Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/136516
題名: 我國公務人員勞動結社意願之研究:世代、工作滿意度與公共服務動機的觀點
A Study of Civil Servants` Intention to Join Public Employee Unions in Taiwan: The Perspective of Generations, Job Satisfaction, and Public Service Motivation
作者: 何昀峯
Ho, Yun-Feng
貢獻者: 董祥開
Dong, Hsiang-Kai
何昀峯
Ho, Yun-Feng
關鍵詞: 工會
公務人員協會
民主化
世代
工作滿意度
公共服務動機
union
civil servant association
democratization
generation
job satisfaction
public service motivation
日期: 2021
上傳時間: 4-Aug-2021
摘要: 我國以公務人員協會替代工會,賦予公務人員勞動結社權利之作法,長期以來效益不彰;即使年輕世代公務人員於2010年後發起各類「非官方」公務員團體,透過人民團體組織進行政策倡議、要求調整工作管理措施、甚至希望籌組工會,但官方的「公務人員協會」組織,參與率始終不高。\n行使勞動結社權之「集體議價」行為,在公共行政學領域,被視為達成人事行政的管理、政治與法律三種研究途徑的匯流點,所牽涉的探討層面相當複雜且多元,具有重要研究價值。本研究以我國政治與社會環境影響之制度變遷背景,兼論公務人員集體議價行為之限制,為總體結構探討觀點;再納入公部門之「世代差異」、「工作滿意度」、「公共服務動機」等個別化要素,分析與勞動結社行動之相關概念,並探討現職公務人員與參與公務人員協會及加入工會之意願。\n本研究利用「台灣政府文官調查第五期(TGBS-Ⅴ)」之內容為次級資料,藉由二元邏輯斯迴歸分析766份問卷,輔以質性訪談之模式驗證後,發現現職公務人員普遍不願意參與協會,而欲加入者以男性、專科學歷以下及中年以上世代較有參與意願;另外,「世代差異」、「工作滿意度」及「公共服務動機」皆會對公務人員勞動結社意願產生顯著影響。本研究進一步發現,年輕公務人員們對工會的渴求,只是想要卻不是需要、公務人員協會對公共服務動機較高者的雙重排擠現象及非正式制度對勞動結社意願的影響。最後,本研究提出「讓協會自己成長」、「重塑協會公益形象」及「重新界定國家與公務人員權利義務關係」三個面向的實務建議。
Taiwan has used civil servant associations in place of labor unions to fulfill civil servants’ right to association. However, such associations have long been ineffective: although the younger generation of civil servants launched various “unofficial” civil servant groups after 2010, using civil associations to advocate policies, demand changes in work management, and even seek to organize labor unions, the participation rate in official civil servant associations has been consistently low.\nIn the field of public administration, “collective bargaining” is the exercise of the right to freedom of association in the workplace and is regarded as a confluence point of managerial, political, and legal approaches to the study of personnel administration. Therefore, it involves complex and diverse issues and has important research value. The research framework in the present study discusses the limitations on civil servants’ collective bargaining in the context of institutional changes influenced by Taiwan’s political and social environment. In addition, the present study incorporated individual-level factors such as generational difference, job satisfaction, and public service motivation to analyze concepts related to association in the workplace and explore the willingness of civil servants to participate in civil servant associations and join labor unions.\nThe present study used the Taiwan Government Bureaucrats Survey (TGBS-V) as secondary data, applying binary logistic regression to analyze data from 766 questionnaires. After verifying the model with qualitative interviews, it was found that serving civil servants are generally unwilling to participate in civil servant associations, while men, respondents with a junior college degree or lower, and middle-aged or older respondents were more willing to participate. In addition, generational difference, job satisfaction, and public service motivation all had a significant influence on the willingness of civil servants to associate in the workplace. The present study also found that young civil servants’ desire to join trade unions was a result of “want” rather than “need,” civil servant associations “doubly exclude” individuals with higher public service motivation, and informal organizations affect willingness to associate in the workplace. Finally, the present study proposes three practical suggestions: “allow civil servant associations to grow by themselves,” “reshape the public welfare image of civil servant associations,” and “redefine the relationship between the state and civil servants’ rights and obligations.”
