우리나라 제도이론 연구에 대한 비판적 고찰과 미래 연구 방향

이경묵(Kyungmook Lee) 한국경영학회 2019 經營學硏究 Vol.48 No.1

This paper critically reviewed the literature on institutional theory published in major Korean management journals and suggested future research directions. To do this, I compared recent research trends in American journals and Korean journals. To capture recent global research trends, I reviewed the literature on institutional theory published in Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Journal, Organization Science, Administrative Science Quarterly, American Sociological Review, and American Journal of Sociology from 2011 onwards. I also reviewed the literature on institutional theory published in 5 major Korean management journals; Korean Management Review, Korean Business Review, Korean Journal of Management, Journal of Organization and Management, and Journal of Strategic Management. Among macro-organizational theories, institutional theory has received the greatest attention by Korean scholars. About 16% of macro-organizational research papers published in 3 major Korean management journals investigated institutional theory. However, most papers examined the diffusion of management practices or specific strategies and a few studies investigated institutional decoupling. Though studies on institutional logics, institutional entrepreneurship, and microfoundations of institutional theory have been flourished in American major journals, studies on those topics in Korea are very rare. Based on the comparison, this study calls for future researches on those themes. Especially, this study suggests that research on institutional logics and institutional entrepreneurship can provide unique contributions to institutional theory, since institutional environments of Korea differ substantially from those of Western countries.

俛宇 郭鍾錫의 經世論에 대한 일고찰- 본성론과 제도론의 관계에 유의하여 -

윤석호 경상국립대학교 경남문화연구원 2023 남명학연구 Vol.79 No.-

본고는 제도에 대한 인식이 원시 유학에서부터 하나의 고유한 경세적 논점으로 자리했으며, 성리학 이후로는 이것이 존재론과 본성론에 선택적으로 결속될 수 있음을 전제한다. 그리고 그 사례로서 면우 곽종석을 설정하고, 그의 본성론이 제도론과 접속한 논리적 구조, 나아가 이를 저변으로 하여 제시된 그의 경세론을 해명하는 것을 목표로 두었다. 면우의 본성론은 퇴계로부터 연원하는 이원론적․주리적 사유에 근원하되, 그러한 기조가 가일층한 것이다. 이는 스승인 한주 이진상의 본성론을 비판적으로 계승한 것이기도 한데, 본연지성의 주재성을 강조하는 기조 하에서도, 한편으로 기질지성의 존재를 인정했고 또한 한편으로는 리의 주재성을 실천적 국면으로까지 확장시켰던 것이다. 특히 그는 리의 역할과 의미를 인간 개인에서부터 정치의 차원으로 확장했다. 먼저 통치에 있어 政[=法]이 필수적이며, 법이 덕에 우선하지는 않으나 적어도 양자가 긴밀하게 결합된 상태가 이상적이라고 보았다. 나아가 그는 시의에 상응한 제도의 변화를 인정하되, 이때에도 천리로서의 당연을 견지해야 함을 주장했다. 이와 같은 경세론 하에서 현실을 면밀하게 분석 및 비판하고, 시폐를 타개할 방안을 제시했다. 그 주요한 내용과 특징은 세 가지로 정리할 수 있겠는데, 첫째는 경세의 근본으로서의 수기와 교육, 둘째는 균부와 보국, 셋째는 고제에 근거하고 시의를 참작한 제도 개혁안의 설계 방식이다. 이처럼 그는 본질적이면서도 탄력적인 경세론 하에서 고제의 요체와 취지를 견지하되 이를 구현할 시의성 있는 방식을 다수 제시했다. 그리고 그 가운데 수취제도․둔전확대․산업진작을 제외한 대다수는 1904년 연초에 선포된 고종의 조칙에 반영되었다. 면우는 ‘理’의 보편성을 연결고리로 하여 본성론과 경세론을 제도적으로 일관했다는, 또한 현실의 강고한 제약 하에서도 그 제도가 가진 고제적 이치가 드러날 지점과 방식을 구체적으로 고민하고 제안했다는 점에서 분명한 특징을 가진다. 또한 그와 본성론을 상당 부분 공유했으되 제도의 개선․개혁보다는 덕성의 회복․함양에 치중한 경세론을 피력했던 사례를 감안할 때, 면우의 이러한 경세론이 특정한 본성론 하에서 자연적․필연적으로 발출하는 것이 아님도 확인할 수 있다. 이로써 본다면 면우의 경세론과 그 방안은 제도에 대한 인식이 유교 경세론의 고유한 논점이라는 것, 그것이 성리학을 경과하며 본성론과 선택적으로 결합될 수 있다는 것, 그리고 이때에 양자가 논리적 친연성을 가질 수 있다는 것을 예증한다. 아울러 이러한 분석 결과는 그간 경세론의 사유 구조를 인간 중심의 철학적 논점과 논리에 배속시켰던 설명에 대한 재점검을 요구하는 의미도 지닌다. 말하자면 인간에 중점이 두어졌던 성리학 연구의 논점을 사회나 국가, 시간과 공간 등의 차원으로 확대해야 할, 그러한 가운데에서 경세학의 고유한 논점을 보다 다채롭게 발견해야 할 필요성을 던져주는 것이기도 하다. 이는 차후의 과제로 삼겠다. This paper analyzes Myeonwu Gwak Jongseok`s theory of Governance, aiming to reveal the process of his theory of Human Nature selectively connecting with institutional theory and to clarify the content and structure of his reform plan under such a social philosophical basis. Myeonwu's theory of Human Nature was a further deepening of Toegye’s Theory of Li, and it was also a critical succession of Hanju Lee Jin-sang's theory of Human Nature. In particular, he linked his theory of Human Nature to his theory of institutions. There were two characteristics, one was that the institution did not take precedence over virtue, but at least the two must be closely combined. The other was that the essential purpose of the institution was regarded as li granted from heaven[天理], and the institution must be changed to suit reality, but even in such cases, the essence of the system must be maintained. He proposed a number of reform measures based on his theory of Governance. These were methods that could be implemented in reality while maintaining the essence and purpose of the Old Law[古制]. This aspect can be said to be the influence of his essential and resilient economic theory. In addition, King Gojong selected what he thought was urgent or necessary among the systems proposed by Myeonwoo, and encouraged bureaucrats to implement them. In this way, Myeon-wu's theory of Governance was bound to his theory Human Nature in terms of institutional reform, with the universality of Li(理) as a link. And even under the strong constraints of reality, he specifically considered and proposed a way to achieve the original ideology and purpose of the institution. In addition, his case also means that institution has been a unique issue of economic theory since Confucianism, and that it could be selectively combined with the theory of Human Nature in the stage of Neo-Confucianism.

