領導行為，一直是組織管理領域中的重要議題，西方學者數十年前即陸續提出許多領導理論。隨著時代的變遷，新的理論因應而生，嘗試解釋當代環境中領導相關現象與議題。先鋒領導，即是2020年被提出之新穎領導理論，但此概念的發展仍停留在概念層次，尚缺乏一個有信效度的衡量工具。
本研究試著釐清先鋒領導概念及意涵，以發展適當的衡量工具，並進而探討其前因與後果變數；本研究包含兩個子研究，共探討了六個假設。研究一中，針對臺灣AI產業中31位員工與主管，透過前測先蒐集描述先鋒領導之重要關鍵事例，並以此為基礎編製先鋒領導量表題項。第二階段的樣本，則為臺灣AI產業中，310筆領導者與部屬互評的資料。經由探索性因素分析結果獲得，先鋒領導的四個因素：創新善用性、產業遠瞻性、跨界靈活性與獨斷嚴謹性。研究一中，還檢驗先鋒領導量表的信效度（包含，內部一致性、區別效度、效標關聯效度、遞增效度等）。由效標關聯效度的結果看出，先鋒領導與部屬的創新行為、工作績效之間，具有顯著的相關。研究二， 則探討先鋒領導行為可能的前因，社會資本及冒險行為。研究二結果發現，社會資本及冒險行為皆與先鋒領導之間，有顯著正相關。最後，也提供了理論與實務意涵、研究限制，及未來研究建議等討論。

Discussion on leadership behavior has been one of the important issues in organizational management. A few decades ago, western scholars suggested various leadership theories. With the change of time, new theories were further formulated to explain the phenomenon and issues on leadership that occurred in contemporary society. Vanguard leadership is one of the novel theories formed in 2020, which is still an abstract concept, and there is no convincing measurement for its validity and reliability. This study tried to define the concept and connotation of a vanguard leadership, and design a measurement tool to further probe into its causal factors. There were two main research questions and six hypotheses in this study.
The first research question focused on the 31 staff and managers in Taiwan’s AI industry. A set of measurement items was designed based on a pretest that collected responses for vital cases regarding vanguard leadership. The sample for the second phase was the evaluations among 310 leaders and subordinates in Taiwan’s AI industry. Exploratory factor analysis showed that the four factors of vanguard leadership are ‘innovation and practicality’, ‘industry foresight’, ‘cross-sectoral flexibility’, and ‘assertive rigorousness’. The internal validity, discriminant validity, criterion of validity, and incremental validity, etc. were also tested. The result of the criterion of validity suggested that the subordinate’s innovative behaviors and work performance are significantly correlated with vanguard leadership.
The second hypothesis probed into the potential reasons that vanguard leadership might function concerning social capital and adventurous behavior. The findings suggested that social capital and adventurous behavior are both positively correlated with vanguard leadership. Finally, this study also discussed theoretical and practical implications, research limitations, and recommendations for future research.

致謝 i
中文摘要 ii
Abstract iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節、研究背景與動機 1
第二節、研究問題與目的 3
第二章 文獻探討 3
第一節、先鋒隊歷史背景 3
第二節、先鋒領導力–案例分析 4
第三節、先鋒隊定義 7
第四節、先鋒領導者之行為表現 7
第五節、影響先鋒領導力之前因 8
第六節、先鋒領導力影響之結果 13
第七節、與其他領導風格之比較 15
第八節、人工智慧在台灣現狀 19
第三章 研究一:先鋒領導量表建構與信效度分析 21
第一節、量表前測 21
第二節、正式量表施測與分析 32
第三節、研究一正式量表的樣本 36
第四節、研究一的結果 41
第五節、小結與討論 58
第四章 研究二：先鋒領導之前因分析 59
第一節、研究流程 59
第二節、資料分析方法 61
第三節、研究結果 61
第四節、小結與討埨 65
第五章結論與建議 65
第一節、結論彙整與討論 66
第二節、理論貢獻與實務意涵 68
第三節、研究限制與未來研究建議 73
參考文獻 77
附錄一: 先鋒領導行為與現象問卷 84
附錄二: 專家效度審查意見整理 87
附錄三: 主管問卷 92
附錄四: 部屬問卷 99

卜長莉（2005） :《社會資本與社會和諧》。中國社會科學出版社。
宋明哲（2001） :《現代風險管理》。臺北:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
李青霞（2016） :《自卑與超越》。臺北:華志文化。
涂金堂（2012） :《量表編制與SPSS》。臺北:五南。
葉小燕（2014） :《被討厭的勇氣》。臺北:究竟出版。
李奕萱、蕭嬋（2012） :〈轉型領導如何透過社會資本與知識分享促進虛擬社群
的價值共創〉。交通大學管理科學系所，博士論文。
林合懋（2012）:〈國民小學校長的成就目標, 終身學習經驗, 轉型領導與其多元
智慧學校經營理念之關係〉。國立政治大學教育學系，博士論文。
吳靜吉、林合懋（1998） :〈轉換領導量表與交易領導量表的建立〉。《中國測驗
學會年刊》，45，2，57-88。
吳靜吉（2005） :〈現今台灣教育的醒思─從創意談起〉。《教育研究月刊》，133，
107-117。
高文（2015）:〈魅力型領導、變革型領導和倫理型領導比較研究〉。《長沙大學
學報》，39-41。
周素玲、黃熾森（1994）:〈管理智慧－走進人和人的世界〉。台北：臺灣商務。
彭台光、高月慈、林鉦棽（2006）:〈管理研究中的共同方法變異: 問題本質, 影
響, 測試和補救〉。 《管理學報》，23(1), 77-98.
