통합성과관리를 위한 평가결과활용방안에 관한 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

  In Korea, the performance management system has been introduced in the late 1990s. However, due to the lack of the agreement on the concept of performance management, the absence of performance management system and culture in the public sector and the insufficient power and status of the government performance management agency, the performance management system has not been yet firmly established. Therefore, the Participatory Administration is currently preparing the establishment of the integrated performance management system that strengthens the public sector performance management and focuses on the management by evaluation. Under these circumstances, this study attempts to reestablish the concept of performance management that has been used rather confusingly and to discuss about the performance management and the methods of performance evaluation and to suggest specific ways of performance management under the integrated performance management system.
  Performance management within the framework of the integrated performance management system is defined to be a series of activities that plan, review, assess and feedback for the purpose of improving the performance of the public sector. Accordingly, all the organization including central agencies should set up a systematic and consistent hierarchy of goals and objectives. The results of evaluation using self evaluation indicators will be reflected on personnel management and budget allocation on the individual as well as organizational level. Since individual and organizational evaluations are conducted based on the principle of relative assessment, the result of divisional and individual evaluation within the department may serve as the objective data for differentiated reward in terms of personnel management and budget allocation. Once the integrated performance management system is implemented, transparency and accountability of government work will be increased and the way the public employees work will change greatly in accordance with an explicit incentive system based upon performance.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "해외 공공부문의 성과관리: 효율성 지표" 1999

2 "통합성과관리시스템" 한언 2004

3 "참여정부의 정부업무평가체계 구축방향에 관한 연구" 13 (13): 2004b

4 "지방자치성과의 평가주체와 평가기법의 적합성 논의" 13 (13): 885-908, 2001

5 "지방자치단체를 위한 적정 자체평가모형에 관한 연구" 15 (15): 113-144, 2005

6 "정책평가에 있어서 국무조정실과 감사원의 역할과 과제"" 14 (14): 2004a

7 "정책평가: 이론과 적용(전정판)" 법영사 2003

8 "정부업무평가를 위한 성과지표개발방안" 5-29, 2005

9 "정부업무 평가결과 활용의 개선방안에 관한 연구 한국행정연구원 정부기관평가제도의 성공적 정착과 발전방향" 106-153,

10 "정부 성과관리시스템의 문제점 진단과 개선방향: 통합화 시각" 13 (13): 235-273, 2004

11 "자체평가시스템 구축방안 연구" 147-169, 2004

12 "국민중심의 성과관리시스템 구축을 통한 행정개혁" 9 (9): 36-43, 2000

13 "결과지향적 관리의 효율화를 위한 정책평가제도의 개혁" 14 (14): 1-28, 2004

14 "결과중심의 성과측정 및 성과관리체제에 관한 연구" 한국행정연구원 1998

15 "The Social Construction of Reality" 1967

16 "The Power of Performance Management Accountability for Performance" 1995

17 "The Case for Performance Monitoring" 604-610, 1992

18 "Responding to the Challenges" 32 (32): 288-307, 1999

19 "Public Administration for the Twenty-First Century" 1998

20 "Primer on Performance Measurement" 1995

21 "Performance Management in Government" OECD 1994

22 "Overcoming the Inadequacies of Performance Measurement in Local Government The Case of Libraries and Leisure Services" 55 (55): 37-47, 1995

23 "Notes on the Theory and Practice of Government Productivity Improvement" 135-152, 1989

24 "Mini-Symposium on Intergovernmental Comparative Performance Data" 59 (59): 101-134, 1999

25 "Managing in Local Government" Sage Publications 1994

26 "Making Results Count in Public and Nonprofit Organizations Balancing Performance with Other Values Meeting the Challenges of Performance-Oriented Government" 2002

27 "Learning to Measure Performance:The Use of Indicators in Organizations" 69 (69): 116-127, 1991

28 "A Report to Federal Employees" 2004

29 ""성과주의 예산제도 도입에 따른 지방자치단체의 통합성과관리방안 - 서울시 사례를 중심으로"" 8 (8): 135-162, 2003