• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.67-114
• /
• 2004

This study attempts to integrate causal model with competitiveness evaluation model, both of which have developed independently of each other, in connection with many studies on PMES (performance measurement and evaluation system) including the BSC (balanced scorecard) of Kaplan and Norton (1992, 1996). For this attempt, this study is composed of four analyses : First, this study develops a structural model for evaluating and diagnosing corporate ‘comprehensive’ competitiveness including quality competitiveness, derive CCI (comprehensive competitiveness index) and QCI (quality competitiveness index) ; Second, this study analyzes the determinants of quality competitiveness, the impacts of quality competitiveness, on product design and product reliability, and the impacts of product design and product reliability on quality competitiveness in the comprehensive competitiveness evaluation model of this study. Third, this study empirically identifies the positioning of product design in the quality competitiveness evaluation model of this study and the functional relationship between product design and other functions : product development, manufacturing, marketing, and marketing, and sales in the same comprehensive competitiveness evaluation model, estimate the determinants of product design and its impacts, thereby providing some empirical findings for the foundation of design management theory, and Fourth, this study identifies the positioning of product reliability in the same quality competitiveness evaluation model, estimate the reliability function and the functional relationship between product reliability and other dimensions of product quality, and tests the hypotheses on the causality of product reliability.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2011.11a
• /
• pp.185-187
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study is to develop and apply the oversea construction competitiveness evaluation model which measures the competitiveness of construction companies in global construction market. This model consists of the design and construction competitiveness indexes by ENR statistic data and provides the oversea construction competitiveness index based on the evaluation model.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2017.10a
• /
• pp.1-7
• /
• 2017

Korea's domestic construction market and overseas construction order environment are experiencing a decreasing trend, and this trend is expected to continue. Therefore, domestic construction companies are seeking to enter the global construction market. This study analyzes the global construction market and the global competitiveness for global construction companies and provides the results. To this end, this study has developed a model to evaluate the global construction competitiveness level and to evaluated global construction competitiveness in 2016. The evaluation of global construction competitiveness was analyzed based on the competitiveness of construction infrastructure by country, and the evaluation results of competitiveness of construction companies. These assessments were based on 20 detailed international statistics (ENR, Global Insight, Compass, etc.). The evaluation results are as follows. First, in regard to the comprehensive global construction competitiveness by country, America ranked first among 20 countries, followed by China. European countries like Spain, Germany and the Netherlands ranked third to fifth, respectively. Korea ranked sixth, one rank higher than that of the previous year. America and European countries remain strong. Second, in regard to the comprehensive building infrastructure competitiveness by country, America ranked first followed by Germany. Korea ranked twelfth, which is the same rank as that of the previous year. When it comes to stability in the construction market, China ranked first and Korea eighth. For construction systems, Sweden ranked first and Korea thirteenth, and for infrastructure, Japan ranked first and Korea tenth. Third, according to the construction company's capability evaluation by country, America ranked first followed by China. Korea ranked fourth, two ranks higher than that of the previous year because of its building competitiveness (fifth → fourth) and design competitiveness (eleventh → eighth) which has improved. When it comes to building competitiveness, China ranked first and Korea fourth. For design competitiveness, America ranked first and Korea eighth, and for price competitiveness, India ranked first and Korea seventh. However, Korea is still in the middle of the pack rank among the 20 countries considered when it comes to design competitiveness. It is ranked eleventh for design productivity and thirteenth for foreign sales against the total sales (internationalization). Thus, Korea needs to improve technical power and tap into new markets for improved competitiveness, including increased productivity. To do so, more R&D investment is required.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.35 no.8
• /
• pp.677-682
• /
• 2011

Masan port is a representative port of Kyungnam region, and proceeds to work port development for the future. However, Analytical research related to current competitiveness and strategies for the future of Masan port have been little studied since then. Thus, the aim of this paper is to analyze the current competitiveness level of Masan port. To achieve this abjective, evaluation model based on empirical data was established. And then FHP-based index model that calculate competitiveness level of port was adopted. To analysis competitiveness of Masan port, Data from shippers calling at Masan port were collected. The result of data analysis showed that current competitiveness level of Masan port was 63.