제도이론과 회계학연구

김석웅(Kim, Seok Woong) 한국국제회계학회 2013 국제회계연구 Vol.0 No.47

본고의 목적은 회계변화의 과정에서 유사한 외부환경압력에 직면하는 조직이 상이한 변화결과를 보여주는 이유를 설명하는 제도이론과 이를 적용한 회계학의 연구현황을 살펴보는 것이다. 최근에 다양한 유형의 제도이론이 조직이나 회계의 변화에 대한 통찰력을 얻기 위해 이용되고 있지만, 가장 일반적으로 신제도경제학(NIE), 신제도사회학(NIS), 구제도경제학(OIE)이 중심을 이루고 있다. 신제도경제학(NIE)은 경제거래를 지배하기 위해 이용되는 구조와 관련이 있고, 신제도사회학(NIS)은 조직구조와 시스템을 형성하는 조직환경에서 제도와 관련이 있으며, 구제도경제학(OIE)은 개별인간행위자의 행위와 사상을 형성하는 제도(내부규칙, 관례)와 관련이 있다. 신제도사회학에는 동형화와 탈동조화의 이론이 있다. 우리 나라의 회계학계에서는 실증적 방법론을 적용할 때 주로 대리이론, 거래비용이론과 같은 신제도경제학을 이용한 연구가 주류를 형성하고 있다. 구제도경제학을 회계학에 적용할 때는 회계변화의 과정에서 내부규칙이나 관례(routines)의 중요성을 강조하는데 반하여, 신제도경제학의 경우에는 외부영향의 결과로서 회계변화의 제도화와 확산을 강조하고 제도적 규범과 가치가 어떻게 영향을 주는가를 살펴봄으로서 조직의 변화가능성을 이해하고자 한다. 구제도경제학과 신제도사회학의 경우에는 해석적 방법론을 적용할 때 특히 관리회계분야에서 많이 이용되고 있지만 우리 나라의 회계학계에서는 이에 관한 연구가 거의 없다. The objective of this paper is to overview the institutional theories which explain why some organizations have shown different results of changes under similar external environmental pressures in the process of accounting changes and the state of the art of the accounting researches applying these theories. While various types of institutional theories have been used to get insight on the organization( and accounting) change, In general, New Institutional Economics(NIE), New Institutional Sociology(NIS), Old Institutional Economics(OIE) have been used. The NIE is concerned with structures used to govern economic transactions, the NIS is concerned with institutions in organizational environments shaping systems and organizational structures and the OIE is concerned with institutions(internal rules, routines) shaping individual actor"s behaviour and idea. The NIS has two main isomorphism and decoupling theory. In the Korean accounting academia, The research drawing on the NIE such as agency theory, transaction cost theory is shaping the mainstream research when the positivism is applied. While the importance of internal rules and routines is emphasized when OIE is applied to accounting, The Institutionalization and diffusion of change as a result of external social and technical influence are emphasized When NIS is applied to accounting, Researchers have tried to understand the ability of an organization to change by looking at the influence of institutional norms and values. While OIE and NIS have been used in management accounting when the interpretive methodology is applied, In the Korean accounting academia, this kind of research is very few.

