建構國軍人員績效評估指標之研究 –以陸軍基層連隊士官為例

國軍負有保家衛國之使命，為此必須組建戰力以肆應敵情。而「人」係為戰力之核心，若人力流失恐致無法達成使命。然而國軍現行的人員績效評估機制僅以考評者的主觀思維給予評價，其不客觀公正的評估模式，降低官兵對於國軍的認同感，係為人員離退因素之一。故此，本研究旨在探討國軍人員績效評估中的功績獎點作業，藉由考評者（主官）與受評者（士官）在評估權重上的差異，建構公正且客觀的陸軍基層連隊士官績效評估指標。本研究係以《國軍勳賞獎懲作業實施要點》中的法規條文為基礎，透過探討人力資源管理相關文獻，建構初步的陸軍基層連隊士官績效評估指標架構。接續採用修正式德菲法經專家小組的共識，修正與確立績效評估指標架構。最後透過考評者與受評者進行各評估指標的重要性判斷，運用層級分析法衡量計算相對權重值，探討兩方立場不同下的評估權重差異。經分析結果後獲致以下結論：一、由修正式德菲法確立陸軍基層連隊士官績效評估指標架構，包含3項評估構面（任務績效、情境績效、資訊回饋）與11項評估指標。二、由層級分析法計算分析後，由受評者提供績效評估資訊的「資訊回饋」構面相對權重值，考評者與受考評者之數據皆在20%上下，具一定之重要性。本文因此建議未來國軍在改革人員績效評估制度時，以科學化方式建構績效評估指標，並修訂20%之配比係由受評者提出績效評估資訊回饋，以達到公正且客觀的績效評估模式。

關鍵字

績效評估；績效指標；修正式德菲法；層級分析法；士官

並列摘要

The National Army has the mission of defending the country; therefore, it must form a combat force to respond to the enemy's situation. And "soldier" is the core of combat power. If the manpower is lost, the mission may not be achieved. However, the current personnel performance evaluation mechanism of the national army only gives evaluations based on the subjective thinking of the assessors. Its unobjective and unfair evaluation model reduces the recognition of members for the national army, which is one of the factors for member to leave. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the merit award points in the performance evaluation of the national army personnel, and to construct a fair and objective non-commissioned officer performance evaluation indicators of the army grass-roots company through the difference in the evaluation weight between the evaluator (chief officer) and the evaluatee (non-commissioned officer). This study is based on the laws and regulations in the "Key Points for the Implementation of Rewards and Punishments of the National Army ", and constructs a preliminary performance evaluation indicators structure for the non-commissioned officers of the Army's grass-roots company by discussing the relevant literature on human resource management. Continuing to adopt the modified delphi method, through consensus of the expert group, the structure of performance evaluation indicators was revised and established. Finally, through the evaluation of the importance of each evaluation index by the evaluator and the evaluatee, the relative ratio value is measured and calculated by the analytic hierarchy process, and the difference in the evaluation weight of the two parties under different positions is discussed. After analyzing the results, the following conclusions were drawn: 1. The modified Delphi method establishes the performance evaluation index structure of the non-commissioned officers in the Army’s compamy, including 3 evaluation dimensions (task performance, contextual performance, information feedback) and 11 evaluation indicators. 2. The "information feedback" aspect of performance evaluation information provided by the evaluator is of certain importance in the evaluation ratio of both the evaluator and the evaluator being around 20%. As a result, this study suggested that when reforming the personnel performance evaluation system in the future, the National Army should construct performance evaluation indicators in a scientific way, and revise the 20% ratio to give feedback of the provide performance evaluation information by the evaluate, so as to achieve a fair and objective performance evaluation model.