초록 ▼

4. 결론 및 정책제언

□ 성과측정 매뉴얼 개발 방향의 도출
○ 기존 매뉴얼 및 지침에 대한 실태분석 결과, 공무원과 전문가에 대한 심층 면담조사 및 설문조사 결과 분석에 따른 시사점을 도출하고 개발 방향(사용자 중심의 매뉴얼, 매뉴얼 유용성 제고)을 제시
○ 사용자 중심의 매뉴얼, 매뉴얼의 유용성 및 실용성 제고라는 개발 전략을 설정함

□ 성과측정 매뉴얼 최종안 도출
○ 서론, 성과측정프레임워크, 성과지표, 자료수집 및 관리, 성과분석 및 보고, 성과측정 역설현상 대응방안으로 매뉴얼을

4. 결론 및 정책제언

□ 성과측정 매뉴얼 개발 방향의 도출
○ 기존 매뉴얼 및 지침에 대한 실태분석 결과, 공무원과 전문가에 대한 심층 면담조사 및 설문조사 결과 분석에 따른 시사점을 도출하고 개발 방향(사용자 중심의 매뉴얼, 매뉴얼 유용성 제고)을 제시
○ 사용자 중심의 매뉴얼, 매뉴얼의 유용성 및 실용성 제고라는 개발 전략을 설정함

□ 성과측정 매뉴얼 최종안 도출
○ 서론, 성과측정프레임워크, 성과지표, 자료수집 및 관리, 성과분석 및 보고, 성과측정 역설현상 대응방안으로 매뉴얼을 구성함

□ 개발된 매뉴얼 활용도 제고를 위한 정책 제언
○ 성과지표에 초점을 두었던 기존 매뉴얼을 대체하여 성과지표뿐만 아니라 성과측정의 전반적인 과정을 포괄하도록 함
- 성과지표와 관련된 실무적인 내용은 성과측정 프레임워크 구축, 자료수집 및 관리, 성과정보의 분석 및 보고 등 전후 과정과 연계되는 것이 바람직 함
○ 성과측정 매뉴얼을 표준매뉴얼로 발간하여 실무용으로 배포하되 교육 및 컨설팅이 병행될 필요가 있음
- 국무조정실은 성과측정 매뉴얼을 활용하여 관련 교육 및 컨설팅이 이루어질 수 있도록 워크숍, 설명회 등을 주기적으로 개최하고, 각종 정부업무평가에 참여하고 있는 전문가 풀을 구축하여 각 부처에 제공하는 것이 요구됨
○ 성과측정 매뉴얼은 중기(약 5년) 범위 내에서 주기적으로 업데이트 되어야 할 필요가 있음
- 각종 성과관리 제도 실행 과정 속에 발생하는 역설현상 등을 주기적으로 진단하고 개선방안을 도출하며 이를 성과측정 매뉴얼에 포함시키는 일련의 과정이 요구됨
○ 매뉴얼 수준이 아닌 제도적 수준에서 개선 될 이슈들의 대응 방안을 마련해야 함
- 단기 성과 위주의 지표 선정, 부분-최적화만 고려하는 성과측정 관행 등의 문제는 제도적 수준에서 논의되어야 함
- 기관의 중장기 및 전략적 관점에서 성과를 측정하고 평가하는 제도의 운영 및 부처 별 자율성을 부여하도록 해야 함

Abstract ▼

The purpose of this study is to develop a manual for performance measurement in order to improve the validity of evaluation. Since the performance information (the validity of performance indicators) is not useful, the issue is continuously raised that the evaluation results are not fully utilized e

The purpose of this study is to develop a manual for performance measurement in order to improve the validity of evaluation. Since the performance information (the validity of performance indicators) is not useful, the issue is continuously raised that the evaluation results are not fully utilized even though government evaluation is considered important. The manual provided to overcome such evaluation problems focuses only on developing performance indicators at the planning stage, resulting in a simple guide. Thus, it is necessary to not only draw out some implications by conducting a recognition survey with public officials and analyzing cases of developed countries, but also to develop a manual for performance measurement to improve the validity of performance.