Amartya Sen의 정의론의 방법과 구조

김대근 한국법철학회 2011 법철학연구 Vol.14 No.1

In this Article, Amartya Sen’s theory of justice is introduced as a alternative theory of justice. Sen has criticized Rawls’ theory of justice as a, transcendental institutionalism in that it is based on social contract and it has an arrangement-focused conception which emphasizes on constructing just institution. Instead, Sen stressed on realization-focused understanding as a approach to justice. In that way, Sen criticizes Rawls’ the two principles of justice and difference principle, which is founded on hypothetic conception such as original position and veil of ignorance. In contrast with Rawls, Sen has developed his justice theory on the assumption that human is diverse. The premise of human diversity enables us to consider that person’s capabilities play more important role in achieving individual well-being than distributing of primary goods, because distribution of primary goods depends on person’s own condition and capability. And adapting Adam Smith’s conception of “impartial spectator” which is any other fair and impartial spectator, Sen suggests open impartiality instead of 'justice as fairness’ as closed impartiality. Sen also notes that equality is important in dealing with justice. Especially, he moves questions of equality from ‘why equality’ to ‘equality of what’. It means that actually every theory of justice treats and highlights equality in different space. The fact equality and inequality coexists in different spaces implicates human diversity. Therefore what is important is not to distribute primary goods, but to convert them to person’s capabilities to achieve actual freedom. As freedom has both opportunity perspective and process perspective, it is important to have capability as achievement of freedom and it can be called development as actual freedom. Of course, Sen’s theory of justice has some limits like other political theories. However, it not only functions as an alternative theory of justice, but also suggests useful way to understand the nature of justice in this world. In this Article, Amartya Sen’s theory of justice is introduced as a alternative theory of justice. Sen has criticized Rawls’ theory of justice as a, transcendental institutionalism in that it is based on social contract and it has an arrangement-focused conception which emphasizes on constructing just institution. Instead, Sen stressed on realization-focused understanding as a approach to justice. In that way, Sen criticizes Rawls’ the two principles of justice and difference principle, which is founded on hypothetic conception such as original position and veil of ignorance. In contrast with Rawls, Sen has developed his justice theory on the assumption that human is diverse. The premise of human diversity enables us to consider that person’s capabilities play more important role in achieving individual well-being than distributing of primary goods, because distribution of primary goods depends on person’s own condition and capability. And adapting Adam Smith’s conception of “impartial spectator” which is any other fair and impartial spectator, Sen suggests open impartiality instead of 'justice as fairness’ as closed impartiality. Sen also notes that equality is important in dealing with justice. Especially, he moves questions of equality from ‘why equality’ to ‘equality of what’. It means that actually every theory of justice treats and highlights equality in different space. The fact equality and inequality coexists in different spaces implicates human diversity. Therefore what is important is not to distribute primary goods, but to convert them to person’s capabilities to achieve actual freedom. As freedom has both opportunity perspective and process perspective, it is important to have capability as achievement of freedom and it can be called development as actual freedom. Of course, Sen’s theory of justice has some limits like other political theories. However, it not only functions as an alternative theory of justice, but also suggests useful way to understand the nature of justice in this world.

