:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:社會福利機構主管對新管理主義因應之研究
作者:陳政智
校院名稱:東海大學
系所名稱:社會工作學系
指導教授:簡春安
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2002
主題關鍵詞:社會福利機構新管理主義社會工作管理顧客導向social welfare agencynew managerialismsocial work managementcustomer-oriented
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(8) 博士論文(3) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:7
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:105
論文摘要
新管理主義鼓勵更具「市場」趨向,如強調競爭、引進企業精神、重視創新、強調擴大選擇與增進效率。對於社會福利機構而言,已產生了重大的改變。尤其面對政府財政資源匱乏,民眾的需求日益多元,社會福利機構為求符合時代所需,也努力尋求適切的生存與發展方式,所以開始採用新管理主義的創新理念,來提昇組織的效率,以應付未來要面臨的嚴峻挑戰。但社會福利機構與一般企業組織本質上仍是不同的,所以將管理的概念導入服務的供給,社會福利機構強調的社會正義和人道關懷的價值體系,不應該被效率、競爭、市場、消費主義的價值體系所取代,而是發揮兩者相輔相成的效果。本研究的目的主要在瞭解我國社會福利機構因應新管理主義發展所採取的措施與策略,並探究社會福利機構主管對於新管理主義相關理念的看法,然後依此提出因應新管理主義發展主管應有的條件。
本研究採用質性研究的深度訪談法,運用研究者操作化的新管理主義之具體措施作為訪談的參考,針對社會福利機構的主管進行訪談,最後完成九位研究對象之訪談。
研究結果發現社會福利機構的改革比以前更快速,採取的方式是「跑步跳躍」的模式,而且一般都認同運用準市場的作法,來扶植「良性」的競爭。組織結構的改革則受顧客導向的影響,朝向「服務功能」為中心的方向發展。除此之外,重視績效評估將成為未來的趨勢,而且以效率、效能與品質作為主要的評估標準,只是如何將這些標準具體化成可實際操作的技術,有待進一步的發展。另外,研究發現「政府採取公辦民營措施」、「顧客導向的服務文化」、「擁有相關的專業人力」此三項因素,是新管理主義滲入社會福利機構的主要推手。但公私部門間的合作卻是在一種權力、資訊與資源都不平等的「不對稱夥伴關係」中運作,所以社會福機構若要有能力、知識與技術處理與政府互動的相關問題,並能夠因應顧客的各種意見,機構必須運用相關的專業人力。台灣社會工作專業人員的地位,在新管理主義發展的過程中因此而獲得重視。
最後,研究者根據研究的發現,對政府部門及社會福利機構因應新管理主義的發展提出多項建議,並藉由本研究發現的新管理主義實踐上的困境與限制,提出「相對價值」的理念與原則,以協助社會福利機構主管透過績效來表達機構使命與公共利益之達成。
關鍵詞:社會福利機構(social welfare agency)、新管理主義(new managerialism)、社會工作管理(social work management)、顧客導向(customer-oriented)
The Abstract
New managerialism encourages more “market-like mechanism” trends. For examples: encouraging competition, injecting entrepreneurialism, encouraging innovation, giving the customer wide choices and increasing efficiency. New managerialism impacts hugely on social welfare agencies. Due to lack of government financial support and more widely demand from the society, social welfare agencies are looking for how to survive and grow in the new era. They start applying the new managerialism principles to increase organization efficiency in order to meet the future challenge. But social welfare agencies have essences different from general business units. Therefore, we shall only conduct the management concept into service supply because social welfare agencies focus on social justice and people. It shall not be replaced by efficiency, market, consumer orientation, but amplify both advantages for better result.
The study purpose is focused on understanding how our social welfare agencies face the new managerialism and what are their provisions and counterplots. In addition, it looks for what are social welfare agency managers’ opinions toward new managerialism. New prerequisites are developed for new managerialism managers based on the study.
By employing the deep interview in the qualitative research method. It utilizes researcher operations’ new managerialism for interviewing reference and focuses on interviewing social welfare agency''''s chief managers. Nine social welfare agency manager’s interviews are collected. The study finds that social welfare agency’s renovations are faster than before. They utilize the running leaps model and agree on quasi-market model to grow “benignant“ competition. Organization structure renovations are affected by customer needs and developed toward the direction of “service-centered”.
