某政府機關績效管理制度之實證評估－－平衡計分卡及層級分析法之利用

An Empirical Investigation of the Governmental Performance Management System: Using the Balanced Scorecard and the Analytic Hierarchy Process

本研究以平衡計分卡觀念輔助建構政府機關之績效管理制度，並進一步就現行衡量指標權重設定之客觀性及組織成員的參與和共識性議題，進行相關實證分析，以平衡計分卡結合層級分析法，探討我國某政府機關現行績效管理制度之適切性，研究結果除可彌補相關文獻之不足外，亦可提供個案機關管理當局瞭解其制度之完整適切性，並作為相關政府機關未來在制訂及實施績效管理制度之參考。本研究結果指出，在平衡計分卡四大構面中，個案機關認為「顧客構面」最重要，其次為「財務構面」，但個案機關現行績效管理制度中，卻缺乏明確的顧客構面衡量指標。此外，現行績效管理制度衡量指標權重與層級分析法衡量指標權重具有顯著差異，而考核人員與被考核人員認定的衡量指標權重並無顯著差異，表示個案機關現行以考績委員會議多數決方式所決定之指標權重產生過於主觀的權數，但成員對於績效管理制度的衡量焦點與重心，已凝聚相同的認知與高度的共識。

The pressure of slow economic growth and limited resources forced government administrators to apply some modern private sector management tools to improve governmental performance. Of all the management tools designed to improve organization performance, the balanced scorecard is by far the most popular and has been adopted in a broad rang of industries from manufacturing to non-for-profit organizations. The balanced scorecard is a performance management system that aligns a company's strategy by balancing both financial and non-financial performance measures in decision making. The primary objective of the study is to apply the balanced scorecard and analytic hierarchy process to establish an appropriate model of the performance management system for the government organization in Taiwan. In addition, we also examine the cognition of weights for performance measures among organizational members in the government organization. The research site for this study is a government organization under the jurisdiction of Taipei City government. It is responsible for the planning, design and construction of mass rapid transit systems in the Taipei metropolitan area. The balanced scorecard was developed by Kaplan and Norton in 1992. It translates an organization’s mission and strategy into a set of performance measures that provided the framework for implementing its strategy. The balanced scorecard does not focus solely on achieving financial objectives. It also highlights the non-financial objectives that an organization must achieve to meet its financial objectives. However, the balanced scorecard provides valuable feedback on a variety of performance metrics, but it does not weight the relative importance of these metrics. A scorecard must be developed that appropriately weights and assigns scores to various measures. Proper determination of key performance indicators and relative weights in an efficient and effective way would be the critical success factor in applying the balanced scorecard. Recent literature indicates the Analytic Hierarchy Process can be used to help select the metrics of a scorecard and understand the relative importance of each metric. Although the balanced scorecard has been increasingly adopted by many governments worldwide, yet little or no attention has been paid to applying the balanced scorecard concept and Analytic Hierarchy Process in establishing governmental performance management system. Hence, in this study we apply the balanced scorecard concept to assist in establishing the performance management system and further use the Analytic Hierarchy Process to determine the relative weight of the performance measures of the performance management system in the government organization. The results not only can rich the insufficiency of prior literature, but also provide better insights into the current performance management system for the government organization. In addition, it may offer lessons for the future of the relevant government organizations when they design similar performance management systems. The results indicate that “customer perspective” was rated as the most important factor in evaluating performance, followed by “financial perspective”. However, there are no customer-related performance measures in current performance management system of the organization. It suggests that customer-related performance measures should be used in the governmental performance management system. In addition, there exists significant difference of the weights for performance measures between current performance management system and results from AHP, but there is no cognition difference of weights between the evaluators and the evaluated staffs. It indicates that the weights for performance measures are subjective, but organizational members have a common consensus on the measurement of the performance management system.