• 산업융합연구
• /
• 제18권6호
• /
• pp.61-73
• /
• 2020

본 연구는 고령친화마을 만들기를 위한 노인일자리 참여 노인의 갈등경험을 탐색하여 갈등해결을 유형화하는데 목적이 있다. 본 연구는 질적 연구방법인 근거이론을 적용하였으며, 자료수집을 위해 서울시 ◯◯구 ◯◯동에서 노인일자리 참여자 5명을 표본 추출하여 FGI를 실시하였다. 자료분석은 Strauss & Corbin(1998)의 패러다임 모형에 맞추어 분석하였다. 분석결과, 인과적 조건은 사회적, 경제적, 심리·신체적 참여동기로, 맥락적 조건은 경제적 어려움, 사회적 단절, 삶의 경험 차이가 갈등유발에 영향을 미쳤다. 중심현상은 '경험과 역할의 차이'와 '심리·사회관계 기술의 차이'에 의해 갈등이 시작되고, 중재적 조건은 갈등해소를 위한 의사소통을 통해 대인관계 활성화, 능력 활용을 통한 사회통합, 규칙적인 사회활동으로 나타났다. 상호작용 전략은 교육하기, 신뢰감 형성을 위한 상호지지, 성공적인 고령친화마을 프로그램 운영으로 노인일자리 갈등해소 전략으로 나타났다. 결과는 자신의 삶 찾기, 지역사회교류 활성화, 성취감 증가, 공동체 의식이 성장함으로써 노인일자리 갈등이 완화되는 것으로 나타났다. 결론적으로 노인일자리 갈등 해결 유형은 교육 해결형, 상호지지 해결형, 성공 경험 해결형으로 유형화되었다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제28권2호
• /
• pp.3-43
• /
• 2018

The emergence of a multi-door courthouse is related with a couple of reasons as follows: First, a multi-door courthouse was originally initiated by the United States government that increasingly became impatient with the pace and cost of protracted litigation clogging the courts. Second, dockets of courts are overcrowded with legal suits, making it difficult for judges to handle those legal suits in time and causing delays in responding to citizens' complaints. Third, litigation is not suitable for the disputant that has an ongoing relationship with the other party. In this case, even if winning is achieved in the short run, it may not be all that was hoped for in the long run. Fourth, international organizations such as the World Bank, UNDP, and Asia Development Bank urge to provide an increased access to women, residents, and the poor in local communities. The generic model of a multi-door courthouse consists of three stages: The first stage includes a center offering intake services, along with an array of dispute resolution services under one roof. At the second stage, the screening unit at the center would diagnose citizen disputes, then refer the disputants to the appropriate door for handling the case. At the third stage, the multi-door courthouse provides diverse kinds of dispute resolution programs such as mediation, arbitration, mediation-arbitration (med-arb), litigation, and early neutral evaluation. This study suggests the extended model of multi-door courthouse comprised of five layers: intake process, diagnosis and door-selection process, neutral-selection process, implementation process of dispute resolution, and process of training and education. One of the major characteristics of extended multi-door courthouse model is the detailed specification of individual department corresponding to each process within a multi-door courthouse. The intake department takes care of the intake process. The screening department plays the role of screening disputes, diagnosing the nature of disputes, and determining a suitable door to handle disputes. The human resources department manages experts through the construction and management of the data base of mediators, arbitrators, and judges. The administration bureau manages the implementation of each process of dispute resolution. The education and training department builds long-term planning to procure neutrals and experts dealing with various kinds of disputes within a multi-door courthouse. For this purpose, it is necessary to establish networks among courts, law schools, and associations of scholars in order to facilitate the supply of manpower in ADR neutrals, as well as judges in the long run. This study also provides six case studies of multi-door courthouses across continents in order to grasp the worldwide picture and wide spread phenomena of multi-door courthouse. For this purpose, the United States and Latin American countries including Argentina and Brazil, Middle Eastern countries, and Southeast Asian countries (such as Malaysia and Myanmar), Australia, and Nigeria were chosen. It was found that three kinds of patterns are discernible during the evolution of a multi-door courthouse model. First, the federal courts of the United States, land and environment court in Australia, and Lagos multi-door courthouse in Nigeria may maintain the prototype of a multi-door courthouse model. Second, the judicial systems in Latin American countries tend to show heterogenous patterns in terms of the adaptation of a multi-door courthouse model to their own environments. Some court systems of Latin American countries including those of Argentina and Brazil resemble the generic model of a multi-door courthouse, while other countries show their distinctive pattern of judicial system and ADR systems. Third, it was found that legal pluralism is prevalent in Middle Eastern countries and Southeast Asian countries. For example, Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia have developed various kinds of dispute resolution methods, such as sulh (mediation), tahkim (arbitration), and med-arb for many centuries, since they have been situated at the state of tribe or clan instead of nation. Accordingly, they have no unified code within the territory. In case of Southeast Asian countries such as Myanmar and Malaysia, they have preserved a strong tradition of customary laws such as Dhammthat in Burma, and Shriah and the Islamic law in Malaysia for a long time. On the other hand, they incorporated a common law system into a secular judicial system in Myanmar and Malaysia during the colonial period. Finally, this article proposes a couple of factors to strengthen or weaken a multi-door courthouse model. The first factor to strengthen a multi-door courthouse model is the maintenance of flexibility and core value of alternative dispute resolution. We also find that fund raising is important to build and maintain the multi-door courthouse model, reflecting the fact that there has been a competition surrounding the allocation of funds within the judicial system.

