A survey of personnel participation in the public sector management quality award , Health Promotion Center Region 1 Chiang Mai.
Abstract
A survey of personnel participation in the development of quality of public administration, Health Promotion Center Region 1 Chiang Mai. To study the participation of personnel in the public sector management quality award (PMQA), including problems and obstacles in the participation of personnel in the development of the quality of public administration (PMQA) and to find solutions.
The study was conducted at all levels of personnel in Health Promotion Center Region 1, which have operated for 3 years or more. The total number of people in this survey is 230 persons that composed of government officials, government employees, employees of Ministry of Public Health and staff hire. A data were collected by questionnaire and tested by using tools. The reliability was 0.95 between 1st -14th of July. Using descriptive statistics by the frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation, The result indicated that The level of opinion on the participation of personnel in the development of the quality of public administration of the Health Promotion Center Region 1 was at a high level so the average was 3.63. Classifying by groups, The average of the internal environment was 3.68, higher than the average of the knowledge and attitude which was 3.55. The highest average is motivation factor that was 3.77. Next, The average of organizational culture was 3.76 and the average of organization management was 3.57. It signifies that motivation contributes to a creation of the atmosphere which promotes or encourages staff to participate in the development of quality of public administration in the workplace a lot. The level of opinion of the participation of personnel in improving the quality of government management, the overall was moderate and the average was 3.28. Classifying by participation, The average of the advantage of participation was 3.32, The highest average. Next, The average of participation in the operation was 3.31, the average of participation in the evaluation was 3.30 and the average of participation in decision making was 3.19. It shows that personnel in this workplace still lack participation in decision making, guiding the Development of Quality of Governmental Management and selecting of projects or activities for developing to achieve.
The result of obstacles in this survey pointed that the staff lack of knowledge and motivation on the public sector management quality award (PMQA). Many staff thought that PMQA is complicated and increased workload. Because of this, the staff does not see how important it is to cooperate. In addition, communication and public relations at all level are unclear. Therefore, the guidelines for the development of quality of public administration in Health Promotion Center Region 1 have many ways to do. The executive should focus on improving the quality of government management seriously and continuously as follows : paying attention to personnel at all levels, communicating policy and operational goals throughout the organization clearly, developing an effective communication system by set multi-channel to listen to opinions or suggestions of personnel at all levels, including increased public relations, creating good atmosphere and engagement, promoting good relationship teamwork, making a commitment to personnel, establishing a systematic working committee, enhancing knowledge and understanding about the development of quality of public administration to all levels of personnel, integrating the work and lead the way to improve the quality of government administration for routine work, coaching, adjusting attitudes, personnel, accepting change, and improving and accepting a new things. Furthermore, motivating personnel to participate in the particular development and following up and evaluating continuously.
References
2. สำนักงาน ก.พ.ร..เกณฑ์คุณภาพการบริหารจัดการภาครัฐ พ.ศ.2558. กรุงเทพฯ : บริษัท วิชั่น พริ้นท์ แอนด์ มีเดีย จำกัด; 2557.
3. สำนักงาน ก.พ.ร..รางวัลคุณภาพการบริหารจัดการภาครัฐ ประจำปี พ.ศ.2559.กรุงเทพฯ : บริษัท วิชั่น พริ้นท์ แอนด์ มีเดีย จำกัด; 2559.
4. ศูนย์อนามัยที่ 1 เชียงใหม่.รายงานการประเมินตนเองตามแนวทางการบริหารจัดการภาครัฐ ปีงบประมาณ พ.ศ. 2558; 2558.