RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI우수등재

    계열사의 전략적 상황에 따른 계열사 간 및 계열사 내 자원공유의 선택모형

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100856809

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Existing diversification researches in Korea have accepted the theories for american diversified firms without question. However, the research practice like this may cause a theoretical problem in that Korean diversified firms are so different in organizational structure compared to american ones. The organizational structure of Korean diversified firm is based on a triple-tier system composed of corporate, business, and divisional levels whereas an american one has only corporate and business levels. Due to structural distinction of Korean diversified firm, the logics need to be separately identified according to an organizational level to which it is applied. The issue of resource sharing is also unexceptional. The logic should be differentiated whether the resources are shared between businesses or between divisions within a business. It is stressed in this paper that resource sharing at each level has its own logic. We present relatedness, strategic mission, competitive strategy, and resource attractiveness measured at a business level as the determinants of resource sharing and clarifies which determinant would be effective in resource sharing between businesses or resource sharing within a business. We could get the following results by testing the hypotheses. First, industrial and resource relatedness affect resource sharing between businesses in a positive way, whereas neither has an influence on resource sharing within a business. Second, it is suggested that a build mission would be related to resource sharing between businesses and a harvest mission would be related to resource sharing within a business. However, neither one is significantly supported. We infer the reason from the possibility that the business units to which a build or a harvest mission is assigned indiscriminately involve in resource sharing between businesses because a business unit with a build mission is supposed to be given the resources from other ones whereas the one with a harvest mission is supposed to give. As the fact that a business unit with a hold mission falls on the cell of star in the BCG matrix indicates that it should feed itself, it is encouraged to share the resources inside to efficiently utilize its own resources rather than to give or to be given them. A business unit with a divest mission might not share the resources with other business units as it prepares for being sold or liquidated. Third, a differentiation strategy affects resource sharing between businesses, but it does not affect resource sharing within a business. In contrast, a low-cost strategy does not affect resource sharing between businesses, but it affects resource sharing within a business. Fourth, resource value is positively influential to resource sharing within a business. Also, resource level is related to resource sharing within a business in a positive way and is related to resource sharing between businesses in a negative way. We expect that resource value would not affect resource sharing between businesses because of its inimitability, but the result shows that it does affect. It implies that the inimitability of resources blocks transferring not between different industries but between different organizations as the reason why the resource cannot be imitated is rooted in organizational specificity such as path dependence or tacitness. It would not be so easy for the business units which resides in the different firms to replicate other one`s resources even if they are in the same industry. However, those in the same firm would not have such a difficulty in imitating the resources in spite of industrial differences. The contributions of this study could be summarized as follows. First of all, we argue that a differentiated logic should be applied to each of the organizational levels. On the contrary of existing researches which use a homogenized logic regardless of an organizational level to which it is applied, we stress that a discriminative logi
    번역하기

    Existing diversification researches in Korea have accepted the theories for american diversified firms without question. However, the research practice like this may cause a theoretical problem in that Korean diversified firms are so different in orga...

    Existing diversification researches in Korea have accepted the theories for american diversified firms without question. However, the research practice like this may cause a theoretical problem in that Korean diversified firms are so different in organizational structure compared to american ones. The organizational structure of Korean diversified firm is based on a triple-tier system composed of corporate, business, and divisional levels whereas an american one has only corporate and business levels. Due to structural distinction of Korean diversified firm, the logics need to be separately identified according to an organizational level to which it is applied. The issue of resource sharing is also unexceptional. The logic should be differentiated whether the resources are shared between businesses or between divisions within a business. It is stressed in this paper that resource sharing at each level has its own logic. We present relatedness, strategic mission, competitive strategy, and resource attractiveness measured at a business level as the determinants of resource sharing and clarifies which determinant would be effective in resource sharing between businesses or resource sharing within a business. We could get the following results by testing the hypotheses. First, industrial and resource relatedness affect resource sharing between businesses in a positive way, whereas neither has an influence on resource sharing within a business. Second, it is suggested that a build mission would be related to resource sharing between businesses and a harvest mission would be related to resource sharing within a business. However, neither one is significantly supported. We infer the reason from the possibility that the business units to which a build or a harvest mission is assigned indiscriminately involve in resource sharing between businesses because a business unit with a build mission is supposed to be given the resources from other ones whereas the one with a harvest mission is supposed to give. As the fact that a business unit with a hold mission falls on the cell of star in the BCG matrix indicates that it should feed itself, it is encouraged to share the resources inside to efficiently utilize its own resources rather than to give or to be given them. A business unit with a divest mission might not share the resources with other business units as it prepares for being sold or liquidated. Third, a differentiation strategy affects resource sharing between businesses, but it does not affect resource sharing within a business. In contrast, a low-cost strategy does not affect resource sharing between businesses, but it affects resource sharing within a business. Fourth, resource value is positively influential to resource sharing within a business. Also, resource level is related to resource sharing within a business in a positive way and is related to resource sharing between businesses in a negative way. We expect that resource value would not affect resource sharing between businesses because of its inimitability, but the result shows that it does affect. It implies that the inimitability of resources blocks transferring not between different industries but between different organizations as the reason why the resource cannot be imitated is rooted in organizational specificity such as path dependence or tacitness. It would not be so easy for the business units which resides in the different firms to replicate other one`s resources even if they are in the same industry. However, those in the same firm would not have such a difficulty in imitating the resources in spite of industrial differences. The contributions of this study could be summarized as follows. First of all, we argue that a differentiated logic should be applied to each of the organizational levels. On the contrary of existing researches which use a homogenized logic regardless of an organizational level to which it is applied, we stress that a discriminative logi