Prior to a full-fledged analysis, this study theoretically discusses the performance measurement, examines both national and international cases about existing manuals and measurement processes, and generates some elements for the performance measurement. The research model, the model to derive elements of the performance measurement manual, is composed of four dimensions: theoretical discussions, focus of the analysis, data collection and findings of the analysis. For theoretical discussions, the idea of performance, measurement methodology and steps of performance measurement are discussed, as well as any potential for paradox of performance measurement. Once discussed, while the former three are analyzed with the focus on the usefulness of existing manuals and guidelines, the focus of the latter is whether there is any potential for paradox or improvement. Reviewing literature and conducting interviews and surveys are the methods to collect data for the existing manual analysis, and to determine paradoxes and improvements, it conducts interviews and surveys. For the findings, the elements of performance manual can be drawn out by combining the aforementioned two streams of the model.

The results of the analysis are organized into four categories based on the model. First, in terms of the idea of performance and the measurement method, the actual status for the government evaluation guidelines and manuals are analyzed, which are distributed and developed by the Office for Government Policy Coordination and the Ministry of Strategy and Finance. In this analysis, it is proposed that the performance of the government evaluation emphasizes effectiveness and that the idea is addressed at the level of policy/program, which does not take into account the notion of public good or equity. Most manuals do not cover the measurement methods. Furthermore, based on the result that is obtained by analyzing the 5 steps of performance measurement, it is reasonable to assume that the performance measurement framework is a logic model; compared to other steps, substantial work is done at the performance indicator (target) step. Most manuals do not deal with the paradox of performance measurement separately, but the manual for financial program performance indicator development suggests the issue in the Q&A, and the self-evaluation implementation plan proposes it as a measure to control the tendency of leniency.

Second, the in-depth interviews with professionals and public officials who take responsibility for the government evaluation were conducted. The 19 participating public officials were subjected to 8 interviews, and the professionals participated in in-depth interviews. Those public officials recognized performance as an output and impact of policies/programs that are driven by the departments, yet the professionals highlighted expanding the view of public service, public satisfaction and their quality of life. They both admitted the fact that performance changes according to the government, although the nature of the concept is unchangeable. For the performance of administrative reform value, public officials realized that it does not change much, and professionals regarded it as changeable in instrumental ways. They both accepted the differences between policy, agency and national-level performance, and agreed that they are difficult to measure. Public officials found it difficult to use outcome indicators and to understand quantitative measurement systems, and professionals pointed to the problem of indicator classification with logic models and the misuse or abuse of composite indicators. Professionals also pointed out that the target criteria is not sufficiently diverse, and the public officials expressed that it is hard to set the standard for target validity. For data collection/analysis/reporting, public officials saw that it is improbable to maneuver the data and necessary to manage the data about the satisfaction survey, while professionals emphasized the problem of such satisfaction survey, as well as publishing and analyzing the performance information. As for the paradox of performance measurement, they both indicated the gaming issue around the performance indicator and target. Because the existing manuals are not easy to use directly in developing actual performance indicators, not only did public officials point out that they do not look into or use the manuals, but also professionals raised the issue of low usability, lack of consistency, lack of understanding and sharing between evaluators. As a solution, public officials suggested to have a training session and consultation including cases of both domestic and overseas, whereas professionals proposed a dualized education practice manual, a dictionary for indicators, targeting standards and cases, a qualitative checklist and a Q&A.

