Civil Service Reform: The Enduring Conflict Between Neutral Competence and Responsiveness

1. Civil Service Reform: The Enduring Conflict Between Neutral Competence and Responsiveness Stephen E. Condrey, Ph.D. University of Georgia

2. 文官改革： 中立能力與政治回應間之持續衝突 史蒂芬‧康德雷博士 喬治亞大學

3. “One thing seems clear: that the principles of merit and the practices whereby they were given substance are changing and must change a good deal more to remain viable in our society.” Human resource management systems “should be decentralized and delegated to bring them into more immediate relationship with the middle and lower managers whom they serve.” - Frederick Mosher (1968)

4. 「有一點顯然明確無誤：功績原則以及為這些原則賦予實質內容的作法已然有所改變，而且還必須出現更大的變化，才能繼續適用於當前的社會。」「有一點顯然明確無誤：功績原則以及為這些原則賦予實質內容的作法已然有所改變，而且還必須出現更大的變化，才能繼續適用於當前的社會。」 人力資源管理體系「必須分權化並充分授權，才能與這些體系所服務的中階及低階主管產生更為緊密的關係」。 —莫舍（1968）

5. The Constant Tension Between “Neutral Competence” and “Responsiveness” “Since the rise of merit systems in the United States, civil service processes have been designed in large part to insulate public servants from politics and partisanship…The challenge has always been to find a way to temper the control and flexibility that are required with appropriate levels of protection for public employees.” - J. Edward Kellough & Lloyd G. Nigro (2006)

6. 「中立能力」與「政治回應能力」之緊張關係 「自從功績制度在美國興起以來，文官程序的設計就主要著眼於保護公務人員不受政治與黨派的影響……一向以來的最大挑戰，就是如何在必須控制與彈性之下，又能適當保障公務人員。」 —克洛與奈格羅（2006）

7. Three Cases of Civil Service Reform: • State of Georgia • Jefferson County Personnel Board, Alabama • U.S. Department of Homeland Security

8. 文官改革三例 喬治亞州 阿拉巴馬州傑佛遜郡人事委員會 美國國土安全部

9. State merit protections abolished for new hires in 1996. Decentralized state human resources administration. “I will also bring you legislation to revise the State Merit System, which was established more than 50 years ago to create a professional workforce that was free of political cronyism…But too often in government, we pass laws to fix particular problems of the moment, and then we allow half a century to roll by without ever following up to see what the long-term consequences have been…A solution in 1943 is a problem in 1996. The problem is governmental paralysis, because despite its name, our present Merit System is not about merit…It can take six to eight weeks to fill a critical position in state government. It takes a year to a year-and-a-half to fire a bad worker, because of the mountain of endless paperwork, hearings and appeals.” - Former State of Georgia Governor Zell Miller (1996) State of Georgia

10. 喬治亞州 ‧1996年廢止州政府新進人員保障制度。 州政府人力資源管理分權化。 「我也將推動法案修改州政府功績制度。這套制度奠定於五十多年前，目的在於建立專業的工作團隊，避免政治人物恣意任用親信……政府經常為了因應當下的問題而通過法律，接著卻任由半個世紀的時光如此流過，毫不追蹤當初的作為帶來了什麼樣的長期後果……1943年的解決方案，到了1996年可能就會成為問題。這個問題就是政府癱瘓。當今的功績制度雖然叫這個名稱，實際上卻不是著眼於功績……州政府內的關鍵職位如果出缺，大概6到8週即可補進人員。但要解僱不良員工，則需要花上1年到1年半的時間，原因是解雇員工需要經歷無窮無盡的文書作業以及聽證會與申訴等過程。」 —喬治亞州前州長米勒（1996）

11. Percentage of Unclassified versus Classified Employees*State of Georgia: 1999 - 2008 *Headcount totals for full-time equivalent (FTE) employees for each year were pulled as available from PeopleSoft HR System as they existed 03-11-2009. *For purposes of consistency from year-to-year, FTE employees are defined as all regular, benefit-eligible employees on non-temporary pay plans. **Records for 2006 and forward are under current review by State Personnel as some may have been affected by the most recent PeopleSoft upgrade.

