moreover, it has been shown that satisfaction with psychological rewards also plays a key role in satisfying people, and is sometimes even more important than pay (De Gieter, De Cooman, Pepermans, & Jegers, 2010). However, individual differences research on the relationship between satisfaction with the two aforementioned types of rewards and job satisfaction remains missing. Therefore, the present study tests (1) the presence of individual differences in the relationship between satisfaction with financial as well as psychological rewards and job satisfaction; (2) the role of the work values financial security and recognition as antecedents of these individual differences; and (3) turnover intention and affective commitment as differential consequences of the individual differences pattern. We believe that this will provide us with a deeper, more profound insight into how satisfaction with different job rewards relates to job satisfaction.
مقاله ترجمه مدیریت , رضایت شغلی , مقاله ترجمه شده مدیریت , دانلود مقاله با ترجمه رشته مدیریت , مقاله ای اس ای ترجمه شده مدیریت , مقاله ترجمه شده رضایت شغلی