경영과학 (Korean Management Science Review)

한국경영과학회 (The Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

문화기술 관련 산학협력 연구과제의 속성들에 대한 컨조인트 분석

Conjoint Analysis on the Academia-Industrial Cooperative Research Project Attributes for Culture Technology Research

  • 정욱 (동국대학교 경영대학 서울캠퍼스)
  • 투고 : 2011.09.15
  • 심사 : 2012.09.11
  • 발행 : 2012.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

As culture technology is recognized as the important element of national industry, the necessity of the related policy development for enhancement of culture technology is magnified. In this study, we use conjoint analysis to investigate how the researchers from industry and academia think differently on the importance of several attributes in government-supported culture technology research project such as research period, size of research fund, inter-affiliated research requirement and interdisciplinary research requirement, and preference on those attribute levels. Also, we describes how a simulation experiment is designed to simulate participation shares of four alternative hypothetical research project profiles. This study will help establish the more effective policy of the national research program by understanding the preferential differences between industry and academia on the research project attributes.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 윤영한, 이광범, "Culture Technology를 활용한 문화산업의 국제경쟁력 강화방안", 한국무역학회 2003년도 춘계학술발표대회 발표논문집, (2003), pp.529-555.
  2. 임학순, "예술과 문화기술(CT)의 연계를 위한 문화정책의 과제", 예술경영연구, 제16권(2010), pp.57-76.
  3. 조용래, 김원준, "문화기술(CT) 분류체계 및 표준화에 관한 연구", 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 제9권, 제7호(2009), pp.184-192. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.7.184
  4. Agarwal, M.K. and P.E. Green, "Adaptive Conjoint Analysis versus Self-Explicated Models： Some Empirical Results," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol.8 (1991), pp.141-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(91)90021-X
  5. Beaver, D.D., "Reflections on Scientific Collaboration, (and Its Study), Past, Present, and Future," Scientometrics, Vol.52, No.3(2001), pp.365-377. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014254214337
  6. Dunk, A.S. and A. Kilgore, "Top Management Involvement in R&D Budget Setting： The Importance of Financial Factors, Budget Targets and R&D Performance Evaluation," Advances in Management Accounting, Vol. 11(2003), pp.191-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-7871(02)11008-2
  7. Green, P.E. and A.M. Krieger, "An Application of a Product Positioning Model to Pharmaceutical Products," Marketing Science, Vol.11(1992), pp.117-132. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.11.2.117
  8. Green, P.E. and V.R. Rao, "Conjoint Measurement for Quantifying Judgemental Data," Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.8(1971), pp.355-363. https://doi.org/10.2307/3149575
  9. Heinze, T. and S. Kuhlmann, "Across institutional boundaries? Research collaboration in German public sector nanoscience," Research Policy, Vol.37(2008), pp.888-899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.009
  10. Katz, S.J. and B.R. Martin, "What is Research Collaboration?," Research Policy, Vol.26 (1997), pp.1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
  11. Sanchez, A.M. and M. Perez, "R&D project efficiency management in the Spanish industry," International Journal of Project Management, Vol.20(2002), pp.545-560. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(01)00024-2
  12. SPSS Software Products, SPSS Conjoint 17.0, SPSS Software Products, Chicago, IL, 2007.