資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159049
|
| 題名: | 組織變革下的行政負擔：臺鐵員工的適應與挑戰
Administrative Burdens Under Organizational Change: Adaptation and Challenges of Taiwan Railways Employees |
| 作者: | 宋怡萱
Sung, Yi-Hsuan |
| 貢獻者: | 傅凱若
宋怡萱
Sung, Yi-Hsuan |
| 關鍵詞: | 行政負擔
組織變革
臺鐵公司化
扎根理論
Administrative Burden
Organizational Change
Taiwan Railways Corporation
Grounded Theory |
| 日期: | 2025 |
| 上傳時間: | 2025-09-01 14:52:29 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要: | 本研究以臺鐵公司化後的制度轉型為背景，探討組織變革下，行政人員所面臨的行政負擔類型、其生成脈絡與所造成的影響。不同於過往多以民眾為核心的行政負擔研究，本研究將視角轉向制度執行端，透過深度訪談與扎根理論分析，從行政人員的實務經驗出發，檢視既有的三構面分類（學習成本、合規成本與心理成本）是否適用於行政場域，並進一步辨識是否存在其他尚未被揭示的負擔態樣，最終建構出更符合實務脈絡的分析架構。
本研究結果顯示，臺鐵雖在公司化後導入企業化治理模式，但仍受部會審查與公部門規範的影響，形成新舊制度並行、規範交錯的治理環境，而隨著決策流程拉長、審查頻率與程序複雜度提高，行政人員所承受的負擔也隨之加重，透過訪談歸納，本研究將行政負擔劃分為五大類型：一、學習成本，涉及新制度、工具與跨職能適應的知識壓力；二、合規成本，涵蓋流程重組、查核標準不一與反覆修正等需求；三、時程壓力成本，源於短期內完成高密度規範任務的時限壓力；四、溝通成本，來自組織重整與跨單位協作的協調負擔；五、隱含成本，由時間與心理壓力交織而成，隱含於前述各類負擔中，加重行政人員對工作耗時與疲憊的感受。
本研究不僅補充並擴展行政負擔理論於制度執行端的適用性，亦提出多項改善建議，包含簡化決策與審查程序、統一報表與查核標準、強化支援與協調機制，以及建立心理支持與人力調度措施，期能為行政負擔與組織變革研究提供理論與公共治理實務上的參考，並作為未來制度設計與人力管理策略的依據。
This study examines the types, underlying dynamics, and impacts of administrative burdens experienced by administrative personnel amid organizational transformation, using the corporatization of Taiwan Railways as its primary context. Unlike previous studies that predominantly center on citizens as the recipients of administrative burdens, this research shifts the focus to the implementers within the organizational system. Drawing on in-depth interviews and grounded theory analysis, the study explores the lived experiences of administrative staff, assessing the applicability of the established tripartite framework (learning, compliance, and psychological costs) to the administrative setting, while identifying additional forms of burden not previously captured, thereby constructing an analytical framework better aligned with practical realities.
Findings reveal that although Taiwan Railways adopted corporate governance mechanisms following corporatization, it remains heavily constrained by ministerial oversight and public-sector regulations, creating a governance environment marked by overlapping rules and dual-track systems. As decision-making chains lengthen and review processes become more frequent and complex, administrative workloads and pressures have intensified. Based on the interviews, five categories of administrative burden were identified: (1) learning costs, arising from adapting to new systems, tools, and cross-functional roles; (2) compliance costs, stemming from process restructuring, inconsistent audit standards, and repeated revisions; (3) time-pressure costs, driven by compressed timelines and dense regulatory tasks; (4) communication costs, resulting from organizational restructuring and interdepartmental coordination; and (5) latent costs, formed by the interplay of time and psychological stress, embedded across all other categories and amplifying feelings of exhaustion and time strain among staff.