參考文獻: 一、中文文獻\n\n于承平、林俞均(2011)。新加坡發展尊嚴勞動對我國的啟示。臺灣勞動評論,3(2),253-284。\n王本壯(2008)。社區總體營造的回顧與展望。府際關係研究通訊,3,18-21。\n王光旭(2012)。文官政治認知是否與行政中立行為衝突?2008年臺灣政府文官調查的初探性分析。政治科學論叢,52,117-170。\n王能君(2008)。日本的公部門勞動關係。載於焦興鎧等合著,公部門勞動關係(頁285-321)。新北:空大。\n王雪芳(2021)。我國近二十年公務人員人力結構分析。國家人力資源論壇,4,取自:https://www.exam.gov.tw/NHRF/News_EpaperContent.aspx?n=3778&s=42918&type=20C1A3DAF6A74FCE。\n王鼎銘(2015)。抗爭行為的集體行動邏輯:「反倒扁運動」之理性選擇分析。人文及社會科學集刊,27(4),605-640。\n任正明(2005)。公務人員集體協商權之研究─兼論我國相關法制未來應有之發展。中正大學法律學研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,嘉義。\n朱柔若譯,Robert L. Sauer & Keith E. Voelker著(1999)。勞工關係—結構與過程。台北:鼎文。譯自:Labor Relations: Structure and Process (2rd ed.). Robert, L. S. & Keith, E. V. 1993.\n江昭瑩(2009)。公務人員對公務人員協會的認知及參與之研究。臺灣大學國家發展研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n何昀峯(2019)。從普悠瑪事件到夾帶香菸,「換人換位置」真的是防弊解方?2019年7月25日,取自:https://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/52/article/8318。\n何昀峯(2021)。看看世代,想想制度與未來。國家人力資源論壇,4,取自:https://www.exam.gov.tw/NHRF/News_EpaperContent.aspx?n=3778&s=42920&type=20C1A3DAF6A74FCE。\n吳秀玲(2009)。我國《公務人員行政中立法》之評析。T&D飛訊,86,1-19。\n吳宗憲(2014)。公僕所為何來?台南市政府文官公共服務動機影響工作努力意願之實證研究。政策與人力管理,5(1),81-134。\n吳宗憲、黃皓瑋(2014)。促參承辦人工作動機和團隊關係對其工作態度的影響研究。行政暨政策學報,58,87-120。\n吳東奇(2018)。警察人員世代差異之研究。淡江大學公共行政學系公共政策碩士班學位論文,未出版,新北。\n吳俊憲(2001)。高中多元入學的爭議與檢討。台灣教育,605,49-53。\n吳羿盈(2018)。世代差異對組織承諾、組織公民行為之影響—以公營事業民營化公司為例。臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文,未出版,新北。\n吳秦雯(2010)。法國公務員組織結社權概述。法令月刊,61(9),93-105。\n吳惠林(2001)。工會的形成及其功能—論《工會法》的修正。經濟前瞻,75-79。\n呂育誠、楊戊龍、許峻嘉、張佳旋(2017)。公部門勞動關係之研究。台北:考試院委託研究計劃,未出版。\n宋興洲(2010)。行政中立的弔詭。T&D飛訊,107,1-21。\n李允傑(2002)。政府與工會。新北:空大。\n李至涵(2015)。工會主義或專業主義:我國教師組織定位演變之探討。臺灣師範大學教育政策與行政研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n李仁淼(2021)。公務員之表現自由與政治活動自由之界限。國家人力資源論壇,5,取自:https://www.exam.gov.tw/NHRF/News_EpaperContent.aspx?n=3778&s=42998&type=A020C2C87B55986B。\n沈中元(2001)。公務員法制之研究。空大行政學報,911,1-42。\n沈清文、劉水深、黃俊英(1989)。員工對管理措施的滿意程度與抵制行為傾向之研究―以臺灣紡織業為例。管理評論,8,159-175。\n周志杰、張碧君、蔡尚哲(2009年11月)。中國大陸網路論壇之公民參與分析:以廈門PX專案為例。2009年台灣政治學會年會暨學術研討會─動盪年代中的政治學:理論與實踐,台北。\n林佳和(2004)。公部門罷工─尋找法釋義學體系中的合法性答案?。月旦法學,107,59-85。\n林佳和(2008)。德國的公部門勞動關係。載於焦興鎧、王松柏、王能君、成之約、林佳和、陳淳文、潘世偉、謝棋楠等合著,公部門勞動關係(頁207-248)。新北:空大。\n林冠廷(2014)。關廠工人抗爭之集體行動分析─以聯福自救會為例。政治大學政治學研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n林淑馨(2010)。質性研究:理論與實務。台北:巨流。\n余惠芳、潘麗卿(2014)。以勝算比觀點分析企業營運策略、公司治理與財務預測-台灣上市櫃股之實證研究。全球管理與經濟,10(2),57-77。\n邱皓政(2019)。量化研究與統計分析:SPSS與R資料分析範例(六版)。台北:五南。\n施能傑(2009)。公務人力年齡結構分析及對人力資源管理的意涵。文官制度季刊,1(3),1-24。\n洪瑞彬、劉兆明(2003)。工作價值觀研究之回顧與前瞻。應用心理研究,19,211 - 250\n胡藹若(2005)。從參與理論的觀點論台灣婦女的政治參與-就擔任公職而言。復興崗學報,84,369-393。\n茆昔文(2008)。公務人員工會協商之制度性思考。臺灣勞工季刊,13,30-39。\n紐文英(2015)。研究方法與論文寫作(2版修訂版)。台北:雙葉。\n張禎庭(2018)。不同世代警察人員對勤修制度之期望研究─以基隆市警察局所屬派出所為例。中央警察大學行政管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園。\n梁峻榕(2009)。智慧型手機之形成與演進。元智大學企業管理學系碩士學位論文,未出版,桃園。\n許世雨(2005)。公務人員勞動關係。載於吳瓊恩、張世杰、許世雨、董克用、蔡秀涓、蘇偉業等合著,公共人力資源管理(頁385-411)。台北:智勝。\n許南雄(2018)。各國人事制度─比較人事制度(增18)。台北:商鼎。\n許道然、林文燦(2020)考銓制度。台北:五南。\n許振家、翁福元。(2014)。從個人主義與集體主義談國民小學教師薪資待遇結構的能動性。臺灣教育評論月刊,3(8),11-15。\n許慶雄(1999)。憲法入門I--人權保障篇。台北:元照。\n許濱松(1996)。英美公務員政治中立之研究。載於彭錦鵬(編),文官體制之比較研究(頁151-171)。台北:中央研究院歐美研究所。