냉전과 타이완 학계의 중국근대사연구

정문상(Chung Moon Sang) 중국근현대사학회 2012 중국근현대사연구 Vol.54 No.-

This article attempts to investigate a correlation between modernization theory, that is a representative anticommunist the Cold War discourse, and a study of the modern history. I concretely focus on the historical perspective and research activity of Guo, Ting-yi(郭廷以), who was a representative historian in the Cold War, and Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica(中央硏究院近代史硏究所), that was a research institute. Modernization theory began to be discussed among intellectuals of Taiwan in the mid 60s, and the discussion was more developed and enlarged from 1970. Modernization theory was argued by each discipline, and interdisciplinary study and discussion were also animated. Moreover, attempts to apply modernization theory to each discipline were performed. In the development and enlargement of modernization theory, it is identified that Academia Sinica played a vital role. When to focus on Chinese modern historical world, I also find that such the development of discussion about modernization theory was analogous. Into Institute of Modern History, that began to do academic exchange awarded a research grant from the Ford Foundation, modernization theory or even the perception of the modern history from the United States based on modernization theory, namely ‘(Western)Impact - (Chinese)Response theory’ began to come and proliferate. The perception of Chinese modern history from the United States spread into the Institute, because the perception of the modern history that was formed in the 1930s and was succeeded by Guo, Ting-yi had been already used. Attempts to interpret history by applying modernization theory to the study of history were performed from 1973. The researchers of the Institute performed comprehensive analysis and researches about China divided into 10 areas, based on modernization theory. By joint researchers of the Institute, the modern history of each area in China was interpreted and composed from the standpoint of ‘Impact - Response theory.’ It is consider that this is the very historical thought of modern China established this way that shows symbolically the relevance between the Cold War and the formation of history.

제도보장 이론의 공법적 의미와 문제점, 극복방향

조한상(Cho Han-Sang) 부산대학교 법학연구소 2008 법학연구 Vol.48 No.2

우리 공법하계에 있어서 제도보장이라는 말보다 흔하게 사용되고 있는 개념도 드물다. 칼 슈미트(C. Schmitt)에 의하여 본격적으로 이론화된 제도보장이라는 개념은 '성공적인 학문적 창작품’이라고 까지 평가되어 왔다. 제도보장 이론은 슈미트가 바이마르공화국 헌법을 해석하는 과정에서 고안된 것이다. 그는 자연권적인 자유권만을 진정한 의미의 기본권으로 보았는데, 바이마르공화국 헌법 제2부의 기본권에 관한 규정들을 자연권적 자유권 이외에도 다양한 사항들을 규정하고 있었다. 이를 설명하기 위하여 만들어진 개념이 제도보장이라고 할 수 있다. 제도보장 이론은 이후 많은 학자들에 의하여 발전되었고, 이후 연방헌법재판소의 판례에도 수용되었다. 또 제도보장 이론은 우리의 학계와 실무계에도 많은 영향을 미치고 있다. 그러나 제도보장 이론은 많은 문제점을 가지고 있다. 첫째, 제도보장 이론은 칼 슈미트의 국가와 기본권 이해, 즉 헌법 이해를 전제하고 있다. 그러나 칼 슈미트의 헌법 이해는 오늘날 수용하기 어렵게 되었고, 따라서 제도보장 이론은 처음부터 존립의 근거를 잃게 되는 것이다. 두 번째, 이 이론이 제시하는 제도 및 제도의 핵심영역 개념이 불분명하여, 규범적 이론으로서 부족한 점이 많다는 것이다. 세 번째, 입법자에 의한 제도의 침해를 방어하는데 주안점이 있는 이 이론이 오히려 제도 및 제도와 관련된 국민의 권리를 약화시킬 수 있다는 점이다. 따라서 제도보장 이론은 더 이상 유지되기 곤란하고 이제는 극복되어야 한다고 생각한다. 이를 극복하기 위한 노력이 이미 다양하게 진행되고 있으며, 설득력을 얻고 있다. 하지만 제도보장 이론은 오늘날 기본권의 객관적인 법으로서의 의의를 부각시키는 데 큰 기여를 한 것으로 평가되고 있다. 제도보장 이론이 극복되었다고 하여 제도가 사라지는 것은 아니다. 따라서 이제 우리 공법학도 새로운 제도 이론을 검토해 볼 때가 되었다고 본다. 이 새로운 제도 이론은 논리적으로 정연하면서도 오늘날의 헌법 현실에 부합해야 할 것이다. 무엇보다 새로운 제도 이론은 주장자의 고유한 헌법이해를 전제로 한 임의적 선택에 종속된 것이 아닌, 제도의 본래 의미부터 천착하는 노력에서 출발해야 할 것이다. Our learned circles of public law have used "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory frequently. "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory, that C. Schmitt had advanced in earnesr, has been estimate O as a successful academic invention. Schmitt made "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory, by the way of explaining the Weimar Constitution. He regarded natural liberties as genuine fundamental rights. But Weimar Constitution chapter 2 provided a diversity of articles in addition to natural liberties. In order to explaining this condition, "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory was made. Since then, this theory has been advanced by a lot of scholars, and accepted by the constitutional court of the Federal Republic of Germany. Furthermore, this theory has a great influence on our academic and practical sphere of public law. But "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory has many problcms. (1) This theory premise C. Schmitt's constitutional understanding. But we can hardly accept it, so " Einrichtungsgarantie" theory become-groundless. (2) The concepts of institution and institution's core are ambiguouns, so normative utility of this theory is insufficient. (3) The purpose of this theory, to check the infringement of legislature, was missed. The guarantee of institution has turned into the restriction of institution. For these reasons, "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory should fall into disuse. Bur "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory nevertheless contributed to an idea of objective validity in the fundamental rights. In addition, disuse of "Einrichtungsgarantie" theory never means extinction of institutions. On that account, we should consider new institutions cheory. This new theory has to be a logical argument, and match with our constitutional realities, Willfulness of theoretician must be exclude, Above all, the starting point of this theory must be institution's significance itself.

