An Analysis of Perceptions by Road Construction Engineers on ICEC Framework at the Time of System Transition, from Responsibility Supervision to Construction Management(I) - Main Focus on ICEC Framework -

The result of responsibility supervision system which has been enforced for the last twenty (20) years since January, 1994 is evaluated, and keeps an eye out the process of unification and absorption of the system into the construction management (CM). As a baseline data for this study, the grade framework of construction engineer's ICEC introduced with CM is summarized. In this manuscript, the questionaire survey for CM and ICEC was conducted toward the target group of road field construction engineers and analyzed the outcome of the respondents' answers. 50% of the respondents have answered positively for the question about converting responsibility supervision to CM. 48% of the respondents from construction works field have answered positively for converting responsibility supervision system to CM while 38% of the respondents from engineers of supervision field have answered positively, less positive than the answers from works field engineers. 46% of overall respondents have answered, however, to maintain the present system of 40%, 40% and 20% on the survey to the question asking the opinion on the ways of calculating ICEC to use the rates : 40% of career, 40% of qualification and 20% of academic achievements. However, it appeared that engineers who have comparative advantages with academic achievements and career, and engineers with lower grade qualification demanded higher rate for career.

책임감리가 건설사업관리(CM)로 전환시 도입된 역량지수(ICEC)에 대한 도로건설기술자들의 인식 분석(I) - 역량지수 등급 체계를 중심으로 -

1994.1월 도입된 책임감리제도의 20년 시행 결과를 평가하고, 이 제도가 건설사업관리(CM)에 흡수 통합된 과정을 살펴보았다. 본 연구의 기초자료로서 건설사업관리와 함께 도입된 건설기술자 역량지수(ICEC) 등급 체계를 요약했다. 본 연구에는 도로분야 건설기술자들을 대상으로 건설사업관리와 역량지수에 대한 설문조사를 실시하고 그 응답자의 반응을 분석한 결과를 수록했다. "책임감리가 건설사업관리로 전환된 점에 대한 의견"을 묻는 설문에 응답자의 50%가 CM으로 전환되어야 한다고 답했다. CM으로 전환되어야 한다고 응답한 시공분야 기술자는 48%인 반면, 감리분야 기술자는 38%로 낮았다. "역량지수를 경력 40%, 자격 40%, 학력 20% 비율로 산정하는 방안에 대한 의견"을 묻는 질문에 '현행과 같은 40%, 40%, 20%가 적정하다'는 응답이 46%였다. 그러나 학 경력자와 등급이 낮은 자격의 기술자들이 경력 비율을 높이라고 요구한 것으로 나타났다.