• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.95-131
• /
• 2012

This study examines whether the executive turnover and the executive resignation during the term of office affect the performance of Korean state-owned enterprises. The executive turnover in the paper means the comprehensive change of the executives which includes the change after the term of office, the change after consecutive terms and the change during the term of office. The 'resignation' was named for the executive change during the term of office to distinguish from the executive turnover. The study scope of the paper is restrained to the comprehensive executive change itself irrespective of the term of office and the resignation during the term of office. Therefore the natural change of the executive after the term of office or the change after consecutive terms is not included in the study. Spontaneous resignation and forced resignation are not distinguished in the paper as the distinction between the two is not easy. The paper uses both the margin of return on asset and the margin of return on asset adjusted by industry as proxies of the performance of state-owned enterprises. The business nature of state-owned enterprise is considered in the study, the public nature not in it. The paper uses the five year (2004 to 2008) samples of 24 firms designated as public enterprises by Korean government. The analysis results are as follows. First, 45.1% of CEOs were changed a year during the sample period on the average. The average tenure period of CEOs was 2 years and 3 months and 49.9% among the changed CEOs resigned during the term of office. 41.6% of internal auditors were changed a year on the average. The average tenure period of internal auditors was 2 years and 2 months and 51.0% among the changed internal auditors resigned during the term of office. In case of outside directors, on average, 38.2% were changed a year. The average tenure period was 2 years and 7 months and 25.4% among the changed internal directors resigned during the term of office. These statistics show that numerous CEOs resigned before the finish of the three year term in office. Also, considering the tenure of an internal auditor and an outside director which diminished from 3 years to 2 years by an Act on the Management of Public Institutions (applied to the executives appointed since April 2007), it seems most internal auditors resigned during the term of office but most outside directors resigned after the end of the term. Secondly, There was no evidence that the executives were changed during the term of office because of the bad performance of prior year. On the other hand, contrary to the normal expectation, the performance of prior year of the state-owned enterprise where an outside director resigned during the term of office was significantly higher than that of other state-owned enterprises. It means that the clauses in related laws on the executive dismissal on grounds of bad performance did not work normally. Instead it can be said that the executive change was made by non-economic reasons such as a political motivation. Thirdly, the results from a fixed effect model show there were evidences that performance turned negatively when CEOs or outside directors resigned during the term of office. CEO's resignation during the term of office gave a significantly negative effect on the margin of return on asset. Outside director's resignation during the term of office lowered significantly the margin of return on asset adjusted by industry. These results suggest that the executive's change in Korean state-owned enterprises was not made by objective or economic standards such as management performance assessment and the negative effect on performance of the enterprises was had by the unfaithful obeyance of the legal executive term.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.22 no.2 s.37
• /
• pp.413-426
• /
• 1992

In order to analyze the relationship between teeth and basal bone for the maintainance of the good occlusion, the mesiodistal width of teeth, the basal arch width and the basal arch length were measured on the study model of the normal occlusion group and Angle's class I malocclusion group (non-extraction group, extraction group) The Maximum tooth material, the percentage of basal arch width to maximum tooth material, the percentage of basal arch length to maximum tooth material and the percentage of basal arch width plus basal arch length to maximum tooth material were caculated, and then statistical analysis was done. From thie study, the obtained results were as follows; 1. In maxilla, the percentage of basal arch width to maximum tooth material was $46.9{\pm}2.6\%$ in normal occlusion group, $49.4{\pm}3.9\%$ in non-extraction group, and $42.5{\pm}3.3\%$ in extraction group. In mandible, that was $46.6{\pm}2.4\%$ in normal occlusion group, $47.5{\pm}4.0\%$ in non-extraction group, and $42.6{\pm}2.6\%$ in extraction group. 2. In maxilla, the percentage of basal arch length to maximum tooth material was $33.4{\pm}1.9\%$ in normal occlusion group, $33.9{\pm}1.8\%$ in non-extraction group, and $28.7{\pm}2.5\%$ in extraction group. In mandible, that was $34.4{\pm}4.3\%$ in normal occlusion group, $36.5{\pm}1.9\%$ in non-extraction group, and $31.5{\pm}2.5\%$ in extraction group. 3. In maxilla, the percentage of basal arch width plus basal arch length to maximum tooth material was $80.3{\pm}3.4\%$ in normal occlusion group, $83.3{\pm}4.8\%$ in non-extraction group, and $71.2{\pm}4.3\%$ in extraction group. In mandible, that was $81.0{\pm}5.2\%$ in normal occlusion group, $84.0{\pm}5.4\%$ in non-extraction group, and $74.1{\pm}4.1\%$ in extraction group. 