로베르토 웅거의 사회이론과 법이론

김정오 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2007 외법논집 Vol.27 No.-

Since postmodernism and deconstruction theory began to strengthen its power and to extend its influence in the western intellectual world in the late 20th century, western social thought seems to be in chaos. They lost the fundamental basis upon which human behavior and thinking has been founded. The situation did not happen just in the area of humanities or social science but also in the area of legal world. From the late 1970's, critics appeared in the American legal world and their critical voices began to influence very strongly to all of the law people. In the mid of the critical legal studies movement, Roberto Unger was standing steadyfast. His books were read by almost all of critics and his thought became the basis of their critical works. This article aims to trace Unger’s social theory and legal theory. The main questions will be as followings; whether his social theory can be an alternative to the postmodern social theory or deconstruction theory; whether he provides us with a new legal theory that will alternate with a given legal theories. In chapter I, I will describe Unger's intellectual evolution since 1970's. Since his theoretical interest has been so wide and deep, it will not be easy to describe all of his works. Here his main works will be dealt with. Among the many ideas that Unger has developed, the concept, ’society as an artifact’ is a key one. From that concept, he criticize the given social theories, especially deep-structure social theory (for example, Marxism) and positivistic social theory. From that concept, he draws the unique concepts, formative context, routine activities and etc. And then he constructs his own social theory, that is anti-necessitarian social theory. Hid social theory will be dealt with in chapter II. As I mentioned the relationship between Unger and Critical legal studies, as a legal scholar, Unger continued to have a deep concern with legal theory. Based upon his social theory, he suggested a new way of thinking about how to analyze legal problems. Even if he does not show a concrete legal theory, he shows us in what way we, legal scholars, are going in the future. Unger criticizes the given legal analysis that he names as rationalizing legal analysis. What he suggests for legal analysis is to connect legal analysis with institutional imagination. His legal theory will be dealt with in chapter IV. Unger criticizes liberalism and social democracy as it exists in Western Europe. According to him, liberalism has not kept its promise and social democracy became conservatized. Both of central ideologies in contemporary politics playes as an obstacle rather than as a lever to enhance economic force and to extend democracy. Unger proposes various concepts such as extended social democracy, radical polyarchy, mobilized democracy, and etc. These will be dealt with in chapter V.

