공무원 근무성적평정제도의 개선방안에 관한 연구 : 국립대학을 중심으로 = (A) study on improving performance appraisal system for public officias : focusing on national universities

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In the times of knowledge and information, an effective management of human resource in an administrative office, which is becoming more complicated and diverse in its function, should be performed through fair evaluation of working performance for organization members, reasonable arrangement and movement of human resource, proper education and training, and development of individual potential. A rational performance appraisal (PA) and its effective management would be the best method to solve this issue. However, there were several problems that arise from the imperfection of the evaluation system and its absurd practices. Thus, the objective of this study was to analyze the problems associated with PA which public officials working in governmental organizations have been confronted, to try to resolve them and to suggest an improved model of the system.
The study can be summarized as follow:
After a theoretical discussion of PA of public officials, based on the theory, comparative analyses of the advantages and disadvantages of PA with that of foreign governments and private companies in the nation. The result of a survey performed on 497 public officials, all generalists, working in 3 sample universities has been analyzed, and he problems found in the survey in its institution and practice were summarized as follow:
1) The main objective of PA was to control human resource.
2) The standards of PA were not clear.
3) The objectivity and fairness of the evaluation results was often distrusted.
4) The factors of PA did not consider work specifications of each grade and field of the profession.
5) The evaluation results were kept confidential.
6) Participation was allowed to limited number of evaluatees in the process of PA.
7) Forced distribution of a grade of PA had its drawbacks.
8) Formalism and unfairness were noted in the management of PA.
9) Evaluators were underqualified.
10) The top management had little concern over the fairness in the process of PA.
The suggested methods to solve the problems were as follow:
1) The purpose of PA should be directed to improving personal capability and administration efficiency.
2) A new model affecting PA and its new elements should be suggested based on the working analysis, and matched with the position and area of the original work.
3) Multi-layer evaluation system should be introduced to evaluate performance to secure its objectivity and fairness, and to allow a broader participation.
4) Absolute evaluation system should be introduced to make up for the problems such as the forced distribution practice by the relative evaluation system.
5) The results of PA should gradually be opened to improve the quality of evaluatees and work efficiency.
6) The participation of evaluatees to evaluate PA should be guaranteed to further mutual understanding of the two parties and to make the most of the pros and cons of the evaluatees.
7) The formal, unfair, and irregular practices of PA system should be avoided and the system should adopt a complete merit system focusing the officials' competence and achievement.
8) Education and training of evaluators should be performed regularly to do fair PA.
9) As for the top management, changes of mind on PA and its total utilization are required.
10) The results of PA should be applied diversely to develop personal capability and improve the production of each organization.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 目次
• >Abstract<
• I. 序論 = 1
• 1. 硏究의 目的 = 1
• 2. 硏究의 範圍와 方法 = 2
• 1) 硏究의 範圍 = 2
• 2) 硏究의 方法 = 3
• II. 勤務成績評定에 대한 理論的 考察 = 4
• 1. 勤務成績評定의 理論的 根據 = 4
• 1) 勤務成績評定의 意義와 目的 = 4
• (1) 勤務成績評定의 意義 = 4
• (2) 勤務成績評定의 目的 = 6
• 2) 勤務成績評定의 基本要件과 評定要素 = 7
• (1) 勤務成績評定의 基本要件 = 7
• (2) 勤務成績評定의 評定要素 = 10
• 3) 勤務成績評定의 方法 = 12
• (1) 勤務成績評定方法의 分類 = 12
• (2) 勤務成績評定方法의 類型 = 14
• (3) 評定方法의 選擇에서 고려할 요인 = 20
• 4) 勤務成績評定制度의 限界 = 21
• (1) 勤務成績評定의 限界 = 21
• (2) 勤務成績評定上의 誤謬類型 = 22
• 2. 關聯硏究의 檢討와 分析의 틀 = 25
• 1) 評定手段과 妥當化方案에 관한 硏究 = 26
• 2) 評定過程에 관한 硏究 = 28
• 3) 評定制度의 運營實態에 관한 硏究 = 29
• 4) 分析의 틀 = 30
• III. 勤務成績評定制度의 實態 = 34
• 1. 韓國 公務員 勤務成績評定制度의 實態 = 34
• 1) 勤務成績評定制度의 沿革 = 34
• 2) 現行 勤務成績評定制度와 運營方式 = 38
• (1) 評定의 目的 및 評定要素 = 38
• (2) 勤務成績評定의 對象 = 39
• (3) 勤務成績 評定時期 = 39
• (4) 勤務成績 評定節次 및 方法 = 39
• (5) 評定者와 確認者 = 44
• (6) 勤務成績評定의 審査決定과 非公開 = 45
• 2. 外國 勤務成績評定制度의 實態 = 45
• 1) 美國의 勤務成績評定制度 = 45
• 2) 英國의 勤務成績評定制度 = 49
• 3) 프랑스의 勤務成績評定制度 = 51
• 4) 日本의 勤務成績評定制度 = 53
• 5) 外國과 韓國 公務員 勤務成績評定制度의 比較 = 55
• 3. 民間企業 勤務成績評定制度의 實態 = 58
• 1) S사의 勤務成績評定制度 = 58
• 2) L사의 勤務成績評定制度 = 62
• 3) H사의 勤務成績評定制度 = 69
• 4) 政府와 企業體의 勤務成績評定制度의 比較 = 71
• IV. 勤務成績評定의 制度 및 運營에 관한 分析 = 73
• 1. 設問調査 實施 및 資料分析 方法 = 73
• 1) 設問調査 槪要 = 73
• 2) 設問紙 構成 = 73
• 3) 資料分析 方法 = 75
• 2. 設問調査 結果의 分析 = 75
• 1) 人口社會學的 分析 = 75
• 2) 認識度 分析 = 82
• 3) 制度上의 分析 = 85
• 4) 運營上의 分析 = 98
• 3. 職務分析 = 108
• 1) 職務分析의 必要性 = 109
• 2) 職務分析의 範圍 = 109
• 3) 職務分析의 方法 = 109
• 4) 職務分析 結果 = 121
• 5) 職務分析을 통한 새로운 勤務成績評定書의 評定要素 = 125
• V. 勤務成績評定制度의 問題點과 改善方案 = 131
• 1. 勤務成績評定制度의 問題點 = 131
• 1) 制度上의 問題點 = 131
• 2) 運營上의 問題點 = 133
• 2. 勤務成績評定制度의 改善方案 = 135
• 1) 制度上의 改善方案 = 136
• 2) 運營上의 改善方案 = 142
• VI. 結論 = 146
• 參考文獻 = 149
• 附錄 = 154