Otherwise, the future trend is focused on the performance evaluation and the efficiency, effectiveness and quality are the assessment criteria. More researches need to be done to standardize concrete operational skills. Moreover, new managerialism moves into social welfare agencies because of a) contracting-out with government facilities, b) customer-oriented service culture, c) related professionals, based on the research. But government and social welfare agencies cooperation on authority, information and resources is not fair because of the “asymmetric partnership”. In order to let social welfare agencies have the ability, knowledge and skills to handle the relationships with government, social welfare agencies requires professionals. In the process of new managerialism development, social workers in Taiwan get emphasized.
Finally, researcher submits many suggestions to government and social welfare agencies about the new managerialism. In addition, he also found the limits and difficulties of the new managerialism in this study. Researcher submits “relative value” principles to help social welfare agency managers to achieve organization goals and public profit based on performance.
Key terms: social welfare agency; new managerialism; social work management; customer-oriented
參考書目
【中文部分】
內政部(2002)。內政法規。http://www.moi.gov.tw/moi/moi_law.asp。
王順民(1999)。非營利組織及其相關議題的討論─兼論臺灣地區非營利組織的構造意義。社區發展,85,36-61。new window
司徒達賢(2000)。前瞻的指引。於張茂芸(譯),非營利組織(頁一-十一)。台北:天下遠見。
行政院公共工程委員會(2002)。政府採構法。http://210.69.177.3/gplaw/gplaw.htm。
江明修(1994)。非營利組織領導行為之研究。台北:行政院國家科學委員會專題研究報告。new window
江明修(1995)。我國行政革新政策之研究:民主行政理論的觀點。台北:國科會委託研究。
江明修(1998)。各國行政體制與文官制度之改革比較研究。台北:銓敘部委託研究。
朱鎮明、楊繼明(1999)。英國的政府再造經驗。於詹中原等(編著),新公共管理:政府再造的理論與實務(頁155-182)。台北:五南。
朱金池(1999)。警政品質管理之研究。於Golembiewski, R. T.、孫本初、江岷欽(主編),公共管理論文精選(頁343-366)。台北:元照。
全國法規資料庫(2001)。所得稅法暨施行細則。http://law.moj.gov.tw/。
李美華等(譯)(1998)。社會科學研究方法(Earl Babbie原著,The practice of social research, 8th ed.)。台北:時英。
李茂興(譯)(1996)。合作(Michael Argyle原著,Cooperation, the basis of sociability)。台北:巨流。
李樹田(譯)(2001)。杜拉克精選:管理篇(Peter F. Drucker原著,The essential Drucker on management)。台北:天下遠見。
吳明儒、賴兩陽(合譯)(1997)。資本主義福利體系:日本、英國與瑞典之比較(Arthur Gould原著, Capitalist welfare systems: a comparison of Japan, Britain and Sweden)。台北:巨流。
吳瓊恩(1992)。行政學的範圍與方法。台北:五南。
吳瓊恩、李允傑、陳銘薰(編著)(2000)。公共管理。台北:空大。
社區發展(1999)。健全非營利組織運作,強化社會福利功能。社區發展,85,1-5。
范宜芳(1999)。非營利組織之公辦民營。於江明修(主編),第三部門經營策略與社會參與(頁191-213)。台北:智勝文化。
林鍾沂、林文斌(譯)(1999)。公共管理新論(Owen E. Hughes原著,Management and administration)。台北:韋伯文化。
官有垣(2000)。台灣民間社會福利機構與政府的不情願夥伴關係:以台灣基督教兒童福利基金會為例,1977-1985。於官有垣(編著),非營利組織與社會福利:台灣本土的個案分析(頁121-143)。台北:亞太。
高雄市志願服務協會(2000)。高雄地區社會福利資源手冊。高雄:高雄市志願服務協會。
徐偉傑(譯)(2001)。企業導向的社會(Richard J. Caston原著, Life in a business-oriented society: a sociological perspective)。台北:洪葉文化。
孫本初(1994)。非營利性組織管理之研究:以臺北市政府登記有案之社會福利慈善事業基金會為對象。台北:台北市府研究發展考核委員會委託
孫本初(1999)。公共管理及其未來的發展趨勢。於Golembiewski, R. T.、孫本初、江岷欽(主編),公共管理論文精選(頁1-32)。台北:元照。
陳金貴(1994)。美國非營利組織的人力資源管理。台北:瑞興。new window
陳明照(2001)。企業精神政府之機制與設計。台北:政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
陳秋政(2000)。地方政府管理之理念與實踐。台北:政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
陳政智(2000)。行銷在社會工作的運用。社區發展,89,167-177。new window
張在山(譯)(1991)。非營利事業的策略性行銷。台北:授學。