黃敏萍、林姿葶、鄭伯壎、梁瑋鈞（2012）:〈華人企業組織中的魅力領導:由概
念分析到量表建構〉。《管理學報》，29(4)，307-331。
楊淑娟（2012）:〈全球化擴大國際貧富差距？〉。天下雜誌，網址:
https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5034160，檢索日期：2020/12/31。
洪蘭（2014）:〈勇敢冒險，才有機會成功〉。天下雜誌，網址:
https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5062950，檢索日期：2021/06/26。
陳昇瑋（2019）:〈企業AI化現況調查：領導人缺乏科技素養是最大阻礙〉。
天下雜誌，網址：https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5097935，檢索日期：2020/11/03。
Huang（2019） :〈產品經理的AI開發指南〉。網址:https://vocus.cc/article/
5dcb8312fd89780001573d08，檢索日期:2021/06/15。

二、 英文部分
Aldridge, S. (2001). Social mobility. In Seminar held by the Performance and
Innovation Unit.
Allix, N. M. (2000). Transformational leadership: democratic or
despotic?. Educational Management & Administration, 28(1), 7-20.
Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity (Vol. 87). Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Publishing.
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership:
An examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. The leadership quarterly, 14(3), 261-295.
Avolio, B. J., Waldman, D. A., & Yammarino, F. J. (1991). Leading in the 1990s: The
four I′ s of transformational leadership. Journal of European industrial
training.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire (TM). Mind
Garden, Inc. Menlo Park, CA.
Basadur, M. (2004). Leading others to think innovatively together: Creative
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 103-121.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership: Good, better, best. Organizational dynamics, 13(3),
26-40.
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability:
Implications for data aggregation and analysis.
Borenstein, J. (2011). Robots and the changing workforce. AI & society, 26(1), 87-93.
Burns, J. (1978). Leadmhip. New York: Harper & Row. Burris, ER, Detert, J. R., &
Chiaburu, DS (2008). Quitting before leaving: the mediating effects of psychological attachment and detachment on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 912-923.
Byrne, C. L., Mumford, M. D., Barrett, J. D., & Vessey, W. B. (2009). Examining the
leaders of creative efforts: What do they do, and what do they think
about?. Creativity and innovation management, 18(4), 256-268.
Cheung, C. K., Rudowicz, E., Yue, X., & Kwan, A. S. (2003). Creativity of
university students: What is the impact of field and year of study?. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(1), 42-63.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Commentary: Social institutions and social theory. American
Sociological Review, 55(3), 333-339.
Debord, G. (2004). Panegyric (Vol. 1). Verso.
Forscher, P. S., & Kteily, N. S. (2020). A psychological profile of the alt-right.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(1), 90-116.
George, J. M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales
performance, and turnover: a group-level analysis in a service context. Journal of applied psychology, 75(6), 698.
George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A. N., & Mayer, D. (2007). Discovering your authentic
leadership. Harvard business review, 85(2), 129.
Gilley, K. M., Walters, B. A., & Olson, B. J. (2002). Top management team risk taking
propensities and firm performance: Direct and moderating effects. Journal of
Business Strategies, 19(2), 95.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). The relationship-based approach to leadership:
Development of LMX theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-
level, multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of
organizations. Journal of management, 21(5), 967-988.
Hochwarter, W. A., Witt, L. A., Treadway, D. C., & Ferris, G. R. (2006). The
interaction of social skill and organizational support on job
performance. Journal of applied psychology, 91(2), 482.
Hussey, A. (2001). The game of war: The life and death of Guy Debord (Vol. 507).
