성과급 공정성과 일과 삶의 균형이 조직몰입 및 직무성과에 미치는 영향 : 조직신뢰와 조직문화의 조절효과를 중심으로 = The Effects of Pay Fairness and Work-Life Balance on Organizational Commitment and Job Performance

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 유통기업 종사자들을 대상으로 성과급 공정성과 일과 삶의 균형이 조직몰입 및 직무성과에 미치는 영향을 규명하고, 이러한 관계에 서 조직신뢰와 조직문화가 조절효과를 가지는지를 실증적으로 분석하는 데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 부산 및 영남권에 소재한 기업 종사자 387명 을 대상으로 2024년 10월 한 달간 설문조사를 실시하였으며, 수집된 자 료는 SPSS 29.0을 활용하여 분석하였다. 연구설계는 성과급 공정성을 분 배공정성, 절차공정성, 상호작용공정성으로 세분화하고, 일과 삶의 균형 은 일-가족 균형, 일-여가 균형, 일-성장 균형의 세 하위요인으로 구분 하여 조직몰입 및 직무성과와의 영향 관계를 확인하고자 하였다. 연구 결과 첫째, 성과급 공정성의 하위요인 중 절차공정성과 상호작용 공정성이 조직몰입에 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으나, 분배공 정성은 유의한 영향을 보이지 않았다. 이는 성과급 제도가 구성원에게 공정하게 인식되기 위해서는 단순한 결과의 형평성보다 과정의 투명성과 상사와의 상호작용에서 나타나는 존중과 배려가 더욱 중요한 요인임을 시사한다. 둘째, 일과 삶의 균형의 모든 하위요인인 일-가족 균형, 일-여가 균형, 일-성장 균형이 조직몰입에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타 났다. 이는 구성원이 가정생활과 여가활동, 그리고 자기개발의 기회를 충분히 누릴 수 있을 때 조직에 대한 몰입이 강화됨을 보여준다. 셋째, 조직몰입은 직무성과를 향상시키는 중요한 매개 요인으로 확인되었다. 조직에 몰입한 구성원은 업무에 대해 책임감을 느끼고 자발적으로 노력 하며, 문제 해결과 성과 창출 과정에 적극적으로 참여함으로써 직무성과 를 높이는 것으로 나타났다. 넷째, 조직신뢰는 절차공정성과 상호작용공 정성과 조직몰입 간의 관계를 강화하는 조절효과를 보였으나, 분배공정 성과의 관계에서는 유의한 조절효과가 발견되지 않았다. 이는 구성원들 이 보상의 결과 자체보다 그 과정과 상호작용에서 공정성을 경험할 때 조직에 대한 신뢰가 강화되며, 이는 조직몰입으로 이어짐을 의미한다. 다섯째, 조직문화는 분배공정성, 절차공정성, 상호작용공정성의 하위 요 인 모두 조직몰입과의 관계를 조절하는 조절효과가 나타나지 않았다. 이 는 조직문화가 보상의 분배과정뿐만 아니라 제도의 절차, 상호작용과 같 은 구체적 실행 단계 등에서도 직접적 영향력이 제한적임을 보여준다. 여섯째, 조직신뢰는 일-가족 균형과 조직몰입에서는 조절효과가 유의미 한 결과를 보였지만, 일-여가 균형, 일-성장 균형과 조직몰입의 관계에 서는 조절효과가 나타나지 않았다. 이는 일-가족 균형은 조직신뢰가 동 일하게 적용되는 가족신뢰에 유의미한 영향을 미치지만, 조직신뢰와 일- 여가 균형, 일-성장 균형과 같은 개인영역은 개인의 생활환경과 선호에 크게 의존하기 때문에 조직신뢰의 수준이 높더라도 이 관계에 직접적 영 향을 미치지 못함을 시사한다. 마지막으로, 조직문화는 일-가족 균형과 조직몰입 간의 관계를 조절하는 것으로 나타났으나, 일-여가 균형과 일- 성장 균형의 경로에서는 조절효과가 나타나지 않았다. 이는 가족 중심의 가치가 조직문화의 분위기와 직접적으로 결합하여 조직몰입을 강화할 수 있음을 의미한다. 본 연구의 학술적 시사점은 성과급 공정성과 일과 삶의 균형을 조직몰 입과 직무성과와 연계하여 종합적으로 분석함으로써 기존 연구의 단편적 논의를 보완했다는 점이다. 특히 절차와 상호작용의 공정성이 분배공정 성보다 더 중요하다는 결과는 공정성의 다차원적 접근 필요성을 강조하 며, 일과 삶의 균형이 조직몰입을 강화하는 핵심적 요인임을 확인하였 다. 실무적 시사점은 기업이 성과급 제도를 설계할 때 단순히 보상의 결 과보다는 절차적 투명성과 상호작용에서의 존중을 강화해야 하며, 동시 에 근로자의 가족생활, 여가활동, 경력개발을 지원하는 제도를 마련해야 한다는 점이 도출되었다. 정책적 시사점은 정부와 공공기관이 워라벨 지 원정책과 가족친화경영 제도를 확대하여 조직문화와 공정성이 결합된 지 속가능한 인사관리 환경을 조성해야 한다는 필요성을 강조하였다. 부산 및 영남권 유통기업 종사자에 국한된 표본, 자기기입식 설문에 따른 응답 편향 가능성, 횡단적 연구설계의 한계 등으로 인해 연구 결과 의 일반화와 인과적 해석에 제약이 존재한다. 후속연구에서는 다양한 지 역과 산업으로 확장된 표본을 활용하고, 질적 연구 및 종단적 연구를 병 행하여 결과의 신뢰성을 강화할 필요가 있다. 또한 조직문화와 조직신뢰 의 하위 차원을 세분화하여 보다 정교한 분석을 시도하고, 산업별 맞춤 형 전략과 정책적 지원 방안을 도출하는 연구를 제시하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study aims to examine the effects of perceived pay fairness and work-life balance on organizational commitment and job performance among employees of retail companies, and to empirically analyze the moderating roles of organizational trust and organizational culture in these relationships. To achieve this, a survey was conducted over four weeks in October 2024 with 387 employees from retail companies located in the Busan and Yeongnam regions. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS 29.0. In the research design, pay fairness was divided into distributive, procedural, and interactional fairness, while work-life balance was categorized into work-family, work-leisure, and work-growth balance, in order to identify their structural relationships with organizational commitment and job performance. The results of the study are as follows. First, among the dimensions of pay fairness, procedural and interactional fairness significantly influenced organizational commitment, whereas distributive fairness did not. This indicates that for pay systems to be perceived as fair, the transparency of procedures and the respect and consideration shown in interactions are more crucial than the perceived equity of outcomes. Second, all three dimensions of work-life balance—work-family, work-leisure, and work-growth balance—positively influenced organizational commitment. This finding suggests that when employees can maintain a balance between family, leisure, and personal growth, they develop stronger emotional attachment and commitment to the organization. Third, organizational commitment