论美国政府绩效评估制度

发布时间：2018-04-18 14:14

本文选题：美国政府 + 绩效评估　；参考：《吉林大学》2004年博士论文

【摘要】：现代政府的公共行政中，绩效导向型管理（performance-oriented management）已成为各国政府改革追求的方向和目标。政府的绩效导向型管理是有目的地对资源与信息加以运用，以获取和显示在达到绩效导向型政府与项目的目标方面的显著进步；旨在将管理焦点转移致结果，提高服务质量与项目效益,强化政府责任，提高公众对政府的信任与支持，体现了政府改革对绩效、结果和责任的渴望。因此，绩效评估也由于可以通过识别希望的管理后果和评估它们的成就来提高政府工作的效率和效益而倍受各国政府的高度重视，并是过去30年中公共行政学文献里最为频繁出现的主题之一。党的十六届三中全会明确提出了“坚持以人为本，树立全面、协调、可持续的发展观，促进经济社会和人的全面发展”。科学的发展观引导着正确的政府绩效观，召唤着科学评估政府绩效的制度和方法。经济全球化的快速发展和我国入世后对外开放的现实对我国行政管理体制改革不断提出新的国际化、市场化的要求。目前，我国政府绩效评估实践所处的阶段以及面临的挑战，亟需政府从包括美国在内的外国政府绩效评估的先进实践中吸取经验和教训。这对于进一步改善我国政府绩效评估的实践状况，逐步建立中国特色的政府绩效评估制度，全面实现十六大提出的行政管理体制改革的目标有着非常重大的现实意义。 WP=165 综合国内外的各种观点，政府绩效评估是一些特定的评估活动的总称，主要由绩效测量和项目评价组成。它以政府的战略和目标为引导，以人们的思维框架为基础，选择政府的项目、服务和操作活动并在投入、产出、结果和经济、效率、效力、质量、公平等方面设置指标与标准，然后借助于这些指标与标准，通过对政府活动趋向于既定目标的日常测量和对政府所发挥作用的定期或专项评价，来评定政府活动的绩效。在实践中，建立一个有效的政府绩效评估系统要经过鉴别评估项目、陈述目的并确定所需结果、选择衡量标准或指标、设立绩效和后果（成就目标）的标准、监督结果、绩效报告、使用后果和绩效信息等过程。 20世纪初，美国地方政府开始了对好政府的追求并且以效率为核心对政府的运作进行测量与评估。随着时间的推移，奠基于进步主义运动、威尔逊的效率主义和泰勒的效率革命的政府绩效评估运动在美国得以扩展和延续，并且在不同的时代被赋予不同的主题和思想，以不同的面貌出现。在50-70年代，它以强调成本控制的改革预算管理形式出现；到了70-80年代，“伟大社会”项目的失败引发的生产率运动以及经济自由主义指导下的私有化运动所共同展现出了项目评价的发展、兴盛与衰落；进入90年代，伴随着《首席财务官法》和《政府绩效与结果法案》的出台，新一轮的政府绩效评估在总统与议会的双重支持与推动下，以绩效测量为主要内容在美国联邦政府中迅速推开。从理论上讲，每一个国家的政府绩效评估实践都会有其独特性，这种独特性植根于各国特有的国民性格、价值观以及制度结构等因素所构建的实践基础之上。美国的政府绩效评估实践同样也因其基础的独特性而表现出特有的美国特色。美国政府绩效评估实践的主要理论基础是管理主义，它强调公共部门对私营部门管理技术与经验的借鉴与应用；而 WP=166 美国政府绩效评估实践的历程就是一个管理主义实践的历程。价值观基础包括质疑政府观与金钱至上观。由于对政府的质疑，美国人有着强烈的监督政府的意识；而金钱至上则使得美国人对税收、腐败、浪费等现象非常敏感，迫使政府力求成为有责任政府。美国人富有冒险和创新精神，这使得他们能够不断地探索新的评估技术与工具；同时，美国人在道德领域又相当保守，，无法容忍官员的腐败。美国人性格中的神圣化倾向与金钱至上观相结合，使得他们总是希望政府能够像工商业界那样高效、优质地提供公共服务，而非神秘化也帮助他们更为密切地监督着政府的活动。政治架构中纵向的中央与州、地方政府的分权，以及横向的三权分立和民众与精英的监督与控制，则为政府绩效评估添加了许多的不确定性。在基础因素的作用下，美国政府绩效评估的发起阶段，方案设计力量的一元化使设计呈现理性化特色；而多元化社会基础又为多支力量发起评估提供了机会，结果又赋予政府绩效评估实践持续性特色。在绩效评估的运行阶段，由于理性设计的方案被互动式的运行过程所扭曲，而趋于失败，所以导致政府绩效评估实践呈现了间断性特色。从整个绩效评估发展历程上看，持续性与间断性的结合使得政府绩效评估历程表现出时断时续的特征；而政治架构的分权特色导致绩效评估实践具有明显的局部性，总是不能在全国全面推开，甚至在一级政府的所有部门内的全面铺开也有可能成为奢望。我国政府对自身绩效的普遍关注始于20世纪90年代中后期。目前，政府绩效评估实践基本处于探索阶段。归纳起来，绩效评估实践可分为三类：一是以目标责任制、效能监察、行风评议等为代表的普适性的政府机关绩效评估；二是以卫生部、教育部等对各自所属企事业单位进行 WP=167 的组织绩效的定期评估为代表的行业组织绩效评估；三是以珠海市“万人评政府”、深圳市“企业评政府”等为代表的专项绩效评估。中国政府绩效评估
[Abstract]:Public administration of modern government, performance oriented management (performance-oriented Management) has become the direction and goal of government reform. The performance oriented management of government is to make use of resources and information, to obtain and display the remarkable progress in the goal to reach the performance oriented government and the project aims at will; management focus to result, improve service quality and efficiency, strengthen government responsibility, improve the public trust and support of the government, reflects the government reform on the performance, desire and responsibility of the results. Therefore, the performance evaluation also can be identified by the expectant results and evaluate their achievements to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government work the more attention of governments, and public administration in the past 30 years in the literature as one of the most frequently mentioned themes.
In the third Plenary Session of the 16th CPC Central Committee the party clearly put forward the "people-oriented, establishing comprehensive, coordinated, sustainable development view, promote the economic society and human development. The scientific development view leads to the correct performance view of government, calls for the scientific system and method of government performance evaluation. The rapid development of economic globalization and China's accession to the WTO the opening of the reality of China's administrative system reform continuously put forward new internationalization, the demands of the market. At present, the practice of the stage and the challenges of government performance evaluation in our country, the experiences and lessons from foreign advanced practice need the government to government performance evaluation including the United States. The further improvement of the assessment the practice of Chinese government performance, government performance evaluation system and gradually establish Chinese characteristics, the full realization of the reform of the administrative system of the sixteen The goal is of great practical significance.
WP=165
Various viewpoints at home and abroad, government performance evaluation is a general term for some specific evaluation activities, mainly consists of performance measuring and program evaluation. It takes the government's strategy and objectives for the guide, based on the thinking framework, government projects, service and operation activities and in the input, output, and economic results, efficiency, effectiveness, quality, set up index and standard of justice, and then with the help of these indexes and standards, through the daily measurement of government activities tend to set goals and the government play regular or special evaluation function, to evaluate the performance of governmental activities. In practice, the establishment of an effective government performance the evaluation system through the identification assessment project, purpose statement and determine the desired results, selection standards or indicators, set up performance and consequences (achievement goal) standards, inspection results, performance reports, after use The process of fruit and performance information.
