隨著全球化的衝擊、資訊科技的快速發展、知識經濟時代的變遷、公民多元化的需求與選擇等因素，促使公共事務的複雜化與多元化，在這種迅速變遷與多元的環境中，官僚組織的運作方式已經無法滿足知識經濟時代的需求。由政府與非政府組織、國際與國內、中央與地方以及民間社會各階層、各種力量結合的網絡組織應運而生。如同官僚組織是工業經濟時代出現的產物，網絡組織的出現是知識經濟時代全球化潮流下的產物。 這種政府與民間組織之間的多元互動的網絡關係，由於主要的互動基礎不在於權威，而是資訊、知識、人力資源與技術的交流，同時政府扮演的角色已由直接提供公共服務轉變為公共價值的產生或催生者，也因而使得公共網絡在管理與績效評估方式上與層級節制組織明顯不同，因而如何有效管理網絡以創造公共價值，以及網絡運作的績效評估成為公共管理者要思考的議題。有鑑於公共網絡或網絡式組織對於政策制定與執行的影響力增加，公共網絡管理者面對不同於傳統單一官僚組織的管理問題與權力運作方式，有必要發展相關議題的討論。本文將針對公共網絡的形成背景、意涵、型態、管理方式與績效評估逐一探討。 本文對於網絡類型的觀點，是採取Robert Agranoff的觀點，將網絡根據參與者之間的互動過程與其所欲達到的目的，區分為四種主要的類型，資訊網絡、發展網絡、外展網絡、行動網絡。至於網絡的管理績效評估可從互動結果、互動過程與網絡管理能力三個面向評估，互動結果的標準也包括事後滿意度、雙贏或多贏標準；互動過程則著重在互動過程的品質與決策民主；網絡管理者能力的評估包括對於網絡互動進度、成本的掌握，非政府組織提供資訊可信度的判斷、對於參與者遵守互動規則的掌控。 　　由於目前對於網絡管理的評估仍以理論建構為主，實務經驗的累積仍偏少，雖然在衡量績效時，評估者多會利用不同形式的指標，惟指標的建構需輔以質化與量化的研究途徑，因而本文將於後續研究發展指標建構與測量途徑來探討網絡管理的績效。

　　Historically governments have collaborated extensively with private firms, associations, and charitable organizations to accomplish public goals and deliver public services. The rise of government by network represents the confluence of several influential trends that are altering the shape of public sectors worldwide. There are globalization trend, impact of digital revolution, transformation of bureaucratic organization perspectives, growth of the third-party governments, rise of joined-up governments and various consumer demands. As government relies more and more on third parties to deliver services, its management performance depends ever more on its ability to mange partnerships and to hold its partners accountable. The major objective in this paper is to discuss the nature of theoretical perspectives of public network and its management performance management. Thus, the paper is divided into four major parts. Part one explains why public network or network government is on the rise. Part two discusses the origins and concept of public network and then compares differences of bureaucracies and network. Then, part three examines the characteristics and values of concepts of network; the different types of public networks; the possible strategies for network management, and the problem of network management evaluation. Finally, the author presents some conclusions and policy recommendations. Indeed, there are very few places for public officers to turn to learn more about managing public networks. More specifically, it is more important to learn how to manage a government composed more and more of networks instead of people and resources.