全球化競爭激烈浪潮下，績效管理成為企業界的重要工作。績效評鑑是績效管理核心，欲有效評鑑績效，必須設立完善績效指標。我國傳統上以刑案績效衡量警察工作效能，過度強調刑案績效數字，無法反映民眾對警察的期望，也影響員警勤務執行方向。2004年7月起，內政部警政署鑒於原有績效評鑑所產生之弊端，屢遭外界詬病，爲杜絕選擇性辦案弊病、提升破案績效及偵查品質、落實地區責任制，研擬訂定新偵查犯罪評鑑計畫，自2005年1月起試辦半年，並選擇台北市等11個警察局作為試辦單位。若成效良好，將擴大推行至各個警察機關。 因此，本研究期透過對新、舊制偵查犯罪評鑑計畫之探討，以提供警察機關日後修訂之參考。本研究以台北市警察局員警為調查對象，透過問卷調查與深度訪談質量並重方式進行研究。在問卷調查研究上，發出問卷560份，回收541份，有效樣本為426份，有效回收率為76.07％。深度訪談對象計有十一人，均為單位主官，或為評鑑計畫業務承辦人，對於「偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度」有深入瞭解。所得資料採描述性統計、T檢定、皮爾森積差相關、典型相關和歸納分析等方法加以處理。 研究發現如下： 一、 新舊制偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度各有其優點 二、 員警對新舊偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度瞭解度不足 三、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度下，員警對於各項刑案的偵辦意願降低 四、 影響治安愈嚴重的刑案，員警偵辦意願愈高。 五、 員警對偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度的瞭解度愈高，對刑案之偵辦意願亦愈高 六、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度對於弊端的改善，無太大成效 七、 對新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度，員警多持觀望心態 八、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度主觀分數比例偏高，公正性受質疑 九、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度以偵破總件數作為評鑑基準，仍無法完全破除「選擇性辦案」弊病 十、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度之「重點專案工作」配分太低，影響偵辦意願 十一、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度未納入犯罪預防工作，有欠周詳 十二、 新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度要求全方位績效，員警不能專才專用 十三、 「跨轄偵辦」不受制度變更影響 研究建議如下： 一. 加強對偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度之宣導工作 二. 融合新舊制偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度優點，修訂評鑑方式 三. 評鑑制度修訂時，能納入專家、學者與基層員警意見 四. 重新考量新偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度評鑑項目配分 五. 預防績效能列入評鑑制度項目 六. 訂定適當之個人績效評鑑方式，供各單位參考選用 七. 不同單位評比方式要能多元化 八. 因應社會治安，彈性機動調整刑案配分 九. 評鑑制度應公正、公平、正確 十. 績效評鑑結果應與獎懲制度相結合，以激勵員警士氣 關鍵字：績效評鑑、偵查犯罪績效評鑑制度 / Strike by global vicious competition wave, performance management has become the most important task in entrepreneurial domain. Performance review is the core of performance management. Needless to say, in order to get a validate and efficient review, the parameter of performance review index has to be carefully implemented. As for police officer, performance review was measured solely upon the accumulation of criminal cases have been solved. Under this particular decipherment, neither has fulfilled people’s expectation, nor directed officers on the optimal execution. National Police Agency, Ministry of The Interior, has launched a new performance review index since June, 2004. It’s main purposes are to prevent the pitfalls from the old index, diminish crime case selectivity, increase both case resolution rate and investigation quality, and solidify borough responsibility. It starts off from eleven police stations in Taipei and set the pioneer project for six months from the beginning of 2005. Should the project go well, it will eventually implement nationwide. Thus, this research provides reference for further modification if needed. The research is cross examined by both quantitative (questionnaire) and qualitative (in-depth interview ) measurements. The participants are police officers who current work in Taipei city. On questionnaires part, 541 copies has been collected out of 560 , and 426 valid ones, make validation rate up to 76.07%. As for in-depth interview, there are eleven interviewees, including sheriffs and new project related officers, who acquire better knowledge about the new index project.. All the data has been processed by descriptive statistics, T-test, Pearson’s r, canonical correlation, and systematic analysis accordingly. Findings 1. It contains strengths and weakness at both new and old performance review systems, in terms of crime case resolution rating. 