비상장 중소기업은 상장기업을 벤치마킹해야 하는가? - 전략적 성향에 대한 비교연구 - = Should Unlisted Small and Medium Sized Company Benchmark Listed One? - Comparative Study on the Strategic Tendencies -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Firms should decide the competitive advantages and behaviors depending on the strategic framework.
Therefore the harmony of Firms’ characteristics with strategies can produce favorable performances.
Meanwhile, The ratio of Korean SMEs (Small and Medium sized Enterprises) to total is 99.9% in 2006 and going up continuously. However, the ratio of IPO (Initial Public Offering) to KOSPI and KOSDAQ is only 0.06%, This means that most Korean SMEs are unlisted companies. Consideration of these aspects, the study on Korean unlisted companies can give lots of useful academic and managerial implications to us.
To the best of my knowledge, this is the first attempt to generalize findings in the strategic tendencies of Korean unlisted companies through the comparative analysis with listed ones. Especially, this study tries to identify the strategic characteristics of Korean unlisted companies by comparative analysis to author’s prior study that investigated Korean listed companies.
The results of this study revealed that the Korean unlisted companies were similar to listed ones in some aspects, but different in another aspects. First of all, the performances of unlisted companies were inferior to those of listed ones in every indices. This is due to the characteristics of SMEs mostly consisted with Korean unlisted companies. Second, the result of cluster analysis on the basis of Porter’s generic strategy showed that the Korean unlisted companies were classified into four strategic types (Cost leadership group, Differentiation group, Dual group, Stuck-in-the-middle group), similar to listed companies.
However, the most unlisted companies were in Cost leadership strategic group. unlikely to listed ones. Meanwhile, the ratios of differentiation and dual strategic groups in unlisted companies were different with those in listed ones. That could be interpreted in the insufficiency of available resources, which was the characteristics of unlisted companies.
The Existing studies have insisted that the strategic tendencies of firms influenced upon performances like effectiveness and adaptiveness and efficiency. And this opinion was supported in the study of Korean listed companies. However, it was not supported in Korean unlisted ones, and this is the interesting findings of this study. That is, the unlisted cost leadership strategic firms pursue to increase efficiency but they have different characteristics from listed ones in aspect of the source of competitive advantages.
The result of it, they do not achieve favorable goals. On the contrary, the unlisted differentiation strategic firms achieved favorable goals very well. But the performances of them were inferior to those of listed differentiation strategic firms, though I expected better performances owing to the relative advantages.
The capabilities can be taken as the alternative explanation for this result, but further researches are needed for exact analysis.
This study has some fruitful implications. First of all, This study identified the relationships between firms’ performances and strategies. Especially, as identifying the sources of competitive advantages which should be important considerations for employment of strategy for unlisted companies, indicates the effective strategic direction which reflect the characteristics of unlisted companies, rather than strategic planning behavior of undifferentiated imitating listed ones. Also, this study implies the effective organization management ways to strategic planning by identifying the characteristics of unlisted companies’ performances based on Poter’s generic strategies. For examples, in the case of employment of differentiation strategy, it will be effective to manage organization focusing on market sensing. Meanwhile in the case of employment of cost leadership strategy, it will be effective to manage organization focusing on interaction within and between organizations.
This study has some limitations a...

국문 초록 (Abstract)

