韓國企業의 敎育訓練시스템 類型과 狀況特性 및 成果에 관한 실증연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

To the economies of korea, globalization appears to have brought clear benefits in terms of faster economic growth, rising shares of international capital, access to new technology and sources of productivity growth.
Globalization, however, has an apparent downside by exposing country to the possibility of large outflows of capital where government macroeconomic and financial policies appear to be out of line or where questionable investment strategies are being followed; by increasing pressures for more dynamic human resource development strategies.
In addition, the growing closeness and competition between world economies is bringing more intense pressures to korean government and enterprise for greater harmonization not only in trade policies but also in environmental, human resources and labor standards.
First of all, The most important thing is cope with a difficulty of rapid changing turbulent world context. To the management of korean enterprise, there are so many changing factors, for examples, world trade market situations, korean governmental macroeconomic, financial and monetary policies, sophisticated technological innovation, and changing human resources needs.
So the management of korean enterprise have to carefully consider these changing factors and make a proper measure to take. In particular they have to be focused on human resources needs within the world contextual standard. Because of these reasons, education and training should receive more attention.
The training of employees and the development of their skills and careers have many advantages for the firm. First of all, they help the firm meet its immediate human resource needs. Over the long run, training and development ensure that the firm's employees are ready to meet future challenges. A wide range of approaches to training and development have been devised and some have had considerable success.
In this study, we will look at human resource training and developing employees. We will close by discussing approaches to appraising a typology of education·training system and looking for relationship between situational traits and performance.
The research methods are literature and empirical survey. In particular empirical survey, there are four hypothesis. these hypothesis are tested by questionaire survey. Collected data proceeded by SAS statistical program package. These data processing techniques are frequency analysis, cronbach alpha, factor analysis, cluster analysis, ANOVA and so on.
My hypothesis are as follows；
Firstly, According to education training dimension, we will distinguish different typology of education·training system. Secondly, In the context of typology of education training system, we will find demographic characteristics to different meanings each others. Thirdly, In the context of typology of education training system, we will find situational characteristics to different meanings each others. Fourthly, In the context of typology of education·training system, we will find performance characteristics to different meanings each others.
These hypothesis was tested in a questionaire study. Most questions consisted of Likert five-point scales. A few questions could be answered open-ended response.
<Figure> Research Model
◁그림 삽입▷(원문을 참조하세요)
My fact-finding (hypothesis-testing) results are as follows；Firstly, derived education training system is deeply related environmental unstability. Secondly, leading education·training system is deeply related individuals creativity. Thirdly, It is not meaningful difference between the typology of education·training system and human resources. Fourthly, there are different universe characteristics among four types of education·training system, but nothing have different particular meaning among group.
My research results have some limitations. First of all, this study is not national coverage survey. Secondly, my hypothetical assumptions has some subjective bias because of different conceptual meaning, selection of variables, and compounding effects, and so on.
On the basis of the above results, my proposal of this research are as follows；
Firstly, we will try to rebuild up a general and universal typology of education·training system by national unit based survey and time series analysis. Secondly, we will to expand related factors, for examples, corporation strategy. In particular I hope corporation strategy will join my research fact-finding results in the near the future. Thirdly, we will to rearrange my suggesting variables fitting. Because variables fitting is so difficult job. This has various meaning, researcher's subjective bias, and different operational definition. Fourthly, In the crosstabulation analysis, we find some statistical problems. In particular there are some low reliability and validity because of the scarcity of cases and poor item analysis. So we will make more sophisticated methodological tools. Fifthly, we have to try to do in-depth and follow-up study of the concept and theory-building on education training for firm.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• I. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성과 연구목적 = 1
• 2. 연구의 범위 및 방법 = 4
• II. 지식경영과 인적자원관리 및 교육훈련의 관계 = 7
• 1. 지식경영과 인적자원관리 = 7
• 1) 지식경영시대의 도래 = 7
• 2) 지식경영과 인적자원관리의 관계 = 10
• 2. 인적자원관리와 교육훈련 = 16
• 1) 교육훈련의 의의 = 16
• 2) 인적자원관리와 교육훈련의 관계 = 28
• III. 기업의 교육훈련시스템 유형과 상황특성 및 성과의 관계 = 31
• 1. 기업의 교육훈련시스템 유형 = 31
• 2. 교육훈련시스템 유형과 인구통계적 특성 = 36
• 3. 교육훈련시스템 유형과 상황요인 특성 = 37
• 1) 교육훈련시스템 유형과 환경의 불확실성 = 37
• 2) 교육훈련시스템 유형과 조직구조 = 39
• 3) 교육훈련시스템 유형과 인적자원관리정책 = 42
• 4. 교육훈련시스템 유형과 성과 = 43
• IV. 실증연구를 위한 연구모형 및 연구가설 = 47
• 1. 연구모형 및 연구가설의 정의 = 47
• 1) 연구모형 설계 = 47
• 2) 연구가설 설정 = 47
• 2. 변수의 조작적 정의 및 설문의 구성 = 51
• 1) 교육훈련시스템 유형 = 52
• 2) 환경의 불안정성 = 52
• 3) 조직구조 = 52
• 4) 인적자원관리정책 = 53
• 5) 기업 성과 = 54
• V. 실증적 분석 및 가설의 검증 = 55
• 1. 표본선정 및 자료수집 = 55
• 2. 표본의 인구통계학적 특성 = 56
• 3. 자료의 분석방법 = 57
• 4. 측정항목의 신뢰성과 타당성 분석 = 58
• 1) 신뢰성 검증 = 58
• 2) 타당성 검증 = 60
• 5. 기업의 교육훈련시스템 유형 도출 = 63
• 1) 교육훈련시스템의 특징 = 65
• (1) 관리적 유형(<집단1>) = 66
• (2) 의존적 유형(<집단2>) = 66
• (3) 선도적 유형(<집단3>) = 67
• (4) 상호협력적 유형(<집단4>) = 67
• 2) 연구가설의 검증 = 68
• (1) 교육훈련시스템 유형과 인구통계적 특성간의 차이 검증 = 68
• (2) 교육훈련시스템 유형에 따른 상황특성요인간의 차이 검증 = 70
• (3) 교육훈련시스템 유형과 기업 성과간의 차이 검증 = 72
• VI. 결 론 = 75
• 1. 연구결과의 요약 = 75
• 2. 연구의 시사점과 미래의 연구방향 = 75
• 참고문헌 = 81
• Abstract = 89
• <부록> 한국 기업의 사내 교육훈련시스템 평가를 위한 설문 = 93