臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究以平衡計分卡觀念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合理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合理性，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 objective of the study is to apply the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) concept to establish the performance management system for the government organization. In addition, we also further investigate the objectivity of measurement indexes and the consensus of organizational members in the case organization. We used BSC and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to examine the appropriation of the performance management system for the government organization in Taiwan. The results not only can rich the insufficiency of prior literature, but also provide better insights into the current performance management system for the case organization. In addition, it may offer lessons for the future of the relevant government organizations when they design similar performance management systems.
We found that the case organization considered the “customer perspective” was the most important. However, there are no measurement indexes of customer perspective in current performance management system of the case organization. Besides, there exists significant difference of the weight for measurement indexes between current performance management system and AHP, but there is no difference of weights identified by the assessment staff from those identified by the assessed staff. It indicates that measurement indexes are not reasonable, but organizational members have a common consensus on the measurement of the performance management system.

中文摘要……………………………………………………………………I
英文摘要……………………………………………………………………II
誌 謝…………………………………………………………………………III
目 錄…………………………………………………………………………IV
圖目錄………………………………………………………………………V
表目錄………………………………………………………………………VI
壹、緒 論……………………………………………………………………1
一、研究動機與目的………………………………………………………1
二、研究架構………………………………………………………………3
貳、個案機關簡介…………………………………………………………5
一、個案機關背景…………………………………………………………5
二、現行績效管理制度……………………………………………………6
參、文獻探討與研究假說…………………………………………………10
一、平衡計分卡在政府機關應用之相關文獻……………………………10
二、平衡計分卡衡量指標權重設定之相關文獻…………………………13
三、發展研究假說…………………………………………………………14
肆、研究方法………………………………………………………………17
一、研究樣本與資料來源…………………………………………………17
二、研究模型與分析方法…………………………………………………17
伍、研究結果與分析………………………………………………………23
一、建構個案機關之平衡計分卡…………………………………………23
二、層級分析法權重計算結果……………………………………………26
三、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之關
係……………………………………………………………………………32
四、考核人員與被考核人員認定的衡量指標權重之關係………………34
陸、結論與建議……………………………………………………………37
一、結 論……………………………………………………………………37
二、管理意涵與建議………………………………………………………38
三、研究限制與未來研究方向……………………………………………40
附錄 層級分析法專家問卷…………………………………………………42
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………50

行政院人事行政局，2005，行政院暨地方各級行政機關94年實施績效獎金及績效管理計畫作業手冊。
吳安妮，2002，平衡計分卡在公務機關的應用，行政院研究發展考核委員會研發創新與策略運用學術研討會。
吳明通，2002，企業導入平衡計分卡之績效研究：以帝強鋼鐵為例，國立中山大學高階經營碩士論文。
李興楨，2003，交通部平衡計分卡應用之研究，國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
周齊武、吳安妮、Kamal Haddad與施能錠，2001，探索實施平衡計分卡可能遭遇之問題，會計研究月刊，第183期：63-74。
周文賢，2002，多變量統計分析—SAS/STAT使用方法，臺北市：智勝文化。
房新祐，2005，以層級分析法輔助公部門建立績效評估指標及其對績效管理之運用，第10屆全國公共行政博碩士生論文發表會，臺北：政治大學公共行政學系。
於嘉玲，2001，以平衡計分卡觀點探討公務機關績效評估制度—以僑務委員會為例，私立淡江大學會計學系碩士論文。
林俊宏、曾國雄與任維廉，2005，利用VIKOR方法解決企業資源規劃系統評選問題，農業與經濟，34：69-90。
邱永和、戴肇洋與詹乾隆，2005，政府機關引進企業績效評估作法之研究，行政院研究發展考核委員會編印。
徐木蘭，1999，360度績效評估是政府部門的胎盤素，考銓季刊，第18期：28-30。
陳盈彰，2003，以AHP輔助平衡計分卡建立指標及策略分工之研究，國立交通大學工業工程與管理學程碩士論文。
陳淑玲，2005，運用層級分析法於平衡計分卡指標權重之設定─以某醫院之護理部門為例，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。
葉珍利，2003，公立教學醫院實施平衡計分卡制度成效之個案研究，國立臺灣大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