최근 경기 침체기를 맞아 기업들은 원가절감을 통한 수익성제고를 우선시하는 양상을 보이고 있다. 그런데 전략적 프레임에 의해서 기업은 추구하고자 하는 경쟁우위와 여러 활동들을 결정하게 된다. 따라서 기업의 특성과 전략이 조화를 이루어야 양호한 기업 성과가 산출될 수 있다. 한편, 우리나라의 전체 기업 중 중소기업이 차지하는 비중은 2006년 말 현재 99.9%이며 지속적으로 증가하고 있는데 비해서 KOSPI 및 KOSDAQ 주식시장에의 상장률은 약 0.06%로서 대부분의 중소기업들이 비상장기업에 속하고 있다. 이러한 점을 감안할 때, 이들 비상장기업의 전략적 성향에 대한 연구는 학문적으로나 실무적인 측면에서 유용한 시사점들을 던져줄 수 있다. 특히 본 연구는 상장기업을 조사대상으로 하였던 기존연구와의 비교분석을 통하여 비상장 중소기업의 전략적 특징을 규명하고자 하였다.
Porter의 본원적 전략에 기초한 군집분석 결과 비상장 중소기업도 상장기업과 유사하게 4개 유형의 전략집단(원가우위 전략집단, 차별화 전략집단, 듀얼 전략집단, 무전략집단)으로 분류되었다. 흥미로운 것은 우리나라의 비상장 중소기업들은 원가우위 전략을 가장 많이 채택하고 있지만, 목표하는 기업성과를 제대로 거두지 못하고 있다는 점이다. 반면, 차별화 전략을 채택한 비상장 중소기업들은 상대적으로 양호한 기업성과를 거두고 있었다. 이러한 조사결과는 경쟁우위 및 기업능력 측면에서 설명될 수 있다.
본 연구는 특히 비상장 중소기업의 경쟁우위의 원천을 규명함으로써, 보다 효과적인 전략수립 방향과 그에 따른 조직관리 방향을 제시하였으며 무조건적으로 상장기업을 모방하는 전략수립 행태는 지양되어야 함을 시사하고 있다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 중소기업청, "중소기업 현황"

2 한국증권선물거래소, "주식통계"

3 고인곤, "잘 수립된 사업 계획은 양호한 기업성과를 가져오는가?: 사업계획의 구성요소에 관한 탐색적 연구" 대한경영학회 20 (20): 1-26, 2007

4 "유가증권시장 및 코스닥시장 상장규정"

5 고인곤, "우월한 기업성과를 위한 전제조건으로서의 전략 선택에 관한 실증적 연구; 다면적 기업성과 및 산업분석" 한국상업교육학회 17 : 243-266, 2007

6 홍성도, "벤처비즈니스의 이해" 학문사 2003

7 이상석, "기업가정신과 창업" 학현사 2006

8 Campbell-Hunt, C, "What Have We Learned about Generic Competitive Strategy? A Meta- Analysis" 21 (21): 127-154, 2000

9 Hofer, C, "Turnaround Strategies" 1 (1): 19-31, 1980

10 Penrose, E. T, "The Theory of The Growth of The Firm" Basic Blackwell 1959

11 Weerawardena, J, "The Role of Marketing Capability in Innovation-Based Competitive Strategy" 11 : 15-35, 2003

12 Barney, J, "The Resource-Based of The Firm: Ten Years After 1991" 27 (27): 625-641, 2001

13 Srivastava, R. K, "The Resource-Based View and Marketing: The Role of Market-Based Assets in Gaining Competitive Advantage" 27 (27): 777-802, 2001

14 Krasnikov, A, "The Relative Impact of Marketing, Research- and- Development, and Operations Capabilities on Firm Performance" 72 : 1-11, 2008

15 Rue, L. W, "The Relationship between Planning Sophistication and Performance in Small Businesses" 36 (36): 24-32, 1998

16 Narver, J. C, "The Effect of A Market Orientation on Business Profitability" 54 : 20-35, 1990

17 Peteraf, M. A, "The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage; A Resource -Based View" 14 (14): 179-191, 1993

18 O’Farrell, P. N, "The Competitiveness of Business Services and Regional Development: Evidence from Scotland and the South East of England" 30 (30): 1629-1652, 1993

19 Hunt, S. D, "The Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition" 59 : 1-15, 1995

20 Kim, E, "Testing the Applicability of Porter’s Generic Strategies in The Digital Age: A Study of Korean Cyber Malls" 21 (21): 19-44, 2004

21 Ghemawat, P, "Sustainable Advantage" 64 (64): 53-58, 1986

22 Gatignon, H, "Strategic Orientation of The Firm and New Product Performance" 34 : 77-90, 1997

23 Homburg, C, "Strategic Consensus and Performance: The Role of Strategy Type and Market- Related Dynamism" 20 (20): 339-357, 1999

