从繁文缛节到结果：创造一个少花钱多办事的政府（1993，国家绩效评估委员会）
时间：2021.03.05 创作：欧阳理 From red tape to results: creating a government that works better and costs less The national performance review
Our goal is to make the entire federal government both less expensive and more efficient, and to change the culture of our national bureaucracy away from complacency and entitlement toward initiative and empowerment. We intend to redesign, to reinvent, to reinvigorate the entire national government.
President bill Clinton
我们的目标是创建一个高效率少花费的政府， 同时改造我们自满的权利倾向的官僚作风。我们要重新设计，重新创造，再次复兴我们整个国民政府。
Public confidence in the federal government has never been lower. The average American believes we waste 48
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
cents of every tax dollar. Five of every six want “fundamental change” in Washington. Only 20 percent of Americans trust the federal government to do the right thing most of the time---down from 76 30 years ago!
公众对政府的信心从来没有这么低过，美国民众认为每一美元的税收有48分是被浪费了。六分之五的人希望在华盛顿进行基础改造。只有百分之二十的人认为政府大部分时候做的决定是正确的——远比30年前的76%低的多。
We all know why. Washington’s failures are large and obvious. For a decade, the deficit has run out of control. The national debt now exceeds $4 trillion---$16,000for every man, woman, and child in America.
我们都知道原因，华盛顿这方面的失误很明显。甚至赤字有十多年的时间处于失控状态。国债现在已经超过4万亿美元——欠了大概每一个美国公民，无论男人，女人还是小孩$16，000 左右。
But the deficit is only the tip of the iceberg. Below the surface, Americansbelieve, lies enormous unseen waste. The Defense Department owns more than $40 billion in unnecessary supplies. The Internal Revenue Service
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
struggles to collect billions in unpaid bills. A century after industry replaced farming as America’s principal business, the Agriculture Department still operates more than 12,000 field service offices, an average of nearly 4 for every county in the nation----rural, urban, or suburban. The federal government seems unable to abandon the obsolete. It knows how to add, but not to subtract.
但是赤字还只不过是问题冰山露出水面的尖角而已。美国人认为在这个表面下还有着巨大的看不见的浪费。国防部将400多亿美元用于不太必要的供应品上。美国国税局绞尽脑汁为未付的帐单筹款。在工业取代农业成为美国的主要行业的一个世纪以来，农业部仍然通过超过12，000的下属部门运作，大概平均每个县就有4个左右——无论是城市、农村还是郊外。联邦政府似乎还不能够轻装上阵，他似乎只知道添加，但不会精简。
And yet,, waste is not the only problem. The federal government is not simply broke; it is broken. Ineffective regulation of the financial industry brought us the savings and loan debacle. Ineffective education and training programs jeopardize our competitive edge. Ineffective
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
welfare and housing programs undermine our families and cities.
但是显然，不仅仅只有浪费这个问题。联邦政府不只是有轻微的毛病，更糟的是它已经千疮百孔了。无效的财政政策带给了我们储蓄和贷款的崩溃。糟糕的教育和培训项目削弱了我们的竞争优势。差劲的福利住房项目破坏了我们的家庭和城市。
We spend $25billion a year on welfare, $27 billion on food stamps, and $13 billion on public housing----yet more Americans fall into poverty every year. We spend $12 billion a year waging war on drugs-----yet the average American has no idea where to get job training, and skills of our workforce fall further behind those of our competitors.
我们每年在福利上花费250亿美元，花270亿在粮票，还有130亿在公共住房上——然而越来越多的美国人却陷入了贫困。 每年我们花费120亿来抵制毒品——然而美国民众却不知道去哪里得到职业培训，获得工作技能，这导致我们落后于我们的那些竞争者们。
It is almost as if federal programs were designed not to work. In truth, few are “designed” at all; the legislative process simply churns them out, one after another, year after
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
year. It’s little wonder that when asked if “government always manages to mess things up,” tow-thirds of Americans say “yes.”
似乎联邦计划是专门设计成为不能切实操作的表面文章。事实上，几乎没有计划是故意设计成这样的；立法机关不过年复一年的艰难的重复制定出一个又一个这些无效的计划。毫无疑问，如果我们问“是不是联邦政府运行的一团糟”三分之二的美国人会回答“是”。
To borrow the words of a recent Brookings Institution book, we suffer not only a budget deficit but a performance deficit. Indeed, public opinion experts argue that we are suffering the deepest crisis of faith in government in our lifetimes. In past crises—Watergate or the Vietnam War, for example—Americans doubted their leaders on moral or ideological grounds. They felt their government was deceiving them or failing to represent their values.Today’s crisis is different: people simply fell that government doesn’t work.
借用布鲁克林协会书刊上的一句话，我们正被痛苦的煎熬着，不仅仅是预算赤字，还有政府绩效的失灵。确实是这样的，民意专家告诉大家我们的政府正在承受
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
着前所未有的信誉危机。以前的危机，像水门事件或是越南战争，美国民众只是对政府的道德观和意识形态产生怀疑， 他们感觉到自己被政府欺骗了，或者说是政府没能成功地代表他们的价值观。今天的危机却是不同的：人们就是认为政府运作失败。
In Washington, debate rarely focuses on the performance deficit. Our leaders spend most of their time debating policy issues. But if the vehicle designed to carry out policy is broken, new policies won’t take us anywhere. If the car won’t turn, it hardly matters where we point it; we won’t get there. Today, the central issue we face is not what government does, but how it works.
