Relevance Analysis of Performance Evaluation Systems of Government S&T Research Groups

출연연구기관의 연구회 단위 기관평가제도의 적합성 분석

This research examines performance evaluatees' opinions regarding the current institutional performance evaluation systems of Government S&T Research Institutes (GRIs). Under the current evaluation systems, twenty GRIs are grouped into three Research Groups and each Group has its own evaluation systems. One problem of the current institutional evaluation systems is that the systems cannot reflect individual GRIs' characteristics. The following methods are used. First, based on four perspectives of Kaplan & Norton(1992)'s Balanced Scorecard(BSC) model, six perspectives appropriate to GRUs' characteristics are derived. Second, experts classify current performance evaluation measures into the six perspectives. This enables different evaluation systems of three GRI Research Groups to be compared under the same evaluation measures. Third, GRIs' evaluatees are asked to allocate appropriate weights on the performance measures. Evaluatees' weights of a GRI are compared with average weights of the related Group. Finally in every BSC's perspective, GRIs that have extraordinarily over-scored or under-scored weights are analyzed in terms of GRIs' missions, customers, capability of human resources, etc. In the Basic Research Group, the Korea Basic Science Institute is deviated in the financial perspective and the strategic direction perspectives. In the Public Research Group, Korea Institute of Construction Technology is significantly different from other GRIs in three perspectives. Five out of eight GRIs in the Industrial Research Group, GRIs are significantly different each other in several perspectives. It could be concluded that the current institutional evaluation systems are least appropriate in measuring performance of the GRIs of the Industrial Research Group.