查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 文官甄補政策的價值意涵及其實踐=The Recruiment and Selection of Civil Servants: It's Value Implication and Implementation |
---|---|
作者 | 林鍾沂; | 書刊名 | 空大行政學報 |
卷期 | 8 1998.05[民87.05] |
頁次 | 頁23-46 |
分類號 | 573.41 |
關鍵詞 | 功績制; 分贓制; 代表制; 救助行動方案; 社會正義; Merit system; Spoils system; Representative system; Affirmative action; Social justice; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 一般而言,文官甄補的意涵, 必須要面對功績制的才能任用、恩寵制的政治任命、與代表制的優惠行為三者的交錯作用。爰此,本文先以上述三種的甄補型態之價值意涵,從事辯證性的思考,並據以檢討我國過去所實施的文官甄補作為,指出以前的努力,「雖然轉向功績,但卻功績不足;袪除政治恩庇,卻乏適度的政治回應;朝向社會公正,卻步履蹣跚」,而提出文官甄補未來的建議為:改善考選效度欠佳的文官考試;重新思考部長責任和縣長責任的政治任用;以及合理建構具有社會代表性的特種考試。唯在探討我國文官甄補政策的演進過程中,筆者深刻覺得整個甄補制度的運轉陷入在「偏執的慣性」中。而這種偏執的慣性,才是推動我國未來文官考選與甄補的主要隱憂。 |
英文摘要 | In general, there are three types in the recruitment of civil service: the merit selection, the patronage appointment and the affirmative action. Each system has its countervaiting values. After exploring these systems, we can point out our previous personnel recruitment as follows: turning to merit system, but not enough merit; getting rid of political patronage, but not adequate for political responsiveness; and going toward social justice, but so clumsy. For the advancement of our future civil service, I suggest to: (1) improve context and content validity of civil service examinations; (2) rethink the political appointment of ministry or county mayors; (3) deliberately construct the special exams of social representativeness in our civil service systems. In addition, we must have recruitment policy out of paranoia on the culture of public personnel function. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。