| 摘要: | 非營利組織實現公益價值，倡導自由、民主、平等、福利、人權與永續的議題，有其「公共性」與「自主性」。組織的產生自發於公益的使命，為其組織的主觀責任，於運作時將會伴隨客觀責任的產生，這亦是非營利組織的責任體。 非營利組織在實踐使命時，運用許多社會資源來服務弱勢族群，社會大眾雖然本於信任、尊重與愛心而給予支持，卻同時期待其展現高道德標準與負責的能力。對照非營利組織運作實務，前述社會責任可區分為內隱的自律與外顯的他律，或者另外稱為主觀責任與客觀責任（課責）。本研究聚焦於客觀責任相關概念與研究的分析與解釋，結合身心障礙服務機構運作的現況分析，旨在從機構經營者的觀點出發，探討身心障礙服務機構客觀責任架構的內涵。 文獻探討得知，非營利組織的客觀責任內涵與實踐充滿動態性，Romzek與Ingraham以多元角度將非營利組織課責內涵區分為：層級課責、法律課責、政治課責、專業課責四個面向。從指標建立來看，研究者經常運用資源基礎理論、資源依賴理論、代理理論、利益相關者理論等，建構出「使命達成度與社會接受度、效率、投入程度、滿意度、平衡度、轉換度」等，作為非營利組織管理指標的參考。 但以「身心障礙服務機構評鑑」實務為例，政府運用非營利組織客觀責任評量架構作為評鑑工具，受評機構若符合評鑑指標便可免除政府管制改善的約束，但殊不知組織運作方向及資源分配也隨之受控於政府。這導致身心障礙機構總是被迫依評鑑指標來實踐其服務使命，未能考量整體服務發展與品質要求，也讓組織願景與特色逐漸流失，甚或產生資源排擠效果，扼殺多元服務的發展。況且目前評鑑指標項目達154項，執行過程實已排擠、耗損機構過多的資源。因此，本研究認為客觀責任評量架構的建立，必須顧及財務面與非財務面、短期目標與長期目標的平衡，也要考量內部環境與外界環境的互動，且符合「服務內容的選擇、為誰服務、志工與專職人員的管理、財力與物力資源、業務效率的追求、決策核心的運作」等六項非營利組織運作基本課題。因此本研究結合平衡計分卡架構，運用德菲問卷調查，邀請身心障礙服務機構經營者填答問卷，彙整非營利組織觀點，對當前政府權責機關所實施的客觀責任評量架構提出修正。 研究發現，政府部門由過去較重視「輸入」、「過程」的規範與約束，已轉而重視以「產出」、「結果」的期許，來要求提升機構服務品質。但一致性的指標必須評核全國的身心障礙機構，無法顧及各機構的屬性與地域的特性，其公平與客觀性亦時常被提出質疑，且也不符合良好的評鑑機制應兼顧精確性與適當性的要求；且評鑑只能評核機構的管裡績效，忽略機構使命執行情形的評量。在前述現制之下，評鑑成果卻會影響機構的補助與服務個案的來源，因此讓身心障礙機構對此無不投予高度重視與資源。 但從非營利組織的角色扮演而言，發現前述評鑑機制讓多數身心障礙服務機構僅能關注其服務提供的角色，而對開拓與創新、改革與倡導、價值維護較不重視。從制度理論觀點加以反思，當非營利組織無法審視組織使命時，組織的運作可能會產生使命飄移的疑慮。簡言之，伴隨著時空的遞移，影響制度建立或變遷的因素也隨之改變，本文以身心障礙服務機構的客觀責任評鑑制度為例，以非營利組織管理者的觀點，提出具體的修改建議與制度建立的邏輯，希望對手段目的化的評鑑實務能發揮制度反思的效果。
Non-profit organizations (NPOs) aim to achieve public interest and initiate issues of liberty, democracy, equality, welfare, human rights and sustainability. Thus, NPOs are characteristic of “publicness” and “autonomy”. NPOs originated from their mission to fulfill public welfares and such a mission is subjective responsibility of NPOs. At the same time, operations of NPOs bring forward objective responsibility, which is the comprehensive responsibility system of NPOs. When putting their mission into practices, NPOs utilize many social resources to serve disadvantaged groups. Although the public support NPOs on the basis of their trust, respect and love to NPOs, they still look forward to NPOs’ compliance with high ethical standards as well as NPOs’ accountability. In terms of practices of NPOs’ operations, the aforementioned social responsibility can be divided into the implicit self-discipline and the explicitheteronomy, or into so-called subjective responsibility and objective responsibility (accountability). The thesis has reviewed studies on concepts related to objective responsibility as well as analyzed current situations encountered by welfare services institutions for the disabled. Based on the above research, the thesis aims to exam the evaluation framework on objective responsibility of welfare services institutions for the disabled from the perspective of the institution manager. According to the studies on the related concept, meanings and practices in the NPOs’ objective responsibility are very dynamic. From the multi-dimensional aspect, Romzek and Ingraham indicated that there are four dimensions in the objective responsibility for NPOs: “hierarchical accountability”, “legal accountability”, political accountability” and “professional accountability”. From the viewpoint of indicators as the assessment of the NPOs’ management, researchers have also applied the Resource-Based Theory, the Resource Dependence Theory, the Agency Theory and the Stakeholder Theory in the establishment of indicators such as “degree of mission achievement and social acceptance”, “efficiency”, “involvement degree”, “satisfaction degree”, “balance degree” and “transformation degree”. The National Evaluation of Welfare Services Institutions for the Disabled, for example, is one assessment that the government developed on the basis of the evaluation framework on objective responsibility of NPOs. In practices, if an institution can fulfill the standard of indicators in the evaluation, then