臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：政府績效資訊之運用：官僚態度之分析焦點
書刊名：行政暨政策學報
作者：胡龍騰 引用關係
作者(外文)：Hu, Lung-teng
出版日期：2015
卷期：60
頁次：頁41-89
主題關鍵詞：績效資訊；績效學習；績效課責；績效資訊透明；官僚態度；Performance information；Performance learning；Performance accountability；Transparency of performance information
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(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:543
  • 點閱點閱:93
相較於對績效管理制度之建立和改進，以及對績效衡量方法與指標之效度建構等面向的重視，績效資訊的運用（performance information use）似乎是一個被忽略的重要研究議題。為能了解我國行政部門於績效資訊運用實際情況，並探索可能之影響因素，本文遂以行政院所屬各機關之研考業務相關人員為對象，進行實證研究。本研究發現，在我國歷經多年的績效管理和評量制度推動的洗禮下，業務中需接觸績效管理或績效資訊彙整之公務同仁，對於執行與運用績效資訊的態度承諾、對於組織績效資訊之可信賴程度、由過去績效評量結果進一步從中學習之意願、對於將機關績效資訊予以透明化之態度，以及對依績效結果予以課責之態度，皆已有正面且較為成熟的看法。然而，相較於在其他變項的表現，受訪者對於將機關績效資訊予以透明公開一事上，卻持相對保守的態度。其次，本研究也發現，行政機關似乎未能重視評量所得之績效資訊，以致於機關績效資訊獲得運用的程度似乎並不樂觀。就實際經驗來看，大多僅將評量所得之資訊運用於與機關策略規劃和績效評量本身有關之事務上。透過階層迴歸分析，本研究也發現，對執行與運用績效資訊之態度承諾、對績效資訊之信賴程度、對績效學習概念之態度、對績效資訊透明化理念之認同程度，以及對績效課責之態度等因素，實對機關於不同層面之績效資訊運用程度產生不同的顯著影響。不過，雖然本研究假設機關同仁對績效資訊可信賴程度之感受，將扮演調節或干擾效果，影響上述幾個變項對於依變項的影響力；就資料所得分析結果來看，同仁對績效資訊的信心程度，僅對其於績效學習態度對績效資訊之運用具有影響作用。
The use of performance information has been an ignored issue in government performance management and measurement. This paper attempts to empirically explore and identify critical factors which influence public employees' perceived use of performance information in public agencies. Survey questionnaire was administered to public employees who are in charge of collecting and reporting their agency or unit's performance data and information in 39 central government agencies requested by the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission of the Executive Yuan. This study finds that performance information produced by agencies is majorly utilized in the revisions of agency's planning of strategic targets and performance indicators. The analyzed results of performance information however are rarely connected with the improvement of internal management and seldom opened to the public or the media. To further examine the impact of bureaucrats' attitudes on agency's performance information use, this study includes bureaucrats' commitment to performance management practices and performance information use, confidence in the credibility of performance information, as well as their attitudes toward performance learning, transparency of performance information, and performance accountability as the independent variables. All of the factors show varied degrees of significant impact on different types of performance information use such as strategic management and learning, improvement of internal management, and openness of performance information. In addition, the results of the present study demonstrate that the level of confidence in the credibility of produced performance information may moderate the influence of employees' attitude toward performance learning on their perception of performance information use.
