Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회논문지)

The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis on the effects that affect the organizational achievement by each factor of the multi-rater feedback system of public enterprises

공기업 다면평가제도의 각 요인별 조직성과에 미치는 영향 분석

  • Kang, Jae-An (Hoseo Graduate School of Venture Information department of business and administration) ;
  • Cho, Sung-sook (Hoseo Graduate School of Venture Information department of business and administration)
  • 강재언 (호서대학교 벤처전문대학원 정보경영학과) ;
  • 조성숙 (호서대학교 벤처전문대학원 정보경영학과)
  • Published : 2009.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study, centering on public enterprises, has been conducted from 4 different perspectives such as grasping the effects that the factor precedent of the multi-rater feedback affects on the usefulness of evaluation and the effects that the usefulness of evaluation affects on the organizational achievement, checking on whether there is any discrepancy among the effects affecting on the usefulness of evaluation in accordance with the degree of advance training on the evaluation system, and being what kind of effects the usefulness of valuation that the appraised eventually understand affects on the organizational achievement. As result of the study, the factor precedent that are confidence of the appraisers and the support from CEO reasonably affected on the usefulness of evaluation, but the standard referred to evaluation was not reasonable. It became resultantly clear that the confidence of the appraisers held the effect of control from the verification of whether there is the effect of control between the factor precedent and the usefulness of evaluation in accordance with the degree of advance training. However, it turned out that the standard referred to evaluation and the support from CEO held no effect of control. As result, It was possible to confirm that the usefulness of evaluation in this study affects directly or indirectly to the organizational achievement such as organizational immersion, job satisfaction, self development opportunity, and organizational revitalization as influenced by the prior factors, and the advance training was partially effective on the adjusting effect.

본 연구는 공기업을 중심으로 다면평가제도의 선행요인이 평가효용성에 미치는 영향과 평가효용성이 조직성과에 미치는 영향을 파악하고 평가제도의 사전교육정도에 따라 평가효용성에 미치는 영향에 차이가 있는지를 알아보고 궁극적으로 피평가자가 인식하는 평가효용성이 조직성과에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 4가지 관점에서 연구하였다. 연구 결과 선행요인인 평가자 신뢰성, 최고경영자의 지지는 평가효용성에 유의한 영향을 미치고 있으나 평가준거는 유의적이지 못하였다. 사전교육의 정도에 따라 선행요인과 평가효용성 간에 조절효과가 있는지를 검증한 결과 평가자 신뢰성은 조절효과가 있는 것으로 판명되었다. 그러나 평가준거, 최고경영자의 지지는 조절효과가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 결과적으로 본 연구의 평가효용성이 선행요인의 영향을 받아서 조직의 성과 즉, 조직몰입도, 직무만족도, 자기계발기회, 조직활성화에 직접 또는 간접적으로 영향을 미치며, 사전교육이 부분적으로 조절효과가 있는 것으로 확인할 수 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김태룡. 안희정, 한국형 팀제가 조직효과성에 미치는 영향, 한국행정논집, 2007.
  2. 박중훈 결과중심의 성과측정 및 성과관리체제에 관한 연구, 한국행정연구원, 1999.
  3. 윤소연, 김범준 "다면평가에서의 부정성 효과", 한국산업 및 조직심리학회,Vol.17, 2004,
  4. 오세희, 교육행정기관 공무원의 다면평가제도에 관한 연구, 동아대학교 대학원 박사학위논문, 2007.
  5. 이종수, 윤영진, 백종섭, 권해수, 곽채기, 윤태범, 이재원, 다면평가제도, 새 행정학(서울 : 대영문화사), p.467, 2005.
  6. 정학룡, 다면평가시스템변수와 반응번수간의 영향에 관한 연구,고려대학교 경영대학원 석사학위 논문, 1997.
  7. 중앙인사위원회, 다면평가운영요령 및 우수사례집, 2007.
  8. 한인근, 전략적 인사관리를 위한 공무원 평가제도의 개선 방안, 동아대학교 사회과학논집, 제24집 제2호, p. 201-202, 2005.
  9. 황요성, 다면평가제도의 개인수용성 결정요인과 개선 효과에 관한 연구 경희대학교 대학원 박사학위 논문, 2007.
  10. Antonioni, D. Predictors of upward appraisal ratings, Journal of Managerial Issues, 6-1, pp. 26-36, 1999.
  11. Barclay, J. H. & Harland, L. K. Peerperformance appraisal: The impact of rater competence, rater location, andrating correctability on fairness perceptions, Group & Oraganization Management, 20-1, pp. 39-60, 1995.
  12. Brotherton, P. candid Feedback Spurs Change in Culture, HR Magaxine, Vol.41(5), pp. 65-74, 1996.
  13. Cleveland, J. M., Murphy, K. R. & Williams, "Multiple Uses of Performance Appraisal:Prevalence and Correlates," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74, pp. 130-135, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.130
  14. Dipboye, R. L., de pontbriand, R. "Correlates of Employee Reactions to Performance Appraisal Systems", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 66, No. 2, pp.248-251,1981. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.2.248
  15. Dyer. L. & Reeves, "Human esource Strategies and Firm Performance: What do we know and where do we need to go- International Journal of Human Resource Management 6(3):566-670, 1995.
  16. Facteau, C. L. & Craig., S. B."Are Performance Appraisal Ratings from Different Rating Sorurces Comparable", Jouranlof Applied Paychology 86.pp. 215-227, 2001.
  17. Facteau, C. & Joyce, E, Reactions of leaders to 360 degree feedback from ubordinates and peers, Leadership Quarterly, No.4, pp. 427-448, 1998.
  18. Fedor. D. B. & Betten hausen, K. L. The impact of purpose, Participant, 1989.
  19. Higgison, J. K. & Alam, R. E., "Supply chain management techniques in medium-to-small manufacturing firms", The International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(2),19-31, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574099710805646
  20. Hoffman, R. "Ten Reasons You Should be Using 360 degree Feedback", Human Resouce anagement, Vol. 32, Vol. 40(4), April, 1995.
  21. Ilgen, D. R, Fisher, C. D. & Taylor, M. S. Consequences of individual feedback on begavior in Organizations, Jouranl of Applied Psychology, 64-4, 349-371, 1979.
  22. Joel Moses, et. al., Other people's expectation. Human Resource Management. Vol. 32, 1993
  23. Lepsinger, R. & Lucia, A. "The Art and Science of 360 Feedback", Jossey-Bass-Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA,1997.
  24. London, M. "Job Feedback; Giving, Seeking, and Using Feedback for Performance Improvement", Mahwah, NJ; Erlbaum, 1997.
  25. Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D. & Zacharia, Z. G."Defining supply chain", Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), 1-24, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2001.tb00001.x
  26. Nathan, B. R. Mohrman A. M. Milliman, Jr, J. Interpersonal Relations as a Context for the Effects of Appraisal Interviews on Perormance and Satisfaction", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, No.2, pp.352-369, 1991. https://doi.org/10.2307/256446
  27. Robert., G. E. "Maximizing Performance Appraisal System Acceptance: Perspectives form Municipal Government Personnel Administrators",Public Personnel management, 23-4, pp. 525-549, 1994.
  28. Rogg, Schmidt, Shull & Schmitt, 2001.
  29. Whitener, E. M. "Do high commitment Human Resource Practices Affect Employee Commitment-Across-Level Analysis Using Hierarchical Liner Modeling."Journal of Management 27(5): 515-535, 2001.
  30. Wimmer, S. & Norwack, K. M. "Common Mistakes Using 360-degree Feedback", Training & Development, 52(5), pp.69-80,1998.