12. 非正式員工與正式員工的百分比*喬治亞州：1999—2008非正式員工與正式員工的百分比*喬治亞州：1999—2008 *每年全時約當數（FTE）員工的人數資料，係取自2009年11月3日的人軟人力資源管理系統 *為了維繫不同年度之間的一致性，FTE員工的定義乃是享有福利的正式員工，不含臨時僱用人員。 **2006年之後的紀錄，目前正受到州政府人事委員會的審核，原因是其中若干數據可能受到人軟系統最近的 升級所影響。

13. Right-to-work state with weak public employee unions Gubernatorial success in passing his legislative agenda Editorial support of the state’s largest circulation newspapers Support of the state’s bureaucratic leadership Georgia – A Perfect Storm?Factors Influencing the Legislative Success of the Georgia Reform

14. 喬治亞州—一場完美風暴？促成喬治亞州改革計畫立法成功的因素喬治亞州—一場完美風暴？促成喬治亞州改革計畫立法成功的因素 州政府重視工作權，而且公務人員工會力量孱弱。 州長成功通過其立法議程 州內各大報社都以社論表達支持 州政府官僚領袖鼎力支持

15. HR Professionals’ Experience with EAWProper Use of At-Will Employment* Cronbach’s Alpha = .842 *Respondents were asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement with survey statements related to employment at-will using the following scale: 1 = “Strongly Disagree”; 2 = “Disagree”; 3 = “Neither Agree/Disagree”; 4 = “Agree”; and 5 = “Strongly Agree.” Percentages reported in the table do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding and omission of “neither agree or disagree” responses.

16. 人力資源專家對任意僱用作法的經驗適當運用任意僱用原則*人力資源專家對任意僱用作法的經驗適當運用任意僱用原則* 克隆巴赫阿爾發係數Cronbach’s Alpha=. 842 *調查對象對於問卷問題表示同意與否，係採以下量表：1=「強烈反對」；2=「反對」；3=「不同意也不反對」；4=「同意 」；5=「強烈同意」。上表的百分比，因為捨去小數點後過多的位數，以及略去「不同意也不反對」的回答數，因此加總 起來不等於百分之一百。

17. HR Professionals’ Experience with EAWMisuse of At-Will Employment* Cronbach’s Alpha = .802 *Respondents were asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement with survey statements related to employment at-will using the following scale: 1 = “Strongly Disagree”; 2 = “Disagree”; 3 = “Neither Agree/Disagree”; 4 = “Agree”; and 5 = “Strongly Agree.” Percentages reported in the table do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding and omission of “neither agree or disagree” responses.

18. 人力資源專家對任意僱用作法的經驗 濫用任意僱用原則* 克隆巴赫 阿爾發係數=.802 *調查對象對於問卷問題表示同意與否，係採以下量表：1=「強烈反對」；2=「反對」；3=「不同意也不反對」；4=「同意 」；5=「強烈同意」。上表的百分比，因為捨去小數點後過多的位數，以及略去「不同意也不反對」的回答數，因此加總 起來不等於百分之一百。

19. Fundamental Flaw? “EAW systems may have a fundamental flaw in that they may undermine trusting workplace relationships necessary for effective public management.” - R. Paul Battaglio & Stephen E. Condrey (2009)

20. 根本性的缺陷？ 「任意雇用制度可能具有根本性的缺陷，足以破壞職場上的信任關係，而這種信任關係正是公共管理不可或缺的要素。」 —巴塔格里歐與康德雷（2009）

21. Has EAW Diffused? Overall trend is toward lessening of employee rights and decentralized methods of personnel administration.