Third, a recognition survey was carried out to a total of 409 public officials who are currently working in 43 different central agencies. The survey consists of awareness, level of use, usefulness of manuals/guidelines and potential for performance measurement paradoxes and improvement. According to the result of the awareness analysis, the government performance management guidelines from the Office of Government Policy Coordination’s were the most well-known, followed by the manual for performance indicator development and management, and the manual for financial program performance indicator development. In comparison with existing manuals, the extent of the three manuals being used was similar and the usefulness was low. The usefulness of the manual for performance measurement steps was from medium to medium-high and was useful to understand the idea of performance in the Q&A. However, the analysis showed that the domestic and overseas cases were the least useful. To increase the use of it, it is required that indicator development and international cases should be included in domestic/overseas cases and that the Q&A section part be helpful in practice and specific to multiple areas. Most frequently, the steps of performance indicators were perceived as paradoxical, and the performance indicator selection step and data collection/analysis/reporting step were determined to be in need of improvements. As for ways to improve this issue, it is shown that both groups recognized the necessity of a measure that recommends an output indicator when an outcome indicator is hard to set, suggests a qualitative standard and examples of the measurement method, and gives extra points to over-performers.

Fourth, performance management manuals for Canada, New Zealand and England are analyzed in accordance with the idea of performance, measurement methodology, framework, performance indicators, data collection, data analysis, data reports and paradoxes. The purpose of all three countries is to improve efficiency, but their emphasis is different. Canada stresses the logic model, so they analyze the level of policy making and implementation. New Zealand is based on metric indicators, but they focus on engaging different shareholders so that the discussion quality is encouraged to increase. As for England, they have their roots in a radical positivistic point of view, and try to enhance the performance measurement level by developing a methodology that can measure more elaborately.

Based on the analysis so far, the final manual is composed of a performance measurement framework, performance indicator development, targeting, data collection and management, a performance analysis and report and performance measurement paradox. The strategy for manual development can be suggested in three ways. Firstly, the manual should be user-centered by complementing performance-indicator-centered manuals, and produce an educational textbook separately for the relevant public officials to use. Secondly, it should reflect opinions and implications for each element of the performance measurement manual to improve its usefulness. Lastly, in order to enhance the practicality of the manual, it should propose 5 steps, paradoxes and a Q&A about performance measurement, as well as improvements based on real cases. Moreover, there can be some recommendations to increase use of the manual. By replacing existing manuals that focused on performance indicators, it should encompass not only performance indicators but also the overall process of performance measurement. In addition, it is necessary to publish a performance measurement manual as a standard, parallel with training and consulting. The manual need to be regularly updated in the midterm (5 years), and be prepared with reaction plans to issues to be improved, not at the manual level, but at the institutional level.