Random House (UK).
Jyoti, J., & Bhau, S. (2015). Impact of transformational leadership on job
performance: Mediating role of leader–member exchange and relational identification. Sage Open, 5(4), 2158244015612518.
Kanter, R. M. (1983). The change masters: Innovation for productivity in the
American corporation. Simon and schuster.
Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational
leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of applied psychology, 88(2), 246.
Kaufmann, V., & Debord, G. (2006). Revolution in the Service of Poetry.
Kim, H. S., & Shim, S. (2003). Gender‐based approach to the understanding of
leadership roles among retail managers. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(3), 321-342.
Lenski, G. E. (1954). Status crystallization: a non-vertical dimension of social
status. American sociological review, 19(4), 405-413.
Ligon, G. S., Hunter, S. T., & Mumford, M. D. (2008). Development of outstanding
leadership: A life narrative approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 312-
334.
Ling, Y. A. N., Simsek, Z., Lubatkin, M. H., & Veiga, J. F. (2008). Transformational
leadership's role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: Examining the
CEO-TMT interface. Academy of Management journal, 51(3), 557-576.
Marcus, G. (2002). The Game of War: The Life and Death of Guy Debord.
Marcy, R. T. (2020). Leadership of socio-political vanguards: A review and future
directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), 101372.
Merrifield, A. (2005). Guy Debord (p. 47). London: Reaktion Books.
Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure, Rev.
Moxley, R. S., & Pulley, M. L. (2004). Hardships. The Center for Creative Leadership
handbook of leadership development, 2.
Moyer, B., MacAllister, J., & Soifer, M. L. F. S. (2001). Doing democracy: The MAP
model for organizing social movements. New Society Publishers.
Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration,
application, and innovation. Psychological bulletin, 103(1), 27.
Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative
people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6),705–750.
Mummendey, A., Kessler, T., Klink, A., & Mielke, R. (1999). Strategies to cope with
negative social identity: Predictions by social identity theory and relative
deprivation theory. Journal of personality and social psychology, 76(2), 229.
Nunn, A., Johnson, S., Monro, S., Bickerstaffe, T., & Kelsey, S. (2007). Factors
influencing social mobility.
Nunnally Jum, C., & Bernstein Ira, H. (1994). Psychometric theory.
Ogola, M., Sikalieh, D., & Linge, T. (2017). The influence of idealized influence
leadership behavior on employee performance in Small and Medium Enterprises in Kenya.
Pettigrew, T. F., Christ, O., Wagner, U., Meertens, R. W., Van Dick, R., & Zick, A.
(2008). Relative deprivation and intergroup prejudice. Journal of Social
Issues, 64(2), 385-401.
Pelz, D. C., & Andrews, F. M. (1966). Scientist. Organizations: Productive Climate
for Research and Development. John Wiley, New York.
Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting creativity to work:
Effects of leader behavior on subordinate creativity. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 55(1), 120-151.
Rejai, M., & Phillips, K. (1979). Leaders of revolution (Vol. 73). SAGE Publications,
Incorporated.
Robbins, M., Judge, A., Liang, L., McClintock, K., Yaworski, E., & MacLachlan, I.
(2007). 2′-O-methyl-modified RNAs act as TLR7 antagonists. Molecular Therapy, 15(9), 1663-1669.
Runco, M. A. (1999). Contrarianism. In S. R. Pritzker (Ed.). Encyclopedia of
creativity (pp.367–371). (1st ed.). Academic Press.
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.
Shanteau, J. (1992). Competence in experts: The role of task
characteristics. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 53(2),
252-266.
Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of
research. Academy of management review, 25(1), 217-226.
Shanteau,J., Weiss, D. J., Thomas, R. P., Pounds, J., & Hall, B. (2003). How can you
tell if someone is an expert? Empirical assessment of expertise. Emerging
perspectives on judgment and decision research, 620-641.
Sheldon, K. M. (1999). Conformity. In S. R. Pritzker (Ed.). Encyclopedia of creativity
(pp.341–346). (1st ed.). Academic Press.
Tyagi, V., Hanoch, Y., Choma, B., & Denham, S. L. (2018). The ‘Right’side of
creativity: Creative personality and social risk-taking predict political party affiliation. Creativity Research Journal, 30(4), 451-460.
Walumbwa, F. O.,Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L.,Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J.
(2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of management, 34(1), 89-126.
Weber, E. U., Blais, A. R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain‐specific risk‐attitude
scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of behavioral decision making, 15(4), 263-290.
Wood, P. (2002). Modernism and the Idea of the Avant-Garde. A companion to Art
Theory, 215.