• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.117-154
• /
• 2006

This research examines performance evaluatees' opinions regarding the current institutional performance evaluation systems of Government S&T Research Institutes (GRIs). Under the current evaluation systems, twenty GRIs are grouped into three Research Groups and each Group has its own evaluation systems. One problem of the current institutional evaluation systems is that the systems cannot reflect individual GRIs' characteristics. The following methods are used. First, based on four perspectives of Kaplan & Norton(1992)'s Balanced Scorecard(BSC) model, six perspectives appropriate to GRUs' characteristics are derived. Second, experts classify current performance evaluation measures into the six perspectives. This enables different evaluation systems of three GRI Research Groups to be compared under the same evaluation measures. Third, GRIs' evaluatees are asked to allocate appropriate weights on the performance measures. Evaluatees' weights of a GRI are compared with average weights of the related Group. Finally in every BSC's perspective, GRIs that have extraordinarily over-scored or under-scored weights are analyzed in terms of GRIs' missions, customers, capability of human resources, etc. In the Basic Research Group, the Korea Basic Science Institute is deviated in the financial perspective and the strategic direction perspectives. In the Public Research Group, Korea Institute of Construction Technology is significantly different from other GRIs in three perspectives. Five out of eight GRIs in the Industrial Research Group, GRIs are significantly different each other in several perspectives. It could be concluded that the current institutional evaluation systems are least appropriate in measuring performance of the GRIs of the Industrial Research Group.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.8 no.spc1
• /
• pp.410-432
• /
• 2005

Korea's government-sponsored research institutes (GRIs) have contributed a lot to the economic development of Korea. They have become major components of the Korean national innovation system. However, in these days, they have been blamed for low productivity and inefficiency, as well as insufficient contribution to national development. This paper argues that the major problem of Korea's GRIs lies in their concentration in a few regions, e. g. Seoul, Gyeonggi, and Daedeok. It argues that they should be fairly distributed among regions in order to contribute to the development of Korea effectively. In this regard, this paper explores the relevant policy options to effectively distribute Korean GRIs among regions. It suggests two categories of distribution scenarios. The first category is based on the types of GRIs to be distributed. This category has three scenarios: existing GRIs, branch institutes of existing GRIs, and new GRIs. The second category is based on the jurisdiction of GRIs. It has also three scenarios: GRI system as an independent sector, GRI-university cooperation system, and integration of GRIs to regional universities. These scenarios have advantages and disadvantages, respectively. Therefore, we must find a rather satisfactory scenario based on the mixture of scenarios of both categories.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.832-859
• /
• 2005

Government-sponsored Research Institutes (GRIs) have made a great contribution to the development of Korea's Science and Technology (S&T). However, recently, GRIs are facing the challenge of many problems, for instance, absence of reasonable strategies, insufficient resources, and so on. Therefore, many GRIs are required for solving these problems by enhancing their strategic management capabilities. For this purpose, this paper suggests a Strategic Management Audit Model for Korean GRIs. The concept of Strategic Management Audit Model has not been widely adopted in Korean GRIs. In this paper, we suggest GRI-specific Strategic Management Model and apply it to Korea Basic Science Institute (KBSI), which is under the Korea Research Council of Fundamental Science and Technology (KRCF). Based on our strategic management audit, we propose several potential strategies for Korean Basic Research Institutes (KBSI). Our model and its implications will also be helpful for other Korean GRIs.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 1998.06a
• /
• pp.131-163
• /
• 1998

The interest in the evaluation of government-sponsored research institutes (GRIs) has increased markedly in Korea in 1990s; this is mainly because of the increasing needs 1) to improve the quality of R&D at GRIs, and 2) to reorient the GRIs' strategic position in Korean national innovation systems due to the enhancement of R&D capabilities of private companies and universities during last decade. As a first attempt to diagnose the managerial and strategic issues of GRIs, a Multi-Ministerial Evaluation Committee was established as an ad hoc task force under the Prime Minister's Office in 1991. According to the recommendations of the committee, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to which most of GRIs were affiliated, made it a rule to evaluate the annual performance of GRIs since 1992. This paper examines the recent experience of MOST's evaluation of Government-sponsored Research Institute in Korea. After several years'efforts of Science & Technology Policy Institute(STEPI) to build prospective evaluation systenL MOST decided to apply two supplementary approaches for the evaluation of GRIs; one is summative annual evaluation and the other is formative 3-year evaluation. The annual evaluation system that is designed as a temporary measure is to monitor and to guide the self-evaluation activities of GRIs. In the process of annual evaluation, MOST tries to minimize its direct involvement, and allows each GRI to develop self-evaluation system that is most appropriate for the unique characteristics of the institute. If there exist urgent issues under scrutiny, however, it can be incorporated and examined by a group of external experts as special issues in the annual evaluation system. The aim of 3-year evaluation is both to examine the past performance of each GRI and to investigate whether the strategic role of each GRI is viable in the future. Its major focus, however, lies not on auditing past performance but on strengthening future strategic position of each GRI. The MOST designates a group of evaluation experts with appropriate knowledge and competence as members of the General Evaluation Committee for one year. With the help of STEPI, a specialized research institute for R&D evaluation, the General Evaluation Committee develops methodology and procedures for the actual evaluation of GRIs. Based on the evaluation reports and recommendations from the General Evaluation Committee, the MOST develops various policy measures for strengthening GRIs.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 2005.06a
• /
• pp.95-115
• /
• 2005