한국 헌법상 제도보장과 기본권보장의 구별과 상호 관계에 대한 고찰 - 제도와 권리의 개념상 구별에 기반한 논증을 중심으로 -

박상돈(Park Sangdon) 한국공법학회 2020 공법연구 Vol.48 No.4

한국에서는 헌법상 제도보장을 인정하면서 제도보장과 기본권보장을 준별하는 견해가 오랫동안 통설적인 지위에 있었다. 그러나 새로운 기본권론에 근거하여 종래의 제도보장론에 대한 비판이 다수 등장하면서 종래의 제도보장론을 통설로서 무비판적으로 수용하기는 어렵게 되었다. 이제는 종래의 통설적 제도보장론과 이에 대한 비판론을 모두 대상으로 하여 문제점을 검토하고 미흡한 부분에 대하여는 대안을 제시할 필요가 있으며 그러한 검토의 전제로서 제도보장과 기본권보장의 구별 여부 및 제도보장과 기본권의 관계를 확인하여야 한다. 이 글에서는 기존의 논의에서 주로 시도한 바 있는 기본권의 성격에 근간을 두는 논증을 대신하여 제도와 권리의 개념상 구별을 출발점으로 하여 제도보장과 기본권보장의 구별 여부를 검토하고 제도보장과 기본권의 관계를 살펴보았다. 제도와 권리의 개념상 구별에 의하면 기본권의 성격에 관하여 어떠한 입장을 취하더라도 제도보장과 기본권보장은 본질적으로 구별되는 개념이다. 한국 헌법상 제도보장규정과 기본권규정은 구별되어 병존함으로써 원칙적으로 준별된다고 보는 것이 타당하다. 제도보장과 기본권은 상호 관련성이 있다는 점을 부인할 수 없으나 그러한 관련성은 제도를 보장함으로써 기본권의 보장에 기여한다는 의미라고 할 수 있다. 제도보장규정은 기본권 도출에 관하여 그 배경과 보장 여건을 형성하는 간접적인 근거가 될 수는 있으나 직접적인 도출 근거가 되기는 어렵다. 본 연구는 새로운 제도보장론의 모색을 위한 시론적 서설적 연구로서 향후 본 연구를 토대로 하여 제도보장의 발전을 위한 추가적인 고찰이 필요하다. In Korea, institutions guarantee(Einrichtungsgarantie) theory has been a prevalent position for a long time. The traditional institutions guarantee theory distinguishes between institutions guarantee and fundamental rights guarantee. But the traditional theory cannot be a prevalent position no longer because there are some criticisms against the traditional theory in the view of new fundamental rights theory. It is necessary to review both the traditional theory and criticisms and to suggest alternatives of drawback of the theories. For the review, it is needed to consider the validity of distinction between institutions guarantee and fundamental rights guarantee and the relationship between institutions guarantee and fundamental rights. Those are done by using the concept of institution and right as theoretical framework in this paper. Without reference to character of fundamental rights, institutions guarantee and fundamental rights guarantee must be conceptually distinguished because of the conceptual distinction between institution and right. There are institutions guarantee provisions which coexist with fundamental right provisions and a sharp distinction is made between institutions guarantee and fundamental rights guarantee basically in Constitution of the Republic of Korea. Institutions guarantee and fundamental rights have some relationship. It means that institutions guarantee provisions are not direct legal basis for making a new fundamental right but can be indirect legal basis for fundamental rights. This is a preliminary study on new institutions guarantee theory and further study will be needed for the improvement of institutions guarantee.

