庇護工場評鑑指標之研究：策略地圖的觀點

李靆鎂

指導教授 ： 鄭勝分

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/社會教育學系在職進修碩士班/碩士(2012年)

摘要

因應人權保障，2007年所修訂之身心障礙者權益保障法，庇護工場評鑑列為法定業務，主管機關以評鑑來瞭解執行績效，期能提升績效。然各界反彈及質疑不斷。故本研究以臺北市庇護工場評鑑指標為對象進行實證探討，設定四個研究問題：瞭解庇護工場評鑑現況為何？瞭解合宜的庇護工場評鑑指標為何？探究以策略地圖檢核庇護工場評鑑指標的可行性為何？對現行庇護工場評鑑指標提出可行建議。
本研究分六階段實施進行原指標歸類為策略地圖的四大構面，第一階段焦點座談、第二階段以立意抽樣選擇臺北市所有庇護工場進行問卷調查、第三階段進行專家問卷調查，第四階段與本研究歸類作比較，完成庇護工場策略地圖指標，第五階段與新北市指標及策略地圖無形資產價值作比較，即形成庇護工場策略地圖，第六階段再與企業及NPO的策略地圖作比較，即完成本研究實施。
研究結論分參大項敘述，壹、臺北市評鑑現況的SWOT分析，優勢：較多庇護員工的庇護工場成績較優、母機構較大之庇護工場評鑑成績較優、目前評鑑流程已發展周延且配套多、目前指標的發展量多且細緻、庇護員工管理指標多是有助評鑑發展。劣勢：小機構資源較少評鑑成績較不佳、員工對庇護工場目標不清不利發展、評鑑考核之時程太近耗費資源、部分指標的內容不妥易受質疑、缺乏回應性指標客觀性不夠、四大構面不平衡不利長遠發展。機會：成績全面提升是調整評鑑方式的時機點、雙目標的共識是發展共同願景的好時機、引介企管概念是穩定庇護工場與發展的好時機。四、威脅：質疑庇護工場定位不明、成效說不清致外界質疑績效不彰、非協力合作的夥伴關係限制庇護工場的發展、外在的辨識度不高難受認同。貳、庇護工場評鑑指標合宜性的探討之結論，一、評鑑指標的調整：平衡四大構面、增加回應性指標、發掘各構面策略連結的價值。二、策略地圖連結無形資產價值的結論。參、策略地圖具有檢核評鑑指標的可行性：可彰顯庇護工場特色的價值、方便使用於庇護工場績效檢核的工具。
本研究建議：壹、庇護工場評鑑現況研究結果建議：發展認證模式取代評鑑監督機制、運用經常性輔導的配套機制提昇小機構績效、引企業優勢結合服務以強化庇護工場之價值、目標自決破除定位不明的迷思、提高庇護工場辨識度以提昇服務認同及訂單績效、以顧客服務概念建立與主管機關間夥伴關係才能提升自主權、持續以雙目標為願景提升庇護工場績效、加強全員策略行動之課程以提高目標達成、增強使命感教育強化組織及人力資本。貳、合宜庇護工場指標為何的研究結果建議：建立具模式的指標架構以輔認證模式之發展、指標的構面平衡以利永續發展、運用回應性指標使指標內容更趨時代潮流。參、運用策略地圖檢核指標可行性之研究結果建議：重新思考以策略地圖建立評鑑指標。
未來研究建議可擴大探討庇護工場評鑑制度、庇護工場認證模式、庇護工場成效管理、庇護工場經營管理模式，亦可參考本研究建立之庇護工場策略地圖，選擇幾家庇護工場進行個案深度研究。

