Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159046
|
| Title: | 初探公務人員身分對人事行政程序繁文縟節之感知差異 ─ 以人事人員與非人事人員為例
A Preliminary Study on the Perceived Differences in Bureaucratic Procedures of Personnel Administration between Personnel and Non-Personnel Officers in the Civil Service System |
| Authors: | 高嫆淑
Kao, Jung-Shu |
| Contributors: | 董祥開
Dong, Hsiang-Kai
高嫆淑
Kao, Jung-Shu |
| Keywords: | 繁文縟節
知覺與偏誤
人事行政程序
課責
回應性
Red tape
Perception and bias
Personnel administrative procedures
Accountability
Responsiveness |
| Date: | 2025 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-09-01 14:51:49 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 為確認公務人員身分對於人事行政程序繁文縟節是否存在感知差異，並釐清差異存在之可能原因，本研究以人事人員與非人事人員兩大類身分為研究對象，透過台灣文官調查第四期（TGBS-IV）次級資料輔以訪談進行分析。
研究結果顯示：公務人員身分對人事行政程序繁文縟節感知差異產生影響，其中非人事人員比人事人員更易感知到人事行政程序的繁文縟節。其次，在繁文縟節3項構面─繁瑣負擔、必要性及效能性（達成目標程度）的感知程度上，人事人員均高於非人事人員。另外，本研究亦發現人事行政程序繁瑣與必要性的感知程度具有負向連動關係，以及人事人員與非人事人員均認知到內部規定對人事行政程序繁文縟節之影響。
對此，本研究提出建立人事行政行為的基準規範、人事行政程序再簡化及藉由資通訊科技輔助轉型人力資源管理等實務建議，並提出將非正式規則對人事行政程序繁文縟節影響予以量化驗證，作為未來研究方向。
To confirm whether there are perceptual differences in red tape in personnel administrative procedures among civil servants with different identities, and to clarify the possible causes of these differences, this study takes personnel staff and non-personnel staff as two major categories of research subjects, conducting analysis through secondary data from the Taiwan Government Bureaucrats Survey Phase IV (TGBS-IV) supplemented by interviews.
The research results show that civil servant identity has an impact on perceptual differences regarding red tape in personnel administrative procedures, with non-personnel staff being more likely to perceive red tape in personnel administrative procedures than personnel staff. Furthermore, regarding the perception levels of the three dimensions of red tape—bureaucratic burden, necessity, and effectiveness (degree of goal achievement)—personnel staff scored higher than non-personnel staff on all dimensions. Additionally, this study found a negative correlation between the perception levels of complexity and necessity in personnel administrative procedures, and both personnel staff and non-personnel staff recognized the impact of internal regulations on red tape in personnel administrative procedures.
In response to these findings, this study proposes practical recommendations including establishing benchmark standards for personnel administrative behavior, further simplification of personnel administrative procedures, and transforming human resource management through information and communication technology assistance. The study also suggests quantitative verification of the impact of informal rules on red tape in personnel administrative procedures as a future research direction. |
| Reference: | 壹、英文文獻
Allison, T., Puce, A., & McCarthy, G. (2000). Social perception from visual cues: role of the STS region. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(7), 267-278.
Amirkhanyan, A. A., H. J. Kim, & Lambright, K. T. (2014). The Performance Puzzle: Understanding the Factors Influencing Alternative Dimensions and Views of Performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), 1-34.
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social Psychology Seventh Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Baldwin, J. N. (1990). Perceptions of Public versus Private Sector Personnel and Informal Red Tape: Their Impact on Motivation. The American Review of Public Administration, 20(1), 7-28.
Baron, R. A., & Branscombe, N. R. (2012). Social Psychology. London: Pearson.
Baron, R. A., & D. Byrne (1991). Social psychology: Understanding human interaction. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Beckerman, W. (1956). Distance and the Pattern of Intra-European Trade. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 38(1), 31-40.
Benveniste, G. (1983). Bureaucracy (2nd Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Borry, E. L. (2016). A New Measure of Red Tape: Introducing the Three-Item Red Tape (TIRT) Scale. International Public Management Journal, 19(4), 573-593.
Bozeman, B. (1993). A Theory Of Government “Red Tape”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(3), 273-304.
Bozeman, B. (2000). Bureaucracy and Red Tape. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bozeman, B., & Feeney, M. K. (2011). Rules and Red Tape: A Prism for Public Administration Theory and Research. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Bozeman, B., & Scott, P. (1996). Bureaucratic Red Tape and Formalization: Untangling Conceptual Knots. The American Review of Public Administration, 26(1), 1-17.
Bozeman, B., Reed, P. N., & Scott, P. (1992). Red Tape and Task Delays in Public and Private Organizations. Administration & Society, 24(3), 290-322.
Buchanan, B. (1975). Red-Tape and the Service Ethic: Some Unexpected Differences Between Public and Private Managers. Administration & Society, 6(4), 423-444.
Bullough, E. (1912). Psychical Distance as a Factor in Art and an Aesthetic Principle. British Journal of Psychology, 5(2), 87-118.
