Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship (벤처창업연구)

The Korean Society of Business Venturing (한국벤처창업학회)
권호 표지

An Empirical Study on Classification, Business Type, Organizational Culture on Performance of Korean IT SMEs·Venture

중소·벤처기업의 업종, 영업형태, 조직문화가 기업성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 삼원분산분석(3-way ANOVA)을 중심으로

  • Roh, Doo-Hwan (ETRI, Commercialization Strategy Section) ;
  • Hwang, Kyung-Ho (Kyungnam University, School of Liberal Studies, College of General Education)
  • Received : 2019.03.11
  • Accepted : 2019.04.29
  • Published : 2019.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In Korea, small and medium sized domestic enterprises(SMEs) play an pivotal role in the national economy, accounting for 99.9% of all enterprises, 87.9% of total employment, and 48.3% of production. and SMEs was driving a real force of the development of national economy in many respects such as innovation, job creation, industrial diversity, balanced regional development. Despite their crucial role in the national development, most of SMEs suffer from a lack of R&D capabilities and equipments as well as funding capacity. Public R&D institutes can provide SMEs with valuable supplementary technological knowledge and help them build technological capacity. so, In order to effectively support SMEs, government and public R&D institutes must be a priority to know about the factors influencing the performance related to technology transfer and technological collaborations. In particular, SMEs are not only taking up a large portion of the national economy, but also their influence in politics and economy so strong that raising the competitiveness of small and medium-sized companies is a national policy goal that must be achieved in order to achieve sustained economic growth. For this reason, it is necessary to look specifically at the relationship between concepts such as the environment, strategy, and organizational culture surrounding the enterprise to enhance the competitiveness of SMEs. The paper analyzes 665 companies to find out which organizational culture affects their performance by classification and type of business of SMEs. This study demonstrated that when SMEs seek consistency in their external environment, strategies, and organizational structure to maintain their continued competitiveness. According to three-way analysis of variance (3-way ANOVA) indicates that classification of industries in SMEs has statistically significant main effects, but the type of business and organizational culture do not have significant effects. However, the company's organizational performance (operating profit) of SMES were found to differ significantly in comparison between groups according to classification standards of industries, and therefore adopted some parts. In addition, an analysis of the effect of interaction between the three independent variables of small and medium-sized enterprises has shown that there are statistically significant interaction effects among classification, types of business, and organizational cultures. The results shows that there is an organizational culture suitable for each industry classification and type of business of an entity, and is expected to be used as a basis for establishing promotion policies related to the incubation and commerciality of small and medium-sized venture companies in the future.

