성과평가 등급의 수와 공무원의 동기부여

Abstract

피평가자인 공무원들이 성과평가의 결과를 받아보았을 때 우선적으로 접하게 되는 것이 바로 등급이다. 등급으로 성과평가를 받은 공무원들은 성과평가의 등급을 성가평가의 결과로 인식하며, 동시에 결과에 대한 피드백을 받는다. 또한, 승진이나 성과급 지급에 직접적인 근거로서 성과평가의 등급을 직접적으로 활용할 수 있다. 특히 최근에 들어와서는 성과주의 확산과 더불어 성과평가가 공무원들에게 동기부여의 요소로 부각되어 성과평가의 등급을 늘리고자 하는 시도가 지속적으로 이루어지고 있다. 하지만 성과평가 등급단계의 신설이 피평가자의 동기부여에 있어 효과적인지에 대한 실증적인 근거는 부족하다. 본 연구는 성과평가 등급개수와 동기부여 측면의 효과성과 관련된 뚜렷한 준거가 존재하지 않는 상황에 대한 탐색적 연구의 성격을 지니고 있다. 연구의 실현가능성을 위하여 경기도 A 지방자치단체에 재직 중인 공무원들을 연구대상으로 하여 자기보고식 설문조사를 실시하였다. 설문조사는 2016년 10월 10일부터 21일까지 약 2주 동안 진행하였으며, A시 공무원 600명에게 설문지를 배부하여 그 중 416부를 분석에 활용하였다. 분석방법으로는 빈도분석, 신뢰도 및 타당도분석을 하였으며, 차이검증으로 T-test와 ANOVA분석을 실시하였다. 또한, 독립변수인 성과평가 공정성 인식, 과업상호의존성, 집단주의 조직문화가 종속변수인 성가평가등급 개수간의 영향력을 살펴보기 위해 상관관계분석과 이항로짓분석을 하였다. 이에 대한 분석결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫 번째로 ‘공공조직에서도 성과평가가 필요하다고 인식하는 공무원일수록 동기부여적인 측면에서 2단계 평가체계(pass-fail system)를 선호하지 않을 것이다’라는 가설은 채택되었다. 이로 미루어 보면, 성과평가의 필요성에 동의를 구하지 않은 상태에서 성과평가의 등급을 세분화한다면 조직 내에서의 반발이 커질 것으로 예상해 볼 수 있다. 두 번째로, ‘공공조직에서 성과평가가 공정하다고 인식하는 공무원일수록 동기부여적인 측면에서 2단계 평가체계(pass-fail system)를 선호하지 않을 것이다’라는 가설은 기각되었다. 세 번째로, ‘과업상호의존성이 높은 업무를 수행하는 공무원일수록 동기부여적인 측면에서 2단계 평가체계(pass-fail system)를 선호할 것이다’라는 가설 역시 기각되었다. 네 번째로, ‘집단주의 조직문화가 강하게 형성되어 있는 부서에서 근무하는 공무원일수록 동기부여적인 측면에서 2단계 평가체계(pass-fail system)를 선호할 것이다’라는 가설도 기각되었다. 본 연구는 4개의 가설 중 3개의 가설이 통계적으로 유의하지 않은 분석결과가 도출되었다는 한계를 지니고 있다. 그러나 한국의 공직사회에서 성과평가와 관련하여 이론적·실증적 측면에서 체계적인 근거 없이 법적으로 평가등급의 수를 3개 이상으로 하여야 한다는 강행적인 규정에 의해 성과평가를 시행하고 있었다. 성과평가의 등급의 등급 개수에 대한 논의가 이제까지 제대로 이루어진 적이 없다는 사실에 비추어보았을 때, 본 연구를 통해서 한국의 공직사회에 대한 성과평가제도의 저변 확대 및 성과평가 등급의 고민과 관심을 촉발시키는데 그 의미가 크다고 할 수 있다. 다만 성과평가 등급에 대한 사전 고민이 전혀 이루어지지 않은 상태에서의 설문은 현행 평가단계에 대해 이미 조직적으로 학습화된 관행에 따라 기계적으로 응답하였을 가능성을 의심해볼 수도 있다. 따라서 후속연구에서는 이에 기반한 허위변수들을 명확하게 통제하여 보다 정교된 검증이 요구될 것이다.|This study explored the situation of the absence of a clear criteria related to the number of performance appraisal grades. In addition, motivational issues which make civil servants show a higher preference concerning terms of motivation in certain circumstances were studied. The purpose of this study is to examine how different levels of performance ratings affect civil servants' motivations on their performance appraisals. In order to do so, a self-report questionnaire was administrated to civil servants in city A and the results derived from the analysis of the 416 participants’ responses. When civil servants receive the results of the performance appraisal, appraisal grades are what come first. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence about the effectiveness of the performance appraisal stage establishment regarding public server motivation. When setting the number of appraisal grades, it is important to consider each civil servants’ subjects to appraisals. This will affect the settings and developments within the performance appraisal system. Performance appraisals are designed to serve as a basis for personnel related decisions. By linking rewards to performance, agencies seek to motivate poor performers to increase their productivity, while maintaining or enhancing that of higher performers. In order for agencies to differentiate between the rewards of high and average performers, it is necessary for them to have multi-level rating systems. Pass-fail systems do not distinguish between high and average performers; this only makes the use of performance ratings for personnel related decisions much more difficult. Experiences with performance-based rewards have not yet been successful in the government agencies because they do not provide meaningful differences in rewards among above-average and poor performers. The rating levels used by agencies derived from the intended results of performance appraisal. Because of the difficulties in rewarding high performers, this study suspected that higher performers are less likely to be satisfied with pass-fail