本研究關注的焦點在公元兩千年，政當輪替的新舊政權交替後，民進黨執政菁英的形成。從執政菁英的背景分析、進入分析，以及不同場域間的流動分析，來探討新政府執政團隊的組成特色。我們蒐集了兩千年至兩千零三年行政院執政菁英的人事資料，包含任職的部門、層級、以及基本個人變項等。以國史館學術資源綱站、人事行政局歷年度編纂的「行政院暨各部會行處局署主管人員名錄」中登錄的資料爲主，若有不足之處，則輔以中央社主編的中華民國名人錄、全球資訊綱、電子報或者是書面報紙。 在資料分析中，發現了新政府在不同程度的可替代性部門中，有著不一樣的汰舊新策略，當然，無論是可替代性高或低的部門類別，團隊菁英的組成皆集中於輪替當年，然而在零二年的內閣改組時，可替代性低的類別，有著比可替代性高的類別較高比例的人事任命（即低可替代性部門的更換速度較高可替代性部門慢），說明了兩大不同屬性的類別中，在執政菁英的更換策略上有其差異性。另外，在執政基礎的穩定化過程中，民進黨政府除了提供黨內菁英職業選擇的機會外，也擴大了社會菁英的政治參與基礎。以兩性共治爲選舉號召的民進黨，在取得執政權後，的確在女性政務人員的任用上有所增加 ，但在趨勢上並不明顯。這與我們認爲新政府任用了許多女性人員的一般觀念仍存有落差。在比較新舊政府執政菁英的任命時，也發現了一個明顯的世代交替現象。最後，外省籍族群勢力的衰退，則說明了民進黨在執政之後，並沒有提供其較大空間的行動機會。

This research project focuses on the formation of administrative elites within the DPP after the political power turnover in 2000. Through the analysis of the administrative elites' background, and their entry and mobility between sectors, the features of this administrative group can be specified. Personnel data of DDP administrative elites was collected for the 2000-2003 period. These data including by which department these elites were recruited, their levels and personal profile. The profile details were mainly collected from Academia Historic and the compilation of data on superintendent of the Executive Yuan and respective departments. In case of missing data, other sources such as the internet, newspapers, and “Who's Who in the Republic of China” were consulted. Through analysis of these data, we found that the new government used a different recruitment strategy from which, depending on the substitutability of the staffs. Departments with more replaceable staffs indicates a considerably high a level of personnel flow, and vice versa. Besides, during the process of government's stabilization, the DPP government not only offered internal career chance, but also sought to expand the recruitment from social elites. Since DPP strongly appealed to sex equality before coming into power, after assuming power the number of female administrators increased slightly. Furthermore, in comparing the employment pattern of the old and new governments, generational turnover was also recognizable. Finally, as the government did not provide those with mainland background with ample opportunities, this group experienced a decline in power.