2. Police officers have little comprehension on both review systems. 3. Under the new review index, police officer has lower interests handling criminal cases. 4. As imposing more severe threat on security, the police officer is relatively more devoted to investigation. 5. The more understanding on review system, the more efficient officer hand on the case. 6. There is little efficacy of improving the existing problems. 7. Most police officers are more like spectators, not participating much. 8. New review index includes more subjective scorings and invites severe challenge on justification. 9. New review index is based on sum of crime cases resolved, that doesn’t stop case selectivity. 10. The score on “Special Project” is too low in new review index which effects the degree of devotion. 11. New review index failed to include the crime prevention intervention. 12.New review system neglects the individual specialty, instead, emphasizes on overall common practice, that depresses officers expertise and makes a biased performance review. 13.“ Cross jurisdiction investigation” stays intact. Suggestions 1. Propagate the performance review system. 2. Re-mix the advantages extract from both systems, and modify on the review method. 3. Combine the voice of experts, academic professionals and basic police officers for rectification. 4. Reconsider the scoring system to match the perspective items. 5. Includes prevention invention on the item list. 6. Customize the appropiate individual rating chart for varying departments. 7. Multi-function evaluation to suit various departments demand. 8. Remain scoring flexibility according to security status. 9. The essence of review system should be justice, fair and correct. 10. Intermingle the result of performance review with award/punishment system to further inspire the officers. Key words:

隨著國內社會變遷，人口結構改變，當失能老人家庭成員無法照顧或根本没有家人可以照顧時，提供可近性之社區型機構式照顧之小型養護機構就應運而生。台北市小型養護機構從未立案時期蓬勃發展，至民國86年「老人福利法」修正，政府開始透過法制化將小型養護機構管理制度化後，機構數從立案初期民國90年之203家降至98年6月之154家。依據內政部社會司民國98年6月統計資料顯示，全國養護機構養護床位平均進住率為73.84%，台北市則為82.37%；98年6月全國老年人口比率為10.52%，而台北市老人人口比率則已達12.43%，顯見台北市老人人口增加比率高於全國比率，且其養護機構占床率亦高於全國平均值。依上述數據合理推估，台北市老人對於養護機構需求應遠大於其他縣市，但統計資料卻顯示台北市養護機構卻逐年遞減。當機構負責人不斷反應，政府政策造成台北市機構經營困境。本研究想瞭解政府對小型養護機構管理政策在不同階段有何變演？進一步探討政策演變過程，對小型養護機構發展產生何種影響？再者探究除政府政策外，尚有那些因素會影響小型養護機構發展？ 本研究在著手進行文獻探討時，發現與台北市小型養護機構政策演變有關時間點，可以依時間序列分為五個階段；第一階段：民國80年以前，完全没有政策規範機構之政策空窗期；第二階段：民國80年至86年，台北市政府頒布「台北市私立老人養護所設置管理辦法」開始規範台北市小型養護機構之政策蘊釀期；第三階段：民國86年至88年，「老人福利法」修正後小型養護機構即將開始法制化規範之政策緩衝期；第四階段：民國88年至96年，小型養護機構邁入正式法制化管理之政策完備期；第五階段：民國96年以後，「老人福利法」再次修正之政策變革期。研究者再依據此五個時間階段，深度訪談機構負責人、地方政府及中央政府政策制訂者、學者專家，瞭解每一階段政府政策演變對小型養護機構發展有何影響。 研究發現，政策空窗期，小型養護機構不需立案、政府無法可管，機構自主性最高可以隨意發展；政策蘊釀期，台北市雖擬以地方法規規範小型養護機構，但因為没有罰則及強制力，機構配合度不高，政府政策對機構缺少制約力；政策緩衝期，老人福利法及子法已經修正通過，小型養護機構面對公權力即將強力規範，仍試圖抗爭以拖延政府管制時間，此階段機構與政府之間關係充滿衝突；政策完備期，政府對於小型養護機構從立案、評鑑、督導等各項法制完備，小型養護機構自主性大幅降低，發展意願也逐漸降低；政策變革期，老人福利法經10 年後再次修正，機構自主性再次限縮，許多理想性修法結果，尤其硬體設備部分對於屬都會型之台北市小型養護機構產生配合困難。本研究同時發現，對小型養護機構之管理政策，中央政府透過法制規範全力主導，地方政府自主性也相對降低，也就是政策完備期開始，影響小型養護機構發展之政策主要在於中央政府之法規。 