위기현장지휘자의 지휘행동이 현장구성원들의 사기·응집성·만족도에 미치는 영향 = (A) Study on the Impact's of Fire Ground Commander's Behavior on the Fireman's Moral, Cohesiveness, Job Satisfaction

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Introduction
This study examines Fire Ground Commander's(FGC) command behavior from the point of view of Fireman' perceptions within fire administration organization.
FGC's command behavior used Yukl's Multiful linkage model(MLM).
Yukl(1981, 1989) proposed the concepts of integration of both mediation variable and situation variable to explain leader's behavior which influence in organization outcomes. Yukl presented 13 componenent that explain leader's behavior ; Informing, Planning and Organizing, Problem solving and crisis management, Clarifying role and objectives, Motivating task commitment, Recognizing and rewarding, Developing, Consulting and Delegating, Monitoring Operations, Supporting, Harmonizing and team building, Representing, Interfacing.
Organization's effectiveness measured Moral, Group cohesiveness, Job satisfaction. Moral has been studied extensively in social science. Cohesiveness refers to degree that feel emotional attachment in organizations. Job satisfaction defined as degree is state that desire is fulfilled psychologically about job itself.
This study explores on the impact of FGC' command behavior on the fireman's organization effectiveness, and limited to fireman's job, this paper looks at the followings ;
(a) What is the most effective command behavior that influence to Moral factor ?
(b) What is the most effective command behavior that influence to cohesiveness power factor?
(c) What is the most effective command behavior that influence in job satisfaction factor?
(d) What is the most effective command behavior that influence in organization effectiveness under control of office workers or/and outside workers, experience or/and inexperience of large-scale disaster?
Methods
The instruments used the MlM scale proposed by Yukl(1989) and the organization effectiveness questionnaire developed by other researchers. A questionair is composed of similar questions for explanatory variable in order to measure various aspect of variables selected from variable model. Validity and Reliability Analysis of question is performed to com suitability for questionnaire study. Then, after conforming appropriateness of the questionnaire to this paper, the variables are used in hypothesis approval. Especially, this scale wished to secure reliability and validity through preliminary survey of two times. But, MLM's 13 factors reduced for 8 factors, that is, Informing, Problem solving and crisis management, Clarifying roles and objectives, Motivating task commitment, Developing, Monitoring operations, Supporting, Representing.
Data for this research came from 593 fireman working in fire administration organization in Korea. Participants were asked to complete and return the questionaire directly to the researcher.
Results.
The data was analysed by frequency, percentage, Pearson's Correlation Coefficient, ANOVA Analysis, Multi-Regression, T-Test, and GLM with SPSS 10.0 Statistic Package Program.
The following figure summarize results of analysis depended on hypothesis.
(a) Command behavior factor which influence to moral factor is Informing, Problem solving and crisis management, Motivating task commitment, Developing, Representing.especially, It was Informing factor(β =.378) and Representing factor(β=3.97) that effect on influence over Moral factor.
(b) Command behavior that influence to cohesiveness factor was Information, Monitoring operation, Supporting, Representing etc. Specially, Representing factor(β =.592) have a strong influence.
(c) Command behavior factor which influence to job satisfaction factor was Information, Developing , Representing. Specially, Information and representing factor have a strong influence.
(d) In the cases of outsider workers, command behavior factor which influence to moral factor is Representing(β=.542), Informing(β=.250), Supporting(β=.125), Monitoring Operations (β=.108), but Developing(β=-.113) have a negative influence to moral factor. And in the case of office workers, Informing(β=.509), Representing(β=.285), Clarifying Roles & Objectives factor is positively influence to it.
In the case of experience of large-scale disaster, Representing(β=.509), Inforning(β=.306), Supporting(β=.112) have a positively influence to moral factors, but Developing (β=-.071), Problem Solving & Crisis Management(β=-.071) is negative(-) influence to it. And in case of inexperience, Representing(β=.424), Inforning(β=.371), Motivating Task Commitment(β=.265) have positive influence in moral factors, but Supporting(β=-.294) is negative influence to it.
(e) In the case of outsider workers, the order of FGC's command behavior factor which influence to group cohesiveness is Representing (β=.610), Inforning (β=.257), Supporting (β=.109), Monitering Operations (β=.098), that is positively(+) influence to it, but Developing(β=-.067) factor is negative. And in the- 221 - case of office workers, the order is Representing(β=.419), Inforning(β=.405).
