최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기대한산업공학회지 = Journal of the Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers, v.40 no.3, 2014년, pp.342 - 357
박성민 (백석대학교 경상학부)
The present study analyzes the relationship between research and development (R&D) inputs and performance of a national technology innovation R&D program using successive binary Logistic regression models based on a typical R&D logic model. In particular, this study focuses on to answer the followin...
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
대표적인 기술혁신 국가연구개발사업으로는 무엇이 있는가? | 한편, 대표적인 기술혁신 국가연구개발사업으로는, 미국 ATP, 대만 경제부 산하 Industrial Technology Development Program(ITDP) 및 대한민국 지식경제부 산하 지식경제기술혁신 사업(Knowledge Economy Technology Innovation Program, KETIP) 등이 있다(Ruegg and Feller, 2003; Shipp et al., 2005; Ruegg, 2006; Hsu and Hsueh, 2009; KEIT, 2010; KEIT, 2011; KEIT, 2013). | |
실증분석 결과의 주요 내용은 무엇인가? | 첫째, R&D 입력변수 X1(즉, 정부지원금액)은 특허등록 성과 창출에 통계적으로 유의한 양(+)의 관계를 보였다. 하지만, R&D 논리모형 상 시간적 경과에 따라 그 강도가 약화되어 매출액, 신규고용 성과 창출에는 양(+)의 관계는 보였지만 통계적 유의성은 확인되지 않았다. 둘째, R&D 논리모형 상 직전 대비 후속 성과 창출 성공-실패 여부 사이에는 강한 의존 관계가 존재하는 것으로 분석되었다. 즉, 매출액 성과 창출에 가장 큰 양(+)의 관계 예측변수는 B1, 신규고용 성과 창출에 가장 큰 양(+)의 관계 예측변수는 B2로 확인되었다. 셋째, 주관기관 유형 영향요인변수 T1의 경우, “대기업” 대비 “중소기업” 매출액 및 신규고용 성과 창출 성공 확률이 더 큰 것으로, 협력 유형 영향요인변수 T2의 경우, “단독 R&D” 대비 “협력 R&D” 특허등록 및 매출액 성과 창출 성공 확률이 더 큰 것으로 판명되었다. 넷째, 세가지 R&D 입력변수 간 강한 상관성에 확인되어 회귀모형 계수 추정 시 세심한 주의가 요구될 수 있다고 판단된다. | |
공공부문 R&D 성과평가란 무엇인가? | 공공부문 R&D 성과평가는 R&D 논리모형(Logic Model) 또는 논리사슬(Logic Chain) 등으로 지칭되는 체계적 흐름도에 근거하여 R&D 자원의 투입 이후 시간적 경과에 따라 단계적으로 창출되는 성과의 효율성, 효과성, 적절성 등을 다양한 연구방법론을 활용하여 가능한 계량적으로 분석한 후, 그 분석 결과를 후속 R&D 사업 계획의 수립 및 전개 시에 활용하는 것이다(Wholey, 1983; Bickman, 1987; Wholey, 1987; McLaughlin and Jordan, 1999; Ruegg and Feller, 2003; W. K. |
Belderbos, R., Carree, M., and Lokshin, B. (2004), Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance, Research Policy, 33(10), 1477-1492.
Berchicci, L. (2013), Towards an Open R&D System : Internal R&D Investment, External Knowledge Acquisition and Innovative Performance, Research Policy, 42(1), 117-127.
Bickman, L. (1987), The Functions of Program Theory, Special Issue : Using Program Theory in Evaluation, New Directions for Program Evaluation, 1987(33), 5-18.
Chen, X., Wang, X., and Wu, D. D. (2011), Analysing Firm Performance in Chinese IT Industry : DEA Malmquist Productivity Measure, International Journal of Information Technology and Management, 10(1), 3-23.
Fritsch, M. and Lukas, R. (2001), Who Cooperates on R&D?, Research Policy, 30(2), 297-312.
Guan, J. and Chen, K. (2010), Modeling Macro-R&D Production Frontier Performance : An Application to Chinese Province-level R&D, Scientometrics, 82(1), 165-173.
Hosmer, D. W. and Lemeshow, S. G. (2000), Applied Logistic Regression, 2nd ed., New York NY : John Wiley and Sons.