This study not only extends the applicability of administrative burden theory to the implementation side of bureaucratic systems but also offers practical recommendations. These include streamlining decision-making and review procedures, standardizing reporting and audit requirements, enhancing support and coordination mechanisms, and establishing measures for psychological support and workforce allocation. The findings aim to contribute to both theoretical development in administrative burden and organizational change research, and practical insights for public governance, serving as a reference for future institutional design and human resource management strategies. |
| 參考文獻: | 中文文獻
卜正球（2016）。臺灣的公營事業改革：事業自主有改善嗎？中華科技大學學報，（66），51-76。
王秀芳（2002）。中油公司員工對民營化變革認知、態度與組織承諾之研究。南華大學管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
石義崇（2004）。台鐵管理與民營化政策之方向。國立中正大學政治學研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
李昌諧（2003）。公營事業民營化變革中員工生涯發展需求之探討¬—以台灣鐵路管理局為例。國立臺灣師範大學工業科技教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
林淑馨（2004）。民營化與第三部門：日本鐵路改革經驗的反思。公共行政學報，（11），109-142。
林淑馨（2006）。民營化與組織變革：日本國鐵的個案分析。政治科學論叢，（27），147-184。
林淑馨（2012）。再探鐵路事業民營化─日本經驗的現實與困境。公共事務評論，13（1），1-26。
林淑馨（2021）。台鐵改革的迷思及面臨的關鍵性問題。理論與政策，（89），123-129。
林湘芬（2024）。組織變革認知、工作不安全感與留任意願關係之研究：以臺灣鐵路管理局公司化為例。國立成功大學交通管理科學系碩士論文，未出版，台南。
邱冠斌、劉佳昆（2007）。我國公營事業民營化過程之研究—以中華電信為例。中華行政學報，（4），119-132。
張國藩（2004）。民營化組織變革環境下員工變革認知對變革態度之影響研究—以中華電信為例。大葉大學工業工程學系碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
陳永明（1999）。台電員工屬性與工作價值觀對民營化組織變革態度之研究。東吳大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
陳美惠（2003）。台灣鐵路管理局公司化勞資爭議之探討。國立交通大學管理學院碩士論文，未出版，台北。
陳重安（2013）。規範與繁文縟節。公共行政學報，（44），161-166。
陳敦源、簡鈺珒（2018）。繁文縟節與組織績效：以臺灣作為個案觀察。文官制度，10（4），25-60。
鈕文英（2021）。質性研究方法與論文寫作（三版）。台北：雙葉書廊。
潘淑滿（2022）。質性研究：理論與應用（二版）。新北：心理出版社。
蔡篤進（2002）。郵政員工對公司化態度之研究¬—以台灣中區郵政管理局為例。東海大學公共事務碩士論文，未出版，台中。
賴正聲（2013）。員工對港務局公司化變革態度之探討。國立臺灣海洋大學航運管理學系博士論文，未出版，基隆。
賴昶丞、黃素惠（2023）。民營化面臨之困境與挑戰：以臺鐵組織效能為例。中華行政學報，（32），129-143。
英文文獻
Aarøe, L., Baekgaard, M., Christensen, J., & Moynihan, D. P. (2021). Personality and public administration: Policymaker tolerance of administrative burdens in welfare services. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 652-663.
Amiot, C. E., Terry, D. J., Jimmieson, N. L., & Callan, V. J. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of coping processes during a merger: Implications for job satisfaction and organizational identification. Journal of management, 32(4), 552-574.
Ashford, S. J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content, cause, and consequences of job insecurity: A theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Management journal, 32(4), 803-829.
Axtell, C., Wall, T., Stride, C., Pepper, K., Clegg, C., Gardner, P., & Bolden, R. (2002). Familiarity breeds content: The impact of exposure to change on employee openness and well‐being. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 75(2), 217-231.
Baekgaard, M., & Tankink, T. (2022). Administrative burden: Untangling a bowl of conceptual spaghetti. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(1), 16-21.
Baekgaard, M., Mikkelsen, K. S., Madsen, J. K., & Christensen, J. (2021). Reducing compliance demands in government benefit programs improves the psychological well-being of target group members. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(4), 806-821.
Baekgaard, M., Moynihan, D. P., & Thomsen, M. K. (2021). Why do policymakers support administrative burdens? The roles of deservingness, political ideology, and personal experience. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(1), 184-200.
Balogun, J. (2004). Exploring strategic change. Prentice Hall Europe.
Barnes, C. Y. (2021). “It takes a while to get used to”: The costs of redeeming public benefits. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(2), 295-310.
Bartunek, J. M., Rousseau, D. M., Rudolph, J. W., & DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 42(2), 182-206.
Bell, E., Ter‐Mkrtchyan, A., Wehde, W., & Smith, K. (2021). Just or unjust? How ideological beliefs shape street‐level bureaucrats’ perceptions of administrative burden. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 610-624.
Bilodeau, N., Laurin, C., & Vining, A. (2007). “Choice of organizational form makes a real difference”: the impact of corporatization on government agencies in Canada. Journal of public administration research and theory, 17(1), 119-147.
Bordia, P., Hunt, E., Paulsen, N., Tourish, D., & DiFonzo, N. (2004). Uncertainty during organizational change: Is it all about control? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(3), 345-365.
Bovey, W. H., & Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to organisational change: the role of defence mechanisms. Journal of managerial psychology, 16(7), 534-548.
