本文採用歷史制度論研究途徑，以歸納考績制度發展歷史，並觀察其在「考績的意涵」、「固定比例的運用」、「考績標準的授權」、「考績制度與文官制度間的關係」等四議題上所呈現的制度特徵。在歷史制度論觀點下，考績制度變遷或發展，係與不同文官制度轉變階段之重要事件具有關連性，亦即從建國初期制度建立開始，逐步演化成今日整體制度架構內涵，故當前考績法修正所面對的問題與挑戰，也與其不同階段發展過程中的制度特徵，具有密切關連性。基於此，藉由分析過去考績制度修訂經驗，或可提供未來制度改進時，考慮或處理的問題焦點。
本文內容乃從目前考績法草案，以及考績制度發展歷程，比較分析前述四項制度特徵，最後提出待處理的課題及可能的思考途
徑。筆者認為考績制度變革的關鍵，除了需對這些待解決課題進行制度調整外，尚需凝聚各方共識，以形成利於變革之環境，方可有效落實改革工作；同時也唯有在制度傳承與時空轉變間尋求調和，考績制度變革才能一方面與文官制度發展脈絡緊密契合；另方面也能在人員與組織等不同需求間發揮最大效益。

This paper studies four institutional characteristics of the performance evaluation (PE) institution of ROC, including “content,” “ratio,” “delegation of evaluation standard” and “relationship with civil service,” and tries to compare different characteristics between development stages.
The ROC’s PE institution is not only part of the civil service; it is also the result of historical development of the civil service. So, its problems and challenges are closely related to the development process of civil service. That means if we want to look into PE’s future development, we have to analyze and learn from PE’s historical experiences.
For this reason, this paper looks at three issues from the Historical Institutionalism perspective: first, analyze institutional characteristics of PE amendments; second, compare different PE development stages and key issues; and finally identify problems and offer possible solutions to them. The authors argue that the key to successful changes of PE depends not only on institutional alternatives for solving problems but also on building consensus and environment that would be instrumental to building institution. Only when institutional development and context change match each other, can PE institution follow the steps closely of civil service development and help civil service organizations and employees achieve their best performances.