行政考評的倫理議題－田野訪談的剳記

Abstract

行政院研究考核暨發展委員會訂頒「為民服務工作考核」，期間自民國九十三年度至九十五年度三年間，應台灣北部某縣市之邀擔任考核委員。對考評事件的三造關係人（考評者、委託者、受考者）來說，行政考評應該是單純的理性評估活動，還是容許打破角色界線進行行動的研究？我相信嘗試去知道「那兒到底發生了什麼樣的事？」是發展改善方案或創造有效知識的最基本步驟。本文嘗試建立一種「倫理的行動理論」，用來說明遭逢倫理困境的個人，如何進行倫理思辨並開展倫理行動的動態過程；這種分析假定倫理行為產自於個體持續的實踐辯證，所以倫理的行為就是一種學習的行為。本研究所得倫理議題共七類十項：1. 行政考評的實施應否明示考評的主導理論與實用理論。2. 若行政考評可以調控行政作為的方向，則永業公務員抵拒行政考評的正當性為何？3. 行政考評的量表化，是否忽略了多元文化管理的議題。4. 有足夠的信心遭遇倫理的情境，才具備處理倫理困境的能力。5. 行政考評的過程中，三造關係人都可能遭遇相似且具有遞移效果的倫理困境。6. 考評者在參與考評過程中，角色定位的形成與倫理課題是否有關。7. 藉考評之便進行研究的訪談資料蒐集，存在何種研究倫理困境。

Should we take administrative evaluation as a rational activity or an action research? According three years field experience as an evaluation commissioner in one northern Taiwan county government, I tried to find out “what’s going on here?” And I believed it’s the basic way to get things better! Theoretical concerns of this paper are: 1. to develop an action theory of administrative ethics in evaluation proceeding, 2. assumed that ethical behaviors came from dialectical reflection of individual, so ethical behaviors can be taken as a learning behavior. This field study dug out some empirical ethic propositions as following: 1. Should we reveal the espoused theories and theories-in-use of administrative evaluation? 2. Is there any kind of legitimacy for public servant to resist top-down evaluation? 3. Multi-culture management values were missed in a scaled evaluation. 4. One who had faith to encounter ethical situation, got the ability to deal with ethical dilemma. 5. All three parties of administrative evaluation faced the same ethical issues. 6. While evaluator toke roles, ethical issues existed.