\n陳坤炎、林立曼(2007)。我國公務機關公務人員勞動三權之探討。公務人員月刊,130,33-43。\n陳秋政(2008)。社會中心途徑之跨部門治理研究:以「洛杉磯河整治計畫」為例。政治大學公共行政學系博士論文,未出版,台北。\n陳重安、許成委(2016)。公共服務動機:回顧、反思與未來方向。公共行政學報,51,69-96。\n陳敦源、吳舜文、陳揚中、王光旭(2019)。從工作要求資源模式檢視公共衛生護理人員職業倦怠因素:以公共服務動機為調節變數。台灣衛誌,38(5),479-497。\n陳敦源、黃東益、柏門(2018)。民主治理下的政府效能:公共服務動機、繁文縟節、與政務/事務官關係。科技部專題研究計畫(編號:NSC100-2410-H-004-097-MY2),未出版。\n陳朝峰(2003)。我國公務人員集體勞動權法制之研究。國立中正大學勞工研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,嘉義。\n陳德禹(1992)。文官行政中立的理論與實際。「政大公企中心」紀念張金鑑教授學術研討會論文,台北。\n湯京平、黃詩涵、黃坤山(2009)。災後重建政策與誘因排擠─以九二一地震後某社區營造集體行動為例,政治學報,48,1-31。\n焦興鎧(2007)。從勞動三權國際勞動基準之發展看我國工會法之修正方向。法令月刊,58(2),26-48。\n黃婉玲(2020)。我們想要什麼樣的文官?在考選制度中噤聲的公共服務動機。國家菁英季刊,13(1),1-20。\n黃煥榮、蔡秀涓、張筵儀(2017)。公部門面對世代差異之人力資源運用策略。考試院委託研究,未出版。\n黃榮堅(2009)。刑法上個別化公務員概念。臺大法學論叢,38(4),273-334。\n黃駿逸(2001)。美國聯邦公務人員勞動三權之研究-兼論我國考試院公務人員協會法草案。政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。\n楊戊龍(2007)。論公務人員的勞動結社權與我國公務人員協會。公共行政學報,22,39-70。\n楊戊龍(2016)。美國公務員言論自由的保障與限制:聯邦最高法院判決分析及其對台灣的啟示。政治科學論叢,68,1-36。\n楊戊龍(2017年9月22日)。我國(台灣)公務員勞動關係法制之檢討:國際規範與他國法制之借鏡。2017年「高雄大學法學院與岡山大學法學部」學術交流研討會論文,高雄。\n葉名山、吳承瑋(2018年9月27日)。以邏輯斯迴歸模式分析影響汽車道路路駕駛考驗通過因素及汽車道路駕駛考驗實施現況探討。2018年「道路交通安全與執法」研討會論文,桃園。\n董安琪譯,Mancur Olson著(1989)。集體行動的邏輯。台北:允成文化實業。譯自:The Logic of Collective Action:Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Olson, M. 1965.\n董祥開、陳敦源、黃東益(2018)。公務人員風險偏好、服務動機、與決策類型之關係─建立一個勇於任事的政府(第2年)。科技部專題研究計畫(編號:MOST 104-2410-H-004-037-SS2)未出版。\n董祥開、簡粲綺、蘇姵文(2019)公務人力高齡化現象下之人力資源管理對策。文官制度季刊,11(3),71-103。\n董蘭英(2006)。公務員行使勞動三權之分析-以英法德三國為例。空大行政學報,17,23-52。\n熊忠勇(2018)。再談政治中立還是行政中立?過去的選擇與未來的發展。文官制度季刊,10(1),93-120。\n趙永茂、韓保中(2017)。臺灣的民主生機:治理能力、政策網絡與社區參與。台北:國立台灣大學出版中心。\n趙守博(2008)。公部門員工罷工問題之探討。臺灣海洋法學報, 7(2),1-22。\n銓敘部(2000)。文官制度改革系列叢書第七輯─公務人員協會法專輯。台北:銓敘部。\n劉昊洲(2006)。公務人員協會未能普遍成立原因之探討。人事月刊,42(6),53-56。\n劉昊洲(2014)。公務員法專論(二版)。台北:五南。\n劉梅君(2008)。深化性別意識與勞動價值教育。臺灣勞工季刊,13,82-91。\n劉義周(2004)。政黨民主與臺灣民主化。臺灣民主季刊,1(1),41-63。\n蔡秀涓(2004)。世代因素對公務人員工作價值觀影響之實證分析:以考試院暨所屬機關為例。東吳政治學報,18,41-67。\n蔡秀涓、余致力、陳敦源、謝立功(2008)。統合性政府倫理法制之研究。台北: 行政院研究發展考核委員會。\n蔡秀涓、陳敦源(2013)。實踐公務員倫理法制的範圍與方法:國際趨勢與臺灣現況。文官制度季刊,5(4),1-48。\n蔡富丞(2018)。年金改革後─吸引考生報考公職考試之因素研究。臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文,未出版,新北。\n衛民(1994)。公共部門的集體協商-美國公務人員的經驗。勞資關係論叢,2, 81- 121。\n衛民、許繼峰(2006)。勞資關係與人力資源管理的合與分。勞工研究,6(1),83-87。\n蕭瑞麟(2007)。不用數字的研究(2版)。新北:臺灣培生教育。\n賴維堯(2018)。行政中立:涵義系絡、法制規範及續階任務。T&D 飛訊,240,1-33。\n謝岳峰(2012)。工會發展之探討─以我國、德國及美國為例。政治大學勞工研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n顏秀慧(2012)。淺談公務員定義。綠基會通訊,101年4月,16-17。\n顏鈺展(2011)。國際勞動基準對我國公部門集體勞動關係法制建構之研究。中國文化大學勞工關係學系研究所碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。\n蘇俊斌(2018)。日本對公務員政治活動的限制。文官制度季刊,10(4),61-84。\n蘇偉業(2012)。南轅北轍的議題與路徑:政治轉型下台灣與香港文官中立機制之比較。公共行政學報,43,35-62。\n蘇偉業(2018)我國行政中立概念與實踐之回顧。T&D 飛訊,240,1-21。\n顧忠華(1998)。台灣非營利組織的公共性問題:理論及經驗研究。行政院國家科學委員會委託研究(計畫編號NSC87-2418-H004-006-E21),未出版。\n顧忠華(1999)。公民結社的結構變遷:以臺灣非營利組織的發展為例。臺灣社會研究季刊,36,123-145。\n\n\n二、外文文獻\n\nAberbach, J. D., & Rockman, B. A (1994). Civil servants and policymakers: Neutral or responsive competence? Governance, 7(4), 461-469.\nAgranoff, R. (2006). Inside collaborative networks: Ten lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review, 66(special issue), 56-65.