學校營繕工程人員績效研究-以國立臺灣大學為例

Abstract

人才是單位中最重要的無形資產，如何找出單位中工作努力、能力強及貢獻度高的同仁，絕對是單位最重要的課題。研究國內文獻發現，工程單位常因承辦工程之種類、性質、規模不同，導致工程管理及相關行政作業流程繁雜，工程施作期間內，承辦人除工程品質的維繫外，同時還須要面對各項意外及不可抗力因素，以確保工程如期完工，在種種因素與變數下，國內尚無一套客觀、易評且合理之評核工具，用以「量化」單位與承辦人員優劣與辛苦程度，而每當考核來臨時，通常造成評核者困擾，這種考核方式不易引導、激發單位中團隊合作與工作熱情，創造存優汰劣的良性競爭的工作環境。 為改善此一現況，本研究參考平衡計分卡精神，確定研究個案單位願景與目標後，依目標設定評核指標，並將各指標之權重依各股貢獻度配分，有效整合了單位中因工程種類、性質、規模、工期、業務、流程不同而造成無法評比的困擾。研究發現，為達成研究個案之願景與目標，關鍵在於以下7項工作能否有效執行，包含預算執行、工程進度管控、效率管控、案件數量與管理、品質管控、親切即時的服務與各股整體有效運作等。另為確實評核上述工作的完成度，又依其性質及重要性分別設定22項「量化」及「質化」之評核指標，為避免單位主管主觀意識影響評核結果，本研究設定之量化指標及質化指標權重比為80%：20%。相關評核指標包含預算執行力、預算執行效率、修繕時效、發包時效、公文時效、工程專案件數、開口合約修繕件數、辦理招標件數、校收文件數、公文管理與研考、工程品質查證、5項指標評量、工程督導、施工查核、修繕評鑑、滿意度調查、校務建言回復、無預警停電次數、管考落實、業務配合、團隊士氣、勞逸分配等。 另本研究利用個案99年度資料進行檢核，並以各股貢獻度、名次、貢獻度達成率、每人量化貢獻度與組長評核等結果反複驗證，發現本研究之評核方式確實可行，相關研究過程、方法、評核指標提供其他工程單位參考。

Human Resources is the most important intangible assets in a unit. The identification of the hardworking, abled and contributing colleagues is definitely an imperative topic. Through analyzing related literature, it is discovered that the complicated management and related administrative work flow were due to the differences in the types , nature and scale of contracted works. During the construction period, in addition to the maintenance of quality of works, contractors also have to deal with various accidents and inevitable factors so as to ensure the timely completion of works.With all these factors and variables, we still do not have a set of objective, east and reasonable assessment tools to quantify the quality and efforts of contractors. An appraisal thereby becomes a brain-racking task for the appraiser. Such assessment mechanism might not be able to guide and inspire the spirit of collaboration and passion of works, and create an atmosphere for competition which would lead to the survival of the fittest.To improve the situation, this research would take reference of the balanced scorecard system. Indicators of evaluation would be calibrated in accordance to the mission and vision set by the unit, and each indicator would be given its weight with reference to the contribution made by each group. The system effectively mitigates the difficulties in assessment caused by the differences in the types, nature, scale, duration, marketing and workflow of works.The research reveals the key to the realization of mission and vision of the unit includes whether the below could be executed with effectiveness: the execution of budgets, the management and control of progress of works, the management and control of efficiency, the management and quantity of cases, the management and control of quality, the provision of sincere and immediate services and the overall operation of all groups. In other to assess in real the level of completion, 22 indicators on the quality and quantity will be set in accordance to the nature and importance of the works. To avoid the influence of the subjectivity of supervisors, the research suggests a 80%：20% ratio for indicators on quantity and quality respectively.These indicators include the degree of execution of budgets, the efficiency of execution of budgets, the time limit of maintenance, the time limit of calling quotations, the time limit of official documents, the number of work projects, the number of cases of maintenance under oral contracts, the number of quotations made, the number of documents received, the management of official documents and research, the checking of quality of works, 5 indicators, the supervising of works, the verification of construction, the evaluation of maintenance, the survey on the degree of satisfaction, the reply to suggestions of administration in school, the number of suspension of electricity without warnings, the realization of assessment of management, the cooperation of works, team spirit, the sharing of work burdens, etc. The research has made use of the data of cases in the year of 99. The assessment system is proved practical and workable with the use of the information in the degree of contribution of each group, the rank, the degree of realization, the individual degree of realization and the assessment by the group leader. The procedures, methods of the research and the assessment indicators are provided for the reference of other work units.