平衡計分卡應用於公務機關資訊部門績效評估之研究－以某公部門為例

A Study of Implementing Balanced Scorecard of Government MIS Department-A Case Study of Engineering Department of Government

10.29767/ECS.200812.0003

梁鐿徽(Yi-Hui Liang)；謝欣志(Hsin-Chih Hsieh)；王秋燕(Chiu-Yen Wang)

政府機關 ； 資訊部門 ； 績效衡量 ； 平衡計分卡 ； 層級分析法 ； Government ； MIS department ； Balanced Scorecard ； Performance Evaluation ； AHP

Electronic Commerce Studies

6卷4期（2008 / 12 / 31）

425 - 445

繁體中文

本研究旨在建立公務機關資訊部門策略管理績效的平衡計分卡模型。以平衡計分卡(Balanced Scorecard)作為研究對象的績效衡量工具，依組織特性的策略與目標，績效衡量聚焦於使用者導向、企業價值、內部流程與未來準備度構面等四大構面，並提供一個適當、合理、有效、容易、精確的績效衡量方式。 本研究藉由國內外文獻探討整理出公務機關資訊部門績效衡量指標，發展公務機關資訊部門績效研究問卷，藉由親自訪談及解釋問卷填答方式，本研究以某中央級公部門為例對象為一級主管成功回收11份專家問卷，利用AHP法及Expert choice 2000分析結果，於完成各構面及指標權重計算後，建立本研究對象之平衡計分卡模型。 研究結果顯示構面間與各構面之指標間之權重並非均等權重，而是存在一定程度之差異。構面間之重視程度依序為「內部流程構面」、「使用者導向構面」、「企業價值構面」、「未來準備度構面」。各構面中所包含之各績效衡量指標綜合分析後，在公務機關資訊部門績效衡量時，極重視的前三項指標分別為「控制成本」、「滿足終端使用者的需求」與「操作與維護IT應用要有效率」。使績效衡量可以聚焦於公務機關資訊部門的必要投入與產出效益，更可以作為公務機關資訊部門績效改善之策略方向。最後，發展出一個整合的策略與績效管理系統，由本研究所建立平衡計分卡模型建構出公務機關資訊部門績效衡量的準則，並提供公務機關行政策略的參考，盼能有效利用有限的預算資源並做合理合適的分配，以提昇整體績效。

The purpose of this study is to establish balanced scorecard in performance measurement of Government '' MIS Department. Balanced IS scorecard used as a measurement tool to assess study subjects, according to its strategy and goal formed by its assignment property, can be divided into four levels: User orientation, Business value, Internal processes, Future readiness, which can provide us with a timely, efficient, flexible, simple, accurate, and highly overall reliable measurement tool. This research figured out the criterion for evaluating the performance of information department affiliated to public organizations. According to the criterion, a questionnaire was developed to probe into the performance of information department affiliated to public organizations. Questionnaires were dispatched and explanations about the items were given to central level executives. Eleven expert questionnaires were retrieved and analyzed by AHP and Expert choice 2000.After completing weighted calculation of every level and indicator, balanced scorecard model of this study subjects is thus established. The findings of this study show that the indicator weightings between and among all the levels are not the same, rather there exists certain amount of differences. The degrees of attention drawing in order of importance among all levels are internal processes level, user orientation level, business value level and Future readiness After comprehensively analyzing indictors of performance measurement included in every level, the highly valued top three indictors are, when conducting performance measurement in Government '' MIS Department, ”control IS costs,” ”satisfy end-user requirements,” and ”be efficient in operating and maintaining IT applications” respectively. To make the evaluation of performance not only focused on the essential investment and benefits but also provided tactics for future improvement of information department affiliated to public organizations. Finally, to develop an integrated system of tactics and performance management, utilizing the Balanced Scorecard to construct the criterion for evaluating the information department affiliated to public organizations, attempting to provide public organizations with an easy reference for administrative tactics, so that it is possible to utilize limited budget and resources, making reasonable and suitable distribution and even promoting the whole performance.

1. 劉正田、林維珩、袁玉珠(2002)。公共工程預算執行之策略性績效衡量指標－平衡計分卡之應用。當代會計，3(2)，149-181。
   連結：
2. Fleisher Craig S.,Mahafi Dam-en(1997).A Balanced Scorecard Approach to Public Relations Management Assessment.Public Relations Review,23(2),117-142.
3. Johnson, H.T.,Kaplan, R.S(1987).Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting.Boston, MA:Harvard Business School.
4. Kaplan, R.S.(1990).Measures for manufacturing execellence: A summary.Journal of Cost Management,4(3),22-29.
5. Kaplan, R.S.,Norton, D.P.(2000).The Strategy-Focused Organization.Boston, Massachusetts:Harvard Business School.
6. Kaplan, R.S.,Norton, D.P.(1996).Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System.Harvard Business Review.
7. Kaplan, R.S.,Norton, D.P.(1996).The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action.Boston, MA:Harvard Business School.
8. Karathanos, Demetrius(2005).Applying the Balanced Scorecard to Education.Journal of Education for Business,80(4),222-230.
9. Kloot Louise,Martin John(2000).Strategic performance management: A balanced approach to performance management issues in local government.Management Accounting Research,11(2),231-251.
10. Martinsons, Maris,Davison, Robert,Tse, Dennis(1998).The balanced scorecard: a foundation for the strategic management of information systems.Decision Support Systems,25,71-88.
11. Storey Anne(2002).Performance Management in Schools: could the Balanced Scorecard help?.School Leadership & Management,22(3),321-338.
12. 公告
13. 行政院(2000)。行政院暨所屬各機關計畫預算執行考核獎懲作業要點。2000.8.3行政院台八十九研管字第一四○一八之一號函修正。
14. 吳安妮(2000)。績效評估之新方向。主計月報，530，43-52。
15. 吳安妮(2003)。平衡計分卡在公務機關實施之探討。研考雙月刊，27(5)，45-61。
16. 吳淑惠(2005)。國立台灣科技大學資訊管理研究所。
17. 周齊武、吳安妮、李惠娟、Haddad, Kamal(2001)。平衡計分卡於服務部門之應用--以資訊部門為例-1。會計研究月刊，192，99-105。
18. 周齊武、吳安妮、李惠娟、Haddad, Kamal(2001)。平衡計分卡於服務部門之應用--以資訊部門為例-2。會計研究月刊，193，114-122。
19. 施正文(2004)。義守大學管理研究所。
20. 公告
21. 張桂玲(2003)。逢甲大學會計與財稅研究所。
22. 91 年臺灣省高級中等學校資訊教育輔導訪視表公告
23. 陳正義(2006)。義守大學資訊管理研究所。
24. 陳慶安(2000)。績效評估發展趨勢。人力發展期刊，82，21-25。
25. 湯宗泰、郭家欣(1996)。資訊部門經營管理之實證研究。Journal of Management & Systems，3(2)，135-151。
26. 楊士德(2004)。國立中山大學資訊管理研究所。
27. 廖冠力(2002)。國立成功大學工業管理研究所。
28. 鄭添原(1997)。國立台灣大學會計學系。
29. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)。層級分析法(AHP)的內含特性與應用(下)。中國統計學報，27(7)，1-22。
30. 鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)。層級分析法(AHP)的內含特性與應用(上)。中國統計學報，27(6)，12-20。
31. 羅盛宏(2005)。中原大學資訊管理學系。

1. 鄭嬿鈺(2016)。國民小學資訊業務績效評估之研究－以高雄市為例。義守大學資訊管理學系學位論文。2016。1-100。