Title

受評者與評核者對績效評核標準與評核目的 認知差異之研究 ─以G公司為實證對象

Translated Titles

A Study on the Cognitive Distinction of Raters and Ratees for the Criteria and Purposes of Performance Appraisal A Case Study on G Company

Authors

王光復

Key Words

評核目的 ; 評核標準 ; 自我評核 ; 績效評核 ; 主管評核 ; Evaluation Purpose ; Self Appraisl ; Evaluation Criteria ; Performance Appraisal ; Supervisor Appraisal

PublicationName

中原大學企業管理研究所學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2002年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

諸承明

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

人力資源管理在企業管理領域中,日漸抬頭並受到重視,實乃企業的存亡興衰繫於人才之良窳。而績效管理在人力資源管理中扮演極為重要的角色,故日近績效管理、目標管理在企業經營管理上幾成顯學。 本研究以績效評核來源─主管評核、自我評核之個體特性為前因變數,以績效評核之評核標準接受度、評核目的重要性為後果變數;選定一家上市電子通訊業公司為實證分析對象,經由學術理論探討,研究方法、研究假設建構到問卷調查和研究發現,我們可歸納出下列主要結論。 (1)不管是受評者或評核者基本上均能認同以工作成果或關鍵績效值做為評核標準。 (2)就績效評核落實度而言,主管們反應出深刻期許。 (3)年資愈高之主管愈能接受以人格特質或行為過程做為評核標準,似乎反應出管理應質、量兼顧。 (4)較高教育程度者,對於工作目標管理值之設定,偏向於由主管和受評者共同協商方式設定。 (5)對於以專業品質做為評核標準項目,年齡愈低之中階主管愈能接受,表示其對於自己的專業或技能之信心。 (6)就評核之管理目的而言,在做為人員解雇的決策和做為工作晉級、調任或降級之判斷上,咸認為不應單純由評核結果來決定,尚有其他重要考慮因素可茲參考。 確記,員工績效評核乃組織定期與不定期地對員工的工作能力和表現進行有系統的定,使為衡量、激勵與發展組織人力之基礎,最終的目的與精神是讓企業與員工兩者皆能獲得雙贏的結果─組織獲利與員工個人成長。

English Abstract

Human resources management is playing a more and more important role in enterprise management, as the key to the success of a company is its human resources. Performance Management is playing a critical role in human resources management. This is why recently performance management and objectives management have become fields of study in enterprise management. This study has taken the key players in performance appraisal, the supervisor and the individual and their specifics , as the cause, and taken the level of acceptance of performance appraisal criteria and the importance of appraisal purpose as the result. It has selected a public electronics telecommunication company for the case study. After academic research, methodology and assumptions building and survey, we can summarize the following: (1)Generally speaking, raters and ratees all agree that work achievements and key performance index should be used as the evaluation criteria. (2)In regards to the level of performance appraisal implementation, supervisors have shown much expectation. (3) Supervisors have shown more acceptance of using individual’s characteristics and their behavior as evaluation criteria. It shows that management should focus on both quality and quantity. (4)Those of higher education tend to prefer mutually agreeing, between raters and ratees, on determining the work objectives index. (5)On using professional skills as evaluation criteria items, ratees of younger ages have higher level of acceptance, which shows that they are confident in their professional skills. (6)On the purpose of managing the evaluation, all think that decisions on employee termination, promotion, transfer and demotion should not rely simply on the performance appraisal results. There are other important items to be taken into consideration. Thus, performance appraisal is the regular and irregular systematic rating by organizations to the work competencies and performance of their employees, and it’s the fundamental element of measuring, motivating and developing organizations’ human resources. The final purpose is to achieve the win-win aid for both the organization and its employees – profitability for the organization and development for the employees.