在华盛顿，政府从不在绩效失灵上讨论。我们的领导者将大部分的时间用来讨论政策问题。但是如果贯彻执行政策的车辆不能运转了，新政策又能带我们驶向何方呢？如果车辆出故障了，那么我们的目的地在哪已经不重要了，因为我们永远无法到达。现今我们最重要的问题不是政府做什么而是怎么做。
We have spent too much money for programs that don’t work. It’s time to make our government work for the people, learn to do more with less, and treat taxpayers like customers.
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
我们在无效的项目上花费了太多。现在是我们的政府学会如何为民众服务，如何多干事少花钱，同时要将我们的纳税人看作我们的顾客来对待的时候了。
President Clinton created the National Performance Review to do just that.In this report we make hundreds of recommendations for actions that, if implemented, will revolutionize theway the federal government does business. They will reduce waste, eliminate unneeded bureaucracy, improve service to taxpayers, and create a leaner but more productive government. As noted in the preface, they can save $108 billion over five years if those which will be enacted by the president and his cabinet are added to those we propose for enactment by congress. Some of these proposals can be enacted by the president and his cabinet, others will require legislative action. We are going to fight for these changes. We are determined to create a government that works better and costs less.
克林顿总统创办的《政府绩效回顾报告》应运而生，在这份报告中，我们针对历年来已经实施了的项目提出了许多的建议，这些建议将对我们的行事方式进行改革。这将减少开支，精简不必要的官僚机构，提高对
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
纳税人服务的品质质量， 这样就能建设一个精简而多产的政府了。就像在序文中提到的一样，如果总统和他的内阁制定的条例能够补充到国会制定的政策中，联邦政府能够在五年中节省1080亿美元。我们正在为这样的改变而奋力拼搏，我们下定了决心要建设一个多办事少花钱的政府。
A cure worse than the disease
Government is not alone in its troubles. As the Industrial Era has given way to the Information Age, institutions---both public and private----have come face to face with obsolescence. The past decade has witnessed profound restructuring: In the 1980s, major American corporations reinvented themselves; in the 1990s, governments are struggling to do the same.
不仅仅是政府有自身的问题。随着信息时代取代了工业时期，无论是公共的还是私人的机构都面临着退化的难题。过去的十年见证了意义深远的机构重组：在19世纪八十年代， 主要的美国公司对自身进行了彻底的改造；在十九世纪九十年代，政府也开始进行机构重组。
In recent years, our national leaders responded to the growing crisis with traditional medicine. They blamed the
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
bureaucrats. They railed against “fraud. Waste and abuse.”And they slapped ever more controls on the bureaucracy to prevent it.
But the cure has become indistinguishable from the disease. The problem is not lazy or incompetent people; it is red tape and regulation so suffocating（令人窒息）that they stifle every ounce of creativity. No one would offer a drowning man a drink of water. And yet, for more than a decade, we have added red tape to a system already strangling in it.
最近这些年，我们的国家领导者用过去的旧药来治疗日益变化的危机。他们批判官僚，反对欺骗，浪费和滥用。接着他们为了阻止这一切转而加大了对官僚的控制。
但是处方和弊病逐渐无法区分了。问题不在于政府工作人员的懒散或是无能力，而在于繁文褥节和死板的规章制度令人窒息，以至于创造力都被扼杀了。没有人会给一个淹死的人一杯水。然而我们仍然将繁琐的章程加之于已经被此扼杀的系统上。
The federal government is filled with good people trapped in bad systems: budget systems, personnel systems,
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
procurement systems, financial management systems, information systems. When we blame the people and impose more controls, we make the systems worse. Over the past 15 years, for example, Congress has created within each agency an independent office of the inspector general. The idea was to root out fraud, waste, and abuse. The inspectors general have certainly uncovered important problems. But as we learned in conversation, they have so intimidated federal employees that many are now afraid to deviated even slightly from standard operating procedure.
许多有能力的人员被一些糟糕的系统部门给困住了，像预算系统，人事系统，掌控系统，财政管理系统，信息系统。当我们责怪员工办事不力甚至对他们进行更严厉的控制时，这个系统的运作更加糟糕。在过去的１５年里，举例来说，国会为检察长在每个行社设立一个独立的办公室。这样是为了根除欺骗，浪费和滥用。 检察长当然能够发现一些重要的问题，就像我们在谈话中了解到的一样，许多被监控的员工都不敢有一丝一毫偏离标准的操作程序。
Yet innovation, by its nature, requires deviation. Unfortunately, faced with so many controls, many
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
employees have simply given up. They do everything by the book—whether it makes sense or not. They fill out forms that should never have been created, follow rules that should never have been imposed, and prepare reports that serve no purpose—and are often never even read. In the name of controlling waste, we have created paralyzing inefficiency. It’s time we found a way to get rid of waste and encourage efficiency.
然而创新本质上是不需要太循规蹈矩的。不幸的是，许多员工在面对这么多监控的时候就放弃了按照自己的想法去做。他们不管规章时否正确，程序是否合理，他们仍照本宣科。他们填着无聊的表格，遵照本不应该执行的规则，还准备那些毫无意义的报告，甚至这些报告从未被宣读过。我们竟以控制浪费的名义使系统变得更加无效。现在正是我们避免浪费提高效率的时候了。
The root problem: Industrial-Era bureaucracies in Information Age
根本问题：工业社会的官僚体制在信息时代
Is government inherently incompetent? Absolutely not.