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 정구현, "한국기업의 성장전략과 기업구조"

    2 이학종, "한국기업의 성장전략과 기업구조"

    3 조동성, "한국기업의 다각화 전략 IN: 한국기업의 구조와 전략" 법문사 1986

    4 김국태, "한국 대기업의 계열사와 사업부 간 분권화에 관한 탐색적 연구" 연세대학교 2003

    5 장세진, "외환위기와 한국 기업집단의" 박영사 2003

    6 박경미, "시너지와 경쟁우위: 계열사 간 자원공유와 사업부 간 자원공유의 결정요인 및 성과함의" 연세대학교 2007

    7 황재원, "시너지 창출을 위한 기업본부의 개입방식의 결정요인에 관한 연구" 한국전략경영학회 2007

    8 김영욱, "삼성의 다각화 과정과 지배구조에 관한연구" 서울대학교 1993

    9 권구혁, "대기업 계열사의 경쟁전략과 자원공유 및 인센티브 시스템의 관계:계열사의 성과 및 경영자 만족에 미치는 영향" 27 (27): 309-341, 1998

    10 권구혁, "다각화 전략의 실행에 관한 연구:문제점및 미래 연구 설계의 방향" 한국경영학회 9-47, 1996

    1 정구현, "한국기업의 성장전략과 기업구조"

    2 이학종, "한국기업의 성장전략과 기업구조"

    3 조동성, "한국기업의 다각화 전략 IN: 한국기업의 구조와 전략" 법문사 1986

    4 김국태, "한국 대기업의 계열사와 사업부 간 분권화에 관한 탐색적 연구" 연세대학교 2003

    5 장세진, "외환위기와 한국 기업집단의" 박영사 2003

    6 박경미, "시너지와 경쟁우위: 계열사 간 자원공유와 사업부 간 자원공유의 결정요인 및 성과함의" 연세대학교 2007

    7 황재원, "시너지 창출을 위한 기업본부의 개입방식의 결정요인에 관한 연구" 한국전략경영학회 2007

    8 김영욱, "삼성의 다각화 과정과 지배구조에 관한연구" 서울대학교 1993

    9 권구혁, "대기업 계열사의 경쟁전략과 자원공유 및 인센티브 시스템의 관계:계열사의 성과 및 경영자 만족에 미치는 영향" 27 (27): 309-341, 1998

    10 권구혁, "다각화 전략의 실행에 관한 연구:문제점및 미래 연구 설계의 방향" 한국경영학회 9-47, 1996

    11 권구혁, "다각화 전략에 관한 연구의 문제점 및 개선방향:자원개념을 중심으로 한 통합모형" 26 (26): 531-566, 1997

    12 유석진, "기업그룹의 자원수준이 계열사 성과에미치는 영향에 관한 연구" 연세대학교 2007

    13 황재원, "계열사 수준에서의 관련성: 계열사 간 자원공유의 성과함의" 대한경영학회 21 (21): 1595-1619, 2008

    14 황재원, "계열사 간 자원공유의 결정요인에 관한 연구: 기업 수준 및 사업부 수준 논의의 통합적 접근" 한국전략경영학회 11 (11): 1-25, 2008

    15 Penrose, E. T, "he Theory of the Growth of the Firm" Basil Blackwell 1981

    16 Stern,I, "Withinbusiness diversification in technology-intensive industries" 25 : 487-505, 2004

    17 Chatterjee,S, "Types of synergy and economic value:The impact of acquisitions on merging and rival firms" 7 (7): 119-139, 1986