systems. Several analysis methods were used to examine the relationship between the levels of performance appraisals and civil servants’ motivations. Firstly, frequency and descriptive statistic analyses were performed to search for the averages and standard deviations of general items. Secondly, a factor analysis was conducted to name the sub-factors, and Cronbach’s alpha was yielded to test the reliability of each factor. Thirdly, independent sample t-test and analysis of variance were performed to identify differences between groups. Fourthly, a correlation analysis was conducted to determine the relationship’s degrees between the levels of performance appraisals and civil servants' motivation. Lastly, a binary logic analysis was carried out. The following conclusions were drawn from the results. Firstly, this study initially hypothesized that the more civil servants who recognized the need for performance appraisals showed motivation the less they will prefer the pass-fail systems. After applying this analysis methods to this hypothesis this study found statistical significance that proof this relation. Secondly, hypothesis in this study predicted that the more civil servants who recognized equity in performance appraisals showed motivation the less they will prefer the pass-fail systems. Followed by this statistical analyses this study found no significance level to support this hypothesis. Thirdly, this study hypothesized that civil servants with higher levels of task interdependence that showed motivation will prefer the pass-fail systems. However, this study did not find statistical significance in this analysis of these hypotheses. Final hypothesis in this study was that within local government agencies with a strong formed organizational collectivism, civil servants who showed motivation will prefer the pass-fail systems. However, this relationship did not showed statistical significance. Although this study created an important discussion about performance rating levels and civil servants' motivation with performance appraisals, there has not been enough studies on the subject of performance appraisal systems in practice. Additionally, previous studies showed the improving of performance appraisals formalities, but this study addressed issues of awareness and civil servants’ preferences.; This study explored the situation of the absence of a clear criteria related to the number of performance appraisal grades. In addition, motivational issues which make civil servants show a higher preference concerning terms of motivation in certain circumstances were studied. The purpose of this study is to examine how different levels of performance ratings affect civil servants' motivations on their performance appraisals. In order to do so, a self-report questionnaire was administrated to civil servants in city A and the results derived from the analysis of the 416 participants’ responses. When civil servants receive the results of the performance appraisal, appraisal grades are what come first. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence about the effectiveness of the performance appraisal stage establishment regarding public server motivation. When setting the number of appraisal grades, it is important to consider each civil servants’ subjects to appraisals. This will affect the settings and developments within the performance appraisal system. Performance appraisals are designed to serve as a basis for personnel related decisions. By linking rewards to performance, agencies seek to motivate poor performers to increase their productivity, while maintaining or enhancing that of higher performers. In order for agencies to differentiate between the rewards of high and average performers, it is necessary for them to have multi-level rating systems. Pass-fail systems do not distinguish between high and average performers