本研究依據訪談結果，剖析後分別對相關人員提出建議如下，對政策制訂者：應正視台北市小型養護機構減少趨勢規劃因應策略、對於評鑑制度應檢討修正評鑑指標去蕪存菁、規劃小型養護機構專業分級制度、適時修正與小型養護機構發展扞挌之法令規章；對小型養護機構建議：關心政策對小型養護機構發展之影響、運用創新思維營造小型養護機構獨特競爭力、加強小型養護機構組成協會之整合資源能力、加強小型養護機構正面功能宣導；社會大眾則建議利用評鑑指標共同監督機構服務品質。 / With the change of the domestic society as well as the population structure, the small community nursing centers have been established as many family members or even no one can take care of the disabled elderly person. The development of the small nursing center was raised in the unregistered period. Since 1997, the “Senior Citizen Welfare Act” was revised and the government started to systematically manage the small nursing centers by regulations. As a result, the number of the nursing center decreased from 203 in 2001 to 154 in 2009. According to the statistic of the Department of Social Affairs in June 2009, the accommodating rate of the nursing bed of all nursing centers in Taiwan is 73.84% and 82.37% in Taipei City. In June 2009, the ratio of the senior population is 10.52% in Taiwan and 12.43% in Taipei City. It indicates that the proportion of the senior citizens in Taipei is greater than the national proportion. In addition, the accommodating rate of the nursing bed in Taipei is also greater than the average number of the country. Based on the above reasonable estimations, the demand for the nursing centers in Taipei City is greater than other cities and counties. However, the statistic shows that the number of the nursing center in Taipei gradually decreases. When the owners of the nursing centers in Taipei continuously emphasizing the government policy has created barriers to manage the nursing centers in Taipei City, this study aims to study how the government policy changes in each stage, and discuss how the policy change procedure and the remaining factors affect the development of the nursing centers. This research found that the development period of the small nursing center in Taipei City can be divided into 5 stages according to the time order; the first stage(vacancy period): before 1991, there was no policy to regulate the nursing centers; the second stage(preparation period): from 1991 to 1997, Taipei City Government announced the “Private Elderly Nursing Center Establishment Steps of Taipei City” and started to regulate the small nursing centers in Taipei City; the third stage(initial period): from 1997 to 1999, the small nursing centers started to be regulated after the “Senior Citizen Welfare Act” has been revised; the fourth stage(completion period): from 1999 to 2007,the small nursing centers were officially regulated by the acts; the fifth stage(reform period), after 1997, the “Senior Citizen Welfare Act” was once again amended. The researcher conducts several in-dept interviews of the owners of the nursing centers, local and central government policy makers, scholars and professionals of each stage to understand how the government policy affects the development of the small nursing center in each stage. In the completion period, the government has set up a complete system from registration, evaluation to supervision. As a matter of act, the independence of the small nursing centers significantly decreased which has resulted in a decrease of their willingness for development. During the reform period, the Senior Citizen Welfare Act was revised again after 10 years. The independence of the