\nAndersen, L. B., Jørgensen, T. B., Kjeldsen, A. M., Pedersen, L. H.,& Vrangbæk, K. (2013). Public values and public service motivation conceptual and empirical relationships. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(3), 292-311.\nBatson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic? Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 65-122.\nBehn, R. D. (1995). The big questions of public management. Public Administration Review, 55(4), 313-324.\nBill, G. (2017). VUCA2.0: A Strategy for Steady Leadership in an Unsteady World. Harvard Business School.\nBrett, J. M. (1980). Why Employees Want Union. Organzational Dynamics, 8(4), 53.\nBright, L. (2005). Public employees with high levels of public service motivation: Who are they, where are they, and what do they want? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 25(2), 138-154.\nBryner, G. C. (1987). Bureaucratic Discretion: Law and Policy in Federal Regulatory Agencies. New York: Pergamon Press.\nBozeman, B., & Su, X. (2015). Public service motivation concepts and theory: A critique. Public Administration Review, 75 (5), 700-710.\nClark, P. B., & Wilson, J. Q. (1961). Incentive System: A Theory of Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 6(2), 129-166.\nCooke, F. L. & Xiao, Y. (2014). Gender roles and organizational HR practices: The case of women`s careers in accountancy and consultancy firms in China. Human Resource Management, 53(1), 23-44.\nGamson, W. (1975). The Strategy of Social Protest. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.\nGrant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 393-417.\nHarmon, M. M. (1981). Action Theory for Public Administration. New York: Catelaine Press.\nHall, D. T. & Goodale, J. G. (1986). Human Resources Management. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company.\nHickey, R. (2014). Prosocial motivation, stress and burnout among direct support workers. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 27(2), 134-144.\nHofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.\nHolländer, H. (1990). A Social Exchange Approach to Voluntary Cooperation. American Economic Review, 80(5), 1157-1167.\nHoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. New York, NY: Harper Brothers.\nHui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1988). Individualism and collectivism: A study of cross-cultural researcheres. Journal of cross-cultural Psychology, 17, 225-248.\nJenkins, J. C. (1983). Resource Mobilization Theory and the Study of Social Movements, Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 527-553.\nJurkiewicz, C. L. (2000). Generation X and the Public Employee. Public Personnel Management, 29(1), 55-74.\nJurgensen, C. E. (1978). Job preferences (What makes a job good or bad?). Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(3), 267–276.\nKjeldsen, A. M. (2014). Dynamics of public service notivation: Attraction‒selection and socialization in the production and regulation of social services. Public Administration Review, 74(1), 101-112.