臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　在人力資源管理的各項議題中，績效考核對於員工而言是一件非常重要的事情，也是組織掌握內部狀態與激勵人員的重要管理工具，例如考核的結果就與獎金發放與內部升遷等息息相關。而在進行績效考核時，所採用的評分方式與計算方法會直接影響結果，進而影響目的之達成。
　　本研究以個案公司現行年終績效考核辦法為基礎，首先以語意變數進行績效考核之評分，再利用合適的模糊加權平均方法計算最後績效考核之評比結果。採用語意變數進行績效考核因較貼近人們的思維與習慣，而有較容易施行、較容易理解與較富有彈性的優點。然而，卻也伴隨著計算較為繁複的缺點。因此本研究特別探討當以語意變數進行績效考評時，如何以離散化的模糊算術近似方法求解模糊加權平均計算與績效評比的改良方法，達到降低計算複雜度與符合評比效度上之要求。
　　本研究除了以離散化的模糊算術近似方法求解外，也使用傳統的先解模糊方法進行評比，與本文所提的方法加以比較。可發現評比結果的排名順序雖然並未有不同，但傳統方法解模糊後所得之員工整體績效成績會有明顯偏離的情況。經由實證結果發現，離散化的模糊算術近似方法能夠較傳統的先解模糊方法改善個案公司考核結果的效度，是一種值得推廣的方法。

　　Performance appraisal is an important issue for human resource management. It aims to manage the company’s internal operations and motivate the workers’ performance, and also lays a direct impact on the employee’s bonuses and promotion. Therefore, the method of appraisal and calculation would deeply influence the result and further to achieve the objectives of appraisal.
　　This study is based on the case company's annual appraise performance. First, the linguistic variables were applied to grade the extent of the scale for each question in the appraisal and the appropriate fuzzy interval approximation was proposed. There are several reasons to apply linguistic variable to this study in consideration of the advantages of its similar thinking patterns and habits to human beings, which is easier to carry out, more apprehensible and more flexible. However, the complicated calculation has also become its disadvantage. In order to decrease the degree of the calculation complication and to satisfy the effectiveness, this study proposed a fuzzy discretize approximation approach to improve of the calculating performance while linguistic variable is exerted in the performance appraisal.
　　A comparison has been made between discretized fuzzy arithmetic and the traditional de-fuzzy method. Although the orders of the results in performance appraisal are the same, but the individual result in traditional de-fuzzy method is deviated after weighted average. It also found that discretized fuzzy arithmetic tend to be more effective than the traditional one. The company is commonly encouraged to adopt discretized fuzzy arithmetic to improve the effectiveness for the performance appraisal result.

中文摘要 iv
英文摘要 v
誌謝 vi
目錄 vii
表目錄 ix
圖目錄 xi
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 2
1.3 研究範圍 2
1.4 研究流程 2
第二章 文獻探討 4
2.1 績效考核 4
2.1.1 績效考核的定義 4
2.1.2 績效考核之動機與目的 5
2.1.3 績效考核之程序 6
2.1.4 訂定考核標準 7
2.1.5 績效考核之相關應用 7
2.2 多屬性決策方法 8
2.2.1 多準則決策的定義 8
2.2.2 多準則決策方法的種類 9
2.2.3 多屬性決策方法 10
2.2.4 多屬性決策方法之種類 10
2.3 模糊理論 12
2.3.1 傳統集合與模糊集合 12
2.3.2 模糊數 13
2.3.3 三角模糊數 14
2.3.4 α-割集 15
2.3.5 模糊語意變數 16
2.3.6 解模糊 17
2.3.7 模糊排序 18
2.4 模糊多屬性決策之相關應用 19
第三章 模式建置 21
3.1 個案公司簡介 21
3.2 深度訪談法 22
3.2.1 研究問題之描述 22
3.2.2 質化研究 23
3.3 模糊多屬性評估模式建立 24
3.3.1 決定考核指標 25
3.3.2 定義模糊語意變數與模糊數 27
3.3.3 進行員工績效考核之評估 29
3.3.4 計算模糊績效評估數值 30
3.3.5 進行部門內最終排序 35
第四章 實證研究 36
4.1 離散化模糊區間近似法 36
4.2 傳統先解模糊方法 41
4.3 兩種方法之差異比較 44
第五章 結論與建議 46
5.1 研究結論 46
5.2 研究建議 47
5.2.1 對個案公司之建議 47
5.2.2 後續研究之建議 48
參考文獻 49