was found to be a key mediating factor that enhances job performance, as highly committed employees display greater responsibility, initiative, and efficiency in their work. Fourth, organizational trust moderated the relationships between procedural and interactional fairness and organizational commitment, but no moderating effect was observed for distributive fairness. This implies that trust in the organization is built more on how outcomes are produced and communicated than on the fairness of the outcomes themselves. Fifth, organizational culture moderated the relationship between distributive fairness and organizational commitment, but not the relationships involving procedural or interactional fairness. This shows that cultural values and norms play an important role in shaping how employees accept and interpret distributive fairness. Sixth, organizational trust did not moderate the relationship between work-life balance and organizational commitment, indicating that work-life balance is more strongly influenced by individual lifestyles and environments than by organizational trust. Finally, organizational culture moderated the relationship between work-family balance and organizational commitment, but did not affect the work-leisure and work-growth paths, suggesting that family-related values are more closely aligned with cultural contexts. The academic implications of this study lie in its comprehensive analysis of how pay fairness and work-life balance relate to organizational commitment and job performance, thereby complementing prior fragmented research. The findings highlight the need for a multidimensional approach to fairness and confirm the critical role of work-life balance in enhancing organizational commitment. From a practical perspective, organizations should design pay systems that emphasize transparent procedures and respectful interactions, while also providing systems that support employees’ family life, leisure activities, and career development. From a policy perspective, the findings stress the importance of expanding work-life balance support programs and family-friendly management initiatives by governments and public institutions, fostering a sustainable human resource management environment that combines fairness with culture. This study has limitations in terms of sample representativeness, as it was restricted to retail employees in the Busan and Yeongnam regions, and in terms of methodology, as it relied on self-administered surveys and a cross-sectional design. Future research should broaden the sample scope to include different industries and regions, employ qualitative or longitudinal approaches, and refine the analysis by distinguishing more specific subdimensions of organizational culture and trust.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 ·················································································································1
• 1. 연구배경 및 연구목적 ················································································1
• 2. 연구구성 ········································································································4
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 ··································································································6
• 1. 성과급 공정성 ······························································································6
• 가. 성과급 공정성의 개념 ··········································································6
• 나. 성과급 공정성의 구성요인 ································································18
• 다. 성과급 공정성의 선행연구 ································································22
• 2. 일과 삶의 균형 ··························································································25
• 가. 일과 삶의 균형의 개념 ······································································25
• 나. 일과 삶의 균형의 구성요인 ······························································30
• 다. 일과 삶의 균형의 선행연구 ······························································36
• 3. 조직몰입 ······································································································39
• 가. 조직몰입의 개념 ··················································································39