• 마케팅과학연구
• /
• 제20권2호
• /
• pp.199-207
• /
• 2010

"对我们而言, 成为一名负责的公民和一份成功的事业之间没有区别.....他们对今天的沃尔玛是完全一样的." Lee Scott, 沃尔玛的CEO在2005年卡崔琳娜飓风灾难之后(Esty and Winston 2006) Lee Scott的声明标志着可持续发展的一个新的时代. 作为一个被全球生产商和零售商所关注的全世界最大规模的经销商确认了他们的可持续发展的意图. 近十年来, 环保运动不断增长, 并扩展到全世界. 公司已经诞生, 产品已被创造, 学术期刊 已经展开, 政府已经承诺—所有这一切都在追求可持续发展(Peattie and Crane 2005). 虽然进展的确比一些人渴望的慢了一些, 但是很多大规模的经销商已经为环保做出了可持续发展的努力. 为了更好的理解这个运动我们同时提供高管和消费者参与的有包装的消费品产业的角度. 该研究依赖于三个潜在主题: (1)概念和证据表明,公司为很多理由进行可持续发展 (2)在有包装的消费品行业中, 可持续发展活动的数量在持续增长 (3), 因此, 必须探索可持续发展在消费者意识中起的作用. 根据这些主题, 143名大学生和101名企业高管参加了调查来评估一系列的有关可持续发展的变量包括愿意支付, 行为意图, 态度和偏好. 结果显示高层管理者相信可持续发展的三个最主要的原因是(1)盈利能力的机会; (2)以实现对环境的义务; (3)对顾客和股东负责. 大学生的三大原因: (1)对环境的责任; (2)为子孙后代负责, 和(3):一种有效的管理资源. 虽然企业高管和大学生对支持可持续发展的理由不同, 但是企业高管和消费者的报告显示了对剩下大部分的可持续发展问题的相似性. 另外, 当我们要求消费者去评估6个关键问题的重要性时(医疗保健, 经济, 教育, 犯罪, 政府支出, 和环境), 保护环境仅排在第四位(Carlson 2005). 这6个问题都被认为是重要的, 三个最重要的是(1)改善教育;(2)本地区的经济发展,以及(3)卫生保健. 为了可持续发展的持续性, 我们也将预期结果. 反映社会, 企业利益表现的新定义和执行期的延长同样被揭示出来(Ehrenfeld 2005; Hitchcock and Willard 2006). 基于文献我们发现了三个基本范畴的结果:(1)改进组成的满意度, (2)分化的机会, 以及(3)金融奖励. 在每一种分类中, 我们发现从可持续发展活动中导致11种不同结果的几个特定的结果. 我们的调查结果表明,最有可能的结果最高的前五项依序为公司的可持续发展追求的是:(1)绿色的消费者将会更令人满意;(2)公司形象会更好, (3)公司的责任将得到加强, (4)会降低能源成本;(5)产品将会更多的创新. 另外, 为更好的理解消费者的环境 "身份" 和在市场购买中愿意显示出这个 "身份" 的有趣的交集, 我们扩展了以前Experian Research(2008) 的研究. 因此,受访者分为四个不同类型的绿色消费者(行为绿色,想法绿色, 潜在绿色, 或真正褐色)来获得更好的理解绿色消费者. 我们评估这些消费者愿意从事环保行为评估三种选择. (1)购物零售商支持环保措施;(2)支付更多来保护环境, 以及(3)支付更高的税收,政府可以支持环保措施. 想法绿色消费者表示最愿意改变, 紧随其后的是行为绿色消费者, 潜在绿色消费者和褐色消费者. 这些差异都是显著的(p<.01). 结论和启示我们采用描述性研究, 旨在促进我们理解战略领域的可持续性. 确切地说, 该研究以特定的偏好, 意图, 愿意支付, 行为和态度填补了进行比较与对比的持续性的商业管理者和消费者意见的文献的空白, 对从业人员, 能获得一个战略观点. 此外, 许多结果已经说明, 受访者愿意为产品付出更多来保护环境. 其他特定的结果表明, 女性受访者始终比男性强愿意交流, 为这些产品付更多的钱, 在环保的零售商. 了解这些额外的信息, 实践者现在有了更多的特定市场, 对目标和交流他们为可持续发展所做出的努力. 虽然这项研究仅仅是最初的一步了解实践者和消费者对于可持续发展的异同, 我们的结果对实践与研究都有帮助. 未来的研究应向测试其他变量的影响关系, 以及其他特殊行业.