90
behavior. Therefore, this paper hopes to, through research, provide some suggestions how Chinese government can improve the function of civil servant performance management, further improve strategy execution, promote the effective tool of internal management level, improve service quality and guide citizens to participate in. The second is how to change the situation that focuses on results and ignores the process in civil servant performance management. Since the target responsibility management was the first system used in the civil servant performance management in Chinese government, more concerns are focused on the results but not the process. But in fact, it is very difficult to value public services by quantitative index, and the environmental factors also have some impact to the result of evaluation, in addition, Chinese government has the lack of standardized management in the evaluation, so in the absence of process control, the authenticity of the results tends to have more problems. The third is how to improve the effectiveness of technology in the civil service performance management. The performance evaluation technology is one of the important factors which determine the performance evaluation effect, and also the difficult question in performance appraisal. There were so many subjective qualitative factors in the civil service performance management some years ago in Chinese government. With the popular of quantitative methods, more and more local governments and departments enjoyed using them, however, another extreme emerges, that is, excessive emphasis on quantitative and drop in the” digital trap". In practice, the quantitative method and qualitative method should be combined, instead of separating from each other.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
91
integration of target and instrument orientations and the implementation of performance evaluative result was one the most important part in local performance evaluative process and critical premise to achieve the establishment of new evaluative system and to keep up with the time. Zhiren (2007) argued that public opinion played particularly an important role in performance evaluation to push forward the transformation of regulative government to service-oriented. And Jiannan (2005) thought the core of SOGs was serving the public needs, so the improvement of governments’ civil service performance should emphasize service quality, cost and improvement of customers’ satisfaction. Jiang (2006) also stated that SOGs’
civil service performance evaluation should adhere to the base of positioning governments’
function accurately, with meeting public needs as value orientation, and adhere to scientific development and people orientation, to the principle of public and third party as evaluators.
The civil servants’ performance management exists in all the procedures of government administration, so various problems can be found in the implementation.
Jianfeng and Zheng (2003) states the problems are disconnected to organizational strategy, index either too complicated or too simple, and inefficient performance communication.
While Guangming (2005) believes that the two main problems are unclear responsibility and complicated workflow. Xiaoguang (2006) points out that customer oriented civil servants’
performance evaluation system—service oriented government—has not come into shape and the main subject of civil servants performance evaluation, criteria and index cannot adapt to the requirements of service oriented government construction. Ningsheng (2006) discusses the cultivation and promotion of China’s civil servants performance management systematically and states the development of HRPM should have sound social management basis and at the same time should integrate with government reformation. Guoxian (2007) agrees that civil servants performance management is not only the scientific instrument and efficient tool to accelerate administrative management system reform, but also the main content of the reform. Lihui (2003) argues that government HRPM is beneficial for China’s transformation from management and control model to service oriented model. Shuigen and Lingling (2007) point out that civil servants’ performance management is one of the standards for construction of service oriented government. A responsible government should serve the people and performance management is one of the requisites. Yongliang and Jinqiu (2006) state that the studies on measurement and evaluation of government HRPM are beneficial for the improvement of work efficiency, service methods, fundamental change of government functions, and for the improvement of service quality. Guofu (2005 & 2007) proposes that government HRPM is beneficial for gradual withstanding of service oriented government concept, and for creation of new system and HRPM is the main breakthrough and basic requirement of service oriented government construction. Naikang (2004) argues that the actualization of civil servants’ performance evaluation system should contain target system, comparison system, measurement system and feedback system, which is mainly comprised of information and data collection, performance target confirmation and evaluation project division. Lihui (2002 & 2002) proposes that government performance evaluation should contain information collection, evaluation target confirmation, evaluation project division, performance measurement, and evaluation result application.
As for the present situation and existing problems of civil servants’ performance evaluation, Shuigen and Lingling (2007) believe that China’s evaluation is lack of subordinate institutionalization, the evaluation procedure is lack of assurance, and supervision mechanism is not complete. Zaisheng (2006) argues that the factors influencing evaluation are unclear job target, ambiguous evaluation standards with strong subjective, and disconnection of evaluation results and individual promotion and salary. Because the present
92
one has weak positive guidance, Yanhong (2006) states that the scientific evaluation method and normalized program are needed in China’s civil servants performance evaluation.
Guoxian (2007) points out problems exist in China’s civil servants’ performance evaluation results, such as random evaluation, insufficient systematic assurance, single evaluation results application, ineffective performance management methods, formalization of results application, and insufficient supporting measures, for example open information and incentives.
For the reasons of China’s civil servants’ evaluation dilemma and disturbance, Zhiren (2000, 2006, 2008 & 2009) points out four main reasons, the first is disconnection of civil servants’ job description and evaluation, that is the present job description cannot cover all responsible areas; the second is China’s western and eastern area difference, making the performance evaluation standards inaccurately cover all areas of China; the third is lack of rules and random implementation of rules, making incentives ineffective, and even conflicting psychology towards evaluation due to insufficient evaluation procedure transparency; the fourth is not enough emphasis on performance evaluation and value, making disconnection of evaluation and HR management. While Shuigen (2007) discusses three hindrance reasons of evaluation institutionalization: the first is limitation of present government performance evaluation techniques which comes from enterprise performance management, however, the public service department serves the public, and evaluation indicators are not easy to be put into quantization, and the performance management only develops shortly in China, therefore, the relative theories and practices are not sufficient in China’s evaluation; the second is the resistance of bureaucracy who has already benefited from the present evaluation system and who will resist or operate performance evaluation, and even paralyze the system; the third is the influence from traditional culture and idea which take the concept of “rule by man” as beneficial for harmonious organization, which make the scientific evaluation standard being replaced by people’s relationships, and which honor government standard power concept, making evaluation a method for the superior to control the subordinates. Zhang Yanhong (2006) believes that the existing problems are caused by subjective and objective factors, while the former includes government’s resistance towards performance evaluation mechanism and differentiation towards performance management cognition, and the latter includes unclear definition of public departments’ job functions, complexity in performance measurement, incomplete rules of performance evaluation, and weak performance management atmosphere. Suggestion are also offered Guoxian (2005 & 2007) for China’s civil servants’ performance evaluation, the first is to create beneficial atmosphere for the implementation of performance management, withholding the concept of the people’s satisfaction as value orientation, and generalization of performance evaluation as the content of administration reformation, and in the end the performance evaluation system will be constructed and people will be normalized toward reformation; the second is the establishment of scientific and effective evaluation indicators, analysis of civil servants’ job position, combination of quantitative and qualitative indicators and avoidance of repetition of indicators; the third is active usage of evaluation results, establishing effective feedback mechanism, connecting evaluation results and interests of evaluated objects, and making the civil servants being evaluated voluntarily being guided by evaluation indicators and completing organization target.