22. 目前的整體趨勢是削減員工權利及人事管理的分權作法。目前的整體趨勢是削減員工權利及人事管理的分權作法。 任意僱用制度是否已經擴散？

23. General Summary of Interview Findings: Snapshot of Current Conditions in the States’ Personnel Systems (Source: Hays & Sowa, 2006)

24. 訪談結果摘要：各州人事系統當前狀況概要(來源：海斯與索瓦，2006)訪談結果摘要：各州人事系統當前狀況概要(來源：海斯與索瓦，2006)

25. General Summary of Interview Findings: Snapshot of Current Conditions in the States’ Personnel Systems (Source: Hays & Sowa, 2006)

26. 訪談結果摘要：各州人事系統當前狀況概要（來源：海斯與索瓦，2006）訪談結果摘要：各州人事系統當前狀況概要（來源：海斯與索瓦，2006）

27. General Summary of Interview Findings: Snapshot of Current Conditions in the States’ Personnel Systems (Source: Hays & Sowa, 2006)

28. 訪談結果摘要：各州人事系統當前狀況概要（來源：海斯與索瓦，2006）訪談結果摘要：各州人事系統當前狀況概要（來源：海斯與索瓦，2006）

29. Jefferson County, Alabama • Placed into receivership by the federal courts (first verifiable instance) • Strong civil service system • Emphasis on modernization, not abolition as in Georgia

30. 阿拉巴馬州傑佛遜郡 由聯邦法院判決破產接管（獲得證實的首例） 健全的文官制度 強調現代化，不像喬治亞州以廢除為主。

31. Jefferson County, Alabama Personnel Board • Established 1935 • Covers approximately 12,000 employees in Birmingham, Jefferson County, and other cities within Jefferson County • Very traditional civil service system – 3 member Board, citizens commission appoints the Board • Mayors and County Commissioners have little or no influence over the Board

32. 阿拉巴馬州傑佛遜郡人事委員會 成立於1935年 下轄傑佛遜郡伯明罕市及其他城市約一萬兩千名員工 非常傳統的文官制度—3人委員會，由公民委員會任命。 郡長與郡政委員對委員會幾無影響力

33. Contrary to the Overall Trend Civil Service Reform and the Decline of the Commission Format “Ironically, at the same time that the federal government has been pressuring state and local governments to adopt and strengthen merit systems, the commission form of administering them was on the wane for reasons similar to the abolition of the commission form at the federal level. Put simply, independent structurally, and politically isolated personnel agencies of a regulatory nature were having great difficultly in serving the needs of elected executives and public managers. They became viewed as obstacles to efficiency and effectiveness and were often seen as unduly influenced by pressure groups.” - Norma M. Riccucci & Katherine C. Naff (2008)

34. 文官改革與委員會制度的衰退 相反於整體的趨勢 「反諷的是，就在聯邦政府督促各州及地方政府採用及強化功績制度的同時，推行這些措施的委員會制度卻逐漸衰退，原因與聯邦層級廢止委員會制度的理由相同。簡單說，在結構上與政治上處於孤立而且本質上屬於管制性的人事機關，很難滿足民選官員與公共管理者的需求。這樣的人事機關因此被視為效率和有效作為的絆腳石，也經常被認為受到壓力團體的不當影響。」 —里古奇與奈芙（2008）

35. Receivership History • Failure to produce valid civil service examinations • Federal judge calls director “incompetent” • Ronald Sims (Management Professor at The College of William & Mary) appointed as receiver on July 8, 2002 • Released from receivership on November 20, 2008

36. 未能舉行有效的文官考試 聯邦法官指責人事主管「無能」 羅納德‧席姆斯（威廉瑪麗學院管理學教授）於2002年7月8日被任命為接管人 2008年11月20日結束接管 接管過程

37. Receiver Findings PBJC mired in the past Organizational problems – Structure & Personnel Outdated Technology “Only a few employees could access the information and only then generally for the limited purpose of manual data entry. Other member jurisdictions had no electronic access to the information. There were virtually no analytical tools, no query-building capabilities, and no logical relationships between data structures. Office shelves were crowded and floors were littered with binders of outdated reports and stacks of continuous-feed papers reflecting information housed in an otherwise inaccessible database. The staff was generally not computer literate. Few desktop computers existed in the organization. In short, the Receiver believed that the lack of infrastructure contributed to PBJC’s struggling to execute its basic statutory responsibilities.” - Ronald R. Sims (Forthcoming, 2009)

