최근 많은 기업들이 치열한 경쟁에서 생존하기 위해 개별 고객들에게 초점을 맞춘 전사적이고 체계적인 고객관계관리에 전력을 기울이고 있다. 수익성 높은 대부분 기업들의 성공비결은 복합적이겠지만, 고객지향적 사고에의 신속한 적응이 중요한 부분을 차지하고 있다. 고객관계관리 기법 및 운용철학은 고객을 올바르게 이해하는데서 그치지 않고 고객행동을 사전적으로 예측하여 고객요구에 부응한 제품과 서비스를 제공하는 것만이 치열한 경쟁환경에서 생존함과 동시에 거듭된 성장을 이루는 유일한 해결책임을 강조한다. 고객관계관리는 데이터베이스마케팅과 같은 조직내 실무자 중심의 관점과 접근이 아니라 최고경영자의 마케팅 관점의 경영철학 구현을 통한 전사적이고 조직적인 참여가 이루어져야 한다. 그럼에도 불구하고 많은 기업들이 고객관계관리 기법을 도입하고 구축하는 과정에서 이러한 점을 간과해 왔으며 그 결과, 고객관계관리를 통해 수익성을 높인 기업이 있는 반면에 고객관계관리에 엄청난 비용만을 투입하고 별다른 성과를 거두지 못한 기업들도 다수이다. 본 연구는 CRM구축 및 실행과정에서의 성공요인을 기존 연구와 달리 마케팅적 관점에서 발견해 내고 있다. 시장지향성과 고객지향성이라는 마케팅 철학에서부터 고객정 보지향성과 핵심고객지향이라는 실무적 개념까지 포함해서 마케팅적인 관점에서의 성공적 CRM구축을 위한 선행요인을 발견하고, 이러한 요인들이 마케팅관점의 관계품질과 실무적인 CRM성과에 어떤 영향을 미치는지를 분석함과 동시에 관계품질과 CRM성과 간의 관계의 강도까지 실증적으로 분석해 보았다. 경험적 분석 결과 본 연구에서 구축한 마케팅관점의 CRM선행요인들 중에서 일부 요인을 제외하고는 대체적으로 관계품질 및 CRM성과를 높이는데 상당한 기여를 하고 있음이 확인되었으며, 영향관계의 정도에는 어느 정도 차이가 있음이 확인되었다. 또한 관계품질과 CRM성과 및 세부적 개념구성요인들 간에 매우 높은 정(+)의 관계가 존재함을 확인했다. 이는 CRM의 최종 성과를 달성하기 위해서 CRM구축 및 실행이후에 고객만족과 고객신뢰라는 개념적 연결고리를 강화함과 동시에 이러한 관계품질이 고객유지와 고객점유 정도의 향상으로 이어지도록 하는 창조적 전술개발이 요구됨을 의미한다. CRM을 구축 및 실행하는 대부분의 기업들이 조급하게 재무적인 성과를 기대하는 경향이 있는데, CRM은 마케팅철학을 포함하는 장기적인 경영활동임을 주지해야 한다. 기존의 많은 연구들이 취하고 있는 연구맥락에 근거해서 기술적인 시스템만을 갖추었다고 하여 단기적인 성과를 바라는 것은 오히려 비용의 낭비만을 초래 할 수 있음에 주목해야 한다. 본 연구결과를 바탕으로 CRM의 성공적 구축을 통해 관계품질을 강화하는 것에 대한 전략적 통찰을 제공함과 동시에 실질적인 CRM성과를 달성하기 위한 마케팅 관점의 연결구조를 어떻게 효율적으로 강화할 수 있을 것인가에 대한 학술적이고 실무적인 시사점을 도출했다.
