| Summary: | 碩士 === 世新大學 === 行政管理學研究所(含碩專班) === 93 === Power is the strength of a nation. Development of human resources is the base of that power. The importance of manpower was overlooked until recent years while the capitalization of manpower was advocated. The economic function of manpower was then realized and appreciated. Manpower is the origin of the economy and the reason of political development and social progress. Education is a favorable investment in human resources. A. Mashall pointed out that the most profitable investment of all is in human resources.
The global economy is rapidly moving towards globalization, digitalization, and marketability; moreover, the world is walking towards a globally industrial society that is based on information technology. In this severe international competition, the importance of “manpower” cannot be stressed enough. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) (1996 Manpower Development Report) pointed out that: the development of human resources will not last without economic growth; economic growth will not go far without the development of human resources. Therefore, the 21st century is for the accumulation of human resources and it is for the training and education of human resources.
The task of administrative reformation and public servant training was initiated in 1993 in Mainland China which coincided with the government reformation proposed in Taiwan. Therefore, this study will discuss the training programs of the National School of Administration in Mainland China under the environment of reformation for the reference of governments between the Straits and with suggestions made for improvement. Therefore, the text of the study is to discuss the background, organization, and development of training regulations of the National School of Administration from the officers system and public servant system in order to have an objective conclusion reached through data analysis, observation, and comparison; also, to understand the “features” and to estimate the orientation of future development.
Moreover, public servant training in Mainland China is substantially under the influence of the national environment; therefore, the “Chinese style” public servant training system is necessary. From conventional officer training to public servant training, the system evolution was developed in Mainland China without any precedent or experience for reference where the historical culture means everything. What is the construction and development of the “Chinese style” public servant training system? What affects the construction of “Chinese style” public servant training system? Furthermore, public servant training is constructed primitively in Mainland China with a system and regulations in place. However, under the administration of communists, what are the objectives, principles, and features of public servant training? The teaching material of public servant training demands analysis, training courses, and operation is designed without a focus; the training technique is a routine task; and the training evaluation is based on the satisfaction of trainees without a systematic and scientific training model constructed. Are those situations improved? Where is the development of public servant training of the National School of Administration going?
Finally, public servant training is an important link of personnel management. The performance evaluation of public servant training in Mainland China is based on the subjective recognition and judgment of trainees without a scientific evaluation system. Moreover, the performance evaluation does not necessarily lead to a promotion and it is a common practice in Mainland China where “people rule.” Are the situations improved? Moreover, training is a means of inspiring the potential and achievement of public servants. The question is if the career plan of Chinese public servants can be combined with organizational development through training.
|
|---|
