Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/124912
題名: 公務人員核心價值發展與實證分析
Development and empirical analysis of the core value of public servants
作者: 呂欣容
Lu, Hsin-Jung
貢獻者: 董祥開
呂欣容
Lu, Hsin-Jung
關鍵詞: 公共服務倫理
文官核心價值
倫理價值
行政倫理
公務倫理
Public service ethics
Core value of public servants
Ethical value
Administrative ethics
日期: 2019
上傳時間: 7-Aug-2019
摘要: 公共服務倫理價值在臺灣政府的官方文件中又被稱作公務人員的核心價值,或是文官核心價值。文官核心價值為道德層次的訓示性規範,可作為公務人員自我角色認同的心智認知及從事公共服務時的行事準則。因此一個公務人員所懷抱的倫理價值將會對其工作表現,甚至對政府運作產生重大影響。本研究由學術、實務與實證三個角度去系統性地了解公共服務倫理。首先學術上梳理了從傳統公共行政至新公共服務時期的倫理價值,採用的是文獻分析法;實務上整理了有關倫理價值的國內外研究、官方文件等,並輔以深度訪談法補足文獻上的不足,更深入了解文官核心價值在臺灣發展的脈絡;最後有別於其他研究,採用大量的次級資料去分析2018年臺灣公務人員認為重要的倫理價值以及影響倫理價值的個人與機關特性。研究發現臺灣人事制度上倫理價值始於新公共管理內涵,再接續新公共服務思潮。相較於十年前,「廉正」的價值已獲得大幅的提升,顯示我國推動相關倫理法規有其成效。再者個人特性中,除了主管職或非主管職的職務變項外,性別、年齡、教育程度、官等,皆會影響公務人員認為重要的倫理價值。機關特性中,業務單位與幕僚單位;公權力管制類、公共服務類、政府內部幕僚類;中央機關與地方機關,也會影響成員倫理價值的選擇。最後,核心價值已納入公務人員的服務誓言中,2018年當以推動「接地氣」為重要的價值,乃屬「關懷」面向之下。文官核心價值經過十年的推動,也逐漸成熟,內化為機關的優質組織文化。
The ethical value of public service is also called the core value of public servants in the official documents of the Taiwan government, or the core value of civil servants. The core value of public servants can be used as a mental cognition of public servants’ self-identity and the standard for engaging in public services. Therefore, the ethical value of a public servant will impact on his performance and even on government operations. This study systematically explores the public service ethics from three perspectives: academic, practical and empirical. First, in academics, the ethical values from traditional public administration to new public service are integrated, and the literature analysis method is adopted. In practice, domestic and foreign research and official documents on ethical values are compiled, supplemented by in-depth interviews to provide a deeper understanding of the core value of public servants. Finally, a secondary data is used to analyze the ethical values that Taiwan`s public servants consider important in 2018 and the characteristics of individuals and institutions that influence ethical values. The study found that new public management and new public services affect Taiwan`s personnel policy. Ten years later, the value of clean government has been greatly enhanced, which means that the government has successfully promoted relevant ethical policies. Except the change of position, the personal and institutional characteristics will affect the ethical value of public servants. Finally, the ethical value of public service has been written into the vows of public servants. Concern is the most important value to be promoted in 2018. After ten years of promotion, the core value of public servants has become the culture of public institutions.