Bullough, E. (1957). Aesthetics Lectures and Essays. London: Bowes & Bowes.
Decenzo, A. & Robbins, P. (2005). Personnel/Human Resource Management (pp. 33-46). Prentice Hall, India.
Feeney, M. K., & Bozeman, B. (2009). Stakeholder Red Tape: Comparing Perceptions of Public Managers and Their Private Consultants. Public Administration Review, 69(4), 710-726.
Gilbert, Charles E. (1959). The Framework of Administrative Responsibility. Journal of Politics, 21(3), 373-407.
Goodsell, C. (1984). The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
Gore, A. (1993). From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government that Works Better & Costs Less: Executive Summary: the Report of the National Performance Review. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Grèzes, J., & de Gelder, B. (2009). Social perception: Understanding other people's intentions and emotions through their actions. Social Cognition: Development, Neuroscience and Autism. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
Gutter, J. K. (2000). Miles’s Law. Defining Public Administration, 16, 151-153.
Håkanson, L. (2014). The role of psychic distance in international trade: A longitudinal analysis. International Marketing Review, 31(3), 210-236.
Herbert A. Simon. (1947). Administrative Behavior: a Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. Macmillan, USA.
Hornell, E., Vahlne, J-E., & Wiedersheim-Paul F. (1973). Export och utlandsetableringar. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Discenza, R. (2002). Perception differences of software success: Provider and user views of system metrics. Journal of Systems and Software, 63(1), 17-27.
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J-E. (1977). The Internationalization Process of the Firm: A Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market Commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23-32.
Johanson, J., & Wiedersheim-Paul F. (1975). The Internationalization of the Firm-Four Swedish Cases. Journal of Management Studies, 12(3), 305-323.
Jones, K. P., Arena, D. F., Nittrouer, C. L., Alonso, N. M., & Lindsey, A. P. (2017). Subconscious discrimination in the workplace: A vicious cycle. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 10(1), 51-76.
Kardes, F. R., Cronley, M. L., & Kim, J. (2006). Construal-Level Effects on Preference Stability, Preference-Behavior Correspondence, and the Suppression of Competing Brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 135–144.
Kaufman, H. (1977). Red Tape: Its Origins, Uses, and Abuses. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
Kaufmann, W., & Feeney, M. K. (2012). Objective Formalization, Perceived Formalization and Perceived Red Tape. Public Management Review, 14(8), 1195-1214.
Linnemann, H. (1966). An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows. The Economic Journal, 77(306), 366-368.
Marvel, J. D. (2016). Unconscious Bias in Citizens’ Evaluations of Public Sector Performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(1), 143-158.
Merton, R. K. (1940). Bureaucratic Structure and Personality. Social Forces, 18(4), 560-568.
Murray, B. (2016). The Unconscious Bias Trap: How Misconceptions About Unconscious Bias Can Trip Up Any Business. Effective Executive, 19(4), 20-26.
Noon, M. (2018). Pointless Diversity Training: Unconscious Bias, New Racism and Agency. Work, Employment and Society, 32(1), 198-209.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc.
Pandey, S. K., & Scott, P. G. (2002). Red Tape: A Review and Assessment of Concepts and Measures. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12(4), 553- 580.
Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. SanFrancisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Rainey, H. G., Pandey, S., & Bozeman, B. (1995). Research Note: Public and Private Managers’ Perceptions of Red Tape. Public Administration Review, 55(6), 567-574.
Ronald Humphrey. (1985). How Work Roles Influence Perception: Structural-Cognitive Processes and Organizational Behavior. American Sociological Review, 50(2), 242-252.
Rosenfeld, R. A. (1984). An Expansion and Application of Kaufman's Model of Red Tape: The Case of Community Development Block Grants. The Western Political Quarterly, 37(4), 603-620.
Rufus E. Miles, Jr. (1979). Miles's six other maxims of management. Organizational Dynamics, 8(1), 27-40.
Spencer, L. M. & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Stephan, E., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2010). Politeness and Psychological Distance: A Construal Level Perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 268–280.
Ulrich, D. (1997). Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for Adding Value and Delivering Results. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Ulrich, D., & Brockbank, W. (2005). The HR Value Proposition. Harvard Business Press.
Waldo, D. (1946). Government by Procedure. In F. M. Marx (Ed.), Elements of Public Administration (pp. 352-370). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Welch, E. W., & Pandey, S. K. (2007). E-Government and Bureaucracy: Toward a Better Understanding of Intranet Implementation and Its Effect on Red Tape. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(3), 379-404.
Werther, S. (2020). Red tape for whom? Understanding the positive and negative effects of red tape for different stakeholders. Tilburg University, the Netherlands.
Willett, C. (2001). Knowledge Sharing Shifts the Power Paradigm. In Morey, D., Maybury, M. T., & Thuraisingham, B. M. (Eds.), Knowledge Management: Classic and Contemporary Works (pp. 249-260). Cambridge, UK: The MIT Press.
