慈濟大學公共衛生學系副教授*

國立東華大學教育與行政管理學系副教授兼系所主任**

本研究旨在探討台灣所有公私立大學之人力資源管理（簡稱HRM）策略化程度為何？與大學本身之背景有無關係？及其與HRM部門團隊績效間之相關性如何？除文獻探討外，問卷調查法為主要方法，問卷計應回收295份，發放對象為我國各公私立大學校長、副校長或主任秘書其中一人代表經營層主管，另一則為人事部門主管，一校二份，總計回收率55.60％。研究發現在回收的164個樣本中有67.01％之HRM策略化程度屬策略型、29.88％屬管理型、0.61％屬作業型。以學校背景與HRM策略化程度關係分析時發現差異，但未達顯著，說明如下：

 一、學校類別：科技大學之策略型比例較高，為71.43％。

 二、創校時間：創校時間越久，大學HRM策略化程度有較低情形。

 三、教職員工數：員工人數愈多，HRM策略化程度越高。

另發現台灣整體公私立大學HRM部門之團隊績效平均數為4.18，顯示各校之HRM團隊績效表現理想，且就平均數、變異數比較分析或經由線性逐步迴歸統計模式得知HRM策略化程度與HRM部門之團隊績效間具有顯著關係（P＜.001），即策略化程度越高大學，其HRM部門之團隊績效越佳，且彼此交互影響，其中對團隊績效量表中之「目標達成度構面」之解釋能力最佳，顯示策略化程度越佳之HRM，其各項目標之達成度越高。

關鍵詞：大學人力資源管理、策略化人力資源管理、團隊績效

Yang-Haw Fann  Cheng-I Chu *  Chi-Win Fan**

Dean of General Affairs, Tzu Chi University
Doctoral Student, Graduate Institute of Compulsory Education, National Dong Hwa University
Associate Professor, Department of public health, Tzuchi University *
Associate Professor, Graduate Institute of Administration & Leadership**

Abstract

This study used two questionnaires to investigate the relationship of university characteristics and strategizing level to team performance of human resources departments in ’s universities. According to 55.60% (164 out of 295) of the university presidents, senior officers, or human resources managers responding, 67.01% were categorized as strategic type, 29.88% were categorized as managerial type, and only 0.61% were categorized as operational type. Although not reaching statistical significance, university characteristics and strategizing level of human resources departments exhibited the following trends:

 1.University category: Technical universities had more strategic type personnel (71.43%).

 2.University history: The longer the university’s history, the lower the strategizing level of its human resources departments.

 3.Staff and faculty size: The larger the size of university’s staff and faculty, the higher the strategizing level of its human resources departments.

     The general level of team performance of ’s university human resources departments demonstrated a fairly good average (4.18 on a 5-point Likert scale). Significant relationships existed between the strategizing level and team performance of human resources departments in Taiwan’s universities based on the results of this study (p＜.001). This result indicates that the higher the human resources department’s strategizing level, the better its team performance, and vice versa. The level of a human resources department’s strategizing explained 35.6% of the variance in one of the three sub-dimensions of team performance, “goal achievement”, indicating that a higher strategizing level led to better team goal achievement.