中文部分
1.丁志達（2003），績效管理，揚智文化事業股份有限公司，台北。
2.石智源（2004），運用模糊多屬性決策於平衡計分卡之績效評估，碩士學位論文，雲林科技大學，企業管理研究所。
3.沙克強（1998），合理化人事考核及薪資制度，瑞霖企業管理顧問有限公司，台北。
4.林高正、鄧凱年、許惠馨（2008），具模糊權數之最小生成樹的期望值模式，技術報告，南台科技大學，工業管理研究所。
5.林能敬譯（1990），績效考核與輔導實務，清華管理科學圖書中心，台北。
6.孫宗瀛、楊英魁（2005），Fuzzy控制：理論、實作與應用，全華科技圖書股份有限公司，台北。
7.張火燦（1996），策略性人力資源管理，揚智文化事業股份有限公司，台北。
8.陳國嘉（1992），如何績效考核，財團法人省屬行庫中小企業聯合輔導中心出版，台北。
9.陳國鐘（1991），企業管理制度設計範典，永慶出版社，台北。
10.黃英忠（1997），人力資源管理，三民書局，台北。
11.黃敏宗（2004），以平衡計分卡建構逆向物流業者績效評估模式之研究，碩士學位論文，南台科技大學，工業管理研究所。
12.黃勝輝（2003），國民小學教師績效考核與工作態度之研究，碩士學位論文，嘉義大學，國民教育研究所。
13.舒毓聖（2006），連續性生產事業導入標準成本制度對於績效考核之影響評估-以永豐餘造紙公司為例，碩士學位論文，中山大學，企業管理研究所。
14.鄧凱年（2007），具模糊權數之最小生成樹問題，碩士學位論文，南台科技大學，工業管理研究所。


英文部分
15.Adamo, J. M. (1980), Fuzzy decision trees, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 8 (3), 207-220.
16.Berk, A. R. (1986), Performance assessment: Methods and applications. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
17.Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. E., and Giacchetta, G. (2006), A fuzzy-QFD approach to supplier selection, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 12, 14-27.
18.Byars, L. L. and Rue, L. W. (1992), Management：Skills and application, McGraw-Hill Education, New York.
19.Carlsson, C. and Fuller, R. (2001), On possibilistic mean value and variance of fuzzy numbers, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 122 (2), 315-326.
20.Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1978), Operations on fuzzy numbers, J. Systems Science 9 (6), 613-626.
21.Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1980), Fuzzy sets and systems：Theory and applications, Academic Press, New York.
22.Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1987), The mean value of a fuzzy number, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 24 (3), 279-300.
23.Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1989), Fuzzy sets, probability and measurement, European Journal of Operational Research 40 (2), 135-154.
24.Dubois, D. and Prade, H. (1997), The three semantics of fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 90 (2), 141-150.
25.Giachetti, R.E. and Young, R.E. (1997), A parametric representation of fuzzy numbers and their arithmetics operators, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 91 (2), 185-202.
26.Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. (1981), Multiple attribute decision making：Methods and applications, Springer-Verlag, New York.
27.Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. (1995), Multiple attribute decision making：An Introduction, Sage Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks.
28.Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M.M. (1985), Introduction to fuzzy arithmetic: Theory and applications, Van Nostrand, New York.
29.Kuo, Y. F. and Chen, P. C. (2007) Constructing performance appraisal indicators for mobility of the service industries using fuzzy delphi method, Expert Systems with Applications (Accept).
30.Kurtzberg, T. R., Naquin, C. E., and Belkin, L. Y. (2005), Electronic performance appraisals: The effects of e-mail communication on peer ratings in actual and simulated environments, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 98, 216-226.
31.Liang, H., Yang, K., Sun, Y., Yuan, J., Zhang, H., and Zhang, Z. (2006), Decision support for choice optimal power generation projects: Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on the electricity market, Energy Policy 34, 3359-3364.
32.Lilley, D. and Hinduja, S. (2007), Police officer performance appraisal and overall satisfaction, Journal of Criminal Justice 35, 137-150.
33.Liou, T. S. and Wang, M. J. (1992), Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 50 (3), 247-255.
34.Middlemist, R. D. (1981), Organizational behavior: Applied concepts, Science Research Association, Chicago.
35.Schuler, R. S (1990), Personnel and human resource management, 4th Ed l, MN : West Pub.
36.Schuler, R. S. (1992), Strategic human resources management: Linking the people with the strategic needs of the business, Organizational Dynamics 21 (1), 18-31.
37.Wang, C. H. and Chen, S. M. (2007), Appraising the performance of high school teachers based on fuzzy number arithmetic operations, Soft Computing-A Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies and Applications 12, 919-934.
38.Wang, X. and Kerre, E. E. (2001), Reasonable properties for the ordering of fuzzy quantities (I), Fuzzy Sets and Systems 118 (3), 375-385.
39.Yager, R. R. (1981), A procedure for ordering fuzzy subsets of unit interval, Information Sciences 24 (2), 143-161.
40.Yu, P. L. (1985), Multiple criteria decision making: Concepts, techniques and extensions, Plenum Press, New York.
41.Zadeh L. A. (1965), Fuzzy sets, Information and Control 8 (2), 338-353.
42.Zadeh, L. A. (1971), Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings, Information Sciences 3 (2), 177-200.
43.Zadeh, L. A. (1975), The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning I, II, III, Information Sciences 8 (2), 199-251; 8 (3), 301-357; 9 (1), 43-80.
44.Zeleny, M. (1982), Multiple criteria decision making, McGraw-Hill Company, New York.