24 Chen, M, "Speed, Stealth, and Selective Attack: How Small Firms Differ from Large Firms in Competitive Behavior" 38 (38): 453-482, 1995

25 Longenecker, J. G, "Small Business Management" South-Western College Publishing 1997

26 Nunnally, J. C, "Psychometric Theory" McGraw-Hill 1967

27 Cottrell, T, "Product Variety and Firm Survival in the Micro Computerware Industry" 25 (25): 1005-1025, 2004

28 Kline, R. B, "Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling" The Guilford Press 1998

29 Kumar, K, "Porter’s Strategic Types: Differences in Internal Processes and Their Impact on Performance" 14 (14): 107-124, 1998

30 Miles, R. E, "Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process" McGraw-Hill Book Company 1978

31 Kusunoki, K, "Organizational Capabilities in Product Development of Japanese Firms: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Findings" 9 (9): 699-718, 1998

32 Bagozzi, R, "On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models" 16 (16): 74-94, 1988

33 Walker, O. C, "Marketing’s Role in the Implementation of Business Strategies: A Critical Review and Conceptual Framework" 51 : 15-33, 1987

34 Sharkie, R, "Knowledge Creation and Its Place in The Development of Sustainable Competitive Advantage" 7 (7): 20-31, 2003

35 Cooper, A. C, "Initial Human and Financial Capital as Predictors of New Venture Performance" 9 (9): 371-396, 1994

36 Arkebauer, J. B, "Guide to Writing a High- Impact Business Plan" McGraw -Hill 1995

37 Barney, J, "Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage" 17 (17): 99-120, 1991

38 Veliyath, R, "Firm Capabilities, Business Strategies, and Hypercompetitive Arenas: The Sustainability of Competitive Advantages with Implications for Firm Competitiveness" 10 (10): 56-82, 2000

39 Banker, R. D, "Evidence on Economies of Scale in Software Development" 36 (36): 275-284, 1994

40 Fornell, C, "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error" 18 : 39-50, 1981

41 Ebben, J. J, "Efficiency, Flexibility or Both? Evidence Linking Strategy to Performance in Small Firms" 26 (26): 1249-1259, 2005

42 Hill, C. W, "Differentiation Versus Low Cost or Differentiation and Low Cost: A Contingency Framework" 13 (13): 401-412, 1988

43 Dean, T, "Differences in Large and Small Firm Responses to Environmental Context: Strategic Implica- tions from A Comparative Analysis of Business Formations" 19 (19): 709-723, 1998

44 Valle, S, "Cross-Functionality and Leadership of the New Product Development Teams" 6 (6): 32-47, 2003

45 Latham, S, "Contrasting Strategic Response to Economic Recession in Start-Up versus Established Software Firms" 47 (47): 180-201, 2009

46 Grant, R. M, "Contemporary Strategy Analysis" Blackwell 1998

47 Porter, M. E, "Competitive Strategy" Free Press 1980

48 Porter, M. E, "Competitive Advantage" Free Press 1985

49 Bain, J. S, "Barriers to New Competition, Cambridge" Harvard University Press 1956

50 Vorhies, D. W, "An Investigation of the Factors Leading to The Development of Marketing Capabilities and Organizational Effectiveness" 6 : 3-23, 1998

51 Von Krogh, G, "An Essay on Corporate Epistemology" 15 : 53-72, 1994

52 Anderson, J. C, "An Approach for Confirmatory Measurement and Structural Equation Modeling of Organizational Properties" 33 : 535-541, 1987

53 Marinova, D, "Actualizing Innovation Effort: The Impact of Market Knowledge Diffusion in A Dynamic System of Competition" 68 : 1-20, 2004

54 Wernerfelt, B, "A Resource-Based View of the Firm" 5 (5): 171-180, 1984

55 Collis, D. J, "A Resource-Based Analysis of Global Competition: The Case of The Bearings Industry" 12 : 49-68, 1991

56 Pelham, A. M, "A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of Market Structure, Firm Structure, Strategy, and Market Orientation Culture on Dimensions of Small-Firm Performance" 24 (24): 27-43, 1996

57 박재린, "21세기 중소기업시대의 중소기업경영학" 무역경영사 2005