關鍵字

庇護工場 ； 評鑑指標 ； 策略地圖

並列摘要

Response to human rights protection, People with Disabilities Rights Protection Act was amended in 2007, and sheltered workshop evaluation has been a statutory services. The competent authority wishing to improve the performance understands and carries out the performance by evaluation. However all circles rebound and query constantly. Therefore, this study is empirical evaluation of sheltered workshop in Taipei. Set four research questions: To understand what is the status of sheltered workshop evaluation? To understand what is appropriate evaluation indicators of sheltered workshops? To explore whether it is feasible to check sheltered workshops evaluation by strategy map? And provide the feasible recommendations for evaluation indicators of sheltered workshop.
The study is divided into six stages for evaluation indicators to the strategy map with four dimensions. The first stage is focus groups method. The second stage is to conduct a questionnaire survey of all sheltered workshops in Taipei City by purposive sampling options.
The third stage is expert survey. The fourth stage is to make comparison with this study, and completes strategy map indicators of sheltered workshop. Fifth stage is to make comparison with the indicators of New Taipei City and intangible assets of strategy map, and forms sheltered workshop strategy map. The sixth stage is to make comparison with the enterprise and NPO's strategy map, and then finish the study.
Major items of study findings described in three parameters. First, the strengths of the SWOT of evaluate status in Taipei City are that the performance of sheltered workshop with more sheltered employee is excellent, the result of larger parent body evaluation is excellent, the evaluation process is complete, the development of indicators is various and detailed, and shelter staff management indicators will help the development of evaluation. The weaknesses are that small institutions with fewer resources would get poorer grade on evaluation, the unclear explanation of effects would cause doubts in society, it would waste resources because of the too close time between evaluations, some inappropriate contents of evaluation would easily cause suspicion, and the objectivity is not strong enough for the lack of response to indicators. Second, the conclusion of suitability of evaluation indicators for sheltered workshops are that to commend the suitability of indicators, to make the four dimensions more balanced after adjusting, to add response indicators, to develop the value after linking all indexes. Third, the possibility of strategy map taken as the evaluation indicator are that it can show the value of the sheltered workshop’s feature, and it is a convenient tool for management in effect of sheltered workshop.
This study suggests that: I. About the status of sheltered workshop evaluation findings: To replace the evaluation oversight mechanisms with development of certification model. The use of regular counseling support mechanisms enhance the performance of small organizations. Cited a combination of business services to strengthen the value of sheltered workshops. Break the myth of self-determination by target location. Improve the sheltered workshop recognizable identity to improve service performance and order. To establish the concept of customer service and competent authorities between autonomies in order to enhance partnership. Double vision continues to enhance the sheltered workshops’ performance. Strengthen the program of the full policy action to improve achievement of the goals. Enhance the mission of education to strengthen the organizational and human capital. II, appropriate indicators of sheltered workshops findings suggest: Establish a model secondary authentication mode indicator framework for the development. Indicators of balance dimensions to facilitate sustainable development, The use of response indicators revised indicators to make it more consistent with the trend. III, the use of nuclear strategy map indicator check the feasibility of study results suggest: To rethink the strategy map to establish evaluation indicators.
Recommendations for future research can expand the assessment system of sheltered workshops, sheltered workshop certification model, effective management of sheltered workshops, sheltered workshop management model. May also refer to the establishment of strategy map in this study sheltered workshops. Choose a few case-depth study of sheltered workshops.

並列關鍵字

sheltered workshop ； evaluation indicator ； strategy map

參考文獻

吳安妮，2004，〈平衡計分卡在公務機關實務探討〉，載於林嘉誠（編），《政府績效評估》，臺北市：行政院研究發展考核委員會編，頁115-135。

吳明珠，2011a，〈庇護工場轉型社會企業之可行性研究〉，國立師範大學社會教育與文化行政在職進修碩士專班論文。

吳綵玲，2007，〈老人養護機構評鑑的制度化過程-以台北市歷年評鑑指標變遷為例〉，靜宜大學青少年兒童福利學系碩士論文。

郭亞陵，2008，〈社會企業運作方式及可行性分析-以臺北市庇護工場為例〉。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文。

Brooks, A.C..2009.“Social Entrepreneurship: A Modern Approach to Social Value Creation. ” Measuring Social Value ,65-84.