臺北市政府捷運工程局，2005，捷運統計年報。
劉正田、林維珩與袁玉珠，2002，公共工程預算執行之策略性績效衡量指標：平衡計分卡之應用，當代會計，第3卷第2期：149-181。
劉建良，2004，以商業智慧觀點探討電腦週邊產品ODM代工供應商關鍵評選因素，實踐大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
劉昶光，2004，國家檔案管理績效評估之再造工程：以平衡計分卡模式研究，國立臺北大學會計學系碩士論文。
劉順仁與郭俐君，2004，建立非營業特種基金績效衡量指標之研究，行政院研究發展考核委員會與行政院主計處編印。
鄭鴻彬，2004，以平衡計分卡理念建立績效管理指標之研究：以公務人力發展中心為例，國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文。
鄧振源與曾國雄，1989，層級分析法（AHP）的內涵特性與應用（上），中國統計學報，第27卷6期：5-22。
鄧振源與曾國雄，1989，層級分析法（AHP）的內涵特性與應用（下），中國統計學報，第27卷7期：1-20。
鍾權宏，2002，應用分析層級程序法於我國政府採購績效評估指標之研究，國立東華大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
羅煜翔，2003，以平衡計分卡推動公部門組織策略性績效衡量制度之探討：以國立中正文化中心為例，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。
嚴秀茹，1997，360度績效評估方法初探：多角化評估與管理才能發展， 1997年企業管理國際研究會論文集，臺北：東吳大學企業管理學系，75-84。
Albayrak, E., and Y. C. Erensal. 2004. Using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to improve human performance: An application of multiple criteria decision making problem. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 15 (4): 491-503.
Banker, R. D., H. Chang, and M. J. Pizzini. 2004. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of performance measures linked to strategy. The Accounting Review 79 (1): 1-23.
Banuelas, R., and J. Antony. 2004. Six sigma or design for six sigma? The TQM Magazine 16: 250-263.
Bush, P. 2005. Strategic performance management in government: Using the balanced scorecard. Cost Management 19 (3): 24-31.
Carmona, S., and A. Gronlund. 2003. Measures vs. action: The balanced scorecard in Swedish Law Enforcement. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 23 (11/12): 1475-1496.
Chan, Y-C. L. 2004. Performance measurement and adoption of balanced scorecards: A survey of municipal governments in the USA and Canada. The International Journal of Public Sector Management 17 (2/3): 204-221.
Chan, Y-C. L. 2002. The benefits of balance. CMA Management 76 (9): 48-50.
Denton, G. A., and B. White. 2000. Implementing a balanced-scorecard approach to managing hotel operations. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 41 (1): 94-107.
Eagle, K., T. C. Cooke, and T. S. C. Rossi. 2004. Translating strategy into result. Government Finance Review 20 (5): 16-27.
Elefalk, K. 2001. The balanced scorecard of the Swedish police service. Total Quality Management 12 (7/8): 958-966.
Ellingson, D. A., and J. R. Wambsganss. 2001. Modifying the approach to planning and evaluation in governmental entities: A “balanced scorecard” approach. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management 13 (1): 103-120.
Fletcher, H. D., and D. B. Smith. 2004. Managing for value: Developing a performance measurement system integrating economic value added and the balanced scorecard in strategic planning. Journal of Business strategies 21 (1): 1-17.
Gumbus, A., and B. Lyons. 2002. The balanced scorecard at Philips electronics. Strategic Finance 84 (5): 45-49.
Hafeez, K., Y. Zhang, and N. Malak. 2002. Determining key capabilities of a firm using analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Production Economics 76: 39-51.
Ho, S-J. K., and Y-C. L. Chan. 2002. Performance measurement and the implementation of balanced scorecards in municipal governments. The Journal of Government Financial Management 51 (4): 8-19.
Holmstrom, B., and P. Milgrom. 1991. Multitask principal-agent analyses: Incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 7: 24-52.
Huang, S-M., I-C. Chang, S-H. Li, and M-T. Lin. 2004. Assessing risk in ERP projects: Identify and prioritize the factors. Industrial Management + Data Systems 104 (8/9): 681-688.