貳、中文文獻
文崇一、楊國樞（2000）。訪問調查法。社會及行為科學研究法下冊。台北：東華。
史偉民（2014）。審美態度理論的再檢視。揭諦，26，27-58。
朱景鵬、林嘉琪（2011）。政府機關研究發展之現況與展望。研考雙月刊，35(5)，9-25。
吳秉恩（1986）。組織行為學。台北︰華泰文化事業。
吳泰成（2012）。落實公務人力政策及管理─行政院人事行政總處的規劃與展望。研考雙月刊，36(2)，151-156。
呂育誠（2005）。地方治理意涵及其制度建立策略之研究－兼論我國縣市推動地方治理的問題與前景。公共行政學報，14，1-38。
宋學文、蔡允棟（2004）。憲政改革與我國中央政府未來人事組織制度之發展：各國經驗的比較、分析與借鏡（考試院委託國立中正大學研究案），2004年，取自：https://www.exam.gov.tw/News_Content_table2.aspx?n=3854&s=28434。
李華民（1978）。現代人事管理。台北：中華書局。
林水波（1999）。彈性化政府的設計與評估。載於林水波（主編），政府再造。台北：智勝文化事業。
林水波、王崇斌、陳志瑋、石振國、張世杰、林錫銓、鄭錫鍇、周思廷、郭銘峰、邱靖鈜（2022）。政策倫理VS行政倫理。台北：五南圖書出版。
林水波、任可怡（1998）。人事服務理念之探討-評述全國行政單一窗口化方案。公務人員月刊，19，3-9。
施能傑（1993）。公務人事政策的改革課題：中立與民主、能力與分權。理論與政策，8(1)，33-48。
施能傑（2005年9月）。文官體系能力與政策競爭力：策略性人力資源管理觀點。發表於「強化文官核心能力：再造政府競爭力」學術研討會論文集。台北：行政院人事行政局。
施能傑（2012）。政府人事管理法令的管制品質分析。行政暨政策學報，55，1-30。
范麗娟（1994）。深度訪談簡介。戶外遊憩研究，7(2)，25-35。
孫同文、許耿銘（2017）。中央與地方人事制度分立之研究，2017年3月，取自：https://www.exam.gov.tw/News_Content_table2.aspx?n=3854&s=28491。
張火燦（1998）。策略性人力資源管理。台北：揚智文化事業出版。
張金鑑（1973）。人事行政學。台北：政大公企中心。
張春興（1996）。現代心理學。台北：台灣東華書局。
張潤書（1983）。行政學。台北：三民書局。
陳重安（2013）。規範與繁文縟節【評論 Rules and red tape: A prism for public administration theory and research, B. Bozeman 與 M. K. Feeney 著】。公共行政學報，44，161-166。
陳敦源、呂佳螢（2009）。循證公共行政下的文官調查：台灣經驗的觀點、方法、與實務意義。公共行政學報，31，187-225。
陳敦源、黃建勳（2019）。繁文縟節如何影響公共服務動機？2011年臺灣文官調查資料之分析。文官制度季刊，11(1)，35-71。
陳敦源、簡鈺珒（2018）。繁文縟節與組織績效：以臺灣作為個案觀察。文官制度季刊，10(4)，25-60。
曾冠球、胡龍騰、莊文忠、張鐙文、張智凱（2019）。位置決定腦袋？政府部門系統使用者角色差異下的資料協力意向。公共行政學報，57，39-82。
黃能鋒（2021）。公務人員職場評價之研究：以宜蘭縣政府為例。佛光大學／公共事務學系碩士論文，未出版，宜蘭縣。
黃賀（2015）。組織行為：影響力的形成與發揮。新北：前程文化事業。
黃榮護、葉益昌（2019）。型塑廉能治理的途徑：組織行為的觀點。文官制度季刊，11(4)，1-19。
楊和縉、余致力（2014）。我國高階文官職能培訓之研究。國家菁英季刊，40(10)，1-25。
萬文隆（2004）。深度訪談在質性研究中的應用。生活科技教育，37(4)，17-23。
董祥開、陳敦源、黃東益（2018）。台灣文官調查IV：公務人員風險偏好、服務動機、與決策類型之關係─建立一個勇於任事的政府（科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告），2018年6月，取自：https://srda.sinica.edu.tw/datasearch_detail.php?id=2913。
詹中原（編）（2002）。新公共管理：政府再造的理論與實務。台北：五南圖書出版。
趙其文（1997）。我國人事機構及人員統一管理析論。公務人員月刊，10，2-8。
劉光華（1996）。人事人員應有之新觀念及新作法。人事月刊，25(5)，36-43。
蔡良文（1999）。人事行政學。台北：五南圖書出版。
賴怡瑩（2005）。人事人員之角色變遷及核心能力。人事月刊，40(2)，61-66。
戴國良（2008）。組織行為學。台北：五南圖書出版。
戴國良（2010）。組織行為學─全方位理論架構與企業案例實戰。台北：五南圖書出版。
關中（2011）。文官治理：理念與制度革新。台北：考試院。
蘇偉業（2019）。我國另類人事體制下的另類文官制度發展：是否仍要另類下去？。政策與人力管理，10(1)，1-24。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
108256015 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108256015 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [公共行政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 601501.pdf | | 1575Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