우리나라의 중소기업은 전체 사업체 수의 99.8%, 종사자 비중의 87.8%, 전체 생산액의 48.4%를 차지하는 등 국가경제의 근간을 형성하고 있으며, 고용창출, 기술혁신, 산업의 다양성, 지역균형개발 등 여러 측면에서 국민경제 발전에 있어서 실질적인 원동력이 되고 있다. 이로 인해 중소기업은 기술혁신을 통해서 기술역량을 확보하는 것이 더욱더 필요해졌다. 하지만 대부분의 중소기업은 자금부담 능력은 물론 R&D인력, 연구장비 등 R&D 역량이 대체적으로 부족한 실정이다. 이에 정부에서는 중소기업 지원을 위해서 정부 출연(연)을 통해 다양한 정책적 지원을 강화하고 있다. 즉, 정부출연연구소는 산업 전반의 혁신활동을 증진시키고, 기업의 기술역량을 강화하기 위해 R&D를 통해 창출된 지식과 기술을 꾸준히 시장에 제공하고 있으며, 중소 중견기업이 견실한 기업으로 도약할 수 있도록 인력지원, 장비지원/연구시설 등을 통해 기업들을 지원하는 역할을 수행하고 있다. 특히 중소기업은 국민경제에서 차지하는 비중이 높을 뿐만 아니라 정치, 경제적인 면에서도 그 영향력이 커서 중소기업의 경쟁력 제고는 지속적인 경제 성장을 위해 반드시 달성해야 할 국가적인 주요 정책목표가 되고 있다. 이러한 이유로 중소기업의 경쟁력 제고를 위해 기업을 둘러싸고 있는 환경, 전략, 조직문화 등과 같은 추상화된 개념들 사이의 관계를 구체적으로 살펴볼 필요가 있다. 본 연구는 중소 벤처기업이 지속적인 경쟁력을 유지하기 위해 외부환경과 전략, 조직구조의 일치성(fit)을 추구할 때, 중소 벤처기업의 업종별, 영업형태별로 어떠한 조직문화가 기업성과(영업이익)에 유의미한 영향을 미치는지 알아보고자 665개 기업을 대상으로 실증분석을 하였다. 삼원분산분석(3-way ANOVA)을 통해 기업성과(영업이익)에 대한 중소 벤처기업의 업종, 영업형태, 조직문화의 주효과 및 상호작용효과를 검증한 결과, 중소 벤처기업의 업종은 통계적으로 유의미한 주효과가 있는 것으로 나타났으나, 영업형태와 조직문화는 유의미한 영향을 미치지 않는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 중소 벤처기업의 세 가지 독립변수 간의 상호작용효과를 분석한 결과, 업종, 영업형태, 조직문화 간에는 통계적으로 유의미한 상호작용효과가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 구체적으로 살펴보면, ICT 서비스의 경우, B2B 기업은 관계지향적 문화, B2C 기업은 위계지향적 문화, ICT 기기의 경우는 B2B와 B2C 기업 모두 과업지향적 문화에서 기업성과가 상대적으로 높게 나타났으며, SW 기타의 경우, B2B와 B2C 기업 모두 위계지향적 문화에서 기업성과가 상대적으로 높게 나타났다. 이는 기업의 업종과 영업형태별로 적합한 조직문화가 존재한다는 것을 보여주고 있어, 향후 중소 벤처기업의 육성 및 기업성과와 관련된 촉진정책을 수립할 때 의미 있는 기초자료로 활용될 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Belderbos, R., Carree, M. & Lokshin, B.(2004) Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance. Research Policy, 33(10), 1477-1492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.07.003
  2. Cameron, Kim S. & Quinn, Robert E. (1999). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture. N. Y.: Addison Weslet Inc.
  3. Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E.(2010). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  4. Chang, Y, S., & Moon, H, K.(2011). Organizational Culture Fostering Ambidexterity in Organizations, Korean Aacademy of Management, 19(2), 169-200
  5. Choi, S, W.(2005). A Study on the Organizational Culture Profile in the Korean Central Government, Korean Public Administration Review, 39(2), 41-62.
  6. Chung, S, Y., & Choo, S, Y., & Suh, S, B.(2008). A Study on the Effects of the Fit Among Environment, Strategy, and Organizational Structure on Firm Performance, Journal of Strategic Management, 11(3), 43-67. https://doi.org/10.17786/JSM.2008.11.3.003
  7. Detert, J. R., & Schroeder, R. G.(2000). A Framework for Linking Culture and Improvement Initiatives in organizations, The Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 850-863 https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3707740
  8. Gordon, G. G.(1991). Industry determinants of organizational culture. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 396-415. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4278959
  9. Ham, J, S.(2014). The Impact of Compliance of Internal Capability and Competitive Strategy Pursuant to Changes in Business Environment on Business Performance and Continuous Subsequent Investment: Focusing on Direct Investments by Korean Companies in China, Doctoral Dissertation, Chungbuk National University, Korea.
  10. KAIT(2013). A Book for the Industrial Statistical Classification System of ICT, 2013, 12.
  11. KBIZ(2016). Status of SMEs in 2016, Seoul, KBIZ.
  12. KCC(2012). 2013 ICT Market Forecasting, 2012. 11.
  13. Kim, H. C(2011). A Study on the Effects of the Fit between Competence and Strategy on Firm Performance in Venture Business, Korea Journal of Business Administration, 24(2), 769-787.
  14. Kim, L., & Y. Lim(1988). A Study on the Effects of the Fit between Competence and Strategy on Firm Performance in Venture Business, Korea Journal of Business Administration, 31(4), 827-857.
  15. Kim, N, H., & Lee, J, H.(1997). Empirical Study on Organizational Culture Types, CEO Leadership Styles, and Behavioral Performance, Korean Aacademy of Management, 5(1), 193-238.
  16. Kim, Y, B., & Ha, S, W.(2000). Differences in KSFs, environments, CEO roles, and the external Linkages among Korean ventures at different growth stases, Journal of Technology Innovation, 8(1), 125-153.
  17. Kotler, P. K., & Kevin l.(2001). Marketing management, 14, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  18. KOVA(2015). Survey report on SMEs of ICT Business, Seoul.
  19. KOVA(2016). Survey report on SMEs of ICT Business, Seoul.
  20. Kwon, H, C(2013). (An) Empirical Study on the Korean Military Organizational Culture Gap Based on Th,e Competing Values framework. Doctoral Dissertation, Hansung University, Korea.
  21. Kwon, J, H., Kim, B, S., Kim, Y, J, & Lim, S, J.(1999). 우 Performance Implication=Relationship among Environment, Competitive Strategy and Organizational Structure, Journal of Strategic Management, 22(1), 41-73.
