AHP를 이용한 정부출연연구소 평가 모형 연구 = A Study on the Evaluation Model of Government-funded Research Institutes Using AHP

다국어 초록 (Multilingual 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.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이문영 ; 이찬구, "피인용 특성 분석을 통한 출연(연) 임무중심형 기관평가의 질적 성과평가 개선 방향" 한국기술혁신학회 19 (19): 768-798, 2016

2 김경수 ; 조남욱, "특허 마이닝을 이용한 국방과학기술 연결망 연구" 한국품질경영학회 49 (49): 97-112, 2021

3 라영재, "정책평가의 이론기반평가: 평가원칙과 적용의 실제: 정부업무평가와 공공기관 경영평가 사례를 중심으로" 한국정책분석평가학회 30 (30): 43-78, 2020

4 손은일 ; 백창화, "디지털 시대의 R&D 프로세스 변화 의미와 정책 방향" 한국품질경영학회 50 (50): 35-42, 2022

5 김영현 ; 하진식, "국방품질경영체제(DQMS) 정량평가모델 개발 및 제도화 방안 연구" 한국품질경영학회 50 (50): 183-197, 2022

6 Kaplan, RS, "Strategic learning and the balanced scorecard" 1996

7 Kostoff, RN, "Strategic Management and Implementation of Textual Data Mining in Government Organizations" 11 (11): 493-525, 1999

8 Pouris, A, "Peer Review in Scientifically Small Countries" 18 (18): 333-340, 1988

9 Werner, BM, "Measuring R&D performance – state of the art" 40 : 34-42, 1997

10 Powell ET, "Logic Models: A framework for program planning and evaluation" 2005

11 Harma, S., "Inter-country R&D efficiency analysis : An application of data envelopment analysis" 76 (76): 483-501, 2008

12 Lim, GH, "Evaluation of R&D project in basic research support" 16 (16): 1-90, 2016

13 Saaty, TL, "Decision making-the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes" 13 : 1-35, 2004

14 Jun, IJ, "Analyzing the research pic networks of technology management and developing a performance evaluation model of R&D commercialization" Seoul National University of Science and Technology 2017

15 Ruegg, R., "A toolkit for evaluating public R&D investment models, models, and findings from ATP’s first decade"

16 Park, SH, "A study on the development direction of the research institute based on autonomy and responsibility" KISTEP 2017

17 Jung, GT., "A study on how to identify and prioritize appropriate performance indicators for basic science research" Daejeon University 2015

18 Park, S, "A case study on the university life of returning students" 29 (29): 5-40, 2018