거시 조직이론의 필드 구조

신동엽(Dongyoub Shin),이상묵(Sangmook Yi) 연세대학교 경영연구소 2007 연세경영연구 Vol.44 No.2

본 논문에서는 현재 활발하게 연구되며 거시 조직이론 분야의 발전을 이끌고 있는 자원 의존이론, 조직경제학, 신제도이론, 조직생태학 등 네 가지 거시 조직이론 패러다임들의 핵심 논지를 소개하고, 그 함의와 한계를 토론한다. 조직이론은 경영학을 구성하고 있는 여러 분야들 중에서도 가장 학제적이고, 다양하며, 깊이있고 역동적인 분야로 평가된다. 20여 년간 조직이론 필드를 주도하던 상황이론의 쇠락과 함께 1970년대 중반 경에 거의 동시에 출현하여 현재까지 활발하게 연구되고 있는 조직이론 패러다임에는 자원의존이론, 조직경제학, 신제도이론, 조직생태학, 네트워크이론, 조직학습이론, 느슨한 커플링과 쓰레기통이론 등이 있으나, 그 중에서 본 논분에서는 거시 조직이론의 전형적 접근법을 가장 잘 보여주는 대표적 패러다임인 자원의존이론, 조직경제학, 신제도이론, 조직생태학등 네 가지 이론에 논의의 초점을 맞춘다. 본 논문은 21세기 초인 현재 시점에서 거시 조직이론의 발전을 주도하고 있는 네 가지 이론 패러다임들을 소개하고 토론함으로써 조직이론이라는 매우 역동적이고 다원적인 학문필드의 구조와 발전 과정에 대한 체계적 이해를 돕고자 한다. The current paper examines the following four theoretical paradigms that have led the development of macro organization theory in terms of their key arguments, implications, and limitations: resource dependence theory, economics of organization, neo-institutional theory, and organizational ecology. Organization theory is generally regarded as one of the most diverse, inter-disciplinary, dynamic, and theoretically profound fields that constitute the field of management. With the decline of contingency theory that had dominated the field of organization theory for the previous two decades, multiple organization theory paradigms emerged almost simultaneously about the mid 1970s, such as resource dependence theory, economics of organization, neo-institutional theory, organizational ecology, network theory, organizational learning theory, loose coupling theory, and garbage can theory. Among them, the current paper focuses on resource dependence theory, economics of organization, neoinstitutional theory, and organizational ecology, all of which are regarded to represent the idiosyncratic characteristics of macro organization theory. In so doing, the current paper aims to aid the systematic understanding of the structure and development process of the organization theory field which is highly dynamic and pluralistic.

비정규직 노동자 고용의 기업내부 결정요인에 관한 연구

신상인 한국인적자원관리학회 2005 인적자원관리연구 Vol.12 No.4

The employment pattern has been greatly changed since the currency crisis. The ratio of nonstandard employment among the wageworkers has been 52% as of the late year of 2002. The rapid increase of nonstandard employment has been approached in broad perspective or has been still at the level of proposing the government policy. Therefore, there has not been rich study that examines closely decision of the nonstandard employment and the internal elements of business groups affecting this decision. This study has researched the determinants of nonstandard employment from the viewpoint of the internal business groups and has by experience examined the propriety of its determinants in Korea. The increase of nonstandard employment would be explained from the variously theoretical viewpoints. This study has largely analyzed the increase of nonstandard employment from the five theoretical viewpoints such as strategic fitness, resource-based theory, institutional theory, environmental fitness, and transaction-cost theory. A hypothesis has been formulated on the bassis of the above-mentioned theory and another hypothesis is a moderation effect of the union which would be moderated between theoretical variables and ratio of nonstandard employment. The research materials were collected from the 148 business groups to verify the hypothesis. The results of analysis showed that the greater the coercive and mimetic isomorphism from the viewpoint of theory and the lower the technical skill from the viewpoint of transaction cost theory, the greater the increase of nonstandard employment. Thereupon, the union moderated the nonstandard employment ratio from technical skill. This result showed that if there has been the union, the nonstandard employment ratio has still overwhelmed the technical skill. Lastly, implications and limitations of the result were suggested. 이 연구는 기업에서 비정규직 고용을 결정하는 요인이 과연 무엇인지를 기업 내부의 요인에 초점을 두고 경험적으로 탐색하였다. 이러한 비정규직 고용증가 현상은 다양한 이론적 관점으로 설명할 수 있다. 크게 경영전략적합성론, 자원근거이론, 제도화이론, 환경적합성론 및 거래비용이론 등 다섯 가지 이론적 관점에서 비정규직 고용의 비중차이를 분석하였다. * 서경대학교 경영대학원 강사, (주)홍성 이사 E-mail:ssi0918@chosun.com각 이론에 기초하여 가설을 설정하고, 노동조합의 조절효과도 가설로 설정하였다. 이의 가설을 검증하기 위해 우리나라 제조업체 148개 기업을 대상으로 자료를 수집하였다. 분석 결과, 제도화 이론 관점에서 모방적·강압적 동상화 압력이 클수록, 거래비용이론 관점에서 기술숙련도가 낮을수록 비정규직 고용비중 증가와 관련이 있는 변수로 나타났다. 이 때 노동조합은 기술숙련도에서 비정규직 고용비중을 유의하게 조절하는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 분석결과는 노동조합이 존재할 때 기술의 숙련도가 높아도 비정규직 고용비율이 증가한다는 것이다. 분석결과를 토대로 결과에 대한 함의를 제시하였다. 또한 연구의 한계점과 앞으로의 연구를 위한 방향을 제시하였다.