參考文獻: 人事行政總處(機關)。民國101年。《推動核心價值實施計畫》[法規]。臺灣:行政院。\n江銀世(承辦人)。民國99年。《公務人員服務守則》[公文]。臺灣:銓敘部。\n考試院(機關)。民國101年。《文官制度興革規劃方案:修正版》[方案]。臺灣:考試院。\n考試院(機關)。民國99年。《文官核心價值時程》[文件]。臺灣:考試院。\n考試院(機關)。民國99年。《我國公務人員核心價值建制推動歷程》[文件]。臺灣:考試院。\n余致力(2000)。論公共行政在民主治理過程中的正當角色:黑堡宣言的內涵、定位與啟示。公共行政學報,(4),1-2。\n沈淑敏(1999)。民主行政的建構:新公共行政與新政府運動的回應。東海大學公共行政學系碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n林宗弘、韓佳(2008)。政治貪腐的制度理論:以亞洲各國為例的分析。台灣政治學刊,12(1),53-99。\n林嘉誠(1984)。七十二年選舉行為之研究。政治學報,(12),123-188。\n邱華君(2001)。行政倫理理論與實踐。政策研究學報,(1),85-105。\n建立行政核心價值體系推動方案(民國90年6月7日)。\n施能傑(2004)。公共服務倫理的理論架構與規範作法。政治科學論叢,(20),103-139。\n高廣孚(1989)。教育哲學。台北:五南。\n張世杰(2010)。新公共管理的公務倫理意涵與實踐反省:傅柯的治理理性觀點。空大行政學報,(21),75-128.\n張哲琛(2015)。公務人員核心價值,2019年4月25日,取自https://www.nacs.gov.tw/NcsiWebFileDocuments/178d2bdfd8eeef34f4bf0809b6d3a2c1.pdf。\n許世雨(2000)。新公共行政與新政府運動之辯證與比較。政治大學公共行政學系博士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n許立一(2009)。公務倫理思維及其實踐行動的再思考:從人性假定出發。文官制度季刊,1(1)77-96。\n許孟智(承辦人)。民國98年。《函轉考試院頒布之文官核心價值》[公文]。臺灣:銓敘部。\n陳百希(1996)。宗教學。台北:光啟出版社。\n陳清秀(2009)。廉能政府與公務倫理之探討。文官制度季刊,1(1),115-137。\n陳敦源(2010)。台灣民主治理機制鞏固之研究-權力轉換與文官中立:態度、 可信承諾、與政務/事務人員關係(台灣政府文官調查第一期,TGBS I) (公共版)(E96048)【原始數據】。取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。doi:10.6141/TW-SRDA-E96048-1\n陳敦源(2018)。民主治理下的政府效能:公共服務動機、繁文縟節、與政務/事務關係(台灣政府文官調查第二期,TGBS II) (公共版)(E10062)【原始數據】。取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。doi:10.6141/TW-SRDA-E10062-1\n陳敦源、呂佳螢 (2008)。文官調查:觀點、方法與實務意義。台灣政治學會2008年年會暨全球競爭、民主鞏固、治理再造研討會,南投。\n黃一峯、張家榦(2009)。行政倫理培訓需求分析:中央與地方公共價值之比較分析。人事月刊,48(5),29-42。\n黃紀(2018)。文官追蹤調查。台灣政經傳播研究中心,未出版。\n廉政署(機關)。民國94年。《美國檢核長及政府倫理局制度》[報告書]。臺灣:法務部。\n劉俊宏(承辦人)。民國98年。《頒布文官核心價值》[公文]。臺灣:銓敘部。\n蔡秀涓(2008)。台灣民主治理機制鞏固之研究:各級公務人員公共服務倫理相關態度初探。2008 TASPAA伙伴關係與永續發展國際學術研討會,台北。\n蔡秀涓(2009)。台灣文官的公共服務價值觀與新公共服務精神的比較:經驗調查初探。文官制度季刊,1(4)111-135。\n蔡秀涓(2013)。公共服務倫理政策成效之研究:民主轉型之台灣各級政府人員認知與政策內涵比較分析(E97051)【原始數據】。取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。https://srda.sinica.edu.tw。doi:10.6141/TW-SRDA- E97051-1\n鄭麗芳(承辦人)。民國99年。《修正之公務人員服務誓言》[公文]。臺灣:銓敘部。\n蕭乃沂、陳敦源、黃東益、呂佳瑩(2013)。台灣文官意見調查的挑戰與反思。公共管理與政策評論,(3),68-81。\nAckoff, R. L. (1972). A note on systems science. Interfaces, 2(4), 40-41.\nBarton, R. (1980). Roles advocated for administrators by the new public administration. Southern Review of Public Administration, 463-486.\nBoling, T. E. & J. Dempsey (1981). Ethical Dilemmas in Government: Designing an Organizational Response. Public Personnel Management, 10:11-19.\nDenhardt, Kathryn G. (1988). The Ethics of Public Service. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.\nDenhardt, R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2000). The new public service: Serving rather than steering. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 549-559.\nDrewry, G., & Butcher T. (1988). The Civil Service. Oxford: Blackwell.\nFrederickson, H. G. (1980). New Public Administration (pp. 31-47). Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.\nFrederickson, H. G., & Marini, F. (1997). Modern comparative administration: Essays in honor of Dwight Waldo. Public Administration Review, 57(4), 323.\nGilman, S. C.(2005). Ethics Code and Codes of Conduct as Tools for Promoting Ethical and Professional Service: Comparative Success and Lessons. Washington, DC: TheWorld Bank.\nGuy, M. E. (1989). Minnowbrook II: Conclusions. Public Administration Review, 49(2), 219-220.\nHood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19.