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
Are federal agencies filled with incompetent people? No. The problem is much deeper: Washington is filled with organizations designed for an environment that no longer exists—bureaucracies so big and wasteful they can no longer serve the American people.
难道说政府本质上就是无能的吗？显然不是。难道说联邦政府的工作人员都没有能力？也不是。问题隐藏的很深：政府组织不能够适应环境和时代的发展，官僚机构的繁冗和浪费已经不能很好的为美国人民服务了。
From the 1930s through the 1960s, we built large, top-down, centralized bureaucracies to do the public’s business. They were patterned after the cooperate structures of the age: hierarchical bureaucracies in which tasks were broken into simple parts, each the responsibility of a different layer of employees, each defined by specific rules and regulations. With their rigid preoccupation with standard operating procedure, their vertical chains of command, and their standardized services, these bureaucracies were steady----but slow and cumbersome. And in today’s world of rapid change, lightning-quick information technologies, tough global competition, and demanding customers, large, top-down
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
bureaucracies---public or private---don’t work very well. Saturn isn’t run the way General Motors was. Intel isn’t run the way IBM was.
从十九世纪三十年代到十九世纪六十年代，我们建立了一个庞大的，自上而下的集权政府来处理国家事务。这模仿了当时的合作组织，在等级官僚中，任务分成了简单的几个部分，每一个层级的责任由这个层级的员工承担，这些人都有具体的规章制度约束着。 由于他们拥有严格的操作程序，垂直的管理系统，还有标准的服务，这个官僚结构就很稳定，只是却显得迟钝笨重。在今天这个有着飞速的信息科技，激烈的全球竞争，以及严格要求的顾客的瞬息万变的社会，庞大的，自上而下的官僚机构，无论是公共的还是私人的，都不能有效运作。土星并不在通用汽车的轨道上行驶，英特尔也不是按照ＩＢＭ的方式运作。
Many federal organizationsare also monopolies, with few incentives to innovate or improve. Employees have virtual
lifetime
tenure,
regardless
of
their
performance .Success offers few rewards; failure, few penalties. And customers are captive; they can’t walk away from the air traffic control system or the Internal Revenue
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
Service and sign up with a competitor. Worse, most federal monopolies receive their money without any direct input from their customers. Consequently, they try a lot harder to please congressionalappropriation subcommittees than the people they are meant to serve. Taxpayers pay more than they should and get poorer service.
许多联邦组织也是垄断者，他们没有足够的动力去进行创新和提高。员工不管他们的表现怎么样，都是终生任职的。成功也不能得到回报，失败也没有惩罚。 消费者没有选择的权利，他们不可能不与空中交通控制系统还有国内税收部门打交道，因为这些部门都没有竞争者。 更糟的是，大部分联邦垄断者心安理得的得到收益，却不对自己的顾客投入。结果自然就是他们花费更多的精力去讨好国会拨款委员会却不为本应该服务的人工作。纳税人付出了很多得到的却很少。
Politics intensifies the problem. In Washington’s highly politicized world, the problem is not that a program will perform poorly, but that a scandal will erupt. Scandals are front-page news, while routine failure is ignored. Hence control system after control system is piled up to minimize the risk of scandal.The budget system, the personnel rules,
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
the procurement process, the inspectors general---all are designed to prevent the tiniest misstep. We assume that we can’t trust employees to make decisions, so we spell out in precise detail how they must do virtually everything, then audit them to ensure that they have obeyed every rule. The slightest deviation prompts new regulations and even more audits.
政治强化了这些问题。在华盛顿这个高度政治化的地方，项目的失败并不是问题，丑闻的出现才是真正的问题。丑闻往往是新闻头条，自然工作上的失误就被忽视了。因此控制系统的加强就是为了使丑闻爆发的风险最小化。预算系统，人事系统，控制系统，检察官的设置，所有这些都是为了防止丑闻的出现与曝光。假设我们不能对我们的员工予以信任，这样的话我们就必须使程序的每一个步骤都细节化精确化，然后监督他们严格遵守执行贯彻。但是一点点的偏离就会导致更多的监控。
Before long, simple procedures are too complex for employees to navigate, so we hire more budget analysts, more personnel experts, and more procurement officers to make things work. By then, the process involves so much red
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
tape that the smallest action takes far longer and costs far more than it should. Simple travel arrangements require endless forms and numerous signatures. Straightforward purchases take months; larger ones take years. Routine printing jobs take a dozen approvals.
不久以后，甚至简单的程序员工们难以操作，于是我们只能任用更多的预算分析师，更多的人事专家，还有更多的监控人员来使组织运转。到那时，整个过程就需要更多的手续，即使是很小的一个环节也要花费很多的时间和财力物力，远远超过它本身真正需要的。 一个简单的旅程安排要求无尽的表格和无数的签名。 简单的购买计划需要几个月，稍复杂一店就要几年了，例行的印刷工作也要很多的人的允许和同意。
This emphasis on process steal resources from the real job: serving the customer. Indeed, the federal government spends billions of dollars paying people who control, check up on, or investigate others---supervisors, headquarters staffs, budget officers, and staffs of the General Accounting Office (GAO) and the inspectors general. Not all this money is wasted, of course. But the real waste is no doubt larger, because endless regulations and layers of control consume
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
every employee’s time. Who pays? The taxpayer.