Topic Category 商學院 > 企業管理研究所
社會科學 > 管理學
Reference
  1. 16. 諸承明,「績效評核系統內涵及其效益之研究─採『期望/實際』差距分析模式」,台北,台大管理論叢,第九卷第一期,民國八十七年,頁113-151。
    連結:
  2. sworth.1991.
    連結:
  3. 2. Becker,T.E.,and Klimoski,R.J., “A field study of the relationship between the organizational feedback enviroment and performance”, Personnel Psychology, 42 (1989),pp.343-358.
    連結:
  4. 3. Cascio, W.F., Applied Psychology in Personnel Management, Reston, Virginia : Reston Publishing Company. 1982, pp.313-316.
    連結:
  5. 5. Christopher Meyer, “How the Right Measures Help Teams Excel”,Harvard Business Review, (1994), pp.95-103.
    連結:
  6. 6. Cleveland, J.N., Murphy, K.R.,& Williams, R.E.,”Multiple uses of Performance Appraisal: Prevalence and correlates”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, pp.130-135.
    連結:
  7. 9. Etzioni, A., “Two Approaches to Organizational Analysis: A Critique and a Suggestion”, Adminstrative Science Quarterly,5,(1960), pp.257-258.
    連結:
  8. 11. Fox, S.,T.Caspy,&Reisler, “Variables Affecting Leniency,Halo,and Validity of Self Appraisal”, Journal of Occupational and organizational Psychology, Vol.67,No.1,(1994) pp.45-56.
    連結:
  9. 12. Frechette, Jr. Henry M.,& Wertheim, Edward G., Performance appraisal, Human resourceManagement and development handbook, edited by Traceey William R.,New York: American Management Associations,1985, pp.218-243.
    連結:
  10. 14. Glen, R.M., “Performance Appraisal: An Unnervering Yet Useful Process”, Public Personnel Managenent, Vol.19,No.1,(1990), pp.2-3.
    連結:
  11. 19. Ilgen, Daniel R., Janet L. Barnes-Farrell, & David B. Mckellin, “Performance Appraisal Process Research in the 1980s: What has it Contributed to Appraisal in Use?”, Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Process, Vol.54,(1993), pp.321-368.
    連結:
  12. 20. Jobber, David,Graham J. Hooley, & David Shipley, “ Organizational Size and Salesforce Evaluation Practices”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management Vol.13,(1993), pp.37.48.
    連結:
  13. 21. Jurison, J.,”Reevaluation productivity measures “,Information system Management, Vol.14,(1993), pp.30-32.
    連結:
  14. 23. Kast, Fremont, & James E. Rosenzweig, Organization and Management: A Systems Approach, N.Y.:McGraw-Hill, 1970.
    連結:
  15. 24. Keely, M., “A contingency framework for performance evaluation”, Academy of Management Review,3,(1978), pp.428-438.
    連結:
  16. 25. Latham, G.P.,and Wexley, K.N.,Increasing productivity through performance appraisal,2nd.Ed.,1991,1994.
    連結:
  17. 26. Lee,C.,” Increasing Performance Appraisal Effectiveness:Matching Task Types,
    連結:
  18. 27. Levine, E.L.,”Introductory remarks for the symposium: Organizational applications of self-assessment: Another look.,Personnel Psychology,33,(1980), pp.259-262.
    連結:
  19. 28. Liden, R.C., D. Stilwell, & G.R. Ferris, “The Effects of Supervisor and Subordinate Age on Objective Performance and Subjective Performance Ratings”, Human Relatioms, Vol.49,No.3,(1996), pp.327-347.
    連結:
  20. 32. Mohrman, Jr., Allan,M., Resnick-West, Susan M.,&Lawer III E.E., Designing performance appraisal system-Aligning appraisals and organizational realities,San Frncisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
    連結:
  21. 33. Ouchi, W.G.,”Markets, bureaucracies and clans”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25,(1980), pp.129-141.
    連結:
  22. 34. Porter, M.E., Competitive Advantage: The value chain and competitive advantage, NY: The Free Press,1985.
    連結:
  23. 35. Richard L. Daft, “Strategic Management and Organizational Effectiveness”, Organization Theory and Design, (1997), pp.58-63.
    連結:
  24. 37. Robert S. Kaplan, David P. Norton, “The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into Action”, Boston, Harvard Business Review, (1992).
    連結:
  25. 41. Sherman, Arthur W., Bohlander, George W., & Chruden, Herbert J., Managing human resource ,8th. Ed., Ohio: South-Western, 1988.
    連結:
  26. 42. Shore, Ted H., Lynn McFarlane Shore, and George C. Thornton, “Construct Validity of Self-and Peer Evaluation of Performance Dimensions in an Assessment Center”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.77,,(1992), pp.42-45.
    連結:
