DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

전문경력인사 초빙활용지원사업의 성과 평가 요소 개발 연구

Development of the Factors for Evaluating Performance of the Professional Career Personnel Invitation Program

  • 김미혜 (충북대학교 컴퓨터공학과) ;
  • 박혜진 (건국대학교 교수학습지원센터) ;
  • 김용영 (건국대학교 경영학과)
  • Kim, Mi-Hye (Department of Computer Engineering, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Park, Hye-Jin (Center for Teaching and Learning, Konkuk University) ;
  • Kim, Yong-Young (Department of Business Administration, Konkuk University)
  • 투고 : 2021.09.27
  • 심사 : 2021.12.20
  • 발행 : 2021.12.28

초록

본 연구는 전문경력인사 초빙활용지원사업의 성과 관리 및 평가 체계 강화를 위해 전문경력인사의 과업 수행에 대한 체계적·포괄적 평가가 가능한 평가 요소를 개발하였다. 이를 위해 경계이론과 커크패트릭 4수준 평가 모델에 기반을 두고 사업 평가와 관련한 기존 연구를 분석하여 성과 평가 프레임워크를 개발하였다. 이후 2차에 걸친 델파이 조사 방법을 활용하여 전문경력인사의 개인 측면과 활용 기관 측면에서 성과를 측정할 수 있는 평가 요소를 도출하고, 구체적인 측정 문항을 개발하여 타당화 작업을 진행하였다. 이러한 절차를 거쳐 최종적으로 적용성, 연계성, 명확성, 적합성, 확장성 등 5가지 평가 요소를 선정하였으며, 각 요소별 구체적인 평가 목적을 수립하여 실제 전문경력인사 초빙활용지원사업의 성과 관리를 위해 적용 가능하도록 하였다. 본 연구는 1994년부터 한국연구재단에서 운영하고 있는 전문경력인사 초빙활용지원사업의 성과 관리를 위해 정량적 정성평가가 가능한 성과 평가 체계와 요소를 제시하였다는 데 의의가 있다.

This study developed the factors capable of systematic/comprehensive evaluation of the task performance in order to strengthen the performance management of the professional career personnel invitation program (PCPIP). To this end, a performance evaluation framework was developed by analyzing existing project evaluation studies based on boundary theory and Kirkpatrick's four-level evaluation model. Afterwords, through two Delphi surveys, evaluation factors that can measure performance in terms of individual and invitation institutions of PCP were derived and validated. With this procedure, five evaluation factors were finally selected: adaptability, connectivity, clarity, compatibility, and expandability. This study has implications suggesting a performance evaluation factors capable of hybrid quantitative/qualitative evaluation for the performance management of PCPIP operated by National Research Foundation of Korea Research since 1994.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. S. M. Lee & E. B. Lee. (2013). A Proposal of the Improvement Plan for Professional Experience Personnel Invitation Program. Journal of Institute for Social Sciences, 24(3), 211-231. UCI : G704-SER000011721.2013.24.3.013
  2. B. E. Ashforth, G. E. Kreiner & M. Fugate. (2000). All in a Day's Work. The Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 472-491. DOI: 10.5465/AMR.2000.3363315
  3. D. L. Kirkpatrick (1959). Techniques for Evaluating Training Programs. Journal of American Society of Training Directors, 11, 1-13.
  4. J. W. Gilley, S. A. Eggland, & A. M. Gilley. (2002). Principles of Human Resource Development (2nd ed.), Cambridge, MA: Perseus
  5. S. Yardley & T. Dornan. (2012). Kirkpatrick's Levels and Education 'Evidence', Medical Education, 46(1), 97-106. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04076.x
  6. T. R. Kim & H. J. Ahn. (2007). A Study on Trends of Performance Evaluations on Performance Evaluation Indicator. Korean Public Administration Quarterly, 19, 1097-1118. UCI: G704-000253.2007.19.4.008
  7. K. S. Song & G. S. Lee. (2004). Performance Evaluation of Metropolitan Government. Korean Public Administration Review, 38(6), 179-200. UCI: G704-000298.2004.38.6.014
  8. D. N. Ammons. (1995). Overcoming the Inadequacies of Performance Measurement on Local Government. Public Administration Review. 55(1), 37-47. DOI: 10.2307/976826
  9. O. James. (2002). Evaluating Executive Agencies in UK Government. Public Policy and Administration. 16(3), 24-52. DOI: 10.1177/095207670101600303
  10. S. A. Park, H. Y. Na & H. Y. Lee. (2019). A Study on Effectiveness of Performance Management. Journal of Local Government Studies, 31(2), 1-24. DOI: 10.21026/jlgs.2019.31.2.1
  11. K. H. Kim. (2005). A Study of Educational Environments in Island Areas of Korea. The Journal of Educational Administration, 23(2), 471-497. UCI: G704-000511.2005.23.2.003
  12. S. Y. Park & H. Y. Shin. (2016). Building an Evaluation Model for Official Development Aids in Higher Education. Journal of International Area Studies, 19(4), 23-50. DOI: 10.18327/jias.2016.01.19.4.23
  13. Y. H. Park & J. H. Chang. (2019). A Delphi Study on Development of Performance Evaluation Indicators for Safety and Health Training Programs. The Korean Journal of Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(3), 113-132. DOI: 10.18211/kjhrdq.2019.21.3.005
  14. Y. J. Soung & A. J. Hong. (2010). Analysis on the Validity of Evaluation Items for ODA Projects in Vocational Education and Training. The Journal of Lifelong Education and HRD, 6(3), 45-67. DOI: 10.35637/klehrd.2010.6.3.003
  15. C. Lee & B. Y. Jung. (2016). A Study on Development Indicators of Audit and Performance Evaluation of National Human Resource Development Consortium. Journal of Agricultural Education and Human Resource Development, 48(2), 25-53. DOI: 10.23840/agehrd.2016.48.2.25
  16. S. J. Ju. (2017). A Study on the Improvement of Evaluation Indicators for Performance Measurement of Educational Welfare Priority Project. Social Science Research, 33(1), 107-129. DOI: 10.18859/ssrr.2017.02.33.1.107
  17. Y. M. Lee. (2012). Examining the Perceived Impacts of Training Programs for Small and Midium-sized Corporation Employees' Competency Development on Their Performance, Using the CIPP Evaluation Model. The Journal of Training and Development, 24, 1-20. UCI: G704-SER000002289.2012..24.003
  18. J. Y. Seo. (2012). An Evaluation Study on the Korean Community Education Support Program. The Politics of Education, 19(4), 211-229. UCI: G704-SER000009222.2012.19.4.006
  19. M. G. Moon & C. H. Park. (2016). Evaluation on the Gvernmental Demonstration Project on Character Education for Young Children. The Journal of Korea Open Association for Early Childhood Education, 21(4), 475-496. UCI: G704-000666.2016.21.4.014
  20. Dalkey, N, Rourke, D.L., Lewis, R., & Snyder, D.(1973), Studies in the Quality of Life: Delphi and Decision Making, Lexington: D.C. Health&Co.
  21. Ziglio, E.(1996), The Delphi Method and Its Contribution to Decision-Making, London: Jesscia Kingsley Publishers, 3-33.
  22. J. S. Lee. (2001). The Delphi Method. Seoul: Kyoyookboook.