对于过程的过度重视导致工作偏离了原本的目标：为消费者服务。事实上，联邦政府花费了很大一笔钱支付一些附增的工作，像控制检查人员，监督人员，总部员工，会计办公室人员，还有检察官们。 当然不是说所有钱都是浪费了，但是毫无疑问有一些不必要的花费数额很大，因为繁冗的规章和控制消耗了每个员工的时间。那谁来为这些买单？ 自然是纳税人。
Consider but one example, shared with Vice President Gore at a meeting of federal employees in Atlanta. After federal marshals seize drug dealers’ homes, they are allowed to sell them and use the money to help finance the war on drugs. To sell the houses, they must keep them presentable, which include keeping the lawns mowed.
举一个戈尔副总统在亚特兰大联邦员工会议上分享的例子。在联邦执行人员抓获了毒品经销商后，他们可以将缴获得毒品卖出，得到的钱可以为战场提供药物。 如果联邦工作人员要卖出毒品经销商的房子，也必须保证房子像样，这就包括定时除草之类的。
In Atlanta, the employee explained, most organizations would hire neighborhood teenagers to mow a lawn for $10.
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
But procurement regulations require the U.S. Marshals Service to bid out all work, competitively, and neighborhood teenagers don’t compete for contracts. So the federal government pays $40 a lawn to professional landscape firms. Regulations designed to save money waste it, because they take decisions out of the hands of those responsible for doing the work. And taxpayers lose $30 for every lawn mowed.
工作人员告诉我们许多的组织更愿意花费10美元雇用附近的青少年除草，街道的青少年不需要为这些合同竞争，但是采购规程要求法警署公开操作这些事情，这样才能使这个买卖市场化，有竞争性。所以联邦政府花费了40美元让园艺公司来除草。规程本身是为了减少政府花费而设计的，但是因为做这些决定的人并不需要对此事负责，所以纳税人只能缴纳30美元来除草。
What would happen if the marshals used their common sense and hired neighborhood teenagers? Someone would notice---perhaps the Washington office, perhaps the inspector general’s office, perhaps even the GAO. An investigation might well follow---hindering a career or damaging a reputation.
假设警署有些常识让附近的青少年来除草结果会是
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
怎样呢？这时根据调查，人们也许会发现，在华盛顿政府，检察长办公室甚至总审计局的事业和名声会受到一定的损害。
In this way, federal employees quickly learn that common sense is risky----and creativity is downright dangerous. They learn that the goal is not to produce results, please customers, or save taxpayers’ money, but to avoid mistakes.Those who dare to innovate do so quietly.
由于这样，联邦政府工作人员发现按常识做事是有风险的，而且太有创造性很明显是很危险的。他们在实践中得知，工作的目标不是为了方便公众，或是为纳税人节约用钱，而是避免失误。即使要创新也必须使悄无声息的。
This is perhaps the saddest lesson learned by those who worked on the National Performance Review: Yes, innovators exist within the federal government, but many work hard to keep their innovations quiet. By its nature, innovation requires a departure from standard operating procedure. In the federal government, such departures invite repercussions（反响）.
The result is a culture of fear and resignation. To survive,
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
employees keep a low profile. They decide that safest answer in any given situation is a firm “maybe.”They follow the rules, pass the buck, and keep their heads down. They develop what one employee, speaking with Vice President Gore at a Department of Veterans Affairs meeting, called “a government attitude.”
国家绩效评估委员会对于这个调查结果感到很是难过，是的，联邦政府的确有富有创新精神的人，但是他们必须尽力使革新秘密进行。创新本质上是要求对于常规程序的挑战，但这种挑战或是说对常规的偏离往往会引起很大的反响。
这时员工们就会产生普遍的恐慌或是对常规的顺从。为了生存，员工们普遍保持低调，他们认为对任何问题的最好答案就是“也许”的形式，他们严格遵守规章制度，推卸责任，时时刻刻保持头脑的清醒。他们保持着一种姿态，这种姿态就如一个职员对副总统戈尔说的那样，即“政府态度”。
The solution: creating entrepreneurial organizations 解决之道：政府的企业化运营
How do we solve these problems? It won’t be easy. We know all about government’s problems, but little about
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
solutions. The National Performance Review began by compiling a comprehensive list of problems. We had the GAO’s 28-volume report on federal management problems, published last fall. We had GAO’s High-Risk Series, a 17-volume series of pamphlets on troubled programs and agencies. We had the House Government Operations Committee’s report on federal mismanagement, called Managing the Federal Government: A Decade of Decline. And we had 83 notebooks summarizing just the tables of contents of reports published by the inspectors general, the Congressional Budget Office, the agencies, and think tanks.
我们怎么才能解决上述的问题呢？这的确很艰难，我们可以了解政府存在的所有问题，但是我们却不能轻易的找到解决之道。一开始国家绩效评估委员会将政府存在的所有问题都列在一起。我们可以找到总审计局关于政府管理问题的28卷报告，还有一些高风险的，关于问题项目和机构的17卷报告系列。我们还有众议院政府行动计划委员会对于联邦政府的一些错误管理的报告——管理联邦政府：十年的衰退。我们还有83本记录，这些记录内容都是由检察长，国会预算草案办公室，还有专家组记录提供的。
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
Unfortunately, few of these studies helped us design solutions. Few of the investigating bodies had studied success stories---organizations that have solved their problems. And without studying success, it is hard to devise real solutions. For years, the federal government has studied failure, and for years, failure has endured. Six of every ten major agencies have programs on the Office of Management and Budget’s “high-risk” list, meaning they carry a significant risk of runaway spending of fraud.