  27. 43. Viswesvaran, Chockalingam, Deniz S.Ones, & Frank L. Schmidt, “Comparative Analysis of the Reliability of Job Performance Ratings”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol.81, No.5,(1996), pp.557-574.
    連結:
  28. 參考文獻
  29. (一) 中文部份:
  30. 1. 王文博,「員工績效考評之探討」,台北,人事月刊,第14卷第三期,民國八十一年,頁56-61。
  31. 2. 王信智,「企業員工績效考核之問題及其因應策略」,台北,企業訓練實務講題之就業與訓練,民國八十七年,頁72。
  32. 3. 何永福、楊國安,「績效管理制度之運用」,台北,人力資源策略管理,三民書局,民國八十二年,頁95-120。
  33. 4. 李長貴,「績效評估與績效評核」,台北,人力資源管理「組織的生產力與競爭力」,華泰書局,民國八十六年,頁307-333。
  34. 5. 李建華、方文寶,「企業績效評估理論與實務」,超越企管顧問(股)公司,民國八十五年。
  35. 6. 吳秉恩,「績效考核與人事決策」,分享式人力資源管理,翰蘆出版有限公司,民國八十八年,頁373-395。
  36. 7. 吳靄書,「員工績效」,台北,企業人事管理,大中國圖書公司,民國六十五年,頁183-199。
  37. 8. 林欽榮,「績效評估在人事管理上的運用」,台北,人事管理第28卷第一期,民國八十年,頁104-113。
  38. 9. 陳國嘉,「如何績效考核」,台北,遠流出版社,民國八十年。
  39. 10. 黃英忠,「人事考核」,台北,現代人力資源管理,華泰書局,民國八十二年,頁183-199。
  40. 11. 張火燦,「績效評估的模式及相關理論」,台北,人事管理第31卷第八、九期,民國八十三年,頁4-7。第31卷第十期,民國八十三年,頁12-14。
  41. 12. 張火燦、徐克成,「績效評估與其他人力資源管理功能結合之研究」,台北,人力資源學報,民國八十二年。
  42. 13. 廖志德,「台積電─以頂尖人才打造世界級企業的新績效考核制度」,台北,能力雜誌,第519期,民國八十八年,頁34-39。
  43. 14. 鄭瀛川、王榮春、曾河嶸,「績效評估的向度」,台北,績效管理,世台管理顧問公司,民國八十六年,頁29-32。
  44. 15. 諸承明、楊錦洲、張光正,「我國企業實施人力資源規劃之現況分析」,台北,人力資源學報,民國八十一年,頁1-16。
  45. 17. 鮑惠明,績效發展─實務操演手冊,台北,科技圖書,民國八十七年。
  46. 18. 羅業勤,績效管理─專業經理人手冊,合勤企業管理顧問公司,民國八十七年。
  47. (二) 英文部份:
  48. 1. Aamodt,MichaelG.,Appliedindustrial/Organizationalpsycholy,California:Wad-
  49. 4. Campbell, J.P.,”On the Nature of Organizational Effectiveness” in Goodman, P.S., and Pennings, J.M.(ed.), New Perspectives on Organizational Effectveness, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.
  50. 7. Edwards, M.R.,and J.R.Sproull, “Rating the Raters Improves Performance Appraisals”, Personnel Administration, Vol.28,No.8,(1983), pp.77.
  51. 8. Eichel, E., and H.E.Bender,”Performance Appraisal a Study of Current Techniques”, America Management Associations, New York,(1984), pp.9-33.
  52. 10. Evelyn Eichel, Henry E.Bender,Performance Appraisal-A study of current Techniques, New York , 1984, pp.57.
  53. 13. French, Wendell., Human resources management ,2nd. Ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1990.
  54. 15. Glueck, W.F., Foundation of Personnel, Taxas, Business Pub, 1979, pp.212-213.
  55. 16. Hannan, M.T., and Freeman, J.,” Obstacles to the Comparative Studies” in Goodman, P.S. and Pennings, J.M.(ed.), New Perspectives on Organizational Effectiveness, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977a.
  56. 17. Hartenstein, Annette.,” Building integrated HRM system”,Training & Development Journal, 5,(1988), pp.90-95.
  57. 18. Henderson, Richard I., Practice guide to performance appraisal, Boston: Virginia. Hinkle, D., William, W.,& Stephen, J., Basic bebavioral Statistics, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1984.
  58. 22. Kaplan, Rober S., and David p. Norton, The Balance Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into Action, Boston, Massachusetts:Harvard Business School Press, 1992, pp.52.
  59. Appraisal Process, and Rater Training”. Academy of Management Review, 2, (1985), pp.322-331.
  60. 29. MacDuffie, J.P., and Krafcik, J., Integrating Technology and Human Resources for High- Performance Manufacturing, in Kochan, Y. and Useem, M.eds., Transforming Organizations, New York, Oxford University Press, 1992, pp.210-226.
  61. 30. Mathis, R.L.,and Jackson J.H., Personnel/Human resourece management, 5th. Ed., Minnesota: West, 1988.
  62. 31. Middlemist et al., Organizational Behavior: Applied concept,Chicago:Science Research Association,1981.
  63. 36. Robbins, S.P., Organization Behavior-concept,controversies,and applications, Prentice-Hall International editions,1989.
  64. 38. Schuler, R.S., Personnel Human Resource Management,3rd.Ed, New York West Publishing Co., 1987.
  65. 39. Sherman,Bohlander,and Snell, Managing Human Resources, Appraising and Improving Performance, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1998, pp.317-329.
  66. 40. Sherman,Bohlander,and Snell, Managing Human Resources, Appraising and Improving Performance, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1998, pp.302-303.304.
  67. 44. Werther, Jr., William B., & Pavis, Keith, Human resurces and personnel management, 3rd. Ed.,1988.
Times Cited
  1. 黃進春(2002)。中山科學研究院勞務外包之績效評估。中原大學企業管理研究所學位論文。2002。1-70。
  2. 秦維豪(2004)。績效評估面談類型與績效評估成效之關連性研究。中原大學企業管理研究所學位論文。2004。1-106。
  3. 史書慧(2006)。績效考核制度變革成效之評估 —某中小企業之個案研究。中原大學企業管理研究所學位論文。2006。1-102。