위기관리 커뮤니케이션 차이에 관한 연구 : 아시아나와 SK 사례를 중심으로 = (A) study on crisis-management communication by the difference of crisis type : based on case Asiana and SK

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

As people's interest in crisis-management communication has risen recently, this study has been started on the hypothesis that there is a difference in this communication by its type, and the results of this study may be summarized as follows:
The study established two crisis types, which were quite different in patterns, as the following: unintentional and urgent type and intentional and not urgent type--that is, there's time to space. Then, as proper cases for explaining these types, this study picked out a crash of an Asiana near Mokpo and the SK group problem. This thesis, by analyzing these two cases, examined the principles and strategies of communication applied to each critical phase.
In the investigation of the basic principles of crisis-management communication through the focus group interview process, it came to the conclusion that the principles to be applied should be different according to how a crisis type and stakeholder were defined in regulation. Also, businesses should use a strategy according to whether they are a victim or injurer.
Meanwhile, among the principles of crisis-management communication, 'reliability' and 'consistency' were chosen as the indispensible condition in any difficult situation. This result seems significant.
As a result of a case study through media analysis, the communication principles possible to be applied to intentional and not urgent crises were utterly different from those in urgent and unintentional crises.
In the result of the Asiana case, many parts of the basic principles--promptness, consistency, openness, consensus, reliability and positive quality--of the crisis-management communication hit the mark indeed, and each principle was effective. In the case of SK group, however, applied principles were completely different save reliability and consistency. Nevertheless, the fact that SK case can be seen as a success of crisis-management public relations may mean there is a difference in principles to be applied to a crisis by its type.
In terms of the strategy of crisis-management communication, analysis showed that there was a definite difference between Asiana which would use a receptive strategy and SK which would use a defensive one, and both Asiana and SK used an appropriate strategy in a critical juncture respectively. Besides, a significant result that a crisis-management strategy varied according to characteristics of stakeholder was produced.
Even in model types, there was a difference to be used.
In the event of Asiana, a step-by-step model for crisis of 곤잘레스-헤레오 and 프렛 was most likely to be adequate to explain this crisis-management type. On the other hand, it was hard to account for the entirety of SK case only with one model, and thus there was 스터지's stepwise model for crisis, as a proximate model. Moreover, it was explainable in a portion of a model of 미트로프 and 마라.
From all the things discussed above, here's the conclusion:
First, the principles and strategies vary according to crisis types. In particular, general principles were effective in an intentional and urgent crisis, whereas quite different principles were applied to an unintentional and not urgent crisis.
Second, according to the difference in characteristics of stakeholder, messages necessary to appeal changed through media. A receptive strategy to appeal the emotion of the general public may be effective when they are the main stakeholder. When groups having conflicting interests are the main stakeholder, however, the defensive strategy which appeals their reason is more likely to be effective.
Third, a proper model to explain the type of intentional and not urgent type can not be found although models that account for the type of intentional and urgent crises may be found in the existing research.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = i
• 제 1 장 문제 제기 및 연구 목적 = 1
• 제 1 절 문제 제기 및 의의 = 1
• 제 2 절 연구 목적 = 4
• 제 2 장 이론적 배경 및 관계 문헌 고찰 = 7
• 제 1 절 위기관리의 개념 및 유형 = 7
• 1. 위기관리의 개념 =7
• 2. 위기관리의 유형 = 9
• 제 2 절 위기관리의 발전단계 및 모델 = 16
• 1. 위기관리의 발전단계 및 특성 = 16
• 2. 위기관리의 모델 = 21
• 제 3 절 위기관리 커뮤니케이션 이론 및 전략 = 37
• 1. 위기관리 커뮤니케이션의 기본 원칙 = 37
• 2. 위기관리 커뮤니케이션 전략 = 40
• 3. 위기관리 커뮤니케이션 전략의 선택 = 44
• 제 3 장 연구 문제 및 연구 방법 = 48
• 제 1 절 연구 문제 = 48
• 제 2 절 연구 방법 = 50
• 제 4 장 연구 결과 = 52
• 제 1 절 <연구문제 1>의 결과 [분석 모형 설정 및 대표 사례 선정] = 52
• 제 2 절 <연구문제 2>의 결과 (포커스 그룹 인터뷰) = 55
• 제 3 절 <연구문제 3>의 결과 (미디어 내용 분석) = 64
• 1. 연구문제 3-1 : 목포 아시아나 여객기 추락사고(93. 7. 26) 사례연구 = 64
• 2. 연구문제 3-2 : SK 사태(2003. 2-9월) 사례연구 = 71
• 3. 연구문제 3-3 : 위기 유형 차이에 따른 커뮤니케이션 방법론의 차이 = 86
• 제 4 절 <연구문제 4>의 결과 (위기관리 모델의 수용자 중심 분석) = 90
• 제 5 장 결론 = 96
• 제 1 절 연구 결론 요약 = 96
• 제 2 절 연구의 한계점 및 제언 = 98
• 參考文獻 = 100
• ABSTRACT = 103