平衡計分卡用於政府非營業特種基金績效衡量指標之研究

Abstract

平衡計分卡近年來已廣泛落實於一般企業，此架構目前在美國、加拿大、英國等先進國家之政府機構也受到相當程度的重視與應用。我國政府為了提升施政績效，計劃將平衡計分卡推行於政府部門，包括行政機關、非營業基金，與國營事業等，目前已有十個非營業基金參與平衡計分卡初期的設計，未來政府部門勢必全面推展平衡計分卡至所有的非營業基金。 本研究以六個非營業特種基金為研究主體，透過問卷的方式調查主管機關以及各基金對於顧客認知是否有顯著差異、對於績效衡量指標之態度是否存在顯著的差異等問題，並且提供有效的方法解決之，以供未來政府部門其他單位推動平衡計分卡時作為參考。 研究結果顯示，在顧客認知方面，透過主管機關有效的引導可以加強基金對於顧客的認知程度。在績效衡量指標重要性方面，主管機關與基金對於平衡計分卡顧客構面與內部流程構面的重視程度有顯著差異，其中基金較主管機關重視顧客構面，而主管機關較基金重視內部流程構面，且雙方普遍不重視學習成長構面，因此需仰賴top-down與button-up的雙方運作，同時加強領先指標的重視程度，才能替非營業特種基金設計出完善的平衡計分卡。 在績效衡量指標目標值達成容易度方面，受試者並未因為所屬單位的不同(主管機關或是基金)而對績效衡量指標目標值的達成容易度有顯著差異的看法，而構面的不同也並未造成受試者對於績效衡量指標目標值的達成容易度有不同的看法。基金內部人員在訂定績效衡量指標目標值時，偏向會考慮該目標值是否容易達成，尤其是以財務構面的績效衡量指標最為明顯，主管機關透過提供其他基金提列目標值的資訊(降低水平資訊不對稱)、或是加強各基金的組織承諾與工作投入程度等方法，都有助於降低各基金低列績效衡量指標目標值之情形發生。在績效衡量指標對工作時間分配之影響方面，受試者並未因為所屬單位的不同(主管機關或是基金)，而對此問題有顯著差異的看法，同時構面的不同也並未造成受試者對於績效衡量指標是否影響工作時間的分配有不同的看法。

Balanced Scorecard has been widely used in private sectors in the past few years, and recently it is emphasized in public sectors in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. In order to improve the government performance, Taiwan government tends to implement Balanced Scorecard on public sectors, including some administration organizations, non-profit funds, and government-owned business. This thesis is based on a case study of six non-profit funds, and the main issues addressed are: 1.Do the supervisory agencies and the funds clearly understand their customers? 2.Do the supervisory agencies and the funds have different opinions about the importance of all performance measurements? 3.Do the supervisory agencies and the funds have different opinions about the likelihood to achieve the goals of all performance measurements? And when the funds set their goals, do they consider the likelihood to achieve the goals? 4.Do the performance measurements influence the funds’ time arrangement? The results show that the funds clearly understand their customers through the supervisory agencies’ effective guidance. The supervisory agencies and the funds have different opinions about the importance of performance measurements, especially in customer and internal process perspectives. The supervisory agencies put more emphasis on internal process perspective while the funds focus on customer perspective, and both don’t pay much attention to learning and growth perspective. Non-profit funds can set perfect Balanced Scorecards through top-down and button-up methods, and they need to emphasize the importance of leading indicators. The supervisory agencies and the funds do not have different opinions about the likelihood to achieve the goals of the performance measurements, no matter what perspective they are in. But the funds tend to consider the likelihood to achieve the goals when they set their goals, especially in financial perspective. The supervisory agencies can effectively reduce slack by providing information about co-workers or increasing funds’ organizational commitment and job involvement. The supervisory agencies and the funds do not have different opinions about the performance measurements’ influence on funds’ time arrangement, no matter what perspective the performance measurements are in.