At the beginning of twentieth Century, the local government began to pursue the good government and with efficiency as the core measurement and evaluation of the operation of the government. With the passage of time, to lay the progressive movement based on the government performance evaluation exercise efficiency revolution efficiency doctrine and Taylor's Wilson to expand and continue in the United States, and in different times endowed with different themes and ideas, in different aspect. At the age of 50-70, it is to emphasize the form of the reform of the budget management of cost control; to the 70-80's, "private instruction triggered great society" the failure of the project productivity movement and economic freedom of movement by the common show development project evaluation the rise and decline; in 90s, with the chief financial officer of < > and < > the government performance and Results Act introduced a new round of government performance evaluation in general With the dual support and promotion of the unification and parliament, the main content of performance measurement is pushed forward rapidly in the United States federal government.
Theoretically, every country's government performance evaluation practice will have its uniqueness, its uniqueness is rooted in their own national character, on the basis of the practice of constructing values and system structure and other factors. The government performance evaluation practice of the United States is also due to its uniqueness and shows a unique basis the main feature of the United States. Theoretical basis of practice of the United States government to assess the performance of management, which emphasizes the reference and application of the public sector to the private sector management skills and experience; and
WP=166
Process practice of American government performance evaluation is a management practice. The value basis including the concept and question the government money view. Because of questions about the government, Americans have a strong sense of government supervision; and money makes Americans for tax, corruption, waste phenomenon is very sensitive, forcing the government to be a responsible government. Americans are adventurous and innovative spirit, which allows them to constantly explore new evaluation techniques and tools; at the same time, Americans in the field of ethics and rather conservative, unable to tolerate corruption. Sacred trend and money in the American character, first view combined, so that they always hope that the government would like business the industry that efficient, high quality to provide public services, but also help them to demystify more closely monitor the activities of the government. Political structure in vertical Decentralization of central government and local governments, horizontal separation of three powers and supervision and control of the masses and elites add much uncertainty to government performance evaluation.
Based on the effect of the factors, to evaluate the performance of the U. S. government launched a unified design stage, the design strength showed rational characteristics; and the diversification of social foundation and provides opportunities for multiple force initiated assessment results and give the government performance evaluation practice of persistent characteristics. In the running stage of performance evaluation, the rational design the scheme is distorted by interactive operation process, and tends to fail, resulting in the government performance evaluation practice presents intermittent characteristics. The course of development from the perspective of the performance evaluation, continuity and discontinuity combination makes the government performance evaluation process showed intermittent characteristics; and political structure which has the local characteristics of decentralization obviously the performance evaluation practice, not always in the country to fully open, even in all sectors of the level of government in full swing may also become a luxury Look.
Our government pay close attention to their performance in late 1990s. At present, the government performance evaluation practice in the exploration stage. To sum up, the performance evaluation practice can be divided into three categories: one is based on the target responsibility system, efficiency supervision, government performance evaluation of PCED as the representative of the general; two the Ministry of health, the Ministry of education of their respective enterprises
WP=167
The periodic evaluation of organizational performance is the performance evaluation of the representative industry organizations; the three is the special performance evaluation represented by Zhuhai's "ten thousand people commentary" and Shenzhen's "enterprise evaluation government".
Performance evaluation of Chinese government

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2004
【分类号】：D771.2

【引证文献】