DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Selection of R&D Supervision Institution of Weapon Systems Using Delphi and AHP

델파이 및 AHP를 활용한 연구개발 주관기관 선정에 관한 연구

  • Kim, Jin-Hyeon (Directorate of Technology Planning, Defense Agency for Technology and Quality) ;
  • Lee, Ho-Jin (Directorate of Technology Planning, Defense Agency for Technology and Quality)
  • 김진현 (국방기술품질원 기술기획본부) ;
  • 이호진 (국방기술품질원 기술기획본부)
  • Received : 2019.08.23
  • Accepted : 2019.10.04
  • Published : 2019.10.31

Abstract

Based on the characteristics of the weapon system, a government-funded research institute or a defense industry company is selected as the R&D supervision institution. On the other hand, research for the selection of a R&D supervision institution has not been conducted actively. This paper proposes a methodology for selecting R&D supervision institutions, such as procedure and indices. First, candidates of the index were obtained using data investigation and consulting, and five indices were deduced using Delphi. The weight of the indices was set using AHP. The high element consisted of 'Technical elements' and 'Business element'. The low element of 'Technical elements' consisted of 'Possession and readiness of critical technology' and 'Experience of similar R&D'. The low element of 'Business element' consisted of 'Base circumstance of the project', 'Risk management', and 'Will for the project'. The total weights of the indices were 'Possession and readiness of critical technology' 0.405, 'Experience of similar R&D' 0.297, 'Base circumstance of the project' 0.124, 'Risk management' 0.127, and 'Will for the project' 0.047. The indices were applied to the 00 weapon system and the result was deduced.

국내 무기체계 연구개발은 사업의 특성을 고려하여 정부 출연 연구소 또는 국내 업체 중 한 곳이 주관하여 추진한다. 그러나 그동안 연구개발 주관기관 선정을 위한 평가항목 및 절차 등에 대한 연구는 부족하였다. 이에 본 연구에서는 연구개발 주관기관 선정에 필요한 절차, 항목 등이 포함된 방법론을 제시하고자 한다. 먼저 연구개발 주관기관 평가항목을 객관화하기 위해 과거 사례 조사, 전문가 자문을 통해 평가항목 후보군을 작성하였다. 델파이 설문을 통해 최종적으로 '핵심기술 보유/준비 현황' 등 5개의 항목이 선정되었으며, 계층분석법(AHP: Analytic Hierarchy Process, 이하 AHP)을 통하여 평가항목 간 가중치를 설정하였다. 가중치는 대분류에서 '기술적 요소', '사업적 요소'로 분류하였으며, '기술적 요소'의 하위요소는 '핵심기술 보유/준비현황', '유사체계 경험'으로, '사업적 요소'의 하위요소는 '위험요소 관리', '사업수행 기반 여건', '사업참여의지'로 분류하였다. 각 평가항목의 최종가중치는 '핵심기술 보유/준비현황(0.405)'이 가장 높게 나타났으며, 그 다음으로 '유사체계 경험(0.297)', '위험요소 관리(0.127)', '사업수행 기반 여건(0.124)', '사업참여의지(0.047)'의 순으로 나타났다. 도출된 평가항목은 00 체계의 사례에 적용하여 그 결과를 확인하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Defense Science and Technology Glossary[Internet], Defense Agency for Technology and Quality, c2013 [cited 2013 December 16], Available From : http://dtims.dtaq.re.kr:8070/search/main/index.do (accessed Aug. 21, 2019)
  2. Defense Acquisition Management Regulation, Defense Acquisition Program Administration, Korea, 2019.
  3. M. C. Seong, 18-22 Defense Industry Development Master Plan, Policy Report, Defense Acquisition Program Administration, Korea, pp.38-74.
  4. K. W. Park, K. Y. Lee, C. H. Kim, S. Y. Choi, "A study on knowledge-based alternatives analysis model(KAAM) for the best decision making in weapon systems acquisition", Journal of the Military Operations Research Society Of Korea, Vol.33, No.1, pp.1-18, June. 2007.
  5. G. A. Wilson, H. Buller, "The use of socio- economic and environmental indicators in assessing the effectiveness of EU agri-environmental policy", European Environment, Vol.11, No.6, pp.297-313, Nov. 2001. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eet.273
  6. S. Park, Y. W. Hong, J. K. Na, "A method for selecting the evaluating index of defense R&D project by AHP", Journal of Korean Data & Information Science Society, Vol.23, No.5, pp.961-970, 2012. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2012.23.5.961
  7. C. H. Lawshe, "A quantitative approach to content validity", Personnel Psychology, Vol.28, No.4, pp.563-575, 1975. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  8. C. H. Lee, "Group Decision Theory", Sejong Publishers, p.312, 2010
  9. 2013 Defense Acquisitions Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs, Report to Congressional Committees, Government Accountability Office, USA, p.132.