Several advanced countries in the word have taken administrative reform toward the goal of 'better government' with more efficiency. In the case of
Korea, the Korean government made the Government Evaluation Law of 2006, which was the evaluation system based on a philosophical background of
performance-oriented management. One of the ultimate objectives of the Government Evaluation System is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
government by utilizing performance information of government through the feedback process. In this context, the feedback system in the government
evaluation process is very important. Despite of the importance of feedback, previous studies related to how evaluation information in government
influences policies, budgets, personnel, and organizations in the feedback process were very limited.
Under the recognition of this research problem. this study diagnosed the status quo and operational problems of the present feedback system, and suggested policy implications to be able to provide for the betterment of feedback operation of the present Government Evaluation System through five analytic lenses: organizational; personal; perceptional; theoretical; comparative. In order to accomplish this research objective, this study conducted in-depth literature review deeply related to feedback theories, compared the feedback system of three countries such as, the US, the UK, and Canada, and utilized an empirical study using a questionnaire survey and an interview of public employees working for evaluation in the central government.
The research results of this study can be summarized as the following. First, in terms of organization management (i. e., policy improvement, budget management, organization management), the government's efforts of corrections and audits for improving policies based upon evaluation or the feedback process did not result in satisfactory outcomes. In terms of budget management, 'excellent'-evaluated programs of each government department based on evaluation were allocated more budgets than 'adequate' and 'insufficient'-evaluated programs. This is a good example for improving the efficiency of finance programs. Next, in terms of personnel management of feedback operation (e. g., personnel management and payment management), each government department has utilized evaluation information as the purpose of working contracting condition with public employees, the evaluation of public employees' performance, the selection of public employees' candidate for the position promotion, piece rate for salary, performance stipend, reward, and etc.
Second, the findings of the questionnaire survey of public employees with regard to the major causes of ill-operation of the present feedback systems show several causes of ill-feedback operation with statistical record as follows: the lack of reliability and objectiveness of evaluation methods 16.6%, the misbelief and unreality of evaluation. 13.9%, the inadequacy of evaluation index 13.6%, the lack of manpower and organizations for evaluation 9.5%, the nonprofessionalism of manpower for working for evaluation 9.4%, the lack of self-control of department 7.9%, the lack of personal and organizational
rewards 6.4%, the lack of top executives' leadership 5.8%, the misbelief on evaluators 5.8%, the non-usefulness of result information 5.7%, the lack of the learning and train system for evaluation 4.9%. Findings of this survey of public employees demonstrated that the main causes of ill-operation of the feedback system came from several secondary factors surrounding the feedback system rather than the feedback system itself. The secondary factors are as follows: the misbelief of the evaluation system, the inadequacy of evaluation indicators, the lack of manpower and organization for working for evaluation, nonprofessionalim of manpower for working for evaluation, the lack of top executives' leadership, the misbelief to evaluators, the lack of training on the
evaluation system, and etc.
Third, in the analysis of the research hypotheses regarding how feedback factors influence feedback seeking and job performance, this study demonstrated that environmental feedback factors and personal feedback factors have a positive relationship with personal feedback seeking and it showed that personal feedback seeking has a positive relationship with their job performance. This means that if government forms a feedback environment to be able to encourage feedback and it heightens the usefulness of feedback information, public employees' feedback seeking will be more activated and they will improve their job performance, and as a result, they will increase job performance of all departments of government.
Fourth, by comparing the evaluation and feedback systems of three countries: the United States; the United Kingdom; and Canada, this study suggests several implications for the feedback system of the Korean government: First, it is needed an inner team within department for evaluating each government department itself. Second, it is needed a standard or a framework for making out a strategy plan and a performance report for each government department. Third, feedback operation should be focused on program rather than organization itself. Finally, the connection between program and budget according to evaluation should be established at a gradual step.
Finally, this study suggested policy implications for changing the present feedback system into advanced one as follows. First, the present Self-Evaluation System of each government department should be changed into a more self-controled system. Second, the integration of several evaluation systems should be necessary. Third, the range of self-control of department in terms of evaluation should be extended. Fourth, the reliability and objectiveness of evaluation should be guaranteed. Fifth, the articulation and obviousness of evaluation should be needed. Sixth, an inner team within department for evaluating each department itself is needed. Seventh, the increase of manpower and professionalism for working for evaluation should be strengthened. Eighth, personal and organizational incentives based on evaluation should be extended. Ninth, the connection between program and budget according to evaluation should be established at a gradual step. Tenth, public employees' present recognition on feedback should be changed into more feedback-oriented recognition. Eleventh, public employees' learning and training for well-operation of feedback should be increased. Twelfth, top executives' strong will and leadership for activating the feedback process and feedback-seeking will be necessary. Finally, the participation of stockholders and the openness of evaluation results is necessary.
정부업무평가결과 환류의 정착방안 연구
서울 : 한국행정연구원
|Series Title; No||KIPA 연구보고서 / 2008-06|
|Subject Country||South Korea(Asia and Pacific)|
|Subject||Government and Law < Public Administration|