但是很遗憾的是，这些研究并不能帮助我们找到解决的方法。调查机构并没有成功的案例可以借鉴参考，如果我们不能建设一个成功的解决模型，我们就不可能解决实际的问题。这些年来，联邦政府对于失败进行了研究，可是这些失误仍然存在。十个主要的机构有六个在这个办公室管理项目和预算高危的名单上，这也就以为着他们为这些失误买单。
The National Performance Review approached its task differently. Not only did we look for potentialsavings and efficiencies, we searched for success. We looked for organizations that produced results, satisfied customers, and increased productivity. We looked for organizations that
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
constantly learned, innovated, and improved.We looked for effective, entrepreneurial public organizations.And we found them: in local government, in state government, in other countries---and right here in our federal government.
国家绩效评估委员会对这项任务的解决方式有所不同，我们不仅仅是发现潜在的节约可能性和效率的提升空间，发现处理的成功之处。我们还参照那些高效，能满足顾客要求，多产的组织；研究那些能持续学习，创新提高的机构；理解那些有效的公共企业组织。我们在国内外地方政府，州政府，以及我们的联邦政府都能找到这样的例子。
At the Air Combat Command, for example, we found units that had doubled their productivity in 5 years. Why? Because the command measured performance everywhere; squadrons and bases compete proudly for the best maintenance, fight, and safety records; and top management had empowered employees to strip away red tape and redesign work processes. A supply system that had once required 243 entries by 22 people on 13 forms to get one spare part into an F-15 had been radically simplified and decentralized. Teams of employees were saving millions of
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
dollars by moving supply operations to the front line, developing their own flight schedules, and repairing parts that were once discarded.
举例来说，我们发现空军战斗司令部在五年内效率提高了两倍。为什么呢？因为司令部事事都要考虑绩效，空军和陆军都为了稳定和安全记录战斗和竞争；同时管理高层也授权给战士，让他们不用拘泥于规程，重新设计工作流程。这样一个供给系统就得以简化和分散了，这个系统原本要求243个入口以使得22个人从13个窗口进入，从而能装上F-15的一个备件。员工们通过将操作系统移到前线，制定他们自己的全新的飞行计划，还有修复以前被他们丢弃的部件来节约数以万计的美元。
At the Internal Revenue Service, we found tax return centers competing for the best productivity records. Performance on key customer service criteria---such as the accuracy of answers provided to taxpayers---had improved dramatically. Utah’s Ogden Service Center, to cite but one example had more than 50 “productivity improvement teams” simplifying forms and reengineering work process. Not only had employees saved more than $11 million, they
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
had won the 1992 Presidential Award for Quality.
我们在美国国内税局发现，税收申报中心正在为高产纪录而竞争。对于关键客户服务的标准，像给纳税人精确的回答，政府的绩效正发生翻天覆地的改变。犹他州的奥格登服务中心指出有超过50个效率提高机构正在简化手续和重新设计工作流程。员工们不仅节约了大约110亿美元，而且还获得了1993年的质量总统奖。
At the Forest Service, we found a pilot project in the 22-state Eastern Region that had increased productivity by 15 percent in just 2 years. The region had simplified its budget systems, eliminated layers of middle management, pared central headquarters staff a fifth, and empowered front-line employees to make their own decisions. At the Mark Twain National Forest, for instance, the time needed to grant a grazing permit had shrunk for 30 days to a few hours---because employees could grant permits themselves rather than process them through headquarters.
我们在林业局发现，一个涵盖了22个东部地区的实验项目在两年内生产力提高了15%。这些地区简化了他们的预算系统，精简掉了管理中层，裁掉了五分之一的总部工作人员，授予一线员工自己决策的权力。举例来
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
说，在马克吐温国家林业局，因为员工们能够自己做决定而不是要经过重重手续，于是获得放牧批准的时间由30天缩短到几个小时。
We discovered that several other governments were also reinventing themselves, from Australia to GreatBritain, Singapore to Sweden, theNetherlands to NewZealand. Throughout the developed world, the needs of information-age societies were colliding with the limits of industrial-era government. Regardless of party, regardless of ideology, these governments were responding. In Great Britain, conservatives led the way. In NewZealand, the Labor Party revolutionized government. In Australia and Sweden, both conservative and liberal parties embraced fundamental change.
我们发现政府再造正在许多国家进行，从澳大利亚到大不列颠，从新加坡到瑞典，从荷兰到新西兰。在发达国家，对于信息时代的渴求正与有限的工业时代政府发生冲突。无论是什么执政党，什么样的意识形态，政府都在积极回应。在大不列颠是由保守党执政；在新西兰工人党领导国家；在澳大利亚和瑞典，保守党和自由党都拥护政府的变革。
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
In the United States, we found the same phenomenon at the state and local levels. The movement to reinvent government is as bipartisan as it is widespread. It is driven not by political ideology, but by absolute necessity. Governors, mayors, and legislators of both parties have reached the same conclusion: Government is broken, and it is time to fix it.
Where we found success, we found many common characteristics. Early on, we articulated these in a one-page statement of our commitment. In organizing this report, we have boiled these characteristics down to four key principles.
