香港郵政署“營(yíng)運(yùn)基金”管理體制改革之研析：結(jié)構(gòu)、運(yùn)作及其對(duì)生產(chǎn)力水平的作用


頁(yè)數(shù)：50 字?jǐn)?shù)：41384

香港郵政署“營(yíng)運(yùn)基金”管理體制改革之研析：結(jié)構(gòu)、運(yùn)作及其對(duì)生產(chǎn)力水平的作用內(nèi)容提要香港公營(yíng)部門的改革應(yīng)被視為整個(gè)世界行政發(fā)展進(jìn)程中的一部分，它與“新公共管理”理念與國(guó)際行政改革步伐是基本一致的。本文在這個(gè)大視野下，探討了香港公營(yíng)部門改革中采取的一種形式──“營(yíng)運(yùn)基金”管理體制，并以香港郵政署作為個(gè)案研究的對(duì)象。本文的寫作實(shí)際上圍繞著一系列問題的提出。文章試圖求證這些問題的答案，雖然政府管理有時(shí)是沒有明確的答案的。文章中涉及了以下主要問題：在政府內(nèi)部市場(chǎng)化采用的不同管理體制與模式之間，港府以什么標(biāo)準(zhǔn)篩選施行營(yíng)運(yùn)基金的組織，目的為何？郵政署作為一個(gè)具有行業(yè)壟斷性質(zhì)的組織，尤其在郵件和郵票業(yè)務(wù)服務(wù)上，它為什么要采用營(yíng)運(yùn)基金管理體制，其改革的動(dòng)力來(lái)自何方？作為一種分權(quán)的結(jié)構(gòu)，郵政署與其政策和資源管理部門是如何分權(quán)的，這種分權(quán)體系對(duì)郵政署的行為將帶來(lái)什么影響，而在兩者的互動(dòng)和討價(jià)還價(jià)過(guò)程中，維持利益均衡可能采取的多種策略組合是什么？任何一種制度變遷和制度安排，都會(huì)對(duì)組織績(jī)效產(chǎn)生重要的影響。那么，營(yíng)運(yùn)基金這種制度規(guī)則，會(huì)對(duì)郵政署的生產(chǎn)力具有什么作用，是激勵(lì)還是障礙呢？同時(shí)提出的問題還有郵政署取得的業(yè)績(jī)，是得益于營(yíng)運(yùn)基金體制性的改革，還是其天然的壟斷地位，抑或是其它方面的原因？總體來(lái)講，本文突出探討營(yíng)運(yùn)基金現(xiàn)行權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)的運(yùn)作方式及與組織績(jī)效改進(jìn)之間的聯(lián)系，并試圖運(yùn)用政治學(xué)、公共選擇和新制度經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的一些理論作出初步的分析。本文的基本觀點(diǎn)是，營(yíng)運(yùn)基金的施行具有明顯的實(shí)驗(yàn)性和漸進(jìn)性的特征，這一性質(zhì)決定了營(yíng)運(yùn)基金分權(quán)框架受到了比較嚴(yán)格的限制，分權(quán)結(jié)構(gòu)的解釋權(quán)來(lái)者于上層，組織內(nèi)部市場(chǎng)化的程度極為有限。盡管郵政署在施行營(yíng)運(yùn)基金以后，從內(nèi)部組織結(jié)構(gòu)到程序管理作了大幅度的調(diào)整，也取得了很大的業(yè)績(jī)。但現(xiàn)行權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)在很多方面約束了商業(yè)化運(yùn)營(yíng)的方式，因此，從經(jīng)濟(jì)效率角度，營(yíng)運(yùn)基金體制對(duì)其改進(jìn)是組織的動(dòng)力不夠充分。從主管政策機(jī)構(gòu)而言，在管制營(yíng)運(yùn)基金組織的過(guò)程中，存在著信息不完全和信息不對(duì)稱這一巨大約束，由此政府在管制價(jià)格、投資回報(bào)率、成本控制、管制政策調(diào)整周期、以及融資與補(bǔ)貼渠道等政策制定上都難以達(dá)到十分理想的境地，所形成的刺激機(jī)制也有一定限度。同時(shí)郵政署作為一個(gè)壟斷組織，缺乏外部競(jìng)爭(zhēng)與比較價(jià)格，它有多大的動(dòng)力進(jìn)一步控制成本，改進(jìn)服務(wù)質(zhì)素是一個(gè)疑問。從長(zhǎng)期看，營(yíng)運(yùn)基金形式也不足以根本克服組織內(nèi)部的動(dòng)力缺失問題。筆者認(rèn)為，進(jìn)一步的市場(chǎng)化措施，或者說(shuō)將某些服務(wù)項(xiàng)目進(jìn)一步向市場(chǎng)開放，容許一些私營(yíng)機(jī)構(gòu)進(jìn)入特定的郵政服務(wù)市場(chǎng)，應(yīng)是推動(dòng)公營(yíng)郵政組織內(nèi)在動(dòng)力的的源泉之一。由此，提出一個(gè)更深層次的問題是，在諸多的理念和利益牽制中，政府與郵政署等營(yíng)運(yùn)基金組織進(jìn)一步分權(quán)的“底線”究竟在哪里？主題詞：香港郵政署、營(yíng)運(yùn)基金、改革AbstractAs a part of the recent international administrative reform trend all over the world, reinventing public sector in Hong Kong Special administrative Region is consistent with the process, as well as its value of the “New Public Management ”. In this article, I try to analyze the “Trading Fund” system which was selected by Hong Kong Government as one of the forms in its public sector reform. Hong Kong Post Office is my case study of the “Trading Fund” system.This study actually revolved round with a series of problems which I put forward during my research. I try to answer those questions, although it sometimes is very tough for government management to draw definite conclusions. The article involves the following main problems:First , among the several interior market reform systems that Hong Kong government designed & selected, what kinds of traditional departments should be chosen to carry out “Trading Fund”system. What are its criteria? What are its objectives?Secondly, Hong Kong Post Office is of monopoly for post services, especially in mail, parcel and stamp business etc. With the obvious nature, why is post office willing to carry out the new“Trading Fund”system? What does its motivations