In the case of experience of large-scale disaster, the order is Representing(β=.572), Inforning(β=.294) and Supporting(β=.102). And in the case of inexperiene, Representing(β=.528), Inforning(β=.310).
fig 1. Summary results of Multi-Regression analysis.
◁원문참조▷ 그림을참조하세요
(f) In the case of outsider workers, the order of FGC's command behavior factor which influence to job satisfaction is Representing, Inforning, but Developing factor is negatively. And in case of office workders, Inforning factor is positively influence to job satisfaction, but Problem Solving & Crisis Management factor is negatively.
In the case of In the case of experience of large-scale disaster, the order Inforning, Representing, but Developing factor is negatively. And in case of inexperience, Inforning, Representing is positively influence to job satisfaction, but Developing is negatively.
Discussion
As discussed in above, Measures thought to be relevant to Korean Fire Administration Organization were chosen, through the Pretest and Factor Analysis, useful measures were finally produced. With the measures above mentioned the researcher found the results.
As findings, this study has some policy implication.
(a) Because Informing Behavior of FGC is improve Fireman' organization effectiveness, they must deliver to fireman to information regard with fire fighting and disaster and rapidly communicate changed administration process and task guide.
(b) Developing factor has negatively effect organizational effectiveness, so it required Developing mode of new form, fire simulation technology game.
(c) Traditionally, Representing factor has positively effect organizational effectiveness under Korea fire organization.
This study has some limitations. I cannot generalize the results obtained without conducting studies by collecting data from other, larger samples. Further, I cannot control other variables(work-related variables, organizational variables etc.).

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• I. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구의 목적 = 1
• 2. 연구의 범위 = 6
• 3. 연구의 방법 = 9
• II. 이론적 검토 = 12
• 1. 위기관리조직의 개념 = 12
• 가. 소방조직에서 본 위기현장상황의 개념적 정의 = 13
• 나. 국가위기관리의 의미 = 16
• 다. 우리나라 소방조직의 특징 = 19
• 2. 위기현장상황에 따른 현장지휘행동의 개념 = 32
• 가. 위기현장상황에서 현장지휘자의 리더십 개념 = 32
• 나. 현장지휘행동의 개념과 구성원의 유효성 = 37
• 다. 현장지휘행동에 관한 리더십의 특성 = 43
• 3. Yukl의 리더십에 관한 이론 = 60
• 가. Yukl의 리더십 개념의 틀 = 61
• 나. Yukl의 통합적 관리행태 = 68
• 다. Yukl의 리더십 다중 연결 모델 = 77
• 4. 종속변수에 대한 일반적 이론 = 84
• 가. 사기에 대한 일반적 이론 = 84
• 나. 직무만족도에 관한 일반적 이론 = 93
• 다. 응집성에 관한 일반적 이론 = 98
• III. 현장지휘행동과 조직유효성에 관한 연구 분석 = 105
• 1. 현장지휘행동에 관한 연구 분석 = 107
• 가. 현장지휘행동에 관한 문제점 = 108
• 나. 현장지휘행동에 관한 연구모형의 설계 = 111
• 다. 연구논문에 대한 설문 분석의 개요 = 114
• 라. 연구논문의 분석 모형 = 117
• 2. 변수의 측정 = 120
• 가. 8가지 지휘행동요인과 현장구성원의 변수 측정 = 120
• 나. 위기현장지휘행동의 효과성 측정 = 122
• 3. 자료수집 및 설문문항의 구성 = 129
• IV. 분석결과 = 133
• 1. 기초통계분석 = 133
• 가. 표본의 일반적 속성 = 133
• 나. 측정도구의 신뢰성 및 타당성 분석 = 138
• 2. 분석결과와 논의 = 144
• 가. 요인간의 상관성 분석 = 144
• 나. 개인특성변수와 종속변수의 관계 검증 = 145
• 다. 정규성 검정 = 153
• 라. 사기와 지휘행동의 상대적 영향 = 154
• 마. 응집성과 지도자의 지휘행동유형 관계 분석 = 165
• 바. 만족도와 지도자의 행동유형 관계 분석 = 173
• V. 정책적 시사점 = 182
• 1. 국가종합정보시스템구축·운용 = 186
• 2. 위기현장조직 구성원에 대한 교육과 훈련 = 190
• 3. 대형재난경험의 유무에 따른 현장지휘체계의 개선방안 = 197
• 4. 내근·외근근무의 차이에 따른 근무환경 개선방안 = 202
• VI. 결론 = 209
• 1. 연구의 한계 = 210
• 2. 연구의 요약 = 212
• ABSTRACT = 217
• 參考文獻 = 223
• 설문지 = 232