党的十八大以来，习近平总书记针对干部考核相关工作提出一系列要求，强调要建立日常考核、分类考核、近距离考核的知事识人体系。但在实践操作中，一些地方和部门还未认识到新时代考核工作的重要性，沿用过去的方式方法，不能真正考准考实。考核指标体系作为考核工作的核心内容之一，其科学与否对于考核质量起着重要作用。H省地矿局有着小机关大系统的特征，在事业单位改革的大背景下，为了充分发挥考核的指挥棒作用，提升下属地勘事业单位的工作成效，针对下属地勘事业单位领导班子的考核工作，近年来修订了3次综合考核办法及相应考核指标体系，但实际工作中，H省地矿局仍有干部职工反映在指标体系在权重确定及评价效能等方面存在一些问题。
针对于此，本研究首先对领导班子考核工作及考核指标体系的相关概念和涉及的理论基础进行了整理。其次，对H 省地矿局的总体情况以及下属地勘类事业单位领导班子考核指标体系的发展与现状进行介绍，结合层次分析法（AHP），通过对有关专家进行访谈，对当前指标体系的合理性进行了分析，指出指标设定与专家认知的偏差。在此基础上，作者根据日常工作掌握的考核情况和对相关工作人员的结构性访谈成果，从考核指标体系的设计原则、制定流程、指标权重、评价实施等方面总结归纳存在相关问题，并运用“控制权”等理论模型对问题成因进行深入分析。
通过上述分析，在借鉴其他省份同类地勘类事业单位领导班子考核指标体系构建及修订经验，并吸收相关学者对事业单位领导班子考核问题作出的研究成果的前提下，作者从理论和实践两个维度分别提出相应的完善思路，并对H省地矿局下属地勘事业单位现有指标体系的修订程序、结果反馈、定量考核分值及内容等方面提出针对性的改进建议和优化方案，对未来指标体系改革方向作出展望。
本研究的研究对象不同于传统考核研究中较为热门的地方政府党政领导干部或事业单位工作人员，而是聚焦在事业单位领导班子，是一种较为创新的理论视角。通过分析提出的进一步科学优化和改进指标体系的建议也对完善同类事业单位领导班子的考核指标体系具有一定的借鉴意义。

Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, General Secretary Xi Jinping has put forward a series of requirements regarding the assessment of cadres, emphasizing the establishment of a knowledge-based system for daily assessment, categorized assessment, and close-range assessment. However,in practical implementation, some regions and departments have yet to fully recognize the importance of the new era's assessment work, continuing to use outdated methods that fail to accurately assess performance. The assessment indicator system, as a core component of the assessment process, plays a crucial role in determining the quality of assessments.The Geological Bureau of H Province, characterized by a small administrative structure within a large system, has undergone three revisions of comprehensive assessment methods and corresponding indicator systems in recent years, aiming to leverage the guiding role of assessments and enhance the effectiveness of its subordinate geological exploration units. Despite these efforts, there have been concerns raised by cadres and staff regarding issues in the determination of indicator weights and the effectiveness of evaluations within the existing system.In response to these challenges, this study begins by organizing concepts related to the assessment of leadership teams and the associated theoretical foundations. Subsequently, it provides an overview of the overall situation of the H Province Geological Bureau, introducing the development and current status of the assessment indicator system for subordinate geological exploration units. Employing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and conducting interviews with relevant experts, the study analyzes the rationality of the current indicator system, highlighting discrepancies between indicator settings and expert perceptions. Building on this analysis, the author synthesizes identified issues based on daily work observations and structured interviews with relevant personnel. The study delves into the design principles, formulation processes, indicator weights, and implementation evaluations of the assessment indicator system, employing theoretical models such as the "control rights" to conduct an in-depth analysis of the causes of these issues.Drawing from experiences in constructing and revising leadership team assessment indicator systems in similar geological exploration units in other provinces, as well as absorbing research findings from scholars addressing assessment issues in such units, the author proposes improvement strategies from both theoretical and practical perspectives. The study provides targeted recommendations and optimization plans for the revision process, feedback on results, quantitative assessment scores, and content for the existing indicator system of geological exploration units under the H Province Geological Bureau, offering prospects for future reforms in the direction of indicator system enhancement.This study adopts an innovative theoretical perspective by focusing on the assessment of leadership teams in geological exploration units, a departure from the more conventional examination of local government party and government leaders or staff in public institutions. The suggested scientific optimizations and improvements to the indicator system presented in the analysis hold valuable insights for enhancing the assessment systems of similar units' leadership teams.