organizations was once again restricted. Many small nursing centers in Taipei City have had difficulties to cooperate with the ideal revised results such as the hardware facility. This study also found that the central government fully controlled the small nursing centers through the management policies while the local government started to lose the power of control. In the beginning of the completion period, the central government regulation was the key to affect the development of the small nursing centers. It is found that the registration was not required for the small nursing center in the vacancy period. The organizations were highly independent and could develop according to their interests. In the preparation stage, Taipei City has drafted the local regulations to regulate the small nursing center but the centers were not willing to cooperate due to the lack of penalty and government power over the restriction. In the initial period, although the Senior Citizen Welfare Act has been revised, the nursing centers still attempted to extend the government’s restriction. There were a lot of conflicts between the government and the nursing centers in this stage. Based on the interview results, this study provides the following recommendations to the related personnel after the analysis. To the policy makers: it is necessary to plan the strategies to cope with the decreasing trend of the small nursing center in Taipei City, review the evaluation system, revise the evaluation index, plan the professional classification of the small nursing centers and appropriately amend the regulations for the development of the small nursing center. To the small nursing centers: they should concern about the impact on the development of the small nursing centers, apply new thinking to create the competitive advantage, and improve the resource integration ability of the small nursing center association and the positive promotion of the small nursing center. It is recommended that the public should monitor the service quality of the organization based on the evaluation index. Keywords: small nursing center, evaluation system, senior citizen welfare

1980年代起學術研究開始出現大量趨向市場化的現象，各國政府為了因應市場化的趨勢及維持國際競爭力，高等教育場域開始採用各種宣稱客觀的量化評量表，作為衡量辦學績效的指標，影響所及除了大學經營與學生之外，以學術研究與教學為業的大學教師更是首當其衝。在政府及學術領導階層針對整個學術界積極設立各種規章、加強各類學術評鑑的此刻，身為主管機關代理人的學校當局會採用何種方式貫徹上層的政策理念，而作為最受評鑑制度直接影響的當事人，大學教師面對來自校方的管理機制又將如何因應？我希望藉由勞動過程的理論脈絡，進一步理解校方與教師之間的互動。 研究發現，校方在升等制度、績效評量甚至是各式獎勵辦法都偏重以研究項目為評鑑重點，為了促進教師投入研究工作，無論直接明訂研究部分佔評量標準的較高比例，或表面上降低教師授課時數、減少教學負擔，實則與升等掛勾，間接回歸到對研究工作的要求，都是學校當局為了服膺主管機關要求、確保獲取經費的手段。而在教師的因應方面，教學與服務二個項目並無太大差異，包括新進教師需負擔額外課程的現象或是參與服務活動的狀況，在各學院間都頗為一致，同時這二種工作內容也都較不受評鑑制度左右，亦即教師不太會因為評鑑因素而改變教學、服務的質量。唯獨在研究方面，由於該項目在評鑑體系中最具關鍵角色，因此可以清楚地看到教師們不僅拚命學習投稿技巧，更會不時地使用各種偷吃步來增加論文產量，其用心之積極可見一斑。 此外，針對評鑑制度的實施，教師們展現出抵抗與順從二種反應，表面上順從是多數教師服膺的態度，但我認為抵抗才是真正促使教師形成「同意」的關鍵。所謂順從，無論是曖昧的「欲拒還迎」或毫不掩飾的「坦然以對」，都是教師們主動依循評鑑制度的運作，S/SCI、TSSCI等標準只是在現階段被視為獲得更高職位與報酬的重要條件。而抵抗層面，無論是透過正式管道的「要求取消」或非正式管道的「不予理會」，抗拒的也是校方尊崇特定標準的態度，而非制度本身。抵抗只是調整或消除某些重要條件，並未改變遊戲規則（評鑑制度）的本質，教師們運用擅長或偏好的學術標準與形式反而更容易進行學術產出，而這個過程也再次強化評鑑制度存在的正當性，說穿了仍是一種符合校方預期的利益結果。 最後的疑問在於，大學教師作為一種自主性極強的教育人員，其專業自律的程度應該高於一般勞動者，即使沒有外部的考核機制，應該也能像醫師、律師等其他專業勞動者一樣形成類似自律公約的工作規範，然而我們看到的是教師們接納了這套由官方推行而來的評鑑制度，這種作為算不算對專業自律的否定？我認為答案不盡悲觀。或許既有的評鑑制度有其缺失之處，但因為現階段並未有具體的自律公約，一旦出現不適任教師時若無任何規律措施，除了可能影響學生受教權益，也會對其他教師造成不良影響。因此，評鑑制度在這種時刻扮演的他律角色正好補足校園裡應有的自律缺口，從這個角度來看也是一種評鑑制度正當性的再強化。