RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      IPA 분석을 활용한 사회적기업의 창업생태계 개선 및 활성화 방안 연구 = Research on ways to improve and revitalize the social enterprise startup ecosystem using IPA analysis

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109744327

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      The social enterprise startup ecosystem in Korea has had some positive aspects, such as the government's initiative to build infrastructure in a relatively short period of time and a significant increase in the number of social enterprises. However, there is a lack of consistency in government policies, the disappearance of the innovation inherent in social enterprises, and a lack of mid- to long-term strategies from the perspective of the startup ecosystem. In this study, the importance and satisfaction (current level) of each component of the social enterprise startup ecosystem were analyzed using the IPA analysis method for the most important stakeholders of the social enterprise startup ecosystem, namely, entrepreneurs (social entrepreneurs), to provide implications for the establishment of future social enterprise policies.
      The results of this study showed that the order of importance for social entrepreneurs was: (1) consistency and predictability of government policies (4.72), (2) funding for each stage of growth (4.65), (3) startup support programs (4.64), (4) ease of survival after startup (4.62), and (5) a culture of re-challenge and acceptance of failure (4.57). The satisfaction (current level) rankings were as follows: 1) Startup support staff (3.31), 2) Startup support organization support (3.31), 3) Startup support program (3.20), 4) Startup support organization (intermediate support organization) capacity building (3.17), and 5) Sharing of know-how from senior entrepreneurs (3.13). When the t-test was conducted to analyze the differences in each sub-element of the social enterprise startup ecosystem, all sub-elements showed a higher importance than satisfaction, which means that social enterprise startup entrepreneurs perceive the satisfaction of the social enterprise startup ecosystem components to be very low compared to their importance. In addition, the factors with the highest improvement ranking in the importance-satisfaction matrix were testbed support, ease of market entry, social safety net in the event of a startup failure, ease of exit, a re-challenge ecosystem and a culture of accepting failure, ease of survival after startup, funding support for each stage of growth, and consistency and predictability of government policies. This study proposes improvements to the consistency and predictability of government policies, the creation of a re-challenge ecosystem and the acceptance of failure, the ease of survival after founding, the ease of exit, and funding support for each stage of growth to develop the social enterprise startup ecosystem.
      번역하기

      The social enterprise startup ecosystem in Korea has had some positive aspects, such as the government's initiative to build infrastructure in a relatively short period of time and a significant increase in the number of social enterprises. However, t...

      The social enterprise startup ecosystem in Korea has had some positive aspects, such as the government's initiative to build infrastructure in a relatively short period of time and a significant increase in the number of social enterprises. However, there is a lack of consistency in government policies, the disappearance of the innovation inherent in social enterprises, and a lack of mid- to long-term strategies from the perspective of the startup ecosystem. In this study, the importance and satisfaction (current level) of each component of the social enterprise startup ecosystem were analyzed using the IPA analysis method for the most important stakeholders of the social enterprise startup ecosystem, namely, entrepreneurs (social entrepreneurs), to provide implications for the establishment of future social enterprise policies.
      The results of this study showed that the order of importance for social entrepreneurs was: (1) consistency and predictability of government policies (4.72), (2) funding for each stage of growth (4.65), (3) startup support programs (4.64), (4) ease of survival after startup (4.62), and (5) a culture of re-challenge and acceptance of failure (4.57). The satisfaction (current level) rankings were as follows: 1) Startup support staff (3.31), 2) Startup support organization support (3.31), 3) Startup support program (3.20), 4) Startup support organization (intermediate support organization) capacity building (3.17), and 5) Sharing of know-how from senior entrepreneurs (3.13). When the t-test was conducted to analyze the differences in each sub-element of the social enterprise startup ecosystem, all sub-elements showed a higher importance than satisfaction, which means that social enterprise startup entrepreneurs perceive the satisfaction of the social enterprise startup ecosystem components to be very low compared to their importance. In addition, the factors with the highest improvement ranking in the importance-satisfaction matrix were testbed support, ease of market entry, social safety net in the event of a startup failure, ease of exit, a re-challenge ecosystem and a culture of accepting failure, ease of survival after startup, funding support for each stage of growth, and consistency and predictability of government policies. This study proposes improvements to the consistency and predictability of government policies, the creation of a re-challenge ecosystem and the acceptance of failure, the ease of survival after founding, the ease of exit, and funding support for each stage of growth to develop the social enterprise startup ecosystem.

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