\nKlandermans, B. (1984). Mobilization and Participation: Social-Psychological Explanations of Mobilization Theory. American Sociological Review, 49(5), 583-600.\nLevine, C. H., B. G. Peters & Thompson, F. J. (1990). Public Administration: Challenges, Choices, Consequences. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.\nLin, Nan. (2001). Building a Network of Social Capital. In N. Lin, K. Cook & R. S. Burt (Eds), Social Capital: Theory and Research (pp.3-30).New York: Aldine de Gruyter.\nLincoln, J. R., & Kalleberg, A. L. (1985). Work organization and workforce commitment: A study of plants and employees in the U.S. and Japan. American Sociological Review, 50(6), 738–760.\nLocke, E. A. (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In: Dunnette, M.D., (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1297-1343), Chicago: Rand McNally.\nLyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2014). Generational differences in the workplace: A review of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S139-S157.\nMenard, S. (2010). Logistic Regression: From Introductory to Advanced Concepts and Applications, Los Angeles: SAGE.\nMuller, E. N. & T. O. Jukam (1983). Discontent and Aggressive Political. British Journal of Political Science, 13(2), 159-179.\nNigro, F. A. & Nigro, L. G. (1986). The New Public Personnel Administration. Itasca, Illinois: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.\nNorth, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance.New York: Cambridge University Press.\nOberschall, A. (1973). Social Conflict and Social Movements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.\nOlson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.\nOpp, K. & Roehl, W. (1990). Repression, Micromobilization, and Political Protest. Social Forces, 69(2), 521-547.\nPandey, S. K., Pandey. S., Breslin, R.A., & Broadus, E. D. (2017). Public service motivation research program: Key challenges and future prospects. In J. Raadschelders & R. Stillman (Eds.), Foundations of public administration (pp.314-332). Irvine, CA: Melvin & Leigh.\nPerry, J. L. (1997). Antecedents of public service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(2), 181-197.\nPerry, J. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(1), 5-22.\nPerry, J. L. (2000). Bringing society in: Toward a theory of public-service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 471-488.\nPerry, J. L., & Vandenabeele, W. (2008). Behavioral dynamics: Institutions, identities, and self-regulation. In J. L. Perry & A. Hondeghem (Eds.), Motivation in public management: The call of public service (pp. 56-79). New York, NY: Oxford University.\nPerry, J. L., Brudney, J. L., Coursey, D., & Littlepage, L. (2008). What drives morally committed citizens? A study of the antecedents of public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 445-458.\nPeters, B. G., & J. Pierre (2004). Politicization of the civil service: Concepts, causes, consequences. In B. G. Peters & J. Pierre (Eds.), Politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective: The quest for control (pp. 1-13). London: Routledge.