A Study on Enhancing Brand Recognition in the Research Agency of Geoscience and Mineral Resources

지질자원 전문기관 브랜드인지도 제고방안 연구

  • Received : 2010.03.02
  • Accepted : 2011.09.02
  • Published : 2011.10.28


In this study, we carried out a survey on the degree of recognition for the brand of the Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) to contribute to reestablishing the status and role of KIGAM as an institution that people proud of by effectively delivering KIGAM's various research activities and achievements to people. About 49.9% of external publics recognized that there was relevance between research achievements of geo-technology and national brand. On the contribution of research achievements of geo-technology to promoting Korea's power of science and technology, 42.3% gave positive answers. On research achievements of mineral resources technology, just 14.4% replied they saw such results. As alternatives to promote the degree of recognition for brand, we suggested development of beneficial message, operation of brand management committee, promotion of involvement of research achievements of mineral resources technology about people-friendly subjects, development and distribution of "board game for education on mineral resources technology" for youths, activation of location PR, activation of online Q&A bulletin board, finding out star researchers, and president's PI activities.

본 연구는 한국지질자원연구원(KIGAM)이 전개하는 다양한 연구 활동과 성과를 국민에게 효율적으로 전달하여 '국민이 자랑스러워하는 기관'으로서 KIGAM의 위상과 역할을 재정립하는데 기여하기 위하여 KIGAM 브랜드 인지도에 대한 조사를 수행하였다. 지질자원기술의 연구성과와 국가 브랜드 간 연관성에 대해서 외부 공중의 절반(49.9%)이 관련이 있다고 인식하였고, 지질자원기술의 연구성과가 한국 과학기술력 증진에 기여하는 가에 대하여 42.3%가 긍정 적으로 응답하였으며, 지질자원기술 연구성과에 대해서는 14.4%만이 접한 적이 있다고 응답하였다. 브랜드 인지도를 제고하기 위한 대안으로는 혜택적 메시지 개발, 브랜드관리 위원회 운영, 국민 친화적 주제에 대한 지질자원기술 연구성과의 관여도 증진, 청소년 대상 '지질자원기술 교육용 보드 게임' 개발 배포, 장소 PR(location PR)의 활성화, 온라인 Q&A 게시판의 활성화, 스타 연구원 발굴과 원장 PI 활동을 제시할 수 있다.



Grant : 연구효율화를 위한 지질자원정책개발연구

Supported by : 한국지질자원연구원


  1. Choi, S. (2008). The role of brand trust in the formation of a consumer-brand relationship, The Korean Journal of Advertising, v.19(5), p.75-96.
  2. Crosby, L.A., Kenneth, R.E. and Deborah. C. (1990). Relationship quality in services selling: An Interpersonal influence perspectives. Journal of Marketing, 54(July), p.68-81.
  3. Grunig, J.E. and Repper, F.C. (2002). Strategic management, publics, and issues. (Ed.) James E. Grunig. Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management. Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. p.117-157.
  4. Kim, C.S., Kim, S.Y. and Lee, J.R. (2007). A study on public relations strategy and program on geo-technology R&D outcome, Econ. Environ. Geol., v.40, p.797-804.
  5. Kim, C.S. and Kim, S.Y. (2008). A study on communication programs of Geo-technology R&D outcome using the SMTCR model, Econ. Environ. Geol., v.41, p.267-273.
  6. Kim, S.Y., Yun, S.T., So, C. S., Lee, P. K. and Koh, Y. K (2001), Strategy for encouragement of research activities in Earth Sciences in Korea - Analysis of research grants supported by KOSEF and geological sciences, Jour. Geological Soc. of Korea, v.37, p.659-676.
  7. Macintosh, G. (2002). Perceived risk and outcome difference in multi-level service relationship. The Journal of Service Marketing, v.16(2), p.143-157.
  8. McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research, v.13, p.71-84.
  9. Pimentel, R.W. and Reynolds, K.E. (2004). A model for consumer devotion: Affective commitment proactive sustaining behaviors. Academy of Marketing Science Review, p.1-45.
  10. Reynolds, K.E. and Beatty, S.E. (1999). A relationship customer typology, Journal of Retailing, v.75(4). p.509- 523.
  11. Schultz, D.E. and Schultz, H.F. (2005). Brand Babble: Sense and Nonsense about Branding, Thomson. p. 258.
  12. Tom, J.L.M. and Wong, Y.H. (2001). Interactive selling: A dynamic framework for services, Journal of Service Marketing, 15(4/5), p.379-396.