변혁적 리더십이 조직효과성에 미치는 영향에 대한 공공·민간조직의 비교분석 = (A)comparative analysis on the effect of organizational effectiveness of transformational leadership between public and private organization

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The society nowadays can be characterized by the term 'change.' The organizations in our days require infinite competitive power in order to adjust to the rapidly changing social environment and survive in the competition with other organizations. Many organizations are attempting organizational development and innovation to be reborn as a competitive group, for survival is out of the question without organizational development and innovation.
Measures to improve the effectiveness of the organization to reinforce the competitiveness and enable active adjustment to the social changes must be sought. The factors of organizational effectiveness include Job Satisfaction for the organization members and the Organizational Commitment.
Also, in organizations in which Transformational Leadership is realized, the members are encouraged to input additional efforts to obtain results that exceed the expectation, the Organizational Commitment or Job Satisfaction that can contribute to the improvement of the organization's performance are reinforced. By realizing such Transformational Leadership, the overall effectiveness of the leadership is improved, leading to the improvement of the overall organization's performance.
Also, the degree of improvement in the context of Transformational Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness would differ in the public and private sectors. Especially, this difference would be clearly visible in Korea, since the private and public sectors greatly differ in their organizational structure.
Therefore, in this study, I observed whether Transformational Leadership impacts Organizational Effectiveness, and how the impact differs in the public and private sectors.
To examine the relation between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness, which is the main goal of this study, I selected four independent variables according to Bass(1985)'s theory: charisma factor, which is the factor of Transformational Leadership, individualized consideration factor, intellectual stimulation factor, and inspiration factor.
Dependent variables were selected as Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment, in the aspect of Organizational Effectiveness. As for Job Satisfaction, I set five lower variables including satisfaction for the work itself, relationship with the superior, promotion, and remuneration, based on Dalton(1989) and Campbell(1977)'s theory. As for Organizational Commitment, I set two lower variables including Affective Commitment and Continuance commitment, which are the factors of Organizational Commitment, based on Allen and Meyer(1990)'s theory.
For practical proof, I selected 54 questions related to Transformational Leadership, Organizational Effectiveness and personal characteristics, and conducted a preliminary survey to 70 government officials. Based on the result of the survey, I conducted a final review of the reliability and propriety of the 54 questions, and made a final selection of 48 questions. I prepared a questionnaire with the selected questions, and conducted a survey to 400 government officials working at three public institutes at Chungcheongbuk-do and 600 employees of a private construction company. I analyzed the questionnaires by using the statistics package SPSS Win 12.0.
The result of observing the relation between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness is as follows.
First, as for Job Satisfaction in the public sector, it was found that the individualized consideration factor, intellectual stimulation, and the inspiration factor each had positive (+) influences. The individualized consideration factor was found to have the greatest influence on Job satisfaction with a regression coefficient (B) value of 0.214, followed by intellectual stimulation factor with a regression coefficient (B) of 0.171, and inspiration factor with a regression coefficient (B) value of 0.149. The charisma factor was found to have no influence on Job Satisfaction.
As for Organizational Commitment, the charisma factor, intellectual stimulation factor and the inspiration factors were found to have positive (+) influences. The charisma factor had the greatest influence on Organizational Commitment with a regression coefficient (B) value of 0.188, followed by the intellectual stimulation factor with a regression coefficient (B) value of 0.170, and the inspiration factor, with a regression coefficient (B) value of 0.159. The individualized consideration factor was found to have no influence on Organizational Commitment.
Secondly, in the private sector, the charisma factor, individualized consideration factor, and the inspiration factor were found to have positive(+) influences on Job Satisfaction. The charisma factor was found to have the greatest influence with a regression coefficient(B) value of 0.257, followed by the individualized consideration factor, with a regression coefficient(B) value of 0.184, and the inspiration factor, with a regression coefficient(B) value of 0.139. The intellectual stimulation was found to have no influence on Job Satisfaction.
Also, as for Organizational Commitment, the charisma factor, individualized consideration factor, and the inspiration factor were found to have positive(+) influences. The charisma factor had the greatest influence, with a regression coefficient(B) value of 0.265, followed by the inspiration factor, with a regression coefficient(B) value of 0.200, and the individualized consideration factor, with a regression coefficient(B) value of 0.120. The intellectual stimulation factor was found to have no influence on Organizational Commitment.
Third, in the comparison of the private and public sector, the following result was obtained.
As for Job Satisfaction, the charisma factor and intellectual stimulation factor each had influence only in the private and public sectors. The individualized consideration factor and the inspiration factor both had influence in both sectors, and the individualized consideration factor and the inspiration factors' influences were both bigger in the public sector.
As for Organizational Commitment, the individual and intellectual stimulation factors each had influence only in the private and public sector each. The charisma and inspiration factors had influence in both sectors, and the influence of both factors were bigger in the private sector.
Therefore, in both private and public sectors, Transformational Leadership had influence on Organizational Effectiveness, and it can be deduced that to improve the Organizational Effectiveness, the Transformational Leadership should also be improved.
This study observes the influence of Transformational Leadership on Organizational Effectiveness, and compares the degree of influence in the public and private sector, in turn determining what kind of Transformational Leadership is required to improve the organization al effectiveness.
However, this study was limited to parts of the public and private sector only. Therefore, in the future, researches who aim to conduct similar studies must widen their range of subjects.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서 론 1
• 제1절 연구의 목적 1
• 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 4
• 1. 연구의 범위 4
• 2. 연구의 방법 5
• 제2장 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성의 이론적 고찰 6
• 제1절 리더십의 의의 6
• 1. 리더십의 개념 6
• 2. 리더십의 유형 9
• 제2절 변혁적 리더십 16
• 1. 변혁적 리더십의 의의 16
• 2. 변혁적 리더십의 개념구조 18
• 제3절 조직효과성 27
• 1. 조직효과성의 의의 27
• 2. 조직효과성의 개념구조 34
• 제4절 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성의 관계 49
• 1. 리더십과 조직효과성의 관계 49
• 2. 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성의 관계 52
• 3. 민간·공공조직의 차이에 대한 이론적 고찰 58
• 제3장 연구설계 63
• 제1절 연구모형 및 가설의 설정 63
• 1. 연구과정의 설계 63
• 2. 연구모형과 연구가설의 설정 65
• 3. 변수의 조작적 정의 70
• 제2절 조사개요 77
• 1. 연구조사의 표본 77
• 2. 설문지 구성과 분석방법 80
• 제3절 평가도구 분석 83
• 1. 요인분석 83
• 2. 신뢰도 분석 86
• 3. 응답자의 일반적 특성 89
• 제4장 공공·민간조직의 비교분석 98
• 제1절 공공조직의 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성 분석 98
• 1. 변혁적 리더십 분석 98
• 2. 조직효과성 분석 105
• 제2절 민간조직의 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성 분석 118
• 1. 변혁적 리더십 분석 118
• 2. 조직효과성 분석 129
• 제3절 공공·민간조직의 비교 분석 151
• 1. 변혁적 리더십과 조직효과성의 관계 151
• 2. 공공·민간조직의 비교 분석 173
• 3. 검정결과 해석 178
• 제5장 결론 181
• 제1절 연구결과의 요약 181
• 제2절 시사점과 한계 189
• 참고문헌 191
• 설문지 215