Irwin, D. 2002. Strategy mapping in the public sector. Long Range Planning 35 (6): 637-647.
Ittner, C. D., and D. F. Larcker. 1998. Innovations in performance measurement: Trends and research implications. Journal of Management Accounting Research 10: 205-238.
Ittner, C. D., D. F. Larcker, and M. W. Meyer. 2003. Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: Evidence from a balanced scorecard. The Accounting Review 78 (3): 725-758.
Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 1996. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 2000. The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 2004. Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Lang, S. S. 2004. Balanced scorecard and government entities. The CPA Journal 74 (6): 48-52.
Lawrie, G., I. Cobbold, and J. Marshall. 2004. Corporate performance management system in a devolved UK government al organization. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 53 (3/4): 353-370.
Liedtka, S. L. 2005. Analytic hierarchy process and multi-criteria performance management systems. Cost Management 19 (6): 30-38.
Lin, S-C., G-S. Liang, and K-D. Ye. 2005. A survey investigation of airports as distribution centers: A strategic advantage perspective. International Journal of Management 22 (3): 396-414.
Lipe, M. G., and S. E. Salterio. 2000. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of common and unique performance measures. The Accounting Reviews 75 (3): 283-298.
Ngai, E. W. T. 2003. Selection of web sites for online advertising using the AHP. Information and Management 40 (4): 233-242.
Niven, P. R. 2002. Balanced Scorecard Step-by-step: Maximizing Performance and Maintaining Results. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Papalexandris, A., G. Ioannou, and G. P. Prastacos. 2004. Implementing the balanced scorecard in Greece: A software firm’s experience. Long Range Planning 37 (4): 351-366.
Piotrowski, S. J., and D. H. Rosenbloom. 2002. Non-mission-based values in results-oriented public management: The case of freedom of information. Public Administration Review 62 (6): 643-657.
Potthoff, S. O., D. Olson, N. Thompson, and M. Kissner. 1999. Long term care management: A balanced performance measurement system. Journal of Strategic Performance Measurement 31: 16-22.
Saaty, T. L. 1999. Decision making for leaders: The analytical hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L., and L. G. Vargas. 2001. Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Massachusetts: Luwer Academic.
Searcy, D. L. 2004. Aligning the balanced scorecard and a firm’s strategy using the analytic hierarchy process. Management Accounting Quarterly 5 (4): 1-10.
Slovic, P., and D. MacPhillamy. 1974. Dimensional commensurability and cue utilization in comparative judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human performance 11: 172-194.
Smith, M. 2000. Strategic management accounting: The public sector challenge. Management accounting 78 (1): 40-43.
Snehamay Khasnabis, M.ASCE, E. Alsaidi, L. Liu, and R. D. Ellis. 2002. Comparative study of two techniques of transit performance assessment: AHP and GAT. Journal of Transportation Engineering 128 (6): 499-508.
Wilson, C., D. Hagarty, and J. Gauthier. 2003. Results using the balanced scorecard in the public sector. Journal of Corporate Real Estate 6 (1): 53-63.
Wisniewski, M., and S. Olafsson. 2004. Developing balanced scorecards in local authorities: A comparison of experience. International Journal of Productivity and performance Management 53 (7): 602-610.
Yang, C-C., L-Y. Cheng, and C. W. Yang. 2005. A study of implementing BSC in non-profit organizations: A case study of private hospital. Human Systems Management 24 (4): 285-300.
Yoon, Y., and K. S. Im. 2005. An evaluation system for IT outsourcing customer satisfaction using the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Global Information Management 13 (4): 55-78.
Youngblood, A. D., and T. R. Collins. 2003. Addressing balanced scorecard trade-off issues between performance metrics using multi-attribute utility theory. Engineering Management Journal 15 (1): 11-17.
Zelman, W. N., G. H. Pink, and C. B. Matthias. 2003. Use of the balanced scorecard in healthcare. Journal of Health Care Finance 29 (4): 1-16.
Zhu, Z., J. Roge, X. Wang, and L. Rydl. 2005. Exploring job opportunities for unemployed workers in China: An analytic hierarchy process application. International Journal of Management 22 (1): 17-27.