2.2 A theoretical analysis of the management policies of civil servants in China
“Civil Service Law of the People’s Republic of China” is an act proposed to appraise the public services’ ability including virtue, capability, attendance, performance and integrity
93
thoroughly by different levels of management authority, especially to evaluate actual performance, came into force and defined the evaluation very clearly on January 1st, 2006.
“Examination Requirement of Public Service— Trial implementation”, published by Organization Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security on January 4th, 2007, ruled the basic principles, contents, criteria, processes, results’ application and other relevant of the Civil Examination.
From then on, governments at all level refining the mechanism of civil examination continuously. But there are still several issues on the processes of Chinese civil servants’
performance management both in theoretical investigation and concrete practice.
There is some consensus of Chinese scholar to the development of civil service performance management of Chinese government department; the scholars agree that there are several issues have hampered the development of governments’ civil service performance management. The objective of performance assessment is obscure and should be clearly classified; the content of performance assessment is lack of quantitative criteria; the executive of performance assessment is incomplete; the supervised mechanism of performance assessment is imperfect; and the executors’ professional quality of performance assessment is insufficient.
After analysis of causes to the dilemma and obstruction to all the issues above about the civil service performance management of Chinese government, Chinese scholars agree that the following factors lead to the troubles mentioned above: the deviation of idea about performance management, the inappropriate classification of civil servants posts, ineffective implementation of position analysis, and invalid application of performance assessment.
About countermeasures for improvement, some solutions were proposed after the empirical analysis and theoretical research to the issues which had blocked the development of civil service performance management of Chinese government, such as establishment of the appropriate concepts of performance assessment, reasonable classification of the government civil service and accurate description of positions, scientific evaluation index, sound evaluation feedback and oversight mechanisms and reinforcement of practical application of evaluation results.
In summary, a relatively similar cognition is reached in each segment and aspect of assessment, and in the issues, causes and countermeasures of civil servants’ performance assessment. In specific studies, comparative study and documentary study methods are adopted by Chinese scholars to study the theory and practice of Chinese civil servants’
performance assessment, at the same time, problems caused by objective limitations appear in the researches. For example, some researches directly copy foreign experiences without consideration of Chinese conditions; some university researchers do not have relevant practical experience, while government officials who have abundant practice and experience should be introduced into the research process; most of countermeasures aiming to improve performance assessment are theoretical, more recommendations on specific practice should be explored; the perspective of research is relatively rigid, and innovation is needed in theoretical investigation and approach of study. In present researches of Chinese civil servant performance assessment, scholars merely set foot in the domain of specific practical investigation. Considering the previous situation, researches should make contribution, break the thinking pattern and deepen the reform of Chinese civil servants’ performance management.
94
2.3 Definition of SOGs’ civil service performance management
SOG civil servant performance management is based on value management. How to make the staff in governments work more effectively is the major concern of SOGs’ HRM.
The target of civil servant performance management should be designed on the base of analyzing social needs. Evaluative index should be adopted to assess the results and relevant influence of personal performance in governments, grading performance level, proposing performance improvement plan and promoting performance according to evaluative results.
Based on the above analysis, this study states: SOGs’ civil servant performance management based on value management is with the maximization of human resource as premise, value management concept as organizational common belief; human resource managers, playing the role of value managers, analyze departments’ performance plan and target, and with support of performance resource to value-added business in value driving factors, finally optimization of inner departments’ civil servant performance and personal value maximization can be acquired, and eventually effectiveness of outer administrative behavior and performance can be achieved.
In this pattern, the starting point and elementary are to make sure the performance target under the guidance of value concept, recreate business process and performance resource allocation management; the main content is to establish a set of evaluation index, performance standard and calculating methods which can reflect administrative function; and the core is to establish the application mechanism of evaluation results.
Performance managers in SOGs civil servant are combination of professional personnel specialized in performance management in human resource department and heads of different departments, who can support each other to achieve effective civil servant performance management. The main responsibilities of professional personnel are: program design of performance management, management technique service, evaluation method development, monitoring/evaluating activity, heads of departments assisting and activities organizing; and the heads of departments are executors and practitioners of performance management.
Different from traditional regulative government, SOG civil servant performance managers should pay more attention to achieve the value of civil servants who clearly understand HRPM, stimulate personal value creation through performance management and make sure value achievement of all human resource through various scientific mechanisms operation. Therefore, as value managers, different management patterns should be adopted, and they should not care external performance change or evaluative results, but SOGs providing sustainable excellent service for the public and promoting core ability of civil servants. Thus, creating value concept in SOGs is critical for value managers.
3. DESCRIPTION AND SITUATION ANALYSIS OF CHINESE CIVIL SERVANT