警察治安策略執行者對績效評核制度之態度研究

A Study on The Attitudes of Police Public Security Strategy Executors towards the Performance Appraisal System.

高繼鴻(Chi-Hung Kao)

指導教授 ： 許春金

國立臺北大學/社會科學學院/犯罪學研究所/碩士(2009年)

摘要

警政機關推動治安策略，多訂有犯罪偵防績效評核制度，並附以優渥之獎勵及嚴厲之懲處，要求執行人員能確實達到預期目標；而近年來警政單位逐漸摒除以往以客觀數據績效(發生率與破獲率)為導向的評核方式，改以民眾對治安的滿意度及民眾對警察服務的滿意度為評核方式。警察治安策略從早期消極的勤區查察，被動的犯罪偵查，轉為近年來積極推動為民服務、落實犯罪預防及問題導向的策略，爰研析我國重要治安策略之歷程及績效評核方式，有其重要意義。
本研究以質性深入訪談的方式，探討我國警察機關治安策略之績效評核制度，並採便利取樣方式，以實際執行治安策略績效評核之外勤警察人員為樣本，並為更了解各層級職務的看法，特別訪談不同職責之分局長、派出所所長、小隊長、偵查員、警員等實際受績效評核人員各2名，共計10名。研究發現如下：
一、受訪者對規劃治安策略之看法認為：(1)警察治安策略大同小異；(2)由專責單位規劃，達成目標設定應合理；(3)分析問題現況，參考歷史脈絡是有幫助；(4)對打擊犯罪有使命感，卻對治安策略缺乏共識。
二、受訪者對執行治安策略之態度方面：(1)傳統策略固定僵化，創新作為宣傳不足；(2)治安好壞取決民眾感受，警察服務態度是關鍵；(3)維護治安責無旁貸，支持全民拼治安；(4)落實聯防觀念，推行社區警政；(5)提高見警率及防衛空間設計有助改善治安。
三、受訪者對治安策略績效評核之意見：(1)執行治安策略項目繁多，績效評核期程漫無止盡；(2)績效評比增加工作份量及壓力；(3)犯罪統計不真實；(4)人事獎懲制度對受評核人應公平對待；(5)犯罪預防及為民服務能得到成就感。
因此，本研究提出以下建議：一、修正警察機關執行治安策略之績效考核制度；二、改進因績效評核產生犯罪統計不真實的措施；三、健全獎懲制度，提振團隊士氣；四、鼓勵全民參與犯罪預防、重視為民服務及治安滿意度。

關鍵詞：警察治安策略、組織績效管理、績效評核指標

關鍵字

警察治安策略 ； 組織績效管理 ； 績效評核指標

並列摘要

ABSTRACT
A Study of The Attitudes of Police Public Security Strategy
Executors towards the Performance Appraisal System
by
Kao, Chi-Hung
January 2009
ADVISOR(S)： Dr. SHEU, CHUEN-JIM
DEPARTMENT：Graduate School of Criminology
MAJOR：Criminology
DEGREE：Master of Law
While police authorities promote public security strategies, performance appraisal systems for crime prevention and detection, accompanied by generous reward and severe punishment, are commonly established, with a view to requesting police public security strategy executors to meet the expected target precisely. Police units in recent years gradually discard the previous objective data performance-oriented assessment in which the data are derived from the rates of crime occurrence and solution, and the current assessment is based on people's satisfaction with public order and the police services. Public security strategies used to be negative ground area patrol and passive crime investigation but now are aimed to actively promote public services, to implement crime prevention, and to become problem-oriented strategies. Accordingly, the study of the course of important public security strategies in our country and performance appraisal systems has its significance.
This study, with qualitatively deep interviews, explores the performance appraisal systems for the police public security strategies, and adopts convenience sampling in which the subjects are field personnel of the police who actually conduct the performance appraisal systems for the police public security strategies. In order to obtain a comprehensive understanding of opinions from various sections, 10 subjects of different duties who are actually assessed in terms of the performance appraisal systems for public security strategies are interviewed in particular. They are Chief of precinct, Chief of police office, Section Chief, inspectors, police officers and so on. The findings are listed as follows:
First, the interviewers’ opinions on planning public security strategies: (1) the strategies are more or less the same; (2) the strategies should be planned by a select unit to set reasonable and reachable goals; (3) analysis of present problems and reference of the history are helpful; (4) there is a strong sense of mission in the fight against crime, but a lack of consensus about public security strategies.
Second, the interviewers’ attitudes to the implementation of public security strategies: (1) the traditional strategies are rigid and innovation is not enough for propaganda; (2) whether the public order is good or bad lies in how people feel about it, and the police service attitude is the key; (3) we are duty-bound to maintain public order and to support every citizen to do so; (4) both the joint defense concept and the community policing should be carried out; (5) enhancing the visibility of police and designing defensible space will help improve public order.
Third, the interviewers’ opinions on the performance appraisal systems for the police public security strategies: (1) the strategies contain numerous and complex details, and the performance appraisal process seems lengthy and endless; (2) the performance appraisal increases workload and pressure; (3) crime statistics is not real; (4) personnel rewards and punishments should be fair to appraisees; (5) a sense of accomplishment can be derived from crime prevention and public services.
Therefore, a few suggestions are proposed as follows in this study: First, to amend performance appraisal systems for public security strategies conducted by the police authorities; second, to improve the measures that performance appraisal brings about false crime statistics; third, to integrate reward and punishment systems to boost team morale; fourth, to encourage all the people to engage in crime prevention, and put emphasis on public services and people’s satisfaction with public security.
Key words: police public security strategy, organizational performance management, performance appraisal indicators

並列關鍵字

police public security strategy ； organizational performance management ； performance appraisal indicators

參考文獻

Akers,R. L. 2003.Companions in Crime:the social aspects of criminal conduct..Contemporary Sociology,32(3):372-373。

Bushway,S.D.,Piquero,A.R.,Broidy,L.M.,Cauffman,E.,&Mazerolle,P.2001. Criminology.An empirical framework for studying desistance as a process. 39(2):491-515

Lab, S. P. 2000. Crime Prevention: Approaches, Practices and Evaluations.. Fourth Edition OH: Anderson.

Newman, O. 1972. Defensible Space: Crime Prevention though Urban Design., New York: Macmillian Publishing Company.

Trojanowicz, R. & Bucquerourx, B. 1990.Community policing: A contemporary perspective, Cincinnati OH: Anderson Publishing Co.