| Summary: | 碩士 === 淡江大學 === 公共行政學系公共政策碩士在職專班 === 97 === To nominate female employees for higher public service in of Taiwan is a tendency that is continuously affected by global gender mainstreaming during the late years. ROC Armed Forces composed mainly by male members have to face the task of female colonel candidates since the year 2009 after starting to recruit female officers for two decades. A proper assessment and corresponded opportunity for promotion will be the key factor and incentive to inspire courage and willing of dedication into the employees. It is also an important responsibility for the agency head and human resource management department.
Most of gender differences researches in civilian and official branches lead the conclusion of less promotional opportunity for female. The military specialist and environment is different from other branches and civilian companies. It is an interesting task for human resource managers to learn what the assessment criteria of colonel candidates should be applied, the gender differences of promotional opportunity and the different perception between candidates and superior officers in ROC armed forces. The common promotion criteria of military were transferred to an assessment scale to analyze the questionnaires made by superior officers and both male and female colonel candidates statistically. The analysis and results were applied to anticipate the promotional probability of female officers and to estimate the perception differences. Several suggestions that could be regarded as reference resources are led by the conclusions of this study for superior officers, human resource managers, male and female officers. Those conclusions are:
1.Twenty-four assessment criteria included “professional ethics” are applied by superior officers to evaluate the qualification of colonel candidates.
2.The promotional probability of female colonel candidates compared to male candidates is 84%.
3.Significant differences were found in the perceptions of four assessment criteria included “performance” between the superior officers and female colonel candidates.
4.Significant dissimilarity and different assessment results were found in “dedication in job and family”, “gregariousness” and “performance evaluation” for superior officers from divergent services.
5.A discrepancy was discovered in “physic performance” by superior officers with master degree and with no significant difference was found among superior officers with different educational backgrounds.rior officers with different educational background.
6.Significant differences were found in the criteria: “dedication in job and family” and “compliant
willing” assessed by senior superior officers to female officers.
|
|---|