오늘날의 소비자들은 가격, 제품의 품질 등 실용적 가치 보다 쇼핑의 즐거움, 라이프스타일의 구현, 매력적인 점포쇼핑환경, 브랜드 애착심 등의 정서적 가치를 더 중요하게 생각하고 있다. 이처럼 소비자들은 단순히 상품만을 구매하기보다는 다양한 가치를 얻기 위해 쇼핑을 한다는 사실은 여러 연구에서 제안되었다(안광호와 이하늘 2011; Mathwick 등 2001). 이렇듯 소매점포 선택과 관련한 소비자행동차원의 쇼핑경험가치와 브랜드자산에 대한 중요성과 관심이 높아지고 있지만 관련 연구는 미미한 실정이며 이와 관련한 비교문화적 연구는 매우 미비한 실정이다(황순호 2010). 본 연구는 한국과 중국의 소비자들의 소매점포 선택과 관련한 소비자행동연구의 필요에 의해 시작되었다. 또한 소비자행동분야에서 소비자 경험이 중시되면서 소매점내 쇼핑경험가치에 초점을 맞추었다. 본 연구는 정치, 경제, 사회, 문화적으로 서로 다른 한국과 중국의 소비자들을 대상으로 대형할인점 소매점포에서 고객들이 지각하는 쇼핑 경험가치와 브랜드자산과의 관계를 밝혀내고 이를 통해 점포 충성도와의 관계를 찾아내어 소매점의 쇼핑 경험가치와 관련된 시사점을 찾아내기 위한 국가 간 비교 연구를 시도하였다. 본 연구는 이론적 배경으로 쇼핑가치와 유통브랜드 자산, 그리고 점포 충성도에 대한 이론적 배경을 소개하였으며, 가설 검증을 위한 자료 수집을 위하여 한국과 중국의 대형할인점 고객들을 대상으로 한국과 중국의 대도시 (서울 과 북경) 소비자들을 표본프레임으로 설정하고, 대면 설문조사를 실시하였다. 연구의 결과 한중간 소비성향 차이 비교에 대한 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 한국소비자와 중국 소비자 간의 소비성향차이를 검정한 결과 중국 소비자들은 심미적 소비성향과 상징적 소비성향의 평균값이 한국 소비자들에 비해 높게 나타났으며 한국 소비자들은 쾌락적 소비성향이 중국소비자들에 비해 상대적으로 높은 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 대형할인점에 대한 한국과 중국의 브랜드 자산 지각에 대한 연구결과 중국에 비해 한국 소비자들이 브랜드 인지와 브랜드 이미지를 모두 높게 지각하는 것으로 나타났다. 셋째, 한국과 중국에서 편의점과 할인점 이용 고객들이 지각하는 소매점에서의 쇼핑경험에 대한 탐색적 요인분석결과 각각의 국가에 따라 각기 다른 쇼핑경험가치가 나타났다. 한국의 할인점에서는 소비자이익 가치, 심미성가치, 유희성 가치가 중요한 쇼핑가치로 도출되었다. 또한 중국의 할인점에서는 유희성 가치, 심미성 가치, 소비자이익 가치, 서비스우수 가치가 중요한 쇼핑경험가치로 도출되었다. 이러한 연구의 목적에 대한 실증적 분석을 바탕으로 한국과 중국의 대형할인점 소비자들의 쇼핑경험가치과 브랜드자산을 바탕으로 한국의 대형할인점에 있어서 경험가치의 이론적 중요성에 관한 새로운 통찰력을 제공하여 주며 충성도 제고에 있어서 브랜드관리의 중요성에 대한 이론적 시사점을 제공하여 준다. 이와 더불어 유통의 국제화 시대에 있어서 대형할인점의 국제화에 요구되는 한국과 중국 간의 고객 가치의 차이점에 대한 비교문화적 관점에서 중요한 실무적 시사점을 제시한다. 즉, 해외유통전략을 실행하는데 있어서 쇼핑가치에 기반한 현지화 전략의 중요성에 대한 시사점을 제시하여 주며 국가차원에서의 차별적 유통전략의 개발 필요성을 제안하여 준다.
Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.