期刊論文
1.翁栢萱、陳薇如(2011)。政府機關組織績效評估實務探析。T&D飛訊，119，1-23。  延伸查詢new window
2.Jun, J. S.(2009)。The limits of post-new public management and beyond。Public Administration Review，69(1)，161-165。  new window
3.余致力(20040600)。論政府績效。公務人員月刊，96，1-3。  延伸查詢new window
4.胡龍騰(20110600)。我國施政績效資訊運用實務與問題分析。研考雙月刊，35(3)=283，10-22。  延伸查詢new window
5.徐仁輝(20050900)。績效管理與組織學習。公務人員月刊，111，36-46。  延伸查詢new window
6.劉昭博(2006)。績效評估知識生産在政府知識管理上之產權意涵。考銓季刊，48，149-165。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.Bourdeaux, C.(2008)。Integrating performance information into legislative budget processes。Public Performance & Management Review，31(4)，547-569。  new window
8.Cunningham, G. M.、Harris, J. E.(2005)。Toward a theory oi performance reporang to achieve public sector accountability: A field study。Public Budgeting & Finance，25(2)，15-42。  new window
9.Curristine, T.(2005)。Government performance: Lessons and challenges。OECD Journal on Budgeting，5(1)，127-151。  new window
10.Curristine, T.。Performance information in the budget process: Results from the OECD 2005 questionnaire。OECD Journal on Budgeting，5(2)，87-131。  new window
11.Dull, Matthew(2008)。Result-model reform leadership: Questions of credible commitment。Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory，19(2)，255-285。  new window
12.Guthrie, J.、English, L.(1997)。Performance information and programme evaluation in the Australian public sector。International Journal of Public Sector Management，10(3)，154-164。  new window
13.Ho, A. T.(2007)。Exploring the roles of citizens in performance measurement。International Journal of Public Administration，30(11)，1157-1177。  new window
14.Hood, Christopher(2006)。Gaming in targetworld: the targets approach to managing British public services。Public Administration Review，66(4)，515-521。  new window
15.Hyndman, N. S.、Anderson, R.(1995)。The use of performance information in external reporting: An empirical study of UK executive agencies。Financial Accountability & Management，11(1)，1-17。  new window
16.Mamoch, Gordon(2008)。Performance stories: A comparison of the annual reports presented by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the English National Health Service。Public Performance & Management Review，31(4)，570-603。  new window
17.Moynihan, D. P.、Ingraham, P. W.(2004)。Integrative leadership in the public sector: A model of performance-information use。Administration & Society，36(4)，427-453。  new window
18.Moynihan, D. P.、Lavertu, S.(2012)。Does involvement in performance management routines encourage performance information use? Evaluating GPRA and PART。Public Administration Review，72(4)，592-602。  new window
19.Moynihan, Donald P.、Pandey, Sanjay K.(2010)。The big question for performance management: Why do managers use performance information?。Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory，20(4)，849-866。  new window
20.Moynihan, D. P.、Fernandez, S.、Kim, S.、LeRoux, K. M.、Piotrowski, S. J.、Wright, B. E.、Yang, K.(2011)。Performance regimes amidst governance complexity。Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory，21(S1)，141-155。  new window
21.Ossege, C.(2012)。Accountability: Are we better off without it。Public Management Review，14(5)，585-607。  new window
22.Taylor, J.(2011)。Factors influencing the use of performance information ior decision making in Australian state agencies。Public Administration，89(4)，1316-1334。  new window
23.Wall, A.、Martin, G.(2003)。The disclosure of key performance indicators in the public sector. How Irish organizations are performing。Public Management Review，5(4)，491-509。  new window
24.Willoughby, K. G.(2004)。Performance measurement and budget balancing: State government perspective。Public Budgeting & Finance，24(2)，21-39。  new window
25.Yang, K.(2008)。Examining perceived honest performance reporting by public organizations: Bureaucratic politics and organizational practice。Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory，19(1)，91-105。  new window
26.Yang, Kaifeng、Pandey, Sanjay K.(2008)。How do perceived political environment and administrative reform affect employee commitment?。Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory，19(2)，335-360。  new window
27.Moynihan, Donald P.(2005)。Goal-based learning and the future of performance management。Public Administration Review，65(2)，203-216。  new window
28.Dubnick, Melvin J.(2005)。Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the mechanisms。Public Performance & Management Review，28(3)，376-417。  new window