\nKast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1973). Contingency Views of Organization and Management. Sra.\nKast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1974). Organization and Management: A Systems Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.\nKernaghan, K. (2003). Integrating Values into Public Service: The Values Statement as Centerpiece. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 711-719.\nKirkhart, L. (1971). Toward a Theory of Public Administration. In F. Marini (Ed.), Toward a New Public Administration: The Minnowbrook Perspective (pp.127- 164). Scranton, Pa: Chandler.\nKluckhohn, C. (1951). Values and Value-orientations in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in Definition and Classification. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.\nLawton, A., & Doig, A. (2006). Researching Ethics for Public Service Organizations: The View from Europe. Public Integrity, 8(1), 11-33.\nLuthans, F., & Stewart, T. I. (1977). A general contingency theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 181-195.\nLuthans, F., Schonberger, R., & Morey, R. (1976). Introduction to Management: A Contingency Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.\nMarini, F. (1971). Toward a New Public Administration. Scranton, PA: Chandler.\nMoilanen, T., & Salminen, A. (2007). Comparative Study on the Public-service Ethics of the EU Member States. Research and Studies, 1, 1-42.\nOECD. (1996). Ethics in the Public Service: Current Issues and Practice. Public Management Occasional Papers, (pp. 2-62), Paris: OECD.\nOECD. (2000). Building Public Trust: Ethics Measures in OECD Countries. Paris: OECD.\nPelletier, K. L. and M. C. Bligh (2006). Rebounding from Corruption: Perceptions of Ethics Program Effectiveness in a Public Sector Organization. Journal of Business Ethics, 67: 359-374.\nPerry, R.B.(1926). General Theory of Value. London: Longmans, Green & Company. Spranger, E., (1928). Lebensformen Halle, Germany: Niemeyer.\nRohr, J. A. (1989). Ethics for Bureaucracy. (2rd Ed.). New York: Marcel Dekker.\nRose-Ackerman, S. (1998). Lessons from Italy for Latin America. Journal of Public and International Affairs, 9: 447-69.\nRosenbloom, D. H. and Kravchuk. (2002). Public Administration( 5rdEd.). New York: McGraw-Hill.\nSvensson, Goran, GregWood and Michael Callaghan (2004). A comparison between corporate and public sector business ethics in Sweden. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(2/3): 166-184.\nWaldo, D. (Ed.). (1971). Public Administration in a Time of Turbulence. Scranton, PA: Chandler Publishing Company.\nWamsly, G. L., Goodsell, C. T., Rohr, J. A., & Wolf, J. F. (1990). Public Administration and the Governance Process: Shifting the Political Dialogue. A Centennial History of the American Public Administration. New York: Free Press.\nWeber, M. (1968). On Charisma and Institution Building. University of Chicago Press.\nWeber, M. (2015). Bureaucracy. In Working in America (pp. 29-34). Routledge.\nWilliamson, S. D. (1987). Financial intermediation, business failures, and real business cycles. Journal of Political Economy, 95(6), 1196-1216.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
105256033
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105256033
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
603301.pdf1.58 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.