\nPutnam, R. D., Robert, L, & Raffaella, Y. N. (1993).Marking Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Pricceton University Press.\nRainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. SanFrancisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.\nRobie, C. A., Ryan, M., Schmieder, R. A., Parra, L. F., & Smith, P. C. (1998). The relation between job level and job satisfaction. Group & Organization Management, 23(4), 470-495.\nRosenbloom, D. H. & Kravchuk, R. S. (2005). Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in Public Sector. Boston: The McGraw-Hill Companies.\nRosenbloom, D. H. (1998).Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in Public Sector. (4rd ed.).New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.\nRouban, L. (2007). Politicization of the civil service. In B. G. Peters, & J. Pierre (Eds.) Handbook of public administration (pp. 199-209). London: Sage.\nSalamon, M. (1998), Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice (3rd ed.). Essex, England: Pearson Education.\nSchott, C., Neumann, O., Baertschi, M., & Ritz, A. (2019). Public service motivation, prosocial motivation and altruism: Towards disentanglement and conceptual clarity. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(14), 1200-1211.\nSearing, D. D. (1991). Roles, Rules, and Rationality in the New Institutionalism. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1239-1260.\nShafritz, J. M. & Hyde, A. C. (1997). Classics of Public Administration (2rd ed.). Chicago, Dorsey Press.\nSmola, W. K., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational differences: revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 363-382.\nTullock, G. (1971). The Paradox of Revolution. Public Choice, 11, 89-99.\nvan Witteloostuijn, A., Esteve, M., & Boyne, G. A.(2017). Public sector motivation ad fonts: Personality traits as antecedents of the motivation to serve the public interest. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(1), 20-35.\nVandenabeele, W. (2007). Toward a public administration theory of public service motivation: An institutional approach. Public Management Review, 9(4), 545- 556.\nVandenabeele, W., Brewer, G. A., & Ritz, A. (2014). Past, present, and future of public service motivation research. Public Administration, 92(4), 779-789.\nVandenabeele, W., Ritz, A., & Neumann, O. (2018). Public service motivation: State of the art and conceptual cleanup. In E. Ongaro and S. V. Thiel (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe (pp.261-278). London: Palgrave Macmillan.\nVelicer, W. F., & J. L. Fava. (1998).Effect of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern recovery. Psychological Methods, 3(2), 231-251.\nVroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Oxford, England: Wiley.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
104256022
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104256022
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
602201.pdf2.03 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.