張瑞當(1998)。如何增進非營利組織之社會利益,會計研究月刊,151,71-75。
程瑞玲(1984)。非營利組織之績效衡量。台北:東吳大學會計研究所碩士論文。
黃源協(2002)。後民營化時代的身心障礙福利機構管理─最佳價值與標竿計畫的實踐。社區發展,97,80-105。new window
黃源協(2000a)。社區照顧:台灣與英國經驗的檢視。台北:揚智。
黃源協(2000b)。社區照顧服務輸送模式之探討。社會政策與社會工作學刊,4(2),179-220。new window
黃源協(1999a)。新管理主義、社區照顧與社會工作。社區發展,85,200- 213。new window
黃源協(1999b)。邁向新世紀的社會工作管理。社區發展,88,197-218。new window
黃源協(1999c)。社會工作管理。台北:揚智。
黃新福(1999)。非營利組織的治理型態解析。於Golembiewski, R. T.、孫本初、江岷欽(主編),公共管理論文精選(頁391-432)。台北:元照。new window
黃同圳(2000)。績效評估與管理。於李誠(主編),人力資源管理的12堂課(頁105-137)。台北:天下文化。new window
詹中原等(編著)(1999)。新公共管理:政府再造的理論與實務。台北:五南。
詹中原(1999)。政府再造──革新「行政革新」之理論建構。於詹中原等(編著),新公共管理:政府再造的理論與實務(頁3-28)。台北:五南。new window
詹中原(1999)。新公共管理與國家發展。於詹中原等(編著),新公共管理:政府再造的理論與實務(頁71-83)。台北:五南。
楊美齡(譯)(1997)。管理浪潮下的迷思(Eileen C. Shapiro原著, Fad surfing in the boardroom: reclaiming the courage to manage in the age of instant answers.)。台北:天下文化。
趙善如(譯)(1999)。社會服務方案績效的評量:方法與技術(Lawrence L. Martin, & Peter M. Kettner原著,Measuring the performance of human service programs.)。台北:亞太。
趙橋、賴禾(譯)(1998)。瞭解行銷快易通。台北:商周。
蔡進雄(1998)。組織人?或專業人?談教師的組織承諾與專業承諾。教育實習輔導季刊,3(4),78-80。
鄭怡世(1999)。臺灣民間非營利社會福利機構參社會福利服務探析。社區發展,87,312-326。new window
鄭錫鍇(1999)。新結盟主義之BOT模式本質。於詹中原等(編著),新公共管理:政府再造的理論與實務(頁335-377)。台北:五南。
劉毓玲(譯)(2000)。21世紀的管理挑戰(Peter F. Drucker原著,Management challenges for the 21st century)。台北:天下遠見。
劉仲冬(1996)。量與質社會研究的爭議及社會研究未來的走向及出路。於胡幼慧(主編),質性研究:理論、方法及本士女性研究實例(頁121-139)。台北:巨流。
劉淑瓊(2001)。社會服務「民營化」再探:迷思與現實。社會政策與社會工作學刊,5(2),7-55。new window
謝俊義(1998)。全球行政改革的典範:新公共管理。考銓,14,81-96。new window
簡春安、鄒平儀(1998)。社會工作研究法。台北:巨流。new window
蘇洺賢(2000)。我國非營利組織之跨組織合作關係類型及管理機制探討。台中:靜宜大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
【英文部分】
Austin, D. M. (1995). Management overview. Encyclopedia of social work (19th ed., pp.1642-1658). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Barker, R. L. (1991). Social work dictionary (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Bellon , C., & Goerl, G. (1992). Reconciling public entrepreneurship and democracy. Public Administrative Review, 52(2), 130-134.
Bitter, B. J., & George, K. R. (1976). The exemption of nonprofit organizations from federal income taxation. Yale Law Journal, 85, 299-358.
Clarke, J., & Newman, J. (1997). The managerial state. London: SAGE.
Denhardt, R. B. (1991). Public administration: an action orientation. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, Inc.
Drucker, P. F. (1989). The new realities: In government and politics, in economics and business, in society and world view. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.
Drucker, P. F. (1995). The information executives truly need. Harvard business review, 73(1), 54-62.
Dunleavy, P., & O''''Leary, B. (1987). Theories of the state: the politics of liberal democracy. London: Macmillan Education Ltd.
Farnham, D., & Horton, S. (1996). Managing people in the public service. London: Macmillan Press.
Frederickson, H. G. (1997). The spirit of public administration. San Francisco: Jossey-bass Publishers.
Glennerster, H. (1992). Paying for welfare: the 1990s. New York & London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Gray, A., & Jenkins, B. (1995). From public administration to public management reassessing a revolution?. Public administration, 73(1), 75-99.
