目的:应用海氏评价法(Hay guide-chart profile, Hay)和国际岗位评价法(international position evaluation，IPE)开展公立医院职能部门负责人岗位价值评价并对结果进行比较分析，为完善职能部门薪酬绩效制度改革提供参考。方法:2021年7—8月，选取某公立三级甲等综合医院的10个职能部门负责人岗位作为研究对象，邀请院内、院外专家基于Hay和IPE岗位价值评价方法对职能部门负责人岗位价值进行评估。分别采用Cronbach n α系数和组内相关系数开展可靠性和一致性评价；运用逼近理想解排序法(technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution，TOPSIS)比较两种岗位价值评价结果的差异，并进行岗位价值分档排序。n 结果:发放岗位价值评价表22份，回收20份，其中院内专家12份、院外专家8份。Hay评价中，医务科与医院办公室负责人岗位评分较高，均值分别为757.30分和727.21分，后勤管理科负责人岗位评分均值最低(279.94分)；院内专家对科研科、党委办公室及医保科负责人岗位的评分低于院外专家，对医院办公室负责人岗位的评分则高于院外专家。IPE评价中，医院办公室和医务科负责人岗位的点值评分较高，均值分别为680.25分和621.00分，后勤管理科负责人岗位评分均值最低(365.05分)；院内专家对党委办公室、科研科及后勤管理科负责人岗位的评分低于院外专家，对医院办公室负责人岗位的评分则高于院外专家。两种评价方法对职能部门负责人岗位价值评分的Cronbach n α系数分别为0.943(Hay)和0.800(IPE)；分档排序结果显示，医院办公室与医务科均排在第1档，党委办公室与护理部均排在第2档，医保科与后勤管理科分别排在第3档和第4档，信息科、人事科、财务科与科研科分档排序在两种方法中的差异均为1个档次。n 结论:Hay与IPE的岗位价值评价结果一致性较高，但前者可靠性更高；通过TOPSIS法综合评价实现岗位价值分档排序，可为公立医院职能部门薪酬绩效制度改革提供依据。“,”Objective:To conduct a position evaluation of functional departments directors by means of Hay guide-chart profile (Hay) and international position evaluation (IPE) for heads of public hospital departments, and a comparative analysis of the results, for reference in reforming the performance-related pay system of the functional departments.Methods:From July to August of 2021, positions of ten functional department directors of a public tertiary general hospital were selected, and expert groups within and out of the hospital were invited for a position evaluation using both Hay and IPE. Cronbach n α and intraclass correlation coefficient were used in the reliability and consistency evaluation. Technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) was conducted to compare the differences between results of both methods, with the position value ranked by quartiles.n Results:22 position evaluation forms were issued and 20 were recovered (12 for in-hospital experts and 8 for extramural experts). In Hay evaluation, the scores of medical affairs department and hospital head office were higher, averaging 757.30 and 727.21 respectively, and those of logistics management department were the lowest, being 279.94. In-hospital experts scored lower than those extramural experts on the posts of directors of scientific research management department, Party committee office and medical insurance department, while the scores of the directors of the hospital head office were higher than those extramural experts. In IPE evaluation, the position values of hospital head office and medical affairs department were the highest, averaging 680.25 and 621.00 respectively, and the score of the logistics management department was the lowest, being 365.05. In-hospital experts scored lower than those extramural experts on the posts of directors of Party committee office, scientific research management department and logistics management department, while the scores of the directors of the hospital head office were higher than those of extramural experts. The Cronbach n α coefficients of position value scoring of functional department heads evaluated by two evaluation methods were 0.943 (Hay) and 0.800 (IPE) respectively. The hospital head office and medical affairs department ranked the first quartile, the Party committee office and nursing department ranked the second, while the medical insurance department and logistics department ranked the third and fourth respectively. In addition, the ranking differences of the information technology department, human resource department, financial department and scientific research management department were within one quartile.n Conclusions:The position evaluation results of Hay and IPE are consistent, but the former is more sensitive. Ranking of position values by quartiles via TOPSIS can support the reform of performance-related pay system of functional departments of public hospitals.