• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.36 no.2
• /
• pp.80-98
• /
• 2008

In the past, the purpose of urban landscape planning was to beautify cities. Now, that is changing as cities with their own characteristic identities and images are focusing on the making of livable cities. The subject of international competition is turning from a country objective to that of individual cities. To increase the attraction of the urban image will, therefore, be the most important and urgent policy in all cities. A city without global competitiveness will be demoted to a sub-city. This study intends to suggest strategic ways to improve the urban image suitable for Korean cities by the analysis and classification of the advanced cases in other countries. This study can be summarized as follows: 1. The image of cities is promoted by diverse strategies such as establishing landmarks, making meaningful places, hosting festivals and sports events, and making cultural policies. These strategies can be classified by three factors: the landscape and ecological factor, the historical and cultural factor, and the administrative and economic factor. 2. Korean cities are making efforts to promote their images through a variety of ways. Mega cities in Korea are steadily carrying out projects to use the administrative and economic factor such as expanding the infrastructure, supporting enterprises, advertising and marketing with accumulated capital. However, local small cities mainly depend on festivals and simple events or programs that are of interest but which lack characteristic identity. 3. Cities of advanced western countries are upgrading their images by finding and applying strategic methods to reflect characteristic identity and to keep in step with the changes of the times. On the other hand, cities in Japan try to promote urban image with traditional native festivals and with the making of livable places based on resident participation. The central government in Korea needs to establish a master plan considering the regional balance to improve the image of each city. Local governments should carry out these diverse strategic methods. The task after benchmarking advanced cities with beautiful landscapes will be to find an 'All-Korean Style' and apply it to cities with characteristic image.

• Journal of Venture Innovation
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.51-65
• /
• 2021

The HR policy in the public sector was closed and operated mainly on written tests, but in 2006, a new evaluation, promotion and education system based on competence was introduced in the promotion and selection system of civil servants. In particular, the seniority-oriented promotion system was evaluated based on competence by operating an Assessment Center related to promotion. Competency evaluation is known to be the most reliable and valid evaluation method among the evaluation methods used to date and is also known to have high predictive feasibility for performance. In 2001, 19 government standard competency models were designed. In 2006, the competency assessment was implemented with the implementation of the high-ranking civil service team system. In the public sector, the purpose of the competency evaluation is mainly to select third-grade civil servants, assign fourth-grade civil servants, and promotion fifth-grade civil servants. However, competency assessments in the public sector differ in terms of competency assessment objectives, assessment processes and competency assessment programmes compared to those in the private sector. For the purposes of competency assessment, the public sector is for the promotion of candidates, and the private sector focuses on career development and fostering. Therefore, it is not continuously developing capabilities than the private sector and is not used to enhance performance in performing its duties. In relation to evaluation items, the public sector generally operates a system that passes capacity assessment at 2.5 out of 5 for 6 competencies, lacks feedback on what competencies are lacking, and the private sector uses each individual's competency score. Regarding the selection and operation of evaluators, the public sector focuses on fairness in evaluation, and the private sector focuses on usability, which is inconsistent with the aspect of developing capabilities and utilizing human resources in the right place. Therefore, the public sector should also improve measures to identify outstanding people and motivate them through capacity evaluation and change the operation of the capacity evaluation system so that they can grow into better managers through accurate reports and individual feedback