• Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX
• /
• v.48 no.1
• /
• pp.93-109
• /
• 2018

The Ministry of Strategy and Finance of South Korea accesses public organizations annually for increasing outcomes with effective and clear managements. The management assessment is categorized into the business management applied all organizations and the main business assessed by purposes and characters of organizations. This study analyzes metrical indexes of main businesses with using the logic model and suggests the direction of developing metrical indexes of organizations. Metrical indexes of the Korea Land and Geospatial Informatix Corporation in 2017 were analyzed to develop indexes. The results indicates that metrical indexes of the Korea Land and Geospatial Informatix Corporation are mainly consisted of the commitment and process. The logic model was suggested to analyze proprieties of metrical indexes of the main business. This study shows that organizations develop metrical indexes of the main business with classifying that these are from calculation indexes or result indexes. Thus, this study suggests that organizations consider result indexes based on the logic model for developing metrical indexes of the main business.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2017.05a
• /
• pp.103-113
• /
• 2017

SCI(E)논문은 국가연구개발사업으로부터 도출되는 대표적 1차 산출 성과이며, R&D활동의 흐름을 파악할 수 있는 가장 중요한 지표 중 하나이다. 우리나라는 1980년대 50위권에 머물렀던 SCI(E)논문수가 1990년대를 거치면서 비약적으로 확대되었고, 최근 양적 규모 면에서는 세계 12위 수준을 유지할 만큼 괄목한 만한 성장을 이루었다. 최근 이러한 양적 확대 속에서, 논문의 질적 수준이 정체되고 있다는 문제점이 종종 거론되고 있다. 따라서 우리나라의 SCI(E)논문 성과가 가지는 질적 수준을 평가하기 위해 다양한 노력이 있어 왔다. 대표적인 SCI(E)논문의 질적 지표로 논문 피인용횟수와 저널 영향력지수가 있다. 그러나 이러한 지표는 학문 분야간 인용 특성을 반영하지 못하므로, 국내 연구자 사이에서도 다양한 순위보정영향력지수를 개발하고자 하는 시도가 있어 왔다. 본 논문에서는 그간 개발된 순위보정영향력지수를 추가적으로 보완하여, 보다 의미 있는 지표를 도출하고자 하였으며, 해당 지표를 국가연구개발사업 SCI(E)논문 성과에 적용하여 우리나라 SCI(E)논문 성과의 질적 수준을 검토하였다.

• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.287-304
• /
• 2016

This paper introduces a new bibliometric measure called Quality Factor, which assesses multiple facets of faculty research performance. The computation of Quality factor is based on a combination of publication count, citation count, h-index, and Impact Factor. In order to analyze the relationship between Quality Factor and other bibliometric measures (publication count, citation count, h-index, g-index, Impact Factor), the study collected publication data of 189 Korean Library and Information Science professors from 2001 to 2014 to produce the rankings of the faculty by each bibliometric measure and computed Spearman's rank correlations between the rankings. The overall results showed Quality Factor to be correlated to citation-driven measures (citation count, h-index, g-index), but the scatterplot as well as rank-interval analysis showed Quality Factor to be distinctive and more discriminating than other measures.

• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.48 no.2
• /
• pp.295-322
• /
• 2017

As a first step in developing a more effective and robust approach to faculty research performance assessment, this study analyzed the existing faculty research assessment methods by comparing Korean universities' research evaluation standards, National Research Foundation of Korea's (KRF) standard for assessing research proposals, and various bibliometric measures. The study data included research evaluation standards of KRF along with 27 Korean universities with Library and Information Science (LIS) department, and the publication data of 183 LIS faculties in Korean universities from 2001 to 2015, which consisted of 3,863 papers 16,978 citations. After the comparative analysis of research evaluation standards, the study examined the rankings of institutions and faculty produced by applying the collected standards and bibliometric metrics to the publication data. The study showed that Korean university standards for research evaluation, which aim to consider both productivity and impact of faculty research, differ from similar bibliometric measures such as h-index, and the difference could significantly impact the assessment of faculty research performance.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.494-512
• /
• 2010

Recently diversity of research field is emphasized all over the world. Nations with advanced programs in research field keep developing new R&D programs for interdisciplinary studies. These new research atmospheres need objective validity in evaluation process. Peer review is recognized as a best evaluation method for national research and development programs. However, peer review system has restrictive boundary because of its subjectivity of the reviewer. Scientometrics has been developed as an alternative system to peer review. But the effectiveness of quantitative indicators which also has qualitative aspect is rarely analyzed in real program evaluation. In this study, we suggest distribution of marks of peer review and newly developed quantitative review through analyzing deviations between two different reviews in real national R&D program evaluation. Moreover, we could have significant correlation between two review systems in the same case study.