38. 接管所獲得的發現 • 傑佛遜郡人事委員會墨守舊法，毫無進步。 • 組織問題—結構與人員 • 過時的科技 「只有少數員工能夠接觸相關資訊，而且也只是為了手動輸入資料而已。其他轄區無法透過電子通訊取得資訊。他們幾乎完全沒有分析工具，沒有問題建構能力，資料結構之間也沒有邏輯關係。辦公室的書架上堆滿了書籍文件，地板上也滿是一本本過期的報告以及一疊疊連續印表紙，顯示資訊都保存在無法以其他方式存取的資料庫裡。工作人員整體而言都不具備電腦能力，整個組織裡看不到幾部桌上型電腦。簡言之，接管人認為傑佛遜郡人事委員會之所以未能充分執行法律規定的基本職責，乃是因為欠缺基礎設施。」 —羅納德‧席姆斯（即將提出的報告，2009）

39. Receiver Accomplishments • Replaced or trained existing staff • Modern HRIS system • New pay plan • New organization structure • Remodeled offices • Revamped rules • Met requirements for professional examination and testing division

40. 更換或訓練既有人員 現代化的人力資源管理系統 新的償付計畫 新的組織結構 辦公室重新裝修 修改規定 達成設立專業考試小組的要求 接管人的成就

41. PBJC Outcomes • Rebuilt 1935 Cadillac • Complaints of responsiveness by Mayors • Released from litigation dating from the 1970s

42. 傑佛遜郡人事委員會的結果 重建1935年的昂貴計畫 郡長抱怨回應速度不夠快 擺脫了1970年代以來的訴訟官司

43. PBJC in Perspective • Attempt to professionalize from the “bottom-up” • No attempts for “top-down” professionalization • Corrupt County Commission • County near bankruptcy • Strong mayor form of government • Legislative push for a county manager

44. 持平評價傑佛遜郡人事委員會 • 企圖「由下而上」進行專業化 • ‧沒有「由上而下」的專業化嘗試 • ‧腐敗的郡委員會 • ‧郡政府近乎破產 • ‧強郡長制政府 • ‧立法設置郡經理

45. Department of Homeland Security “Change through crisis has been ongoing theme in American government. In a system designed to move hesitantly and incrementally, emergencies, not grand theory, are what often spark the energy for significant action.” - Camilla Stivers & Ralph P. Hummel (2007)

46. 國土安全部 「經由危機而改革是美國政府一再出現的現象。現行體系的設計原本就是要讓政府以緩慢而漸進的方式運作，因此能夠激起重大行動的力量向來不是什麼大理論，而是緊急狀況。」 —史蒂佛絲與休墨爾（2007）

47. Decentralization Trend Seen in States Continues In Federal Government • Thompson terms this “disaggregation” • Related to private sector and aligning strategy and mission • DOD and DHS are examples: “A direct consequence of these new systems, however, is the disaggregation of the federal personnel system into multiple, agency-specific systems. Disaggregation, in turn, represents a fundamental threat to an institution whose viability is contingent on its inherently collective nature.” - James R. Thompson (2006)

48. 出現於各州的分權化趨勢在聯邦政府中持續發展出現於各州的分權化趨勢在聯邦政府中持續發展 湯普森稱之為「分散」 私部門以及策略與任務的一致性都與此有關 國防部與國土安全部是這方面的範例： 「然而，這些新制度所造成的一項直接後果，就是聯邦人事體系分散為隨機關而異的多樣化體系。現行政府體制的運作必須仰賴本身集體性的本質，因此這種分散化對現行體制乃是一種根本上的威脅。」 —湯普森（2006）

49. DHS Overview • Created October 8, 2001 • Afforded greater flexibility with labor relations, compen-sation, etc. • Union opposition • Political rollercoaster – 2002 election & 2006 election

50. 國土安全部概觀 創立於2001年10月8日 在勞動關係與報酬等方面獲得較大的彈性 工會反對 政治動盪——2002年與2006年的選舉