  22. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W.(1986). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard Business School Classics.
  23. Lee, B, H., & Huh, M, G.(2014). Configurations of Strategy, Environment, and Structure in Korean Hidden Champions: Analysis and Performance Implications, Journal of Strategic Management, 17(3), 139-161. https://doi.org/10.17786/jsm.2014.17.3.007
  24. Lee, J, W., & Kim, M, J.(2014). The Impact of Strategic Fit and Cooperative Relationships on the Performance of SMEs: An Empirical Study of Samsung Electronics' Suppliers. Asia Pacific Journal of Small Business, 36(1), 45-67.
  25. Lee, J, W., & Miller, D., & Woo, S, J., Son, J, H.(1993). The Fit Between Strategy and Environment and Performance in Two Technological Contexts, Korea Business Review, 23(1),149-172.
  26. Lee, S, S., & Jang, H, W.(2005). An Empirical Study on the Fit among Global Sourcing, Competitive Strategy and Strategic Flexibility, Korea Journal of Business Administration, 18(1), 175-202.
  27. Miller, D.(1981). Toward a new contingency approach: The search for organizational gestalts. Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1981.tb00088.x
  28. Miller. D., & Friesen, P. H.(1983). Strategy-making and environment: The third link, Strategic Management Journal, 4(1), 221-235. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250040304
  29. Miller, D.(1986). Configurations of strategy and structure: toward a synthesis, Strategic Management Journal, 7(1), 233-249. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250070305
  30. Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C.(1986). Organizations: New concepts for new forms. California Management Review, 28(3), 62-73. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165202
  31. MSIP(2014a). A Plan to reinvigorate Government Funded Researcher's commercialization Supports plan for SMEs, MSIP.
  32. MSIP(2013). Monthly Report on ICT industrial trend, 2013, 55-78.
  33. MSIP(2014b). The Plan for Technology Commercialization for the diffusion of R&D performance, Seoul, MSIP.
  34. MSIP(2015). Government's R&D Innovation policies, MSIP
  35. Na, B. S.(2001). (The) analysis of relationship among learning organization, organizational culture, organizational learning and organizational effectiveness. Doctoral Dissertation, Korea University, Korea.
  36. Park, J. B.(2011). A Study on Relations among Environment, Strategy, and Performance of Technology Transfer Intermediaries in Korea, Journal of Industrial Economics and Business, 24(1), 275-302.
  37. Park, W., Kim, E. J., & Park, H. Y.(2016). An Empirical Analysis of the Influence Factors on Private-Public R&D Collaboration of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in ICT Sector, Asia Pacific Journal of Small Business, 38(2), 25-44.
  38. Porter, M. E.(1996). What is strategy?, Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61-78.
  39. Porter, M. E.(2008). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors, Simon and Schuster.
  40. Quinn, R. E.(1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. Jossey-Bass.
  41. Roh, D. H., Jeong, Y. K., & Park, H. Y.(2016). An Analysis on the Relative Importance Evaluation of SMEs.Venture Technology Commercialization Problems Using AHP, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Enterprenership, 11(1), 1-12.
  42. Seo, B, W(2011). A Study of the Effects that Management Policies and Accounting and Information Systems of Small and Medium Businesses Have on Business Performances , The Review of Eurasian Studies, 7(4), 102-125.
  43. Schein, E. H.(1985). Defining organizational culture. Classics of Organization Theory, 3, 490-502.
  44. Schein, E, H.(2010). Organizational culture and leadership, 4th(ed), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  45. Schendel & Hofer, C. W.(1979) Strategic Management: A New View of Business Policy and Planning, Little, Brown, Boston, 1979.
  46. SMBA(2014a). Overview of Budget and Fund in 2014, Seoul. SMBA.
  47. SMBA(2014b). Yearly Report, Seoul. SMBA.
  48. Tylor, E.(1964). Culture defined. Sociological Theory: A Book of Readings, West Drayton: Collier-Macmillan, 18-21.
  49. Venkatraman, N., & Camillus, J. C.(1984). Exploring the concept of "fit" in strategic management. The Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 513-525. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1984.4279696
  50. Van de Ven, A. H., & Drazin, R.(1984). The concept of fit in contingency theory. Minnesota Univ Minneapolis Strategic Management Research Center.
  51. Yu, T., & Wu, N.(2009). A Review of study on the competing value Framework, International Journal of Business and Management, 4(7), 37-42
  52. 정보통신산업진흥원(2013), ICT 통계월보 10월호.