Hsu, F. M. and Hsueh, C. C. (2009), Measuring Relative Efficiency of Government-Sponsored R&D Projects : A Three-Stage Approach, Evaluation and Program Planning, 32(2), 178-186.
IBM SPSS (2009), PASW Statistics Release 18, Armonk NY: IBM Corp.
Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology(KEIT) (2010), 2010 Performance Investigation and Analysis of Knowledge Economy Technology Innovation Program, Korea : KEIT.
Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology(KEIT) (2011), 2011 Performance Investigation and Analysis of Knowledge Economy Technology Innovation Program, Korea : KEIT.
Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology(KEIT) (2013), 2012 Performance Investigation and Analysis of Knowledge Economy Technology Innovation Program, Korea : KEIT.
Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information(KISTI) (2008), Law-Enforcement Ordinance-Enforcement Regulations, Available Online at : http://www.ntis.go.kr/ThMain.do (Accessed 1 August 2013).
Laursen, K. and Salter, A. (2006), Open for Innovation : The Role of Openness in Explaining Innovation Performance among U.K. Manufacturing Firms, Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131-150.
McLaughlin, J. A. and Jordan, G. B. (1999), Logic Models : A Tool for Telling Your Program's Performance Story, Evaluation and Program Planning, 22(1), 65-72.
Ministry of Knowledge Economy(MKE) (2008), 2007 Electric Power Industry R&D Programs, Korea : MKE.
Ministry of Knowledge Economy and Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology(KIAT)(MKE.KIAT) (2012), 2012 Guideline of Knowledge Economy R&D Performance Index Design, Korea : MKE.KIAT.
Ministry of Science and Technology and Office of Science and Technology Innovation(MST.OSTI) (2008), 2008 Internal Evaluation Manual of National R&D Programs, Korea : MST.OSTI.
$Minitab^R$ (2005), $Minitab^R$ Release 14.20 StatGuide, State College PA : Minitab Inc.
Montgomery, D. C., Peck, E. A., and Vining, G. G. (2001), Introduction to Linear Regression Analysis, 3rd ed., New York NY : John Wiley and Sons.
Office of Management and Budget(OMB) and Office of Science and Technology Policy(OSTP) (2012), Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Subject : Science and Technology Priorities for the FY 2014 Budget, Available Online at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/, (Accessed 1 August 2013).
Office of Science and Technology Policy(OSTP) (2012), Innovation for America's Economy, America's Energy, and American Skills : Science, Technology, Innovation, and STEM Education in the 2013 Budget, Available Online at : http://www.ostp.gov/, (Accessed 1 August 2013).
Robin, S. and Schubert, T. (2013), Cooperation with Public Research Institutions and Success in Innovation : Evidence from France and Germany, Research Policy, 42(1), 149-166.
Ruegg, R. (2006), Bridging from Project Case Study to Portfolio Analysis in a Public R&D Program : A Framework for Evaluation and Introduction to a Composite Performance Rating System, Economic Assessment Office, Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST), U.S. Department of Commerce, Gaithersburg, MD.
Ruegg, R. and Feller, I. (2003), A Toolkit for Evaluating Public R&D Investment : Models, Methods and Findings from ATP's First Decade, Economic Assessment Office, Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST), U.S. Department of Commerce, Gaithersburg, MD.
Shipp, S., Chang, C., and Wisniewski, L. (2005), Evaluation Best Practices and Results : The Advanced Technology Program, Economic Assessment Office, Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST), U.S. Department of Commerce, Gaithersburg, MD.
W. K. Kellogg Foundation(WKKF) (2004), W. K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Development Guide, Battle Creek MI.
Wholey, J. S. (1983), Evaluation and Effective Public Management, Boston MA : Little Brown.
Wholey, J. S. (1987), Evaluability Assessment : Developing Program Theory, Special Issue : Using Program Theory in Evaluation, New Directions for Program Evaluation, 1987(33), 77-92.
Wu, W., Tsai, H., Cheng, K. and Lai, M. (2006), Assessment of Intellectual Capital Management in Taiwanese IC Design Companies : Using DEA and the Malmquist Productivity Index, R&D Management, 36(5), 531-545.
*원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다.
Free Access. 출판사/학술단체 등이 허락한 무료 공개 사이트를 통해 자유로운 이용이 가능한 논문
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.