无论是在美国的州还是地方这个现象都普遍存在，再造的运动就像两党执政一样广泛传播，这绝不是由政治意识推动的，它是靠实际的需要促进的。“政府是分散的，现在是修复整合的时候”是任何一个政党的统治者，市长还有立法者的一致结论。
1. Cutting
Red Tape Effective, entrepreneurial
governments cast aside red tape, shifting from systems in which people are accountable for following rules to systems in which they are accountable for achieving results. They streamline
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
their budget, personnel, and procurement system---liberating organizations to pursue their missions. They reorient their control systems to prevent problems rather than simply punish those who make mistakes. They strip away unnecessary layers of regulation that stifle innovation. And they deregulate organizations that depend upon them for funding, such as lower levels of government.删繁就简 高效的企业型政府抛弃了繁琐的程序，他们从依靠规则的系统转变成以结果为目标的政府。他们创造了流线型的预算、人事和采购系统，这使得组织能够自由的去完成自身的任务。他们不再只是简单的对失误者进行处罚，而是改进系统来阻止问题的出现。他们去除了那些妨碍创新的无用的规章，政府也放松了对资金来源机构的管制，例如降低政府的管理层级。
2. Putting Customers First
Effective, entrepreneurial
governments insist on customer satisfaction. They listen carefully to their customers---using surveys, focus groups, and the like. They restructure their basic operations to meet customers’ needs. And they use
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
market dynamics such as competition and customer choice to create incentives that drive their employees to put customers first.
顾客优先（纳税人优先）高效的企业型政府以人民的舒适度为第一位，他们通过民意调查等手段来倾听顾客的想法，通过调整基础操作来满足顾客的需要。他们甚至运用市场激励，例如竞争和顾客选择，来促使员工将民众放在第一位。 By “customer,” we do not mean “citizen.”A citizen can participate in democratic decision-making;a customer receives benefits from a specific service, the Social Security Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Park Service, and scores of other federal organizations.
当我们提到顾客时，我们不只是简单的说“市民”。市民仅能参加政治决策，而一个“顾客”却能从各个部门获得具体的服务，像社会保险部门，退伍军人事务管理部门，国家公园服务部门，还有许多的联邦机构。
In a democracy, citizens and customers both matter. But when they vote, citizens seldom have
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
much chance to influence the behavior of public institution that directlyaffect their lives: schools, hospitals, farm service agencies, social security offices. It is a sad irony: citizens own their government, but private businesses they do not own work much harder to cater their needs.
在民主社会，市民和顾客是同等重要的。但是当真正投票的时候，市民几乎没有什么机会能够影响那些公共机构的行为，而这些机构，就像学校，医院，农业服务机构和社会保险部门等，恰好能够直接影响市民的生活。这是一个极具讽刺的事实，市民们拥有自己的政府，但真正为市民服务的却是那些不属于他们的私人部门。
3. Empowering
Employees to Get Results Effective,
entrepreneurial governments transform from their cultures by decentralizing authority. They empower those who work on the front lines to make of their own decisions and solve more of their own problems. They
embrace
labor-management
cooperation,
provide training and other tools employees need to be effective, and humanize the workplace. While
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
stripping away layers and empowering front-line employees, they hold organizations accountable for producing results.权力下放 高效的企业型政府通过分散权力来改造自身，他们通过权力下放，使一线的工作人员能够有更多的自主权来决策和解决问题。他们支持人力资源管理的合作，为工作人员提供他们所需的有效的培训和工具，使工作环境更加人性化。与此同时，他们还精简层级，将权力下放至一线工作人员，使组织能够负责任的达成目标。
4. Cutting
Back to Basics: Producing Better
Government For Less Effective , entrepreneurial governments constantly find ways to make government work better and cost less---reengineering how they do work and reexamining programs and processes. They abandon the obsolete, eliminate duplication, and end special interest privileges. They invest in greater productivity, through loan funds and long-term capital investments.And they embrace advanced technologies to cut costs.一削到底；创造一个少花钱多办事的政府高效的企业型政府始终
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
在努力寻找能让政府少花钱多办事的方法，像重新设计工作流程，检查项目和流程存在的问题，这都是政府一般使用的方法。他们推陈出新，不照抄照搬，摈弃了以往对于特权阶级的照顾。通过资金贷款和长期的资本投资来提高生产力，先进科学方法和工具的应用也是减少花费的有效途径。
These are the bedrock principles on which the reinvention of the federal bureaucracybuild---and the principles around which we have organized our actions. They fit together much like the pieces of a puzzle: if one is missing, the others lose their power. To create organizations that deliver value to American taxpayers, we must embrace all four.以上这些原则是政府改革联邦官僚体系根基的基本，也是组织行事的原则。这些原则就像是难题箱中的那些组成部分相互适应配合，少了那一块就会失去整个的效用。要创造一个能造福纳税人的组织，我们必须履行这四条原则。
Our approach goes far beyond fixing specific problems in specific agencies. Piecemeal efforts have
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
been underway for years, but they have not delivered whatAmericans demand. The failure in Washington is embedded in the very systems by which we organize the federal bureaucracy. In recent years, Congress has taken the lead in reinventing these systems. In 1990, it passed the Chief Financial Officers Act, designed to overhaul financial management systems; in July 1993, it passed the Government Performance and Results Act, which will introduce performance measurement throughout the federal government. With Congress’s leadership, we hope to reinvent government’s other basic systems, such as budget, personnel, information, and procurement.我们的方法没能够对具体部门的具体问题对症下药，这么多年来零零碎碎的努力其实做了不少，但是仍没有达到美国公民的要求。在我们构建联邦官僚体系的时候系统就存在着不少问题。在1990年，政府通过了《财政官员行事条例》；1993年7月，通过了《政府绩效和结果评估条例》，这条法令位联邦政府引入了一套绩效评估方法。在议会的领导下，我们希望能够重建政府的基础系统，像预算，人事，信息还
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
有采购系统等。
Our approach has much in common with other management
philosophies,
such
as
quality
management and business process reengineering. But these management disciplines were developed for the private sector, where conditions are quite different. In business, re d tape may be bad, but it is not the suffocating presence it is in government. In business, market incentives already exist; no one need invent them. Powerful incentives are always at work, forcing organizations to do more with less. Indeed, business that fail to increase their productivity---or that tie themselves up in red tape---shrink or die. Hence, private sector management doctrines tend to overlook some central problems of government: its monopolies, its lack of a bottom line, its obsession with process ratherthan results. Consequently, our approach goes beyond private sector methods. It is aimed at the heart and soul government.