4. In Maxilla, the $95\%$ confidence interval of the percentage of basal arch width to maximum tooth material was $46.3-47.5\%$ in normal occlusion group, $48.1-50.7\%$ in non-extraction group, and $41.7-47.2\%$ in extraction group. In mandible, that was $46.1-47.2\%$ in normal occlusion group, $46.1-48.8\%$ in non-extraction group, and $42.0-43.3\%$ in extraction group. 5. In maxilla, the $95\%$ confidence interval of the percentage of basal arch length to maximum tooth material was $32.9-33.9\%$ in normal occlusion group, $33.3-34.5\%$ in non-extraction group, and $28.1-29.2\%$ in extraction group. In mandible, that was $33.4-3.4\%$ in noraml occlusion group, $35.8-37.2\%$ in non-extraction group, and $30.9-33.1\%$ in extraction group. 6. In maxilla, the $95\%$ confidence interval of thepercentage of basel arch width plus basal arch length to maximum tooth material was $79.5-81.0\%$ in normal occlusion group, $81.6-84.9\%$ in non-extraction group, and $70.1-72.2\%$ in extraction group. In mandible, that was $79.8-82.2\%$ in normal occlusion group, $82.1-85.5\%$ in non-extraction group, and $73.1-75.1\%$ in extraction group. 7. There was correlation between maxilla and mandible in the maximum tooth material, the basal arch width, the basal arch length, the percentage of basal arch width to maximum tooth material, the percentage of basal arch length to maximum tooth material and the percentage of basal arch width plus basal arch length to maximum tooth material, but not in the basal arch length of male of the extraction group. * A thesis submitted to the Council of the Graduate School of Kyungpook national University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Dental Science in December, 1991.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.67-75
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The study is to check the specialty of radiotherapists working in the department of radiation oncology and find job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job commitment having an effect on professional parts. After making analysis of the mutual relation, it is to provide radiotechnologists with making progress in the future. Materials and Methods: From March 2 to March 30, we had carried out a survey with email. It is possible to have 272 questionnaires answered in the survey. We make use of SPSS 13.0 for Windows to analyze the data collected for study. Frequency and a percentage are meant to show general characteristics, and t-test and ANOVA to do the difference between general properties and professionalism. Pearson's correlation coefficient also is meant to do the correlation of professionalism, organizational job commitment and job satisfaction, and multiple regression analysis to do the factor for a relevant variable to affect professionalism. Results: There are subdivisions in the professionalism informing us of the self-regulation $17.74{\pm}2.32/3.55{\pm}.46$, a sense of calling $17.58{\pm}2.63/3.52{\pm}.53$, reference of the professional $17.14{\pm}2.39/3.43{\pm}.48$, service to the public $15.97{\pm}2.48/3.19{\pm}50$, and autonomy $15.68{\pm}2.28/3.14{\pm}46$. Grand mean turns out to be $83.89{\pm}7.63$(Summation of items)/$3.37{\pm}0.49$ (Numbers of items). When it comes to a statistical relation between general characteristics and professionalism, the statistics have it that these come within age (P<.001), period of employment (P<.001), education status (P<.05), a monthly income (P<.001), radiotherapists who get a special license (P<.001), the position (P<.001), and an opportunity for developing (P<.001). As a result of organizational commitment, job commitment, and job satisfaction, grand mean in organizational commitment proves to be $80.10{\pm}8.15/3.34{\pm}.34$. There are subvisions showing affective commitment $28.64{\pm}4.61$/3.58, continuance commitment $27.54{\pm}4.22/3.44{\pm}.53$, and normative commitment $23.95{\pm}2.94/2.99{\pm}.37$ in order of precedence. The average grade in job commitment is $32.47{\pm}5.77/3.30{\pm}.60$ and that in job satisfaction is $63.39{\pm}10.16/3.17{\pm}.51$, respectively. We find the positive relationship between professionalism and organizational commitment (r=.522, P<.05), between professionalism and job commitment (r=.444, P<.05), and between professionalism and job satisfaction (r=.507, P<.05). And we also get the positive relationship between organizational commitment and job commitment (r=.549, P<.05), between organizational commitment and job satisfaction (r=.433, P<.05), and between job commitment and job satisfaction (r=.462, P<.05). To catch the factors influencing the professionalism of radiotherapists, we used multiple regression analysis. According to the final model, it appears affective commitment (B=.755, P<.05), normative commitment (B=.305, P<.05), job satisfaction (B=.092, P<.05), an opportunity for developing (B=-1.505, P<.05), and the position (B=-1.155, P<.05) in order of precedence. It seems that explaining influece on $R^2$ is 0.504. Conclusion: The results of the factors that influence professionalism working as radiotherapists in the department of radiation oncology have it that the more affective commitment, normative commitment, and job satisfaction we feel, the more professionalism we recognize. We think that the focus of professionalism is increased if getting the chances for radiotherapists to have little to do with developing opportunities given.