인사시스템에 대한 공정성 지각이 조직성과에 미치는 영향 : 사회복지담당공무원을 중심으로 = The impact of Justice Perception about Personnel system on Organization Performance : Focussed on Social Welfare Officers

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study has uncovered some important relationships among the officers of social welfare perceptions of distributive justice and procedural justice and organizational committment and job satisfaction and organizational result. This study attempts, first, to identify the perceived two's justices. Second, to determine the relative importance of DJ(distributive justice) and PJ(procedural justice). Add to that two's justice's impact organizational committment, job satisfaction and to examine relationships of organizational committment, job satisfaction. Third, to examine relationships of organizational committment, job satisfaction and organizational result.
The research is the identification of a modest but significant relationship between the two justice and organizational committment and job satisfaction and organizational effectiveness. The result make it clear that the officers of social welfare find that right personnel management of fairness.
The hypothesis was tested with a sample of 422 the officers of social welfare at Gwangju and at Jeonnam in Korea. Data were collected from 422 the officers social welfare. Data analysis was performed using the AMOS 5.0 and SPSS 14.0 windows statistic program.
To summarize the result of five variables's relationship influence is as below.
First, selfish interest management and group value management greatly on distributive justice and procedural justice.
Group value management had more effect on distributive justice and procedural justice than selfish interest management.
Second. Distributive justice and procedural justice greatly influence job satisfactional and, organizational commitment. Procedural justice had more effect on job satisfactional and organizational commitment than distributive justice.
Third, job satisfactional and organizational commitment greatly influence on administrative service quality; responsiveness, assurance, tangibles, empathy, reliability. Job satisfactional had more effect on administrative service quality than organizational commitment.
Therefore, this study supports the hypothesis. The research implications of these study suggest that great causality should be this paper' research model in seven variables. The result indicate that manager must pay attention to officers of social welfare perceptions of procedural justice and distributive justice. In summary, result of this study have managerial implications that procedural justice and distributive justice relationship among these subject, with highly distributive justice perceived officers more likely to associate organization commitment with highly procedural justice perceived officers more likely to related organization commitment, in accordance with organizational justice theory. The correlation between organizational committment and job satisfaction was also significant. It is recommended that future study in this area continue to explore the unique effects of structural and justice's interactional influence on organizational variables.
In addition, it is hoped that justice researcher continue to develop measures of justice or further study reflect the important conceptual contributions.
Building upon the findings of this research, three major implications are suggested as follows. First, in order to increase organizational justice, the personnel systems should provide such characteristics as procedural autonomy and profession which in turn, result in high levels of procedural and distributive justice. That is, the personnel systems decisions should be based on accurate information and data, and the criteria in personnel systems decision making need to be profession applied to all members of an organization. Second, procedural justice can be drastically increased for individuals with high self-esteem by the personnel systems designed to incorporate both the Self Interest Model and Group Value Model characteristics. Therefore, organizational members should be able to increase their self-esteem levels through diverse educations and training programs in organization. Finally, procedural justice plays a key role strengthening the association between organizational commitment and job satisfaction. This suggests that many of the current personnel systems problems can be partially remedied by achieving procedural justice in organizations.
This study is no exception in that its findings to be interpreted with caution. A major limitation of the study is related with a common methods variance problem which is typical in field research relying on the survey method.
Future research should entangle organization, group and individual-level effects on procedural and distributive justice by developing a more complicated and elaborated model of organizational justice. A cross-level approach may be useful for future research.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 = 1
• 제1절 연구목적 = 1
• 제2절 연구범위 및 방법 = 4
• 1. 연구범위 = 4
• 2. 연구방법 = 6
• 제2장 이론적 배경 = 8
• 제1절 인사시스템 = 8
• 1. 인사시스템의 정의 = 8
• 2. 인사시스템의 특성 = 9
• 제2절 조직공정성 지각 = 15
• 1. 조직공정성의 정의 = 15
• 2. 조직공정성 연구접근법 = 16
• 3. 조직공정성 지각의 영향요인 = 29
• 4. 분배공정성과 절차공정성의 상호관련성 = 40
• 제3절 조직성과 = 44
• 1. 조직성과의 정의 = 44
• 2. 조직효과성 = 46
• 3. 행정서비스 품질 = 52
• 제4절 선행연구 = 61
• 1. 조직공정성 = 61
• 2. 조직공정성과 조직효과성 관계 = 64
• 3. 조직공정성과 행정서비스 품질 관계 = 66
• 4. 조직효과성과 행정서비스 품질 관계 = 69
• 제3장 연구 설계 = 73
• 제1절 연구모형의 설정 = 73
• 제2절 가설의 설정 = 76
• 제3절 변수의 조작화와 측정 = 83
• 1. 변수의 조작적 정의와 측정 = 83
• 2. 설문지의 구성 = 91
• 제4장 실증 분석 = 96
• 제1절 표본의 특성 = 96
• 1. 표본의 추출 = 96
• 2. 인구통계학적 특성 = 97
• 제2절 측정도구의 검증 = 100
• 1. 타당도 분석 = 100
• 2. 신뢰도 분석 = 103
• 제3절 기술통계량 및 특성별 차이분석 = 106
• 1. 단일 변수의 분석 = 106
• 2. 특성별 차이분석 = 111
• 제4절 연구모형과 가설의 검증 = 143
• 1. 변수간 상관관계 분석 = 143
• 2. 연구모형의 검증 = 146
• 3. 가설의 검증 = 150
• 제5절 분석결과 논의 = 179
• 1. 특성별 차이분석 결과 = 179
• 2. 가설검증 결과 = 182
• 제5장 결론 = 184
• 제1절 연구결과의 요약 및 시사점 = 184
• 1. 연구결과의 요약 = 184
• 2. 시사점 = 186
• 제2절 향후 연구과제 = 191
• 참고문헌 = 192
• 부록(설문지) = 209