it can be free from the government’s requirement and regulation for improvement. In this case, the mission and the resource allocation of the institution are deeply affected by the evaluation enforced by the government. As a result, welfare services institutions for the disables are always forced to fulfill their service mission in compliance with the evaluation indicators and they hardly pay attention to their entire service development and service quality. Such a problem then leads to the loss of NPOs’ vision and characteristics. It can further result in the crowding-out effect of resources that an institution has and eliminate development of its diverse services, especially when the current 154 indicators in the evaluation have already consumed so many resources from these welfare service institutions. Therefore, the thesis suggests that the establishment of such an evaluation framework on objective responsibility should keep the balance between the financial and non-financial aspect and between the short-term goals and the long-term objectives. Meanwhile, the interaction between the internal and external environment should be taken into consideration as well. Furthermore, the framework should also conform to the six bases of the NPOs operation—“choices of service contents”, “services for whom”, “management of volunteers and full-time staffs”, “financial and material resources”, “service efficiency”, and “the operation of core decision-making”. The methodology of the thesis has combined the framework of the Balanced Score Card (BSC) with the Delphi Method to develop the questionnaire and to collect viewpoints of welfare services institutions for the disabled. Based on the survey result, the thesis has also suggested the authorized government agencies with recommendations and amendments for the current evaluation framework on objective responsibility of NPOs. According to the survey, the government now pays more attention to the “result” and “outcome” performed by an institution, rather than to the regulation and restriction on the “input” and “process”, as the evaluation standard to require the institution to promote its service quality. Moreover, the one-for-all evaluation on all institutions for the disabled nationwide cannot take into account characteristics and regions of different institutions. The equality and objectivity of the evaluation are thus often brought into questions. In addition, the evaluation cannot fulfill the requirement of accuracy and propriety that a good evaluation mechanism should have. Furthermore, the evaluation only assesses the management performance of an institution and overlooks the assessment on mission implementation of the institution. Nevertheless, the evaluation result in fact has great influences on how many resources, subsidies and service cases an institution will get. In this case, welfare services institutions for the disabled have to pay more efforts and resources to the evaluation. Therefore, from the role of NPOs, such an evaluation mechanism restricts many institutions solely to the role as a service provider and makes them to pay less attention to exploration, innovation, reform, issues promotion and values preservation. From the aspect of the institutionalism, when a NPO cannot reflect its own mission, the future direction of the organization will be uncertain. In short, whereas establishment and transformation of an institution should reflect changes of social contexts, by analyzing the evaluation system on objective responsibility of welfare services institutions for the disabled from the aspect of a NPO manager, this thesis not only reviews the problem of the current evaluation system that has already become the aim itself instead of just a method, but also further provides practical recommendations for modification and logics of institution building. |
