績效評核系統內涵及其效益之研究－採「期望／實際」差距分析模式

The Essence and Effects of Performance Appraisal Systems: Adopting the "Expectation/Reality" Discrepancy Model

10.6226/NTURM1998.9.1.113

諸承明(Chen-Ming Chu)

績效評核 ； 員工期望 ； 差距分析 ； Performance Appraisal ； Employee's Expectation ； Discrepancy Analysis

臺大管理論叢

9卷1期（1998 / 12 / 01）

113 - 151

繁體中文

績效評核在人力資源管理中扮演著重要角色。一方面，對企業組織而言，績效評核是組織內部的控制機制，其評核資料將是決定薪資獎懲、教育訓練、職務調整、與生涯規劃等管理措施的基礎，並藉由這些措施來促使員工調整行為，使其期向組織目標邁進。另一方面，對員工個人而言，依據績效評核結果所做成的各項人事決策，往往都與員工切身的權益有關，故員工本身將會注意評核過程中的每一環節，並對此一評核系統抱持著高度的關切與期望。然而，由於績效評核系統對於組織與個人所具有的意義並不盡相同，所以實務上，全業採行的績效評核系統與員工期望之間，常會有相當程度的差異存在，導致績效評核系統在推行時，會遭到員工的質疑與抗拒，並使系統效益受到影響。有鑑於此，本研究嘗試採取「期望／實際」差距分析模式，探討實際系統與期望系統之間的可能差距，並分析此差距對於績效評核系統效益之影響。 為有效探討此一課題，本研究共蒐集了41家企業總計369份的有效問卷，以便進行實證分析。綜合各項統計資料，本研究歸納出下列四項重要的研究發現： (1)實際系統與員工期望之間，具有相當顯著的差距存在。無論是在績效評核的評核目的、評核人員、重視指標、評核工具、評核時機、與評核回饋等層面，實際與期望之間都有相當多的項目，達到顯著差異水準。 (2)分析顯示：員工期望績效評核系統能更重視「人員發展」上的目的、增加自我評核與同僚評核等的比例、強調「質化」與「過程」指標、並應「事前告知」績效評核的內容與標準、放寬評分等級的「比例限制」、縮短評核期間的間隔、以及增闢「回饋面談」與「申訴管道」等。 (3)當實際系統與期望系統之間的差距愈大或愈不一致時，績效評核系統效益也將愈低。無論是在績效評核的評核目的、評核人員、重視指標、評核工具、評核時機、與評核回饋等層面，都有許多項目達到顯著水準。 (4)分析顯示：實際與期望之差距，對於公平性、接受度、與滿意度等效益的關聯性較強；對於工作投入、組織承諾、與離職率箏效益的關聯性較低。尤其在離職率方面，有部份項目甚至出現與預期相反的結果，顯示績效評核與離職率之間的關聯性尚值得進一步探討。

Performance appraisal plays an important role in human resource management. On the one hand, performance appraisal is a critical internal control mechanism in an organization. On the another hand, the various personnel decisions made in accordance with performance appraisal are concern to the privileges of the employees. However, there frequently exist some obvious discrepancies between the expectation and the reality on performance appraisal systems. This study attempts to adopt an empirical model that examines the discrepancies and then to analyze the essence and effects of performance appraisal systems. In hopes of effectively examining this subject, a total of 369 questionnaires were collected from 41 large enterprises. This study concludes the four important results: (1) There are significant discrepancies between the expectation and the reality, including the purposes, raters, criterions, methods, timing, and feedback of the performance appraisal systems. (2) The employees hope that performance appraisal systems could: pay more attention on the developmental purpose, increase the ratios of self-appraisal and peer-appraisal, emphasize the qualitative and process criterions, inform the content and criterions, release the limitation about the ranking grades, shorten the appraisal intervals, enhance the feedback and the communication channel. (3) There are significant correlations between the discrepancies and the effectiveness. The more obvious discrepancies is measured, the lower the effectiveness of the performance appraisal. (4) The effects of discrepancies on the fairness, acceptability, and satisfaction are relative stronger. The effects of discrepancies on the job involvement, organizational commitment, and turnover rates are relative weaker.

