The performance evaluation of local governmental medical centers(LGMC) in korea has been continuing since the end of 1980's. During these days, the evaluation system was changed partially but, the mainstream was not changed at all. Recently, Shin(2001...
The performance evaluation of local governmental medical centers(LGMC) in korea has been continuing since the end of 1980's. During these days, the evaluation system was changed partially but, the mainstream was not changed at all. Recently, Shin(2001) raised some critiques on the evaluation system. In this study, we analyzed the Shin(2001)'s critiques on the current evaluation system, and the focus of analyzing was the matters connected with the selection and weighting of evaluating indicators within the evaluation system.
The major findings of this study were as follows. First, the weight of public contributing indicators within the evaluation system was low(21%) but, their explanatory power of the difference on total evaluation score between high and low grade groups was 29.2%. Therefore, in spite of their low weights within the evaluation system, the discriminating power of public contributing indicators may not be low. Second, having regard for the role of LGMC as public hospitals, we did sensitivity analysis that the LGMC's rank within the evaluation system was significantly changed if the weight of public contributing indicators was increased to 30% or 40%. We found that the rank was significantly changed in both cases. Third, to evaluate the critique that most of the current evaluation indicators are unstable ones because of using achievement indicators(actual/target performance), we did sensitivity analysis that the LGMC's rank was changed if the target values were increased(decreased) to 10% over(under) those of current system. We found that the rank was significantly changed in both cases as well. Finally, to investigate the combined effects that the weight of public contributing indicators and the target values were simultaneously adjusted, we did sensitivity analysis that the LGMC's rank was changed if the target values were increased(decreased) to 10% over(under) those of current system, under the condition of increasing the weight of public contributing indicators to 40%. We found that the rank was significantly changed in both cases and much more changed in the 10% decreasing case.
We proposed that participative budgeting and truth inducing pay scheme be introduced within the current performance evaluation process. They will somewhat mitigate the critique of current indicator's unstability, and contribute to achieve the goal of LGMC's performance evaluation. Because, if they are introduced within the current evaluation process, the members of individual medical centers will set up the self-setting budget(goal) as high as possible, and make effort to achieve the budget.