    18 Teece,D.J, "Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm" 3 (3): 39-63, 1982

    19 Rumelt,R.P, "Towards a strategic theory of the firm,B In Competitive Strategic Management" Prentice-Hall 556-570, 1984

    20 Pondy,L.D, "Toward a theory of internal resource allocation IN Power in Organization" Vanderbilt University Press 0-311, 1970

    21 Rumelt,R.P, "Theory, strategy, and entrepreneurship,In The competitive Challenge" Ballinger 137-158, 1987

    22 Poppo,L, "The visible hands of hierarchy within the m-form: an empirical test of corporate parenting of internal product exchanges" 40 (40): 403-430, 2003

    23 Poppo,L, "The visible hand of corporate staff in the multi-divisional corporations: a focus on inter-divisional exchanges" 1997

    24 Szulanski,G, "The process of knowledge transfer:a diachronic analysis of stickiness" 82 (82): 9-27, 2000

    25 Barney,J.B, "The prescriptive limits of strategic management theory" Texas A&M University 1988

    26 Montgomery,C.A, "The measurement of firm diversification:Some new empirical evidence" 25 (25): 297-307, 1982

    27 Chatterjee,S., "The link between resource type and diversification:theory and evidence" 12 : 33-48, 1991

    28 Ito,K, "The genealogical structure of japanese firms:parent subsidiary relationships" 15 : 35-51, 1994

    29 Xiao Li,S, "The effect of within-industry diversification on firm performance:Synergy creation,multi-market contact and market structuration" 25 (25): 1131-1153, 2004

    30 Rhoades,S, "The effect of diversification on industry profit performance:1963" 55 (55): 146-155, 1973

    31 Prahalad,C.K, "The dominant logic:a new linkage between diversity and performance" 7 (7): 485-501, 1986

    32 Nohria,N, "The differentiated network: Organizing multinational corporations for value creation" Jossey-Bass Publishers 1997

    33 Luffman,G.A., "The Strategy and Performance of British Industry,1970-1980" St. Martins' Press 1984

    34 Pfeffer, J, "The External Control of Organizations:A Resource Dependency Perspective,New" Harper& Row. 1978

    35 Silverman,B.S, "Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification:toward an integration of the resourcebased view and transaction cost economics" 45 (45): 1109-1124, 1999

    36 Harrison,J.S, "Synergies and postacquisition performance:differences versus similarities in resource allocations" 17 (17): 173-190, 1991

    37 Bollen,K.A, "Structural Equations with Latent Variables"

    38 Grinyer,P.H, "Strategy,structure,the environment,and financial performance in 48 United Kingdom companies" 23 (23): 193-220, 1980

    39 Govindarajan,V, "Strategy,control systems,and resource sharing:effect on business-unit performance" 33 (33): 259-285, 1990

    40 Rumelt,R.P, "Strategy,Structure,and Economic Performance" Harvard University Press 1974

    41 Hamel,G, "Strategy as stretch and leverage" 7 : 5-84, 1993

    42 Hill,C.W.L, "Strategy and structure in the multiproduct firm" 12 (12): 331-341, 1987

    43 Hofer,C.W, "Strategy Formulation:Analytical Concepts" St. Paul 1978

    44 Pitts,R.A, "Strategies and structures for diversification" 20 (20): 197-208, 1977

    45 Conant,J.S, "Strategic types,distinctive marketing competencies and organizational performance:a multiple-measures-based study" 11 (11): 365-383, 1990

    46 Barney,J.B, "Strategic factor markets:expectations,luck,and business strategy" 32 (32): 1231-1241, 1986

    47 Abell,D.F, "Strategic Market Planning" Prentice-Hall 1979

    48 Hambrick,D.C, "Strategic Attributes and performance in the BCG matrix:A PIMS based analysis of industrial product business" 25 : 510-531, 1982

    49 Larreche,J., "Statport:A model for the evaluation and formulation of business portfolio strategies" 28 : 979-1001, 1982

    50 Hambrick,O.C, "Some tests of effectiveness and functional attributes of Miles & Snow's strategy types" 26 : 5-26, 1983

    51 Gupta,A.K, "SBU strategies,corporate-SBU relations,and SBU effectiveness in strategy implementation" 30 (30): 477-500, 1987

    52 Bettis,R, "Risk/return performance of diversified firms" 31 (31): 785-789, 1985

    53 Desarbo,W.S, "Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework:uncovering interrelationships between strategic types,capabilities,environmental uncertainty,and firm performance" 26 (26): 47-74, 2005