29.張四明(20091000)。行政院施政績效評估制度之運作經驗與改革方向。研考雙月刊，33(5)=273，45-58。  延伸查詢new window
30.Kamensky, John M.(1996)。Role of the 'Reinventing Government' Movement in Federal Management Reform。Public Administration Review，56(3)，247-255。  new window
31.張四明(20080900)。政府實施績效管理的困境與突破。T&D飛訊，72，1-25。  延伸查詢new window
32.Cavalluzzo, K. S.、Ittner, C. D.(2004)。Implementing performance measurement innovations: Evidence from government。Accounting, Organizations and Society，29(2/3)，243-267。  new window
33.Van Thiel, Sandra、Leeuw, Frans L.(2002)。The Performance Paradox in the Public Sector。Public Performance & Management Review，25(3)，267-281。  new window
34.陳敦源(20021200)。績效制度設計的資訊問題：訊號、機制設計與代理成本。行政暨政策學報，35，45-69。new window  延伸查詢new window
35.吳毓瑩(19961000)。量表奇偶點數的效度議題。調查研究：方法與應用，2，5-34。new window  延伸查詢new window
36.彭台光、高月慈、林鉦棽(20060200)。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。new window  延伸查詢new window
37.Franklin, Aimee L.(2000)。An Examination of Bureaucratic Reactions to Institutional Controls。Public Performance & Management Review，24(1)，8-21。  new window
38.Reck, J. L.(2001)。The Usefulness of Financial and Nonfinancial Performance Information in Resource Allocation Decisions。Journal of Accounting and Public Policy，20(1)，45-71。  new window
39.Williams III, F. P.、Sechrest, D.、McShane, M. D.(1994)。Barriers to effective performance review: The seduction of raw data。Public Administration Review，54(6)，537-542。  new window
圖書
1.Radin, B. A.(2006)。Challenging the Performance Movement。Washington, DC：Georgetown University。  new window
2.Bouckaert, G.、Halligan, J.(2008)。Managing performance: International comparisons。London：Routledge。  new window
3.Frederickson, D. G.、Frederickson, H. G.(2006)。Measuring the performance of the hollow state。Washington, DC：Georgetown University Press。  new window
4.Government Accountability Office(2000)。Managing for results: Challenges agencies face in producing credible performance information。Washington, DC：GAO。  new window
5.Government Accountability Office GAO).(2000)。Managing for results: Challenges in producing credible performance information。Washington, DC：GAO。  new window
6.Government Accountability Office(2001)。Managing for results: Federal managers views on key management issues vary widely across agencies。Washington, DC：GAO。  new window
7.Government Accountability Office (GAO)(2005)。Managing for results: Enhancing agency use of performance information for management decision making。Washington, DC：GAO。  new window
8.Government Accountability Office (GAO)(2008)。Lessons learned for the next administration on using performance information to improve results。Washington, DC：GAO。  new window
9.Ingraham, P. W.、Joyce, P. G.、Donahue, A. K.(2003)。Government performance: Why management matters。Baltimore：Johns Hopkins University Press。  new window
10.Moynihan, D. P.(2008)。The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform。Washington, DC：Georgetown University Press。  new window
11.Van Dooren, W.、Bouckaert, G.、Halligan, J.(2010)。Performance management in the public sector。London, UK：Routledge。  new window
12.張四明(2003)。績效衡量與政府預算之研究。台北：時英。  延伸查詢new window
13.邱皓政(2007)。量化研究與統計分析。臺北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.Moynihan, D. P.(2010)。Through a glass, darkly: Understanding the effects of performance regimes，http://www.lafollette.wisc.edu/publications/workingpapers， 2010/12/05。  new window
圖書論文
1.de Lancer Julnes, P.(2004)。The utilization of performance measurement information: Adopting, implementing, and sustaining。Public productivity handbook。New York：Marcel Dekker。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
1. 部屬啊！您有做自己的機會嗎？尚嚴、專權雙元領導與部屬任務績效之關聯性：以情緒調節策略揭開潘朵拉的盒子
2. 部屬難為：領導者利組織不道德行為與部屬離職傾向、越級建言、主管導向組織公民行為與沉默行為之關係：以領導者-部屬交換關係為調節效果
3. 設計思考提升學習動機與問題解決信心--臺灣大學生學習設計思考課程的實證分析
4. 國際觀光旅館職場友誼與工作表現關係之探討--以卓越能力商數為中介變項
5. 青少年社會網絡指標及幽默表現風格之交互作用影響與被霸凌經驗之關係
6. 中高齡職涯未來時間觀、職場成功老化和就業力之關係--探討工作要求與資源的調節式中介作用
7. 難孕婦女社群成員的知識分享與健康促進行為之關聯性研究
8. 居服員留任傾向之研究
9. 國中生所知覺到的教師自主支持、自我效能、任務價值對學習投入之影響
10. 病患不文明行為對情緒調節的影響：壓力心態與顧客導向的調節式中介模式
11. 重度工作投資與工作倦怠：健康促進與心理資本扮演之調節角色
12. 就事論事或將心比心？顧客不當對待與員工身心壓力的情緒歷程：壓力源評估與同理心特質的調節效果
13. 越南臺商外派人員之領導部屬交換對職場偏差行為之影響--以外在工作價值與工作不安全感為調節變項
14. 學校運動教練工作不安全感、組織認同、工作倦怠與工作退縮行為：工作要求-資源模式之觀點
15. 景觀餐廳顧客認知價值對行為意圖與額外願付價格之影響
 
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：519（臺灣：504，外國：15） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2516201 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68315188
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上