Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management (품질경영학회지)

Korean Society for Quality Management (한국품질경영학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Evaluation Model of Government-funded Research Institutes Using AHP

AHP를 이용한 정부출연연구소 평가 모형 연구

  • Son, Eun Il (Dept. of Business Administration, International University of Korea) ;
  • Baek, Chang Hwa (Dept. of Industrial & Management Engineering, Daejin University)
  • 손은일 (한국국제대학교 경영학과) ;
  • 백창화 (대진대학교 산업경영공학과)
  • Received : 2022.11.18
  • Accepted : 2022.11.22
  • Published : 2022.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze the current status and investigate relevant indicators so that R&D performance evaluation suitable for government-funded research institutes can proceed. A suitable performance evaluation model was presented based on the surveyed indicators. Based on the presented performance evaluation model, the importance was analyzed to calculate the weight for each indicator of the performance evaluation model. Methods: The method applied in this study presented a performance evaluation model based on the organizational performance evaluation cases of advanced overseas countries. By using the AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) technique, the weight of each indicator of the performance evaluation model was studied. Results: As a result of examining the indicators necessary for the evaluation model, focusing on overseas cases, 13 evaluation items were derived. A weight was calculated for the importance of the study results. And the scientific/technical research results showed the highest excellence. Conclusion: Key indicators of performance evaluation suitable for government-funded research institutes were derived and presented through detailed modeling in three stages. A realistic model that can objectively evaluate the performance of government-funded research institutes was proposed using the AHP technique.

Keywords

References

  1. Harma, S. and Thomas, V. 2008. Inter-country R&D efficiency analysis: An application of data envelopment analysis. Scientometrics 76(3):483-501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1896-4
  2. Jun, IJ 2017. Analyzing the research pic networks of technology management and developing a performance evaluation model of R&D commercialization. PhD thesis at Seoul National University of Science and Technology 1-108.
  3. Jung, GT. 2015. A study on how to identify and prioritize appropriate performance indicators for basic science research, PhD thesis at Daejeon University 1-141.
  4. Kaplan, RS and Norton, DP. 1996. Strategic learning and the balanced scorecard. Strategy and Leadership June: 20-34.
  5. Kim, KS and Cho, NW. 2021. A Study on Networks of Defense Science and Technology using Patent Mining. Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management 49(1):97-112.
  6. Kim, YH and Ha, JS. 2022. A Study on the Development and Institutionalization Plan of a Quantitative Evaluation Model of Defense Quality Management System. Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management 50(2):183-197. https://doi.org/10.7469/JKSQM.2022.50.2.183
  7. Kostoff, RN and Geisler, E. 1999. Strategic Management and Implementation of Textual Data Mining in Government Organizations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 11(4):493-525. https://doi.org/10.1080/095373299107302
  8. La, YJ. 2020. Research on the Theory-Based Evaluation of Policy Evaluation: The Practice of Evaluation Principles and Application: Focused on Evaluation of Government Performance and Evaluation System of Public Institution Performance Cases. Journal of Policy Analysis and Evaluation 30(3):43-78.
  9. Lee, MY and Yi, CG. 2016. Developments of Evaluation System for Qualitative Performance Measurement in Government-Supported Research Institute by Article Citation Method. Journal of Technology Innovation 19(4):768-798.
  10. Lim, GH. 2016. Evaluation of R&D project in basic research support. Report of Business Evaluation 16(7):1-90.
  11. Park, S. 2018. A case study on the university life of returning students. Journal of the Korean Association for Youth Research 29(3):5-40.
  12. Park, SH, Ahan, SH, Lee, JH, Jung, EJ and Jung, JH. 2017. A study on the development direction of the research institute based on autonomy and responsibility. KISTEP Issue Report.
  13. Pouris, A. 1988. Peer Review in Scientifically Small Countries. R&D Management 18(4):333-340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00608.x
  14. Powell ET. 2005. Logic Models: A framework for program planning and evaluation. Nutrition Food Safety and Health Conference.
  15. Ruegg, R. and Feller, I. 2003. A toolkit for evaluating public R&D investment models, models, and findings from ATP's first decade, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Technology Administration. US Department of Commerce, Gaithersburg 3-857.
  16. Saaty, TL. 2004. Decision making - the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering 13:1-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-006-0151-5
  17. Son, EI and Baek, CH. 2022. Meaning and Policy of Changing R&D Process for the Digital Transformation(DX). Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management 50(1):35-42. https://doi.org/10.7469/JKSQM.2022.50.1.35
  18. Werner, BM and Souder, WE. 1997. Measuring R&D performance - state of the art. Research-Technology Management 40:34-42.