    54 Gupta,A.K, "Resource sharing among SBUs:strategic antecedents and administrative implications" 29 (29): 695-714, 1986

    55 Ramanujam,V, "Research on Corporate Diversification:A Synthesis" 10 : 523-551, 1989

    56 Hitt,M.A, "Relationships among corporate level distinctive competencies,diversification strategy,corporate structure and performance" 23 (23): 401-416, 1986

    57 Miller,D, "Relating Porter’s business strategies to environment and structure: analysisand performance implications" 31 (31): 280-308, 1988

    58 Capron,L., "Redeployment of brands,sales forces,and general marketing management Expertise following horizontal acquisitions:a resource based view" 63 (63): 41-54, 1999

    59 Hambrick,O.C, "Putting top managers back in the strategy picture" 10 : 5-15, 1989

    60 Miller,D, "Psychological and traditional dimensions of structure" 31 : 539-560, 1986

    61 Henderson,B.D, "Perspectives on the Product Portfolio"

    62 Bettis,R.A, "Performance differences in related and unrelated diversified firms" 2 (2): 379-393, 1981

    63 Grant,R.M., "Performance differences between the Wrigley/ Rumelt strategic categories" 9 (9): 333-346, 1988

    64 Shortell,S.M, "Perceptual and archival measures of Miles and Snow’s strategic types:a comprehensive assessment of reliability and validity" 33 (33): 817-832, 1990

    65 Ilinitch,A.Y., "Operationalizing and testing galbraith's center of gravity theory" 16 (16): 401-410, 1995

    66 Ginsberg,A, "Operationalizing Organizational Strategy:toward and integrative framework" 9 : 548-557, 1984

    67 Nayyar,P.R, "On the measurement of corporate diversification strategy:Evidence from large U.S.service firms" 13 (13): 219-235, 1992

    68 Nayyar,P.R, "On the measurement of competitive strategy:evidence from a large multiproduct U.S.firm" 36 (36): 1652-1669, 1993

    69 Porter,M.E, "On Competition" Harvard Business School Press 1998

    70 Lubatkin,M, "Mergers strategies and stockholder value" 8 : 39-53, 1987

    71 Snow,C.C, "Measuring organizational strategies" 5 : 527-538, 1980

    72 Ouchi,W, "Market,bureaucracies and clans" 25 (25): 129-141, 1979

    73 Buzzell,R.D, "Market share-A key to profitability" 97-106, 1975

    74 St.John,C.H., "Manufacturing-based relatedness,synergy,and coordination" 20 (20): 129-145, 1999

    75 Bower,J.L, "Managing the Resource Allocation Process" Harvard University Press 1970

    76 Ghoshal,S, "Linking organizational context and managerial action;The dimensions of quality of management" 15 : 91-112, 1994

    77 Tanriverdi,H, "Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms" 26 (26): 97-119, 2005

    78 Ito,K, "Japanese spinoffs:unexplored survival strategies" 16 : 431-446, 1995

    79 Ghoshal,S, "Internal differentiation within multinational corporations" 10 (10): 323-337, 1989

    80 McCann,J.E, "Interdepartmental Relations IN Handbook of Organizational Design" Oxford University Press 60-84, 1981

    81 Miller,D, "Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms" 3 : 3-27, 1982

    82 Pitts,R.A, "Incentive compensation and organizational design" 53 : 338-344, 1974

    83 Avolio,B.J, "Identifying common methods variance with data collected from a single source:an unresolved sticky issue" 17 (17): 571-587, 1991

    84 Porter,M.E, "From competitive advantage to corporate strategy" 43-59, 1987

    85 Kerlinger,F.N, "Foundations of Behavioral Research" Holt,Rinehart and Wenston 404-415, 1986

    86 Barney,J.B, "Firm resources and sustained competitive Advantage" 7 (7): 99-120, 1991

    87 Bass,F.M, "Firm effects and industry effects tin the analysis of market structure and profitability" 15 (15): 3-10, 1978

    88 Burgelman,R.A, "Fading memories:a process theory of strategic business exit" 39 : 24-56, 1994

    89 Szulanski,G, "Exploring internal stickiness:impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm" 17 : 27-43, 1996

    90 Jacquemin,A.P, "Entropy measure of diversification and corporate growth" 27 (27): 359-369, 1979

    91 Amit,R, "Efficient corporate diversification:methods and implications" 35 : 879-897, 1989

    92 Teece,D.J, "Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise" 1 (1): 223-247, 1980

    93 Panzar,J.C, "Economies of scope" 71 (71): 268-272, 1981

    94 Page,D.E, "Does business diversification affect performance? some further evidence" 27 (27): 130-147, 1988

    95 Michael,A, "Does business diversification affect performance?" 13 (13): 18-25, 1984

    96 Grant,R, "Diversity,diversification,and profitability among British manufacturing companies,1972-1984" 31 (31): 771-801, 1988