• Proceedings of the KIEE Conference
• /
• 2006.07a
• /
• pp.382-383
• /
• 2006

본 논문은 에너지절약 및 온실가스 배출감소를 목적으로 시행하고 있는 에너지절약정책 중 산업체 자발적협약(Voluntary Agreement)제도의 정책효과를 계량화하기 위한 접근방법을 제시한다. 시책 추진효과의 계량은 2단계 접근으로, 1단계에서 절감효과(에너지 절감 및 온실가스 저감)를 파악하고, 2단계에서 이를 가치화하는 과정으로 수행된다.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.85-108
• /
• 2013

This paper introduces a new qualitative measurement indicator, Relatively Rank-normalized Impact Factor ($R^2nIF$) that can overcome drawbacks of the existing research performance measures. With the help of this innovative indicator, this study analyzes and compares the quality of research papers across countries and National Science Indicators (NSI) standard academic fields. The development of an improved bibliometric indicator for evaluating the quality of research papers and disentangling the "international" dimension of research performance will be of interest to academics and practitioners alike.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.376-399
• /
• 2008

Science and technology (S&T) is one of the most important elements in a nation's competitiveness. In an effort to strengthen their national competitiveness, all countries are focusing on upgrading the level of eir S&T. With these factors in mind, Korea has increased its support of national research and development (R&D). In recent years, this added support has resulted in an increased interest in the effectiveness of R&D. We have made continuous efforts to enhance the accountability and effectiveness of R&D by strengthening performance evaluation and considering R&D evaluation results during the budget review (appropriation) process. In order to change to a performance based system, we need to develop objective and scientific indicators to measure and evaluate the quality of the research performance of R&D programs. One of the primary research outcomes is publications. The impact factor of publications is widely used to evaluate overall journal quality and the quality of the papers published therein. However, the use of impact factors has been criticised because they can vary greatly when works from different subject areas are compared. In order to overcome this limitation, we have developed three kinds of qualitative indicators, which are functions of the impact factor. Two of these qualitative indicators, Modified Rank Normalized Impact Factor and Ordinal Rank Normalized Impact Factor, are based on order statistics (rank) for all journals from a specific specialty. The third qualitative indicator, Relative Field Impact Factor, uses the average impact factor of all journals within a subject category. We also suggest a quantitative indicator, Percentage of Contribution. In this study, we suggest 4 indicators and use them to evaluate the performance of outcomes from three R&D programs supported by the Ministry of Education, Science & Technology. We also perform a simulation study to verify the effectiveness of the proposed indicators. It can be shown that the proposed Ordinal Rank Normalized Impact Factor is the most reliable and effective indicator for comparing research performance across subject categories. However, we recommend using previous indicators in combination with the proposed indicators in this study for the research evaluation of R&D programs.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.111-134
• /
• 2002

본 연구에서는 건설업종에 특화된 신용평가 모형을 개발하여 건설업종에 대한 부도 예측력를 제고하고자 하였다. 건설업은 여타 업종과는 다른 재무적 특성을 지니고 있다. 특히, 재무적 안정성이 취약하고 자산의 대부분이 매출채권, 재고자산으로 구성되어 유동성이 극히 낮은 실정이다. 본 연구는 이러한 건설업종의 특성을 충분히 감안한 신용평가 모형을 개발하고자 한것이다. 신용평가 모형 중 그 현실적 유용성이 높아 많이 이용되어 오던 신용평점 모형을 개발하였다. 총 2,475개 건설업체를 대상으로 모형구조 및 각종 계량지표 및 비계량지표에 대한 분석을 주로 평균차이 검증과 로짓분석에 의거 선정하였다. 그 결과 새로운 신용평점 모형은 매출액 경상이익률, 총 현금흐름 대 차입금 비율 등 9개의 재무지표와 5분류의 비재무지표로 구성되었다. 이 모형을 기존의 신용평점모형과 비교한 결과 신규모형의 변별력이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구가 제시한 신용평점모형과 그 개발 방법이 향후 금융기관들의 부실을 줄이고 결과적으로 수익성을 개선하는데 일조하리라 기대된다.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2017.11a
• /
• pp.941-967
• /
• 2017

제조혁신 기술로서 엔지니어링 모델링 & 시뮬레이션(이하, Eng. M&S) 기술은 제조패러다임을 바꿀 대안기술로 주목되고 있으며, 해당분야 국가수준에서의 기술정책 육성을 위해 경쟁력 분석이 우선적으로 선행되어야 한다. 이를 위해 제조업에서 Eng. M&S가 갖는 의미를 고찰하고, 기존에 정립된 특허, 논문 계량 분석 경쟁력 평가모형을 기반으로 Eng. M&s 기술적 특성을 반영한 시장 관점에서 지표를 추가하여 Eng. M&S 기술에 대한 각국의 경쟁력을 도출을 시도하였다. 또한 모형의 통계적 검증을 통해 기존 계량정보 기반 평가모형보다 다양한 정보에 의한 높은 설명력을 확인하였고, 이에 따라 추가된 시장지표의 유용성을 확인할 수 있었다. Eng. M&S 기술경쟁력 분석 결과, 한국의 경쟁력은 최고기술보유국가인 미국대비 절반 수준으로 7개 주요국 중 가장 낮게 평가되었으며, 도출된 결과를 기반으로 경쟁국들의 정책적 노력에 대해 논의하였다. 본 연구를 통해 설계역량이 현저히 낮다고 평가된 한국 제조환경에 맞는 Eng. M&S 기술 육성 정책 수립이 필요하며, 보다 근본적인 차원에서의 해당 기술 활용을 촉구하는 바이다.