社會福利組織社會工作者績效考核

Performance Appraisal of Social Workers in Social Welfare Organizations

10.6785/SPSW.199906.0179

趙善如(Shan-Ru Chao)

社會福利組織 ； 績效考核 ； 工作能力 ； 工作成效 ； social welfare organization performance appraisal working ability working efficacy

社會政策與社會工作學刊

3卷1期（1999 / 06 / 01）

179 - 209

繁體中文

要化解目前社會工作專業所面臨的責信危機，重視與確實執行社會工作者績效考核是解決對策之一。因爲社會工作者績效考核制度是組織確認目標達成和規劃人力的依據，是社會工作者在職訓練的指標，更是對服務對象權益的保障。績效考核制度中考核方法、內容、參與者、頻率、互動性等都是重要要素。 本研究收集16個社會福利組織社會工作者績效考核制度的相關資料。研究結果發現，較常使用的考核方法是評等量表法、短文評述、重要事件法、計分核對法。有關參與者部份。二分之一的組織採用了社會工作者自評。在16個組織中有14個的考核頻率是一年考核一次，大約三分之一會在考核過程中安排會談，以及在考核後提供針對受考核者回饋。在考核項目上較無法突顯社會工作者專業能力和工作成效，並且在考核後並沒有充分利用考核結果資料，使得社會工作者考核制度無法發揮應有的功能。因此，學術訓練單位、社會福利組織管理者、社會工作者需共同努力，解決社會工作者績效考核制度所面臨的問題。

One solution to solve the accountability crises social work professionals face is to value and implement the performance appraisal system of social workers. The performance appraisal system is of great significance because it is the basis with which organizations appraise their goal accomplishments and manage their manpower, the targets of social workers' on-site training, and even the guarantee of service receivers' rights. It has several important components such as appraisal methods, content, participants, frequency, and interaction. This research collects and analyzes relevant materials of the performance appraisal systems 16 social welfare organizations' employs, and finds out that Rating Scale, Narrative Essay method, Critical Incident method, and Weighted Checklist method are used more often than the other. With respect to participants, half of the 16 social welfare organizations adopt social workers Self-appraisal. Among the 16 social welfare organizations, 14 hold appraisal once a year; one third arranges interviews in the appraisal process and provides feedback to the appraised persons after appraisal. Because the appraisal content cannot project social workers' professional ability and working efficacy, and the appraisal results are not fully used, the social workers' appraisal systems do not live up to their functions. Therefore, academic training centers, administers of social welfare organizations, and social workers need to work together to solve the problems the current performance appraisal systems have.

1. Cascio, W. F.(1992).Management Human Resources: Productivity, Quality of Work Life, Profits.New York:McGraw-Hill.
2. Dobbins, G. H., Cardy, R. L., Platz-Vieno, S. J.(1990).A Contingency Approach to Appraisal Satisfaction: An Initial Investigation of the Joint Effects of Organizational Variables and Appraisal Characteristics.Journal of Management,16(3)
3. Farh, J., Dobbins, G. H.(1989).Effects of self-esteem on Leniency Bias in self-reports of performance: A structural equation model analysis.Personnel Psychology,42
4. Harris, M. M., Schaubroeck, J.(1988).A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings.Personnel Psychology,41
5. Levy, P. E.(1993).Self-Appraisal and Attributions: A Test of a Model.Journal of Management,19(1)
6. Longenecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., Gioia, D. A.(1987).Behind the mask: The Politics of employee appraisal.Academy of Management Executive,1
7. Martin, L. L., Kettner, P. M.(1997).Human Service Program Performance Evaluation.Beverly Hilly:Sage.
8. Meyer, H. H.(1991).A solution to the performance appraisal feedback enigma.Academy of Management Executive,5
9. Millar, K. I.(1990).Performance Appraisal of Professional Social Workers.Administration in Social Work,14(1)
10. Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N.(1995).Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives.Thousand Oaks:Sage.
11. Pynes, J. E.(1997).Human Resources Management for Public and Nonprofit Organizations.New York:Jossey Bass.
12. Weinbach, W. W.(1998).Social Worker as Manager: A practical guide success.Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
13. 林欽榮 Lin, Chin-Rong(1997)。人事管理。台北:前程企業管理公司。
14. 梁偉康(1990)。社會服務機構行政管理與實踐。香港:集賢社。
15. 黃英忠 Huang, Ing-Chung(1997)。人力資源管理。台北:三民書局。
16. 潘清泉(1994)。人事考核：評價與培育。台北:清華管理科學圖書中心。