    97 Lubatkin,M, "Diversification,systematic risk,and shareholder return:A capital market extention of Rumelt’s 1974 study" 32 (32): 454-465, 1989

    98 Palepu,K, "Diversification strategy,profit performance and the entropy measure" 6 (6): 239-255, 1985

    99 Montgomery,C.A, "Diversification strategy and systematic risk" 5 (5): 181-191, 1984

    100 Rumelt,R.P, "Diversification strategy and profitability" 3 (3): 359-369, 1982

    101 LeCraw,D, "Diversification strategy and performance" 33 (33): 179-198, 1984

    102 Amit,R, "Diversification strategies,business cycles and economic performance" 9 (9): 99-110, 1988

    103 Amit,R, "Diversification and risk-return trade-off" 31 (31): 154-166, 1988

    104 Varadarajan,P.R., "Diversification and performance:A reexamination using a new two-dimensional conceptualization of diversity in firms" 30 (30): 380-393, 1987

    105 Gort,M, "Diversification and Integration in American Industry" Princeton University Press. 1962

    106 Davis,R., "Direct estimation of synergy:a new approach to the diversityperformance debate" 39 (39): 1334-1346, 1993

    107 Grimyer,P.H, "Dimensions of organizational structure:a critical replication" 23 (23): 405-421, 1980

    108 Goold,M, "Desperately seeking synergy" 130-143, 1998

    109 Shin,D., "Demystifying Asian Business Networks: the hierarchical core of interfirm relations in KoreaChaebols IN Business Networks in Asia" Quorum Books. 1999

    110 Vancil,R.F, "Decentralization:Managerial Ambiguity by Design" Financial Executives Research Foundation 1980

    111 Govindarajan,V, "Decentralization, strategy, and effectiveness of strategic business units in multibusiness organizations" 11 (11): 844-856, 1986

    112 Christensen,H, "Corporate economic performance:diversification strategy versus market structure" 2 (2): 327-343, 1981

    113 Singh,H, "Corporate acquisition strategies and economic performance" 8 : 377-386, 1987

    114 Berry,C.H, "Corporate Growth and Diversification" Princeton University 1975

    115 Hill,C.W.L, "Cooperative versus competitive structures in related and unrelated diversified firms" 3 (3): 501-521, 1992

    116 Dooms.E.and A.V.Oijen, "Control differentiation, resource sharing and performance of business units" 57 : 320-331, 2005

    117 Dess,G.G, "Conducting and integratingstrategy research at the international,corporate,and business levels:issues and directions" 21 (21): 357-393, 1995

    118 Chen,M-J, "Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry:toward a theoretical integration" 21 (21): 100-134, 1996

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

    120 Porter,M.E, "Competitive Advantage:Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance" Free Press. 1985

    121 Caves,R.E, "Competition in an Open Economy" Harvard University Press 1980

    122 Hamel,G, "Competing for the future" 122-128, 1994

    123 Podsakoff,P.M, "Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research:A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies" 88 (88): 879-903, 2003

    124 Glueck,W., "Business Policy and Strategic Management" McGraw-Hill 1984

    125 Farjoun,M, "Beyond industry boundaries:human expertise,diversification and resourcerelated industry group" 5 (5): 185-199, 1994

    126 Dierickx,I, "Asset stock accumulation and substantiality of competitive advantage" 35 (35): 1504-1514, 1989

    127 Lane,P.J, "Agency problems as antecedents to unrelated mergers and diversification: Amihud and Lev reconsidered" 19 : 555-578, 1998

    128 Frick,R, "Accepting null hypothesis" 23 (23): 132-138, 1995

    129 Robins,J., "A Resourcebased approach to the multibusiness firm:empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance" 16 (16): 277-299, 1995

    130 Wernerfelt,B, "A Resource-based View of the Firm" 5 : 171-180, 1984

    131 Cohen,J, "A Power Primer" 112 (112): 155-159, 1992

    132 Tushman,M.L, "A Political approach to organizations:a review and rationale" 206-216, 1977

    133 최승노, "2001년 한국의 대규모 기업집단"

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2022 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
    2017-01-01 등재 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2001-07-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    1999-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.45 1.45 1.48
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.64 1.69 2.793 0.2
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