• International Journal of Contents
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.66-86
• /
• 2020

With the rapid growth of high-tech, the development of cultural and creative industries has gradually become the focus of national industrial development. With the proposal of China's "Belt and Road" strategy, the role of cultural and creative industries in the provinces and cities along the "Belt and Road" in the entire international trade is becoming increasingly critical. It is necessary to explore solutions to improve the competitiveness of China's cultural and creative industries, factoring the surrounding cities of the "Belt and Road" as an example. Thus, this paper proposes the six-element diamond model based on innovation capability and government support to render a comprehensive evaluation of the competitiveness of the cultural and creative industries in the 31 provinces and cities across the country. The results show that the overall competitiveness of the 18 provinces and cities along the "Belt and Road" cultural and creative industries is weak. Focusing on the 18 provinces and cities along the "Belt and Road", using the linear regression measurement model quantitative analysis, the four types of influencing factors affecting the development of the competitiveness of cultural and creative industries along the "Belt and Road" were obtained. Finally, according to the four types of influence, the competitiveness improvement plan is proposed from the four aspects: government role, consumption preference, industrial innovation ability, and the introduction of high-quality talent.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2011.05b
• /
• pp.111-114
• /
• 2011

Korea construction industry needs to secure its competitiveness in global construction markets and to urgently find out the proper approaches in consideration of the current situation of Korean construction enterprises and environmental changes in the international market. Korea has national plan to improve the competitive level of the construction industry. Expecially, Government is trying to build the global system in construction industry. But there are no the related national competitive date. Therefore, this paper suggested national competitive indicators and development direction in construction industry. And this research has presented the competitiveness analysis of construction industry with the consideration of condition of infrastructure, transparency and technological competitiveness.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2014.05a
• /
• pp.6-7
• /
• 2014

The objective of this study is the competitiveness evaluation of oversea construction by country in order to provide preliminary data of government policy in 2013. In result the United States ranked first, followed by China(2nd), Germany(3rd), France(4th), and Spain(5th), while Korea ranked 7th overall. In particular, Korea's competitiveness in the construction infrastructures by country ranking(8th) was lower than the competency evaluation results of construction companies by country, therein ranking 7th.

• Journal of Information Technology Services
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.373-386
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this research is to develop a model for efficient service R&D investment in government budgeting process. It is necessary to develop an efficient and effective investment model to improve competitiveness of the service industry and national economy. Various existing types of service R&D classification have been reviewed. And object-oriented service R&D request classification types have been derived. A tentative model for evaluating service R&D requests have been developed through extensive discussions on effective methodologies. The model has been refined and revised by four service budgeting experts. The revised and refined checklists and guidelines have been used for 40 real service R&D requests evaluations. As a result, a full model for service R&D evaluation and budgeting has been proved to be useful. Also, a need for more efficient and concise evaluation model has been raised through this evaluation process. A brief model with only 10 checklists has been developed and its usefulness has been proven by pilot test with 10 real service R&D requests. The results of this study can be used for evaluation of service R&D proposals and effective budgeting of R&D requests for improving global competitiveness. Further research is needed for refining the developed evaluation models.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2009.05a
• /
• pp.876-882
• /
• 2009

With overall opening of global construction market by World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements, importance of management efficiency of construction industry which considers both tangible and intangible assets is recently being recognized in our nation. That is, efforts for reinforcement of competitiveness must be placed through maximization of values of internal and external intangible assets of construction industry such as management innovation, information, investment in technology and R&D and intellectual property. Accordingly in this study, evaluation criteria for intangible assets of construction industry were investigated and classified. Using such criteria, evaluation index and model were established based on the degree of importance of each criterion. The purpose of this study is to review importance of intangible assets in terms of competitiveness and management efficiency of construction industry and to provide basic data for establishment of intangible assets and revitalization of investment.

• Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.166-188
• /
• 1998

The following study has been undertaken to build a model for evaluating the level of quality competitiveness of Korean companies in the area of information management. The objective of this paper is to compare the difference in quality-based competitiveness between the 100 advanced companies and other companies in IT management. This empirical study provides the questionnaire and the rating criteria for evaluation, so that any Korean company can easily evaluate their competitiveness. The model, the criteria and the results of this study can be used as a basis for benchmarking. The result indicates that the 100 advanced companies' quality competitiveness is significantly higher than that of most other companies that were surveyed in this study.