為何公務人員不接受考績乙等？我國公務人員考績設計之檢討

現行我國公務人員考績制度常因為作業方式流於形式、考評結果不能真正表現出公務人員實際績效表現等因素為人詬病，而最常引起討論與爭論的制度是「年終考績考列甲等人數比率75%上限」之準強制分配規範，雖然本意是為避免考列甲等人數過於浮濫，但卻陷入了齊頭式平等，反而造成考核者直接以此比率規定做出考核決定之基準，而非真正考量受考人實際工作表現之考核亂象，無法真正發揮績效管理功能。觀諸過去研究幾乎都是著重於考列甲等相關問題探討，卻未從乙等角度切入，甲等浮濫之原因可能是因為公務人員不接受乙等，而非單純只是甲等比例問題。因此，本研究採用問卷調查法，藉由考績考列甲等與乙等之考績結果運用差異性，從較物質層面之考績獎金差異探討至心理層面對乙等之絕對排斥，以此作為問卷設計、資料蒐集、分析之依據。研究後得出以下結論：（一）多數公務人員不接受考績乙等之根本原因係因為自己認為乙等就是代表工作表現不好，且認為在他人觀感部分也是代表工作表現不好，以至於絕對排斥考列乙等；（二）刪除現行考列甲等之一般條件規定，使考列甲等非屬容易達成，亦有影響公務人員接受乙等意願；（三）公務人員從心理本質上，不願接受考績制度應依績效差異覈實考評之意旨。綜上，本研究在考績制度設計上提出三項建議：（一）改變現行考績結果以「甲、乙、丙、丁」呈現方式；（二）依不同機關性質訂定明確之考核標準或考核要件，明確區分各等級考績結果所應達成之績效標準；（三）重新檢視軍公教考核制度之設計，均應以覈實考評工作績效表現，並向公務人員重申績效考核之精神，以發揮考績實質功能。

關鍵字

考績乙等；考績設計；準強制分配；常態分配

並列摘要

The current performance appraisal system for civil servants in Taiwan is often criticized due to the fact that the operation method is a mere formality and the appraisal results cannot truly reflect the actual performance of civil servants. The key problem is the measure of “the quasi-mandatory distribution norm of 75% cap.” Although the measure is aimed to suppress the inflation of grade A rating, it has fallen into a sort of formal equality. That has caused the assessors to directly use that ratio as a benchmark for assessment. As a result, the appraisal does not really take the actual work performance into account. The performance management cannot be well functioning Most of previous studies concerned focused on the dimension of grade A rating, neglecting the dimension of grade B. The reason for the inflation of grade A may be that civil servants do not accept grade B, rather than simply the setting of ratio of grade A. Therefore, this study adopts the questionnaire research method, and uses the outcome differences caused by the two ratings, from material differences to psychological exclusion of grade B, for the design of the questionnaire. Based on the findings, this study suggests: (1) the fundamental reason why most civil servants do not accept grade B in performance appraisal is because they themselves believe that grade B means poor work performance, and believe that their colleagues do think so, hence they absolutely do not accept grade B ; (2) abolishing the current general conditions for rating grade A, which makes it difficult to attain grade A rating and also affects the willingness of civil servants to accept grade B; (3) civil servants are psychologically unwilling to accept the design that the performance appraisal should verify the work performance variation. To sum up, this study puts forward three recommendations for the design of the performance appraisal system: (1) change the current format of performance rating "A, B, C, D"; (2) differentiate assessment standards or assessment requirements for different kinds of agencies, and clearly set required standards for attaining different performance ratings; (3) re-examine the design of performance appraisal system for the military and public education personnel, making it in line with work performance, and reiterate the spirit of the performance evaluation to the civil servants, so as to realize the substantial function of performance appraisal.