Grusky, O., & Miller, G. A. (1970). The sociology of organization. New York: The Free Press.
Hansmann, H. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale Law Journal, 89, 835-901.
Hasenfeld, Y. (1983). Human service organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons?. Public administration, 69(1), 3-19.
Hopkins, B. R. (1991). The law of fund-raising. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hopkins, B. R. (1992). The law of tax-exempt organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Howe, D. (1991). The family and the therapist. In M. Davies (ed.), The sociology of social work (pp. 147-162). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Hughes, O. E. (1994). Public management & administration . New York: ST. Martin''''s Press.
Hughes, O. E. (1998). Public management & administration (2nd ed.). New York: ST. Martin''''s Press.
Hummel, R. P. (1987). The bureaucratic experience (3rd ed.). New York: St. Martin''''s Press Inc.
Kniss, C. J. (1999). Public sector reform: Rationale, trends and problems. Public administration research, 9, 493-498.
Koehler, J. & Pankowski, J. (1996). Quality government: designing, development and implementing TQM. FL: St. Lucie Press.
König, K. (1996). On the critique of new public administration. Speyer: Alle Rechte vorbehalten.
Kotter, J. P. & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York: the Free Press.
Kramer, R. M. (1995). The roles of voluntary social service organizations in four European states: policies and trends in England, the Netherlands, Italy and Norway. In S. Kuhnle & P. Selle (eds.). Government and voluntary organizations. England: Cedric Chivers Ltd.
Lan, Z., & Rosenbloom, D. (1992). Public administration in transition?. Public Administrative Review, 52(6), 535-537.
Lipsky, M. (1984). Bureaucratic disentitlement in social welfare programs. Social service review, 58(1), 3-27.
Local Government Act (1999). Local Government Act: chapter c.27. http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1999/19990027,htm.
Merton, R. K. (1952). Bureaucratic structure and personality. In R. K. Merton, A. P. Gray, B. Hockey, & H. C. Selvin, (eds.), Reader in bureaucracy (pp. 261-372). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Miles, R. E. (1975). Theories of management: implications for organizational behavior and development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Moon, M. J. (1999). The pursuit of managerial entrepreneurship: does organization matter?. Public administration review, 59(1), 31-43.
Moore S. T., & Kelly M. J. (1996). Quality now: moving human services organizations toward a consumer orientation to service quality. Social work, 41(1), 33-40.
Newell, C. (eds.) (1993). The effective local government manager (second edition). USA: ICMA training institute.
Osborne, D. & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Patti, R. (1983). Social welfare administration. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Perlmutter, F. D. (1995). Nonprofit management issues. Encyclopedia of social work (19th ed., pp. 1772- 1777). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Peters, B. G. (1998). Administration in the year 2000: serving the client. International journal of public administration, 21(12), pp. 1759-1776.
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (1998). Governance without government? Rethinking public administration. Journal of public administration research and theory, 8(2), 223-243.
Pollitt, C. (1993). Managerialism and the public services: cuts or cultural change in the 1990s (2nd ed.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Ranson, S., & Stewart, J. (1994). Management for the public domain: enabling the learning society. Hong Kong: St. Martin''''s Press.
Reed, M. I. (1992). The sociology of organizations: themes, perspectives and prospects. London: Harvester Wheat sheaf.
Salamon, L. M. (1989). Beyond privatization: the tools of government action. Washington, D. C.: The Urban Institute Press.
Salamon, L. M. (1992). America''''s nonprofit sector: a primer. New York: Foundation Center.
School leadership and management (2000). Best value. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/a-z/BEST_VALUE.html.
Scottish executive development department (2002). Best value in local government. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/bestvalue/.
Shafritz, J. M., & Ott, J. S. (des.) (1987). Classics of organization theory. Chicago: The Dorsey Press.
Shafritz, J. M., & Russell, E. W. (1997). Introducing public administration. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc.
Simon, J. G. (1987). The tax treatment of nonprofit organizations: A review of federal and state policies. In W. W. Powell (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (pp.67-98). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Taylor, D. W. (2000). Accountants in the public sector: their roles, influences and working relationships. CPA Australia: public sector center of excellence.
Terry, L. D. (1998). Administrative leadership, neo-managerialism, and the public management movement. Public administration review, 58(3), 194-208.
Weinbach, R. W. (1998). The social worker as manager: A practical guide to success (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Wolf, T. (1990). Managing a nonprofit organization. New York: Fireside.
Zifcak, S. (1994). New managerialism- administrative reform in Whitehall and Canberra. Buckingham: Open University.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE