Ahmet TOZLU, M. Tarık ERASLAN

3314

PERFORMACE EVALUATION SYSTEM AS AN OBLIGATION IN PUBLIC SECTOR AND ITS LEGALITY TOWARDS RECENT AMENDMENTS

Bir takım farklılıkların yanı sıra kamu sektörü özel sektörle bazı benzerliklere sahiptir. Diğer yandan, kamu sektörü ve çalışanları vatandaşlar, politikacılar, akademisyenler ya da diğer ilgililer tarafından düşük performansla çalışmakla eleştirilmektedir. Bu eleştiri ve “suçlamalar” kamu sektörü ve özel sektörün benzer süreçlere sahip olduğu inancı ile de eklemlenmiş ve kamu sektöründe performans tabanlı reform çalışmaları hızlanmıştır. Tüm bu küresel değişiklikler Türk kamu yönetimi ve personel sistemi için de geçerlidir.Bu çalışmada benzerlikler ve farklılıklar üzerinden kamu sektörü ve özel sektörün ana dinamikleri anlatılacak ve bir etkinlik ve verimlilik aracı olarak bireysel performans değerlendirme sistemine değinilecektir. Bu kapsamda bireysel performans de- ğerlendirme sisteminin kurgulanması ve uygulanması aşamalarındaki ayrıntılara yer verilecektir. Ardından Türk kamu personel sisteminin ve performans değerlendirme sisteminin mevcut ve temel yasal dayanakları paylaşılacak; güncel değişiklik ve çalışmalar eşliğinde performans değerlendirme sisteminin hukuki açıdan da uygulama mesruiyetinin varlığı ortaya konulacaktır.

Kamu Sektöründe Bir Zorunluluk Olarak Performans Değerlendirme Sistemi ve En Son Değişiklikler Doğrultusunda Kanuniliği

Public sector has both similarities and differences with the private sector. On the other hand, public sector and its employees have been criticized with inefficiency by citizens, politicians, academicians and other relevant counterparts. These critics or “accusations” also were articulated with the belief of having similar processes between public and private sector and so performance based reform studies have accelerated in the public sector. All these global changes are also valid for the Turkish public administration and personnel system. In this study, the main dinamics of public and private sectors will be explained by outlining similarities and differences and individual performance evaluation system will be touched on as a tool of effectiveness and efficiency. The details of designing and implementation phases of individual performance evaluation system will be included in this context. Finally, existing and main legal basis of Turkish public personnel system and performance evaluation system will be shared; also jurally the implementation legality of performance evaluation system will be propounded in company with current amendments and studies.

___

  • Agere, S. and N. Jorm, Designing Performance Appraisals, London, 2000.
  • Akçakanat, T., İnsan Kaynakları Yönetiminde Performans Değerlendirme: Isparta İl Emniyet Müdürlüğü’nde Bir Uygulama (Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Isparta, 2009.
  • Alford D. and J. O’Flynn, Rethinking Public Service Delivery, Managing with External Providers, Palgrave Macmillan Distribution, England, 2012.
  • Andrews, R., G.A. Boyne and R. M. Walker, Subjective and Objective Measures of Organizational Performance: An Amprical Exploration Public Service Performance Perspectives on Measurement and Management, Cambridge, 2006.
  • Atkinson, S. E., and Halversen, R, “The Relative Efficiency of Public and Private Firms in a Regulated Environment: The Case of U.S. Electric Utilities”, Journal of Public Economics. No: 29, p. 281 – 294, 1986.
  • Ban, C., How Do Public Managers Manage, Josey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, 1995.
  • Benn, S. I., and Gaus, G. F., Public and Private in Social Life, St. Martin’ s Press, New York, 1983.
  • Chubb, J. E., and Moe, T. M., “Politics, Markets, and the Organization of Schools”. American Political Science Review. No: 82, p. 1065–1088, 1988.
  • Clarke, J., “It’s Not Like Shopping”, Governance, Consumers and Citizens, Edited by Mark Bevir and Frank Trentmann, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2007.
  • Cole, M. And G. Parston, Unlocking Public Value, A New Model For Achieving High Performance in Public Service Organizations, New Jersey, 2006.
  • Cornetta, M., Marcus A. and Tehranian, H., “Corporate governance and pay-for-performance: The impact of earnings management”,Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 87, Issue 2, p. 357-373, 2008.
  • Dahlström, C., V. Lapuente, “Explaining Cross-Country Differences in Performance-Related Pay in the Public Sector”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 20, p. 577–600, 2009.
  • De Cenzo, David. A. and S. P. Robbins, Human Resource Management, (5. Edition) John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 1996.
  • Eraslan, T. ve A. Tozlu, Kamu Yönetiminde Performansa Dayalı Ücret Sistemi, Sayıştay Dergisi, Sayı 81, ss.33-61, Ankara, 2011.
  • Frederickson, H. George., “Comparing the Reinventing Government Movement With the New Public Administration”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 56, No. 3 (May-Jun.), pp. 263-270, Blackwell Publishing, 1996.
  • Greener, I., Public Management, Second Edition, Palgrave Macmillan, United Kingdom, 2013.
  • Hatry, P. H., Performance Measurements, Getting Results, Urban Institute Press, Washington D.C., 1999.
  • Heywood, A., Siyaset, Adres Yayınları, Ankara, 2010.
  • Hisrich, D.R. and Al-Dabbagh, A., Governpreneurship, Establishing a Thriving Entrepreneurial Spirit in Government, Edgar Elgar Publishing Limited, Massachusetts, 2013.
  • Homburg, V., C. Pollitt, S. Van Thiel, New Public Management in Euroupe, Adaptation and Alternatives, London, 2007.
  • Jreisat, J., Globalism and Comparative Public Administration, Taylor and Francis Group CRC Press, NW, 2012.
  • Karwan, K. R. and Markland, R. E., “Integrating service design principles and information technology to improve delivery and productivity in public sector operations: The case of the South Carolina DMV”, Journal of Operations Management, No: 24, p. 347–362, 2006.
  • Lyons, M. and Dalton, B., “Avustralia, A Continuing Love Affair with the New Public Management”, Governance and Regulation in the Third Sector, International Perspectives, Edit by. Susan D. Phillips and Steven Rathgreb Smith, Routledge, New York, 2011.
  • Maitland, I., Personel Yönetimi, (Çev. DuyguUğur), 3. Basım Epsilon Yayınları, İstanbul, 1998.
  • Mcdavid, C. J. and Laura R. L. H. Program Evaluation&Performance Measurement An Introduction to Practice, Sage Publications, California, 2006.
  • Newman, E.J. and Hinrichs R.J., Performance Evaluation for Professional Personel, New York: Work in America Institute Incompany, New York, 1980. OECD, The State of the Public Service, Paris, 2008.
  • Osborne, D. and T. Gaebler, Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, New York, 1992.
  • Paquet, G., Tackling Wicked Policy Problems, Invenire Books, Ottowa, 2013.
  • Persson, A. and G. Goldkhul, “Government Value Paradigms Bureaucracy, New Public Management, and e-Government”, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 27, p. 45-62, 2010.
  • Pollitt, C., New Perspectives on Public Services, Place and Technology, Oxford University Press, United Kingdom, 2013.
  • Pynes, J. E., Human Resources Management for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Strategic Approach, (4th edition) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2013. Rainey, H. G., Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, (4th edition), John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2006.
  • Reddick, C., Public Administration and Information Technology, (1st ed.), Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2011.
  • Robson, J., “Implementing a Performance Measurement System Capable of Creating a Culture of High Performance”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54, No: 2, 2005.
  • Simon, H. A., “Organizations and Markets”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, No: 5, p. 273–294, 1995.
  • Simon, H. A., “The Proverbs of Administration”, Public Administration Review,Vol. 6, p. 53–67, 1946.
  • Tozlu, A., Kamu Kesiminde Performans Değerlendirme Sistemi: İş Ve MeslekDanışmanlarına Yönelik Bir Uygulama Önerisi, Kalkınma Bakanlığı, 2014.
  • Vaughan, S., “Performance: Self as the Principal Evaluator”,Human Resource Development International, Vol.6, No: 3, p. 371-385, 2003.
  • Wheeland, C. M., “Evaluating City Manager Performance: Pennsylvania Managers Report On Methods Their Councils Use”, State and Local Government Review, No: 26, p. 153–160, 1994. Statute
  • 1982 Anayasası (2709 sayılı Kanun, 9.11.1982 tarih, 17863 sayılı T.C. ResmiGazete). 6111 sayılı Kanun (25.02.2011 tarih, 27857 sayılı T.C. Resmi Gazete).
  • 657 sayılı Devlet Memurlar Kanunu (23.07.1965 tarih, 12056 sayılı T.C. ResmiGazete).
  • Devlet Memurları Sicil Yönetmeliği (mülga) (18.10.1986 tarih, 19255 sayılı T.C.
  • Resmi Gazete).
  • Web based Resources
  • http://www.dpb.gov.tr
  • http://www.dpt.gov.tr
  • http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr
  • http://www.oecd.gov.tr
  • http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr
  • http://www.saglik.gov.tr
  • http://www.tbmm.gov.tr
Law and Justice Review-Cover
  • ISSN: 1309-9485
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 2 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2010
  • Yayıncı: Türkiye Adalet Akademisi
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

THE LAW OF SEARCH IN U.S.A. Advices and Critics on Turkish and American Search Law

Selahattin DOĞAN

LE PRINCIPE DE COMPÉTENCE-COMPÉTENCE EN DROIT TURC DE L'ARBITRAGE

Ebru CHELLI AY

LE PRINCIPE DE COMPÉTENCE-COMPÉTENCE EN DROIT TURC DE L'ARBITRAGE

Ebru CHELLI AY

THE CHALLENGES AND PREJUDGEMENTS TURKEY HAS EXPRIENCED THROUGH ACCESSION PROCESS TO THE EUROPEAN UNION

Gökhan SERTÖZ

PERFORMACE EVALUATION SYSTEM AS AN OBLIGATION IN PUBLIC SECTOR AND ITS LEGALITY TOWARDS RECENT AMENDMENTS

Ahmet TOZLU, M. Tarık ERASLAN

INCREASING SHAREHOLDER COMMITMENTS AT JOINT-STOCK CORPORATIONS UNDER TURKISH COMMERCIAL LAW

Berna TEPE