1. (1996)。台灣地區大型企業排名。台北:中華徵信所。
2. Alexander, E. R., Wilkins, R. D.(1982).Performance Rating Validity: The Relationship of Objective and Subjective Measures of Performance.Group and Organizational Studies,7
3. Carson, K. P., Cardy, R. L., Dobbins, G. M.(1992).Upgrade the Employee Evaluation Process.Journal of HR Magazine,37(11)
4. Cascio, Wayne F.(1992).Managing Human Resources.N. Y.:McGraw-Hill.
5. Cleveland, Jeanette N., Murphy, Kevin R., Williams, Richard E.(1989).Multiple Uses of Performance Appraisal: Prevalence and Correlates.Journal of Applied Psychology,74
6. Dessler, Gray(1994).Human Resource Management.Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:Prentice-Hall, Inc..
7. Edwards, M. R., Sproull, J. R.(1983).Rating the Raters Improves Performance Appraisals.Personnel Administrator,28(8)
8. Eichel, E., Bender, H. E.(1984).Performance Appraisal a Study of Current Techniques.New York:America Management Associations.
9. Glen, R. M.(1990).Performance Appraisal: An Unnervering Yet Useful Process.Public Personnel Management,19(1)
10. Harris, Michael M., Smith, David E., Champagne, Denise(1995).A Field Study of Performance Appraisal: Research-versus Administrative-Based Ratings.Personnel Psychology,48
11. Ilgen, Daniel R., Barnes-Farrell, Janet L., Mckellin, David B.(1993).Performance Appraisal Process Research in the 1980s: What has it Contributed to Appraisals in Use?.Organizational Behavior ＆ Human Decision Processes,54
12. Jacobs, Heidi(1993).The Ratings Game.Small Business Reports,18
13. Jobber, David, Hooley, Graham J., Shipley, David(1993).Organizational Size and Salesforce Evaluation Practices.Journal of Personal Selling ＆ Sales Management,13
14. Kast, F. E., Rosenzweig, James E.(1970).Organization and Management: A Systems Approach.N. Y.:McGraw-Hill.
15. Levinson, P.(1979).A Guide for Improving Performance Appraisal.Washington, DC:Office of Personnel Management, USGPO.
16. Liden, R. C., Stilwell, D., Ferris, G. R.(1996).The Effects of Supervisor and Subordinate Age on Objective Performance and Subjective Performance Ratings.Human Relations,49(3)
17. Lodahl, T. M., Kejner, M.(1965).The definition and measurement of job involvement.Journal of Applied Psychology,49(1)
18. Maurer, Todd J., Tarulli, Beverly A.(1996).Acceptance of Peer/ Upward Performance Appraisal Systems: Role of Context Factors and Beliefs about Managers' Development Capability.Human Resource Management,35(2)
19. Murphy, Kevin R., Cleveland, Jeanette N.(1991).Performance Appraisal: An Organizational Perspective.Colorado State University.
20. Quarles, Ross(1994).An Examination of Promotion Opportunity and Evaluation Criteria as Mechanisms for Affecting Internal Auditor Commitment, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions.Journal of Managerial Issues,6
21. Secunda, Michael Dale(1984).Employee Perceptions of Performance Appraisal System: Causal Determinants of Fairness, Accuracy, and Acceptability.Old Dominion University.
22. Sherman, Authur, Bohlander, George, Snell, Scott(1996).Managing Human Resources.Ohio:South-Western College Publishing.
23. Shore, Ted H., Shore, Lynn McFarlane, Thornton, George C.(1992).Construct Validity of Self- and Peer Evaluation of Performance Dimensions in an Assessment Center.Journal of Applied Psychology,77
24. Sumer, H. Canan, Knight, Patrick A.(1996).Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Performance Ratings: Effects of Rating the Previous Performance on Rating Subsequent Performance.Journal of Applied Psychology,81(4)
25. Tziner, Aharon, Latham, Gary P.(1989).The Effects of Appraisal Instrument, Feedback and Goal-Setting on Worker Satisfaction and Commitment.Journal of Organizational Behavior,10
26. Viswesvaran, Chockalingam, Ones, Deniz S., Schmidt, Frank L.(1996).Comparative Analysis of the Reliability of Job Performance Ratings.Journal of Applied Psychology,81(5)
27. Waldman, D. A., Avolio, B. J.(1986).A Meta-Analysis of Age Differences in Job Performance.Journal of Applied Psychology,71
28. Zenger, Todd R.(1992).Why Do Employers Only Reward Extreme Performance? Examining the Relationships among Performance, Pay, and Turnover.Administrative Science Quarterly,37
29. 朱成(1986)。在臺外資企業職員績效評估制度之研究－以十一家外商公司為例。台北:國立政治大學企業管理研究所。
30. 吳雅芳(1995)。企業績效評估制度、成效與文化特徵差異之研究－以國內美商、日商和台商企業為實證。中壢:中原大學企業管理研究所。
31. 陳奇信(1993)。員工對績效評估的態度與工作績效關係之研究。台北:中國文化大學勞工研究所。
32. 簡文哲(1988)。評估結果、信賴主管程度、內外控取向、回饋／預期一致性、期望信念對回饋反應影響之研究。中壢:中原大學企業管理研究所。
33. 羅淑蕙(1987)。我國公務人員考績制度的研究。台北:國立政治大學公共行政研究所。

1. 楊筌淋(2017)。探討領導行為安全文化對安全績效工作績效之影響。義守大學管理碩博士班學位論文。2017。1-67。