• 나. 조직몰입의 선행연구 ··········································································45
• 4. 조직신뢰 ······································································································47
• 가. 조직신뢰의 개념 ··················································································47
• 나. 조직신뢰의 선행연구 ··········································································48
• 5. 조직문화 ······································································································51
• 가. 조직문화의 개념 ··················································································51
• 나. 조직문화의 선행연구 ··········································································53
• 6. 직무성과 ······································································································56
• 가. 직무성과의 개념 ··················································································56
• 나. 직무성과의 구성요인 ··········································································57
• 다. 직무성과의 선행연구 ··········································································60
• Ⅲ. 연구방법 ······································································································63
• 1. 연구모형 및 가설 ······················································································63
• 가. 연구모형 ································································································63
• 나. 가설의 설정 ··························································································64
• 2. 변수의 조작적 정의 및 설문구성 ··························································73
• 가. 변수의 조작적 정의와 측정 ······························································73
• 나. 설문지 구성 ··························································································80
• 3. 자료수집 및 자료분석 방법 ····································································82
• 가. 조사대상 및 방법 ················································································82
• 나. 자료의 분석방법 ··················································································82
• Ⅳ. 실증분석 및 결과 ·····················································································84
• 1. 조사대상자의 인구통계학적 특성 ··························································84
• 2. 측정도구의 타당성 및 신뢰성 분석 ······················································86
• 가. 독립변수의 타당성 분석과 신뢰성 분석 ········································86
• 나. 조절변수와 종속변수의 타당성 분석과 신뢰성 분석 ··················89
• 3. 상관관계분석 ······························································································90
• 4. 연구가설 검증 ····························································································92
• 가. 성과급 공정성과 조직몰입의 관계 ··················································93
• 나. 일과 삶의 균형과 조직몰입의 관계 ················································94
• 다. 조직몰입과 직무성과의 관계 ····························································96
• 5. 조절효과 분석 ····························································································97
• 가. 성과급 공정성과 조직몰입에서 조직신뢰의 조절효과 ················97
• 나. 성과급 공정성과 조직몰입에서 조직문화의 조절효과 ··············100
• 다. 일과 삶의 균형과 조직몰입에서 조직신뢰의 조절효과 ············102
• 라. 일과 삶의 균형과 조직몰입에서 조직문화의 조절효과 ············104
• 6. 가설검증결과 요약 ··················································································106
• Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언 ····························································································108
• 1. 연구의 요약 ······························································································108
• 2. 시사점 ········································································································114
• 3. 한계점 및 후속연구 제언 ······································································116
• 참고문헌 ··········································································································117
• 설문지 ··············································································································147
• Abstract ···········································································································153