Bozeman, B. (1993). A theory of government “red tape”. Journal of public administration research and theory, 3(3), 273-304.
Bozeman, B. (2000). Bureaucracy and red tape. Upper Saddle River.
Bozeman, B. (2012). Multidimensional red tape: A theory coda. International Public Management Journal, 15(3), 245-265.
Bozeman, B., & Feeney, M. K. (2014). Rules and red tape: A prism for public administration theory and research: A prism for public administration theory and research. Routledge.
Burden, B. C., Canon, D. T., Mayer, K. R., & Moynihan, D. P. (2012). The effect of administrative burden on bureaucratic perception of policies: Evidence from election administration. Public Administration Review, 72(5), 741-751.
Burnes, B. (2004). Managing change : a strategic approach to organisational dynamics. Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Campbell, J. W., Pandey, S. K., & Arnesen, L. (2023). The ontology, origin, and impact of divisive public sector rules: A meta‐narrative review of the red tape and administrative burden literatures. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 296-315.
Cheng, G. H. L., & Chan, D. K. S. (2008). Who suffers more from job insecurity? A meta‐analytic review. Applied psychology, 57(2), 272-303.
Choi, M. (2011). Employees' attitudes toward organizational change: A literature review. Human resource management, 50(4), 479-500.
Christensen, J., Aarøe, L., Baekgaard, M., Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2020). Human capital and administrative burden: The role of cognitive resources in citizen‐state interactions. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 127-136.
Chudnovsky, M., & Peeters, R. (2021). The unequal distribution of administrative burden: A framework and an illustrative case study for understanding variation in people's experience of burdens. Social Policy & Administration, 55(4), 527-542.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., & Morrow, P. C. (2003). The role of individual differences in employee adoption of TQM orientation. Journal of vocational behavior, 62(2), 320-340.
Davis, R. S. (2020). Book Review: Administrative burden: Policymaking by other means.
DeHart-Davis, L., & Pandey, S. K. (2005). Red tape and public employees: Does perceived rule dysfunction alienate managers? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(1), 133-148.
Fedor, D. B., Caldwell, S., & Herold, D. M. (2006). The effects of organizational changes on employee commitment: A multilevel investigation. Personnel psychology, 59(1), 1-29.
Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2006). Managing Successful Organizational Change in the Public Sector. Public Administration Review, 66(2), 168-176.
Fox, A. M., Stazyk, E. C., & Feng, W. (2020). Administrative easing: Rule reduction and medicaid enrollment. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 104-117.
Friedlander, F., & Brown, L. D. (1974). Organization development. Annual Review of Psychology, 25(1), 313-341.
Heinrich, C. J. (2016). The bite of administrative burden: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(3), 403-420.
Heinrich, C. J. (2018). Presidential address: “A thousand petty fortresses”: Administrative burden in US immigration policies and its consequences. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37(2), 211-239.
Hellriegel, D., & J. W., Slocum (1980). Assessing organizational change approaches: Toward a comparative typology. Group & Organization Studies, 5(1), 35-47.
Herd, P. & Moynihan, D.P. (2019) Administrative burden: policymaking by other means. Russell Sage Foundation.
Herd, P., DeLeire, T., Harvey, H., & Moynihan, D. P. (2013). Shifting administrative burden to the state: The case of medicaid take‐up. Public Administration Review, 73(s1), S69-S81.
Keiser, L. R., & Miller, S. M. (2020). Does administrative burden influence public support for government programs? Evidence from a survey experiment. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 137-150.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
Linos, E., Quan, L. T., & Kirkman, E. (2020). Nudging early reduces administrative burden: Three field experiments to improve code enforcement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 39(1), 243-265.
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.
Mack, G., Ritzel, C., Heitkämper, K., & El Benni, N. (2021). The effect of administrative burden on farmers’ perceptions of cross‐compliance‐based direct payment policy. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 664-675.
Madsen, J. K. (2024). Frictions on both sides of the counter? A study of red tape among street-level bureaucrats and administrative burden among their clients. Administration & Society, 56(6), 738-762.
Madsen, J. K., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Moynihan, D. P. (2022). Burdens, sludge, ordeals, red tape, oh my!: a user's guide to the study of frictions. Public Administration, 100(2), 375-393.
Martin, A. J., Jones, E. S., & Callan, V. J. (2005). The role of psychological climate in facilitating employee adjustment during organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 14(3), 263-289.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of vocational behavior, 61(1), 20-52.