这一方法与其他的管理哲学有许多共同点，比如说质量管理和业务流程再设计。当然这些管理方
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
法都是为私人领域量身定做的，与公关管理的要求还是有很大不同的。在市场上，或许繁冗的规章条例也很没有益处，但是却没有像在政府管理中的那么糟糕，毕竟市场自身就存在着吉利的因素。这些有利的激励时时刻刻都在起着作用，促进组织和企业多做事少花钱。事实上，那些被套牢在繁文缛节上的组织或者企业，生产力低下，萎缩终至破产。因此私人企业或者组织都绘有意识的避免政府存在的主要问题：专制，对于底线的无限度要求，对于过程的执着而对结果的忽视等。结果就是我们的政府将力量都放在成为一个集中的权力中心上。
The National Performance Review also shares certain goals with past efforts to cut costs in government. But our mission goes beyond cost-cutting. Our goal is not simply to weed the federal garden; it is to create a regimen that will keep the garden free of weeds. It is not simply to trim pieces of government, but to reinvent the way government does everything. It is not simply to produce a more efficient government, but to create a more effective one. After all,
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
Americans don’t want a government that fails more efficiently. They want a government that works. 国家绩效评估委员会曾经也为减少开销做出过努力，但是我们的使命却不仅仅是减少开支或者说是为这个政府花园除草，我们是为了斩草除根，让这个花园永远不再找出杂草。我们也不仅仅是精简政府机构，我们是为了为政府有效办事找出一条可行的途径；我们也不仅仅只是为了构建一个有效率的政府，我们是为了创造一个有效果的机构。 毕竟，所有的美国人并不希望拥有一个“有效”失灵的政府，他们需要一个真正能有所成的政府。
To deliver what the people want, we need not jettison（投弃货物） the traditional values that underlie democratic governance---values such as equal opportunity, justice, diversity, and democracy. We hold these values dear. We seek to transform bureaucracies precisely because they have failed to nurture these values. We believe that those who resist change for fear of jeopardizing our democratic values doom us to a government that continues---through its
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
failures---to subvert those very values.
为了争取人民的利益，我们不可以将民主管理最基本的价值观给抛弃了，比如说公平的机遇，公正，差异化还有民主等，这些价值观都很珍贵。 我们转变现有的官僚体制是由于现行的体制不能使这些价值观真正得到尊重与传递。 我们认为那些由于害怕民主价值观变质而抵触变化的人使我们的政府真正的在错误中破坏了这些珍贵观念。 Our Commitment: A Long-Term Investment in Change
我们的承诺：对于变化的长期投资
This is not the first time Americans have felt compelled to reinvent their government. In 1776 our funding fathers rejected the old model of a central power issuing edicts for all to obey. In its place, they created a government that broadly distributed power. Their vision of democracy, which gave citizens a voice in managing the United States, was untried and untested in 1776. It required a tremendous leap of faith. But it worked.
这不是第一次美国人认为不得不进行政府重组
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
了。在1776年创始人都不同意沿袭以往的旧模式-----中央集权的发布命令，强制要求全体遵守。他们希望建立一个权力分散的政府，这个版本的民主希望能给与民众一个真正管理政府的机会，但是这却是从未经试验过的，要求更广泛坚实的信任。但的确，这种民众在一定程度上切实可用。 Later generations extended this experiment in democracy to those not yet enfranchised. As the 20th century dawned, a generation of “progressives” such as Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson invented the modern bureaucratic state, designed to meet the needs of a new industrial society. Franklin Roosevelt’s 1937 announcement of his Committee on Administrative Management sounds as if it were written only yesterday:
继任的管理者将民主更广泛的运用到一切为解放的地区，在20世纪来临的时候，像特迪罗斯福还有伍德罗威尔逊这样的改革家，为了满足新工业社会的需要，创造了一个现代的官僚政治的政府。富兰克林罗斯福在他1937年的行政管理委员会上的声明就像是昨天刚刚颁布的一样。
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
The time has come to set our house in order.The administrative management of the government needs overhauling. The executive structure of the government is sadly out of date…. If we have faith in republican form of government… we must devote ourselves energetically and courageously to the task of making that government efficient.
这次是为了让我们各自明白自己的位置，使工作井然有序。政府的行政管理需要再次审查，执行部门也已经过时了……如果我们对共和形式的政府有兴趣的话，我们必须努力积极投身到提高政府办事效率的工作中。
Through the ages, public management has tended to follow
the
prevailing
paradigm
of
private
management. The 1930s were no exception. Roosevelt’s committee---and the two Hoover commissions
that
followed---recommended
a
structure patterned largely after those of corporate America in the 1930s. In a sense, they brought to government the GM model of organization.