목차 Contents

• 표지 ... 1
• 발간사 ... 3
• 목차 ... 4
• 표목차 ... 9
• 그림목차 ... 13
• 국문요약 ... 15
• 영문요약 ... 25
• 제1장 서 론 ... 33
• 제1절 연구의 필요성과 목적 ... 34
• 1. 연구의 필요성 ... 34
• 2. 연구 목적 ... 37
• 제2절 연구내용 및 연구방법 ... 39
• 1. 연구 내용 ... 39
• 2. 자료수집과 분석방법 ... 40
• 제2장 이론적 논의와 분석 틀 ... 43
• 제1절 성과측정에 대한 이론과 방법 ... 44
• 1. 성과에 대한 인식론적 논의: 실증주의 vs 사회구성주의 ... 44
• 2. 성과에 대한 개념적 논의 ... 63
• 3. 성과측정에 대한 방법론적 논의 ... 82
• 제2절 성과측정 매뉴얼의 요소 ... 96
• 1. 성과측정의 단계 ... 96
• 2. 성과측정 역설 현상 ... 105
• 제3절 연구 모형 ... 115
• 1. 분석 틀 ... 115
• 2. 성과측정매뉴얼 개발 ... 127
• 제3장 정부업무평가 지침 및 매뉴얼 분석 ... 129
• 제1절 정부업무 성과관리 운영지침 ... 130
• 1. 개요 ... 130
• 2. 성과의 개념과 측정방법 ... 131
• 3. 성과측정 단계별 분석 ... 135
• 4. 성과측정 역설 현상 제시 및 해결방안 ... 140
• 제2절 성과지표 개발･관리 매뉴얼 ... 141
• 1. 개요 ... 141
• 2. 성과개념 및 측정방법 ... 142
• 3. 성과측정 단계별 분석 ... 145
• 4. 성과측정 과정 역설 현상 제시 및 해결방안 ... 150
• 제3절 재정사업 성과지표 개발 매뉴얼 ... 152
• 1. 개요 ... 152
• 2. 성과개념 및 측정방법 ... 153
• 3. 성과측정단계별 분석 ... 154
• 4. 성과측정 역설 현상 제시 및 해결방안 ... 157
• 제4절 자체평가 시행계획 ... 160
• 1. 개요 ... 160
• 2. 성과개념 및 측정방법 ... 161
• 3. 성과측정 단계별 분석 ... 163
• 4. 성과측정 역설 현상 및 해결방안 ... 168
• 제5절 소 결 ... 170
• 1. 성과 개념과 측정방법 ... 170
• 2. 성과측정 단계별 분석 ... 172
• 3. 성과측정 역설현상 ... 173
• 제4장 성과측정에 대한 심층면담조사 ... 175
• 제1절 정부업무평가 담당 공무원 면담조사 ... 176
• 1. 개요 ... 176
• 2. 성과의 개념과 측정 ... 177
• 3. 성과측정 단계 ... 184
• 4. 성과측정의 역설현상 ... 193
• 5. 기존 매뉴얼 활용 실태 및 개선방안 ... 195
• 제2절 정부업무평가 전문가 심층 면담 조사 ... 200
• 1. 개요 ... 200
• 2. 성과의 개념과 측정 ... 201
• 3. 성과측정 단계 ... 207
• 4. 성과측정 역설 현상 ... 218
• 5. 기존 매뉴얼 활용 실태 ... 220
• 제3절 소 결 ... 224
• 1. 성과에 대한 개념 비교 ... 224
• 2. 성과 측정단계 및 역설현상에 대한 비교 ... 226
• 3. 기존 매뉴얼 활용 실태 및 개선방안에 대한 비교 ... 228
• 제5장 중앙행정기관 공무원 인식조사 ... 231
• 제1절 조사 개요 ... 232
• 1. 조사모델 ... 232
• 2. 응답자 특성 ... 234
• 제2절 분석결과 ... 236
• 1. 기존 매뉴얼에 대한 인지도 및 활용수준 ... 236
• 2. 기존 매뉴얼에 대한 유용성 분석 ... 238
• 3. 성과측정 역설현상에 대한 분석 ... 245
• 4. 성과측정 역설현상 개선방안 ... 249
• 제6장 해외 사례 분석 ... 257
• 제1절 캐나다 성과관리 매뉴얼 ... 259
• 1. 개요 ... 259
• 2. 구성요소별 분석 ... 263
• 제2절 뉴질랜드 성과관리 매뉴얼 ... 273
• 1. 개요 ... 273
• 2. 구성요소별 분석 ... 278
• 제3절 영국 성과평가 매뉴얼(Magenta Book) ... 287
• 1. 개요 ... 287
• 2. 구성요소별 분석 ... 292
• 제4절 소 결 ... 300
• 제7장 성과측정 매뉴얼 ... 305
• 제1절 성과측정 매뉴얼 개발 방향 ... 306
• 1. 분석결과 시사점 도출 ... 306
• 2. 매뉴얼 개발 전략 ... 310
• 제2절 성과측정 매뉴얼 ... 316
• 1. 서론 ... 317
• 2. 성과측정프레임워크 ... 318
• 3. 성과지표 ... 321
• 4. 목표치 ... 337
• 5. 자료수집 및 관리 ... 342
• 6. 성과 분석 및 보고 ... 346
• 7. 성과측정 역설현상과 대응방안 ... 350
• 제8장 결 론 ... 359
• 1. 연구의 의의 ... 360
• 2. 정책 제언 ... 363
• 참고문헌 ... 367
• 끝페이지 ... 383