Mikkelsen, K. S., Madsen, J. K., & Baekgaard, M. (2024). Is stress among street‐level bureaucrats associated with experiences of administrative burden among clients? A multilevel study of the Danish unemployment sector. Public Administration Review, 84(2), 248-260.
Moynihan, D. P. (2003). Normative and instrumental perspectives on public participation: Citizen summits in Washington, DC. The American Review of Public Administration, 33(2), 164-188.
Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2007). The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation. Public administration review, 67(1), 40-53.
Moynihan, D. P., Herd, P., & Ribgy, E. (2016). Policymaking by other means: Do states use administrative barriers to limit access to Medicaid? Administration & Society, 48(4), 497-524.
Moynihan, D., & Herd, P. (2010). Red Tape and Democracy: How Rules Affect Citizenship Rights. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(6), 654-670.
Moynihan, D., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2015). Administrative burden: Learning, psychological, and compliance costs in citizen-state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43-69.
Näswall, K., Sverke, M., & Hellgren, J. (2005). The moderating role of personality characteristics on the relationship between job insecurity and strain. Work & Stress, 19(1), 37-49.
Nguyen, P. T., Rafferty, A. E., & Xerri, M. J. (2025). The Impact of Personal and Change Event Characteristics on Employee Wellbeing via Uncertainty and Insecurity. Organizational Psychology Review.
Nicholson-Crotty, J., Miller, S. M., & Keiser, L. R. (2021). Administrative burden, social construction, and public support for government programs. Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, 4(1).
Nielsen, V. L., Nielsen, H. Ø., & Bisgaard, M. (2021). Citizen reactions to bureaucratic encounters: Different ways of coping with public authorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(2), 381-398.
Nisar, M. A. (2018a). Children of a lesser god: Administrative burden and social equity in citizen–state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 104-119.
Nisar, M. A. (2018b). Overcoming resistance to resistance in public administration: Resistance strategies of marginalized publics in citizen‐state interactions. Public administration and Development, 38(1), 15-25.
Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 15(1), 73-101.
Oreg, S., Vakola, M., & Armenakis, A. (2011). Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 47(4), 461-524.
Pandey, S. K., & Kingsley, G. A. (2000). Examining red tape in public and private organizations: Alternative explanations from a social psychological model. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(4), 779-800.
Paulsen, N., Callan, V. J., Grice, T. A., Rooney, D., Gallois, C., Jones, E. & Bordia, P. (2005). Job uncertainty and personal control during downsizing: A comparison of survivors and victims. Human relations, 58(4), 463-496.
Peeters, R., & Widlak, A. (2018). The digital cage: Administrative exclusion through information architecture–The case of the Dutch civil registry's master data management system. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 175-183.
Rafferty, A. E., & Griffin, M. A. (2006). Perceptions of organizational change: a stress and coping perspective. Journal of applied psychology, 91(5), 1154.
Rainey, H. G., & Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of public administration research and theory, 10(2), 447-470.
Rainey, H. G., Pandey, S., & Bozeman, B. (1995). Research note: Public and private managers' perceptions of red tape. Public Administration Review, 567-574.
Scott, P. G., & Pandey, S. K. (2005). Red tape and public service motivation: Findings from a national survey of managers in state health and human services agencies. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 25(2), 155-180.
Stanica, C. M., Balica, D., Henderson, A. C., & Ţiclău, T. C. (2022). The weight of service delivery: administrative and rules burdens in street-level bureaucracy. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(1), 240-257.
Stanley, D. J., Meyer, J. P., & Topolnytsky, L. (2005). Employee cynicism and resistance to organizational change. Journal of business and psychology, 19, 429-459.
Steijn, B., & Van der Voet, J. (2019). Relational job characteristics and job satisfaction of public sector employees: When prosocial motivation and red tape collide. Public Administration, 97(1), 64-80.
Teo, S. (2000). Evidence of strategic HRM linkages in eleven Australian corporatized public sector organizations. Public Personnel Management, 29(4), 557-574.
Van Loon, N. M. (2017). From red tape to which performance results? Exploring the relationship between red tape and various dimensions of performance in healthcare work units. Public Administration, 95(1), 60-77.
van Prooijen, J. W., & de Vries, R. E. (2016). Organizational conspiracy beliefs: Implications for leadership styles and employee outcomes. Journal of business and psychology, 31, 479-491.
Wanberg, C. R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of applied psychology, 85(1), 132. |
| 描述: | 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政學系
110256009 |
| 資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110256009 |
| 資料類型: | thesis |
| 顯示於類別: | [公共行政學系] 學位論文
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
描述 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| 600901.pdf | | 2585Kb | Adobe PDF | 2 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