come from?Thirdly, as a decentralization structure, how are authority and powers be divided between Post Office and its policy branch under “Trading Fund”structure? How does it influence internal behaviors of the Post Office. In the process of collective bargaining, the Post Office may choose what kinds of behavior strategies.Fourthly, any institutional change can produce a great impact on organizational performance in positive and negative perspective, and how does the “Trading fund”structure influence Hong Kong Post Office’s productivity improvement?Finally, in recent years, Was the splendid performance of Hong Kong Post Office a result of the “Trading Fund”system reform ,or itself monopoly nature, or other objective reasons?In brief, the key issue in this article is the links between organizational performance and the “Trading Fund”structure arrangement with Hong Kong Post Office as a case study.My basic opinion is that Hong Kong “Trading Fund”system reform is an obvious features of experimentalism and gradualism. Due to this, decentralization structure has a great limit and restriction. After the Post Office “Trading Fund”was set up, it has adjusted internal organizational structure and management procedures and improved its productivity greatly. But it is doubtly that the performance was completely beneficial from the “Trading Fund”system . In terms of economic efficiency, the “Trading Fund”system cannot give agencies enough motivations for improving their internal productivity constantly. On the one hand because of the policy and control branches, there are such restrictions as unsymmetry of and incomplete information in the process of policy making; on the other hand because of the Post Office as a “Trading Fund”regulatory organization, there are such restrictions as monopoly, no competitive pressure and no comparative advantage services’ prices , therefore I cannot determine how much motive force from inner “Trading Fund”organizations for controlling their costs and improving their services’ quality.In my opinion, the “Trading Fund”system is not the end of the part of public sector’s reform, the future of the Post Office“trading Fund” development may be to enforce competitive and marketing mechanism which permit private corporations engaging in some kinds of mail and parcel services by contracting out or other means. In essence, “Trading Fund”organizations will further adjust decentralization structure with their policy and resource management branches, and a more difficult problem will be raised－what is the “baseline”of the “Trading Fund”organizations in next the decentralization process?Key Words: Hong Kong Post Office, Trading Fund, Reform“制度（變遷）對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)績(jī)效的影響是無(wú)可非議的?！贫瘸３Ｊ悄切┱T致生產(chǎn)率增長(zhǎng)的部分和那些抑制生產(chǎn)率的部分的混合。制度變遷差不多同時(shí)為這兩類活動(dòng)活動(dòng)創(chuàng)造了機(jī)會(huì)?！偟膩?lái)講是不斷增強(qiáng)了對(duì)從事生產(chǎn)活動(dòng)的組織的激勵(lì)?！盵1] ───道格拉斯·諾斯1．背景：香港部分公營(yíng)部門實(shí)施“營(yíng)運(yùn)基金”管理的性質(zhì)與目標(biāo)在一部分公營(yíng)部門中注入企業(yè)化的“營(yíng)運(yùn)基金”管理體制和運(yùn)作方式，是香港政府推行的公營(yíng)部門改革總體方案中的重要組成部分，也被公認(rèn)為是改革所采用的措施或過(guò)渡性階段之一。80年代末，在“新公共管理”理念的影響下，以及國(guó)際性的公營(yíng)部門改革浪潮推動(dòng)下，港府力臆通過(guò)公營(yíng)部門自覺的改革舉措，維持和強(qiáng)化香港在周邊地區(qū)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)地位、提高有限資源的使用效率和公營(yíng)機(jī)構(gòu)的生產(chǎn)力水平、滿足市民日益增長(zhǎng)的和多元化的需求訴求、推進(jìn)香港經(jīng)濟(jì)、政治、社會(huì)全面的發(fā)展。1989年3月，香港財(cái)政司擬定和頒布的“公營(yíng)部門改革”報(bào)告（Finance Branch，Public Sector Re