经过了这么些年，公共管理部门似乎倾向于按照
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
广泛流行的私人管理范例来行事。在十九世纪三十年代九十这样，罗斯福的委员会和胡佛的两届委员会都是这样做，这就使私人部门的管理方式广泛流传，也就是说，政府套用了通用的管理模式。
By the 1980s, even GM recognized that this model no longer worked. When it createdSaturn, its first new division in 67 years, GM embraced a very different model. It picked its best and brightest and asked them to create a more entrepreneurial organization, with fewer layers, fewer rules, and employees empowered to do whatever was necessary to satisfy the customer. Faced with the very real threat of bankruptcy, major American corporations have revolutionized the way they do business.
直至十九世纪八十年代，甚至连通用公司也发觉这种管理模式似乎不太切实可行了，当通用创造了“杀草丹”模式的时候，这是他们与67年以来的一直使用的管理模式的第一次不同，通用上下都很支持这种模式的试行。这种模式选取了以前管理模式中有利的部分，促使组织更加企业化，
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
减少层级和规章，赋予雇员们更多的权力去满足顾客的需要。面对破产的威胁，许多主要的美国机构都对自己的经营方式进行了改革。
Confronted with our twin budget and performance deficits---which so undermine public trust in government---President Clinton intends to do the same thing. He did not staff the Performance Review primarily with outside consultants or corporate experts, as past presidents have. Instead, he chose federal employees to take the lead. They consulted with experts from state government, local government, and the private sector. But as Vice President Gore said over and over at his meetings with federal employees:”The people who work closest to the problem know the most about how to solve the problem.”
当我们的政府在面对相似的预算和绩效失灵问题时，克林顿总统也想象企业一样进行改革，因为那些问题对政府的公共信任度造成了损害。他不想以前的总统那样去机构体制之外为政府绩效评估委员会寻找员工，相反，他聘任了联邦本身的
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
工作人员牵头这项工作。他们向来自州政府、地方政府还有私人领域的专家咨询。不过正像副总统戈尔在各个会议上对联邦雇员不断重复的：“那些最靠近体制问题的人能够最容易得知解决问题的方法。”
Nor did the effort stop with the men and women who staffed the Performance Review. President Clinton asked every cabinet member to create a Reinvention Team to redesign his or her department, and Reinvention Laboratories to begin experimenting immediately. Since April, people all across our government have been working full time to reinvent the federal bureaucracy.
在政府绩效评估部门的工作人员也从未停止努力。克林顿总统要求每一个内阁成员都努力创新重新设计自己的所属部门，同时创新实验室立即开展了实验创新。自四月以后，联邦政府的人们都开始整日整夜的工作去创新联邦的官僚体制。 The process is not easy, nor will it be quick. There are changes we can make immediately, but even if all of our recommendations are enacted, we will have only
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
begun to reinvent the federal government. Our efforts are but a down payment---the first installment of a long-term investment in change. Every expert with whom we talked reminded us that change takes time. In a large corporation, transformation takes 6 to 8 years at best. In the federal government, which has more than 7 times as many employees as America’s largest corporation, it will undoubtedly take longer to bring about the historic changes we propose.
这个过程是很艰难的，也是很耗费时间的。我们是可以很快地做出一些改变，但是即使我们的建议能够很快生效，这仍然也只是创新的开端而已。我们现在的努力只是一个基础支付——我们为了改革进行得出那长期投资中的第一个部分。每一个专家都告诫我们改革需要时间。在一个大公司，改革最多需要6到8年的时间。在联邦政府，仅工作人员的人数就是最大的公司的人员的七倍还多，这自然需要很多的时间来实施我们的建议与方案，实现政府的改造。
Along the way, we will make mistakes. Some reforms will succeed beyond our wildest dreams; others will
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
not. As in any experimental process, we will need to monitor results and correct as we go. But we must not confuse mistakes with failure.As Tom Peters and Robert Waterman wrote in In Search of Excellence, any organization that is not making mistakes is not trying hard enough.Babe Ruth, the Sultan of Swat, struck out 1,330 times.
改革的路途中，我们会犯错误。有一些改革也许会获得我们从未料想的成功，有一些或许会失败。正像在所有的实验过程中做的一样，我们需要在进行改革的过程中监督和改正我们的错误。就像汤姆皮特斯和罗伯特沃特曼在《追求卓越》一书中提到的，任何组织如果从未犯过错误，这就说明他们没有尽全力去实现目标。
With this report, then, we begin a decade-long process of reinvention. We hope this process will involve not only the thousands of federal employees now at work on Reinvention Labs, but millions more who are not yet engaged. We hope it will transform the habits, culture, and performance of all federal organizations. 通过这篇报告，我们开始了十年之长的创新改造
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
过程。我们希望这个过程不仅有成千的联邦工作人员参与，还有更多的到现在没有加入进来的人关注。我们希望这将改变我们的习惯、文化还有整个联邦组织的表现，提高工作的绩效。
Some may say that the task is too large; that we should not attempt it because we are bound to make mistakes; that it cannot be done. But we have no choice. Our government is in trouble. It has lost its sense of mission; it has lost its ethic of public service; and, most importantly, it has lost the faith of the American people.
In times such as these, the most dangerous course is to do nothing. We must have the courage to risk change.
也许有些人认为这个工程太过庞大，根本无法完成，我们不应该与尝试，因为我们注定了无论怎样都是要犯错误的。但是我们没有其他的选择。现在我们的政府正面临着危机，他正逐渐失去使命感、公共服务的意识，更重要的是，他失去了美国民众的信任。
在这个时候，不作任何改变是很危险的，我们必
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
须有改革的勇气。
时间：2021.03.05 欧阳阳理创编 2021.03.04
创作：欧阳理
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容