著全球經濟整合加速與資訊科技迅速發展，企業面臨多元世代共存之挑戰。不同世代在成長背景、價值觀及工作態度上存在差異，進而影響其對工作環境之知覺、工作價值之認同以及對組織共同目標之投入程度。因此，如何理解並有效管理跨世代員工，已成為企業重要之管理課題。

本研究旨在探討工作環境、工作價值與共同目標之關係，並驗證工作價值之中介效果，同時分析不同世代員工間之差異。研究對象以X世代、Y世代及Z世代在職員工為主，採用Google表單進行網路問卷調查，共發放250份問卷，回收有效問卷221份，有效回收率為88.4%。研究資料以SPSS統計軟體進行分析，並透過描述性統計、信度分析、因素分析、相關分析、差異分析及複迴歸分析等方法，檢驗各研究變數間之關係與影響效果。

研究實證分析結果顯示，不同世代員工在工作環境、工作價值及共同目標上具有部分顯著差異；此外，工作環境對工作價值呈現顯著正向影響，而工作價值亦對共同目標產生正向效果。工作價值在工作環境與共同目標之間具有部分中介效果；世代對共同目標具有顯著影響，顯示不同世代員工在組織目標認同上存在差異。

綜合而言，本研究驗證了工作環境、工作價值與共同目標之間之關聯性，並確認工作價值在其中所扮演之關鍵中介角色。研究結果可作為企業在營造良好工作環境、強化員工工作價值及提升組織共同目標認同之重要參考，並有助於促進跨世代員工之整合與管理。

This study examines the relationships among work environment, work values, and shared goals in a multigenerational workforce. As globalization and rapid technological advancements reshape organizational structures, employees from different generations increasingly work together within the same organization. Differences in life experiences, values, and work expectations may influence employees’ perceptions of the work environment, work values, and identification with organizational goals. Therefore, understanding and managing generational diversity has become an important issue for organizations.
This study investigates the mediating role of work values and explores differences among Generation X, Generation Y, and Generation Z employees. Data were collected through an online questionnaire survey. A total of 250 questionnaires were distributed, and 221 valid responses were obtained, resulting in an effective response rate of 88.4%. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS software, including descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, factor analysis, correlation analysis, ANOVA, and multiple regression analysis.
The results indicate that significant generational differences exist in work environment, work values, and shared goals. The work environment positively affects work values, while work values positively influence shared goals. Moreover, work values partially mediate the relationship between work environment and shared goals. Generation also significantly affects shared goals, indicating differences in organizational goal identification among generations. These findings provide implications for organizations seeking to improve workplace management and strengthen organizational cohesion.

中文部分(依作者姓名筆劃排列)
1. 陳思蓓（2022）。人力資源人員的工作價值觀、工作涉入及其關聯性之研究－以不同世代為調節變項。國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文，台北市。
2. 郭嘉甄（2017）。Y世代與資深世代之工作價值觀探討。國立中正大學碩士論文，嘉義縣。
3. 郭恒志（2015）。資深世代與年輕世代之工作價值觀差異研究。國立雲林科技大學碩士論文，雲林縣。
4. 黃一峯、陳建志（2021）。X世代與Y世代之職場行為研究。行政院人事行政總處人力發展學院，台北市。
5. 黃振恭（2008）。不同世代工作價值觀與工作滿意度之研究。國立中正大學碩士論文，嘉義縣。
6. 劉謙穎（2006）。從世代差異觀點探討工作價值觀、組織承諾與離職意向之關係。國立中興大學碩士論文，台中市。
7. 吳統雄（1990）。電話調查：理論與方法。聯經出版，台北市。

英文部分(依作者姓名開頭字母排列)
1. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands–resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328.
2. Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 875–884.
3. Cable, D. M., & Edwards, J. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 822–834.
4. Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., & Wang, E. T. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1872–1888.
5. Deloitte. (2024). The 2024 Gen Z and Millennial Survey. Deloitte. https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/issues/work/genz-millennial-survey.html
6. Dose, J. J. (1997). Work values: An integrative framework and illustrative application to organizational socialization. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70(3), 219–240.
7. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–507.
8. Guilford, J. P. (1965). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. McGraw-Hill.
9. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279.
10. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
11. Herzberg, F. (1959). The motivation to work. John Wiley & Sons.
12. Jung, Y., & Takeuchi, N. (2014). Relationships among person–job fit, person–organization fit, and turnover intention: A multi-level study. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(5), 721-730. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.5.721
13. Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika, 35(4), 401–415.
14. Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person–organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49.
15. 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.
16. Kuvaas, B. (2006). Work performance, affective commitment, and work motivation: The roles of pay administration and pay level. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 365–385.
17. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717.
18. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
19. Ng, E. S., Schweitzer, L., & Lyons, S. T. (2010). New generation, great expectations: A field study of the millennial generation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 281–292.
20. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
21. Park, S., & Kim, S. (2020). Is the role of work environment different across generations? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6559.
22. Randstad. (2024). Workmonitor 2024: The human side of work. https://www.randstad.com/workmonitor/
23. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714.
24. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press.
25. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–65.
26. Schwartz, S. H. (2007). Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fitzgerald, & G. Eva (Eds.), Measuring attitudes cross-nationally: Lessons from the European Social Survey (pp. 165–193). Sage.
27. Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1020
28. Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069. William Morrow.
29. Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476. https://doi.org/10.5465/257085
30. Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values on the rise, altruistic values on the decline. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1117–1142.
31. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley.