國家競爭力 測定 要素가 經營成果에 미치는 影響에 關한 硏究

Abstract

About 10 years ago, the rate of growth of industrial power in Korea began to slow until by about 1994, and for four years thereafter, it had gone down essentially to zero, which led to IMF era in Korea. Similar slow-downs were observed in other countries, but none has been as severe as that in Korea. According to the IMD report, Korea was ranked as 38th in terms of the competitiveness in economic condition, classified in the lowest group among OECD countries. In fact it has been dropped by 12 for the last five years. If it continues, this comparative deficit in industrial power will undermine the international competitiveness of Korean economy and ultimately our standard of living. Before we decide what should be done to correct it, however, we must understand what has caused it. Unfortunately, we neglect the importance of business environment provided by different nations or regions. Related literature review reveals that most previous research on the industrial competitiveness has been focused on internal improvement of process technology or interrelationship between firms. With global competition in the 1990s, though, local business environment becomes more important than ever. This research examines the relationship between domestic business environment and manufacturers' performance in order to find out the strategic guidelines for improving industrial competitiveness. This study defines the measurement factors of national competitiveness as business environmental factors. Therefore, this study partly replicates and simultaneously expands the work done by IMD on the measures of national competitiveness. Environmental factors employed in this research include government, bank & finance, R&D, human resource, and social capital. Based on the literature review, initial research questions and model were developed. Intial research questions and research model were further elaborated, and the hypotheses for a survey were constructed. Data were collected from local manufacturing firms. A total of 208 manufacturing firms participated in this survey representing response rate of approximately 40 percent. ANOVA and some other statistical techniques were used for the statistical analyses. The results of statistical analyses mostly answered the proposed research questions, while some of them are only partially answered. According to the survey results, it is identified that the degree of importance and satisfaction on government, bank system, R&D, human resource, and social capital were different with respect to the size, proportion of foreign ownership, and location of manufacturers. In addition, the results confirm the propositions about the relationship between satisfaction level on environmental factors and business performance factors.