Government-sponsored Research Institutes(GRIs) have played a great role to the development of Korea Science and Technology(S&T) However, GRIs are facing with challenges of change for their role and function, appearing emerging technology, accelerating technological innovation and increasing research capabilities of other organizations(i.g., universities and firms). We will argue that GRIs should increase competitiveness of their focused research discipline in order to produce a superior outcome and in charge of distinguished role compared with other organizations. This paper aims to suggest a alternative which could increase competitiveness of GRIs's focused research discipline. As a case, in this paper, we analyzed Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology(KRIBB) which is a part of GRIs in Korea.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.165-180
• /
• 1998

This study suggests a new concept for the improvement of productivity and innovativeness of governmental research institutes(GRIs) : GRIs can also accomodate a special graduate course. Through the combination of educational function and research activities, the explict and tacit knowledge made by GRIs could be efficiently diffused to other sectors of national innovation system, especially industries. This study suggests three different models of graduate courses : independent course in each GRI, joint course by several GRIs, and joint course linking GRIs and university.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2005.05a
• /
• pp.306-320
• /
• 2005

Government-sponsored Research Institutes(GRIs) have made a great contribution to the development of Korea's Science and Technology(S&T). However, recently GRIs are facing the challenge of many problems. For instance, absence of reasonable strategies, insufficient resources and so on. Therefore, many GRIs are being asked for solving their problems with successful strategic management. This paper suggests a strategic management model to solve their problems and to cope with the changing S&T environment. In this paper, The strategic management model for GRIs which was thoroughly considered strategic management process suggested to response the need of their change and to perform their strategic management successfully. As a case of GRIs to apply this model, in this paper, Korea Basic Science Institute(KBSI) that is part of the Korea Research Council of Fundamental Science and Technology(KRCF) was analyzed. As a result of analysis with this model which applied to KBSI, various strategies and alternatives were suggested.

• Journal of the Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society
• /
• v.41 no.1
• /
• pp.99-111
• /
• 2016

This paper presents a framework to analyze the change in the research and development (R&D) efficiency of government-funded research institutes (GRIs) in Korea. Cumulative data envelopment analysis/Malmquist index method is utilized to analyze the changes in R&D efficiency of GRIs. Data analysis of the R&D activities of 10 GRIs in Korea Research Council of Fundamental Science & Technology showed that the average R&D efficiency of the 10 GRIs improved from 2009 to 2013. However, the efficiency of a few GRIs decreased in terms of the catch-up index. The proposed framework can help management teams diagnose the current state of R&D activities and determine the efficacy of strategic actions by comparing efficiencies in the past.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.27-40
• /
• 2016

This study uses a network approach to investigate the structural characteristics of sub-organizations within public research institutes in order to obtain their implications for organizational structures. We construct a network based on research similarities between sub-organizations because sub-organizations generally build their own research portfolios. We examine how sub-units are organized based on their structural features. The structural features are compared between three public research institutes in different countries: the Korean the Government-funded Research Institutes (GRIs), the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft in Germany, and the National Laboratories (NLs) in the United States. The structural comparison helps to identify organizational characteristics and to differentiate between them. We found little common ground in the research areas between the GRIs because individual sub-organizations have distinct research portfolios. Therefore, the organizational hierarchy of research in the GRIs is less matured than it is in other public research institutes. This study suggests that the GRIs need to establish integrated strategies in order to strengthen the common knowledge base.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.117-137
• /
• 2014

In recent years, there has been a gradual increase in the number of R&D projects for solving societal problems. However, government-funded research institutes(GRIs) are going through many trials and errors due to the lack of R&D systems suitable for solving societal problems. In this regard, this study attempted to discuss the improvement directions for evaluation systems of GRIs, which serves as a major influencing factor in performing R&D initiatives for solving societal problems. Towards this end, a study of R&D initiatives for solving societal problems was conducted first, and improvement directions for effective promotion were presented after deriving limits in terms of R&D initiatives for solving societal problems, along with the current status of evaluation systems by GRIs. Lastly, implications and limitations of this study were discussed. This study has its significance in that it is the first research to propose evaluation indicators in terms of solving societal problems at the level of GRIs and is expected to be a foundation for future research of related fields.