28 research outputs found
Structural Relationships between Team Performance, Transformational Leadership, Empowerment, Absorptive Capacity, Task Uncertainty, and Psychological Safety Perceived by R&D Team Members in Korean Large Companies
νμλ
Όλ¬Έ(λ°μ¬)--μμΈλνκ΅ λνμ :λμ
μλͺ
κ³Όνλν λμ°μ
κ΅μ‘κ³Ό,2019. 8. κΉμ§λͺ¨.This study was aimed at examining the structural relationships between transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity and team performance perceived by R&D team members in large companies and finding and the moderating effects of team task uncertainty and team psychological safety on a specific path of the structural model. To meet the research objectives, the following steps were taken: i) to examine the structural model of transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity and team performance perceived by R&D team members in large companies; ii) to examine the relationships between transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity and team performance perceived by R&D team members in large companies; iii) to examine the mediating effects of team empowerment and team absorptive capacity on the structural relationships between transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity and team performance of R&D teams in large companies; iv) to examine the moderating effects of team task uncertainty on the structural relationships between transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity and team performance of R&D teams in large companies; and v) to examine the moderating effects of team psychological safety on the structural relationships between transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity and team performance of R&D teams in large companies.
The target of this study is R&D team members in domestic large companies. However, if a large company is rarely involved in research and development, it is hard to find the accurate characteristics of a general R&D team by conducting research on that company. The target population was accordingly set as the R&D teams at the top 50 companies in consideration of the R&D investment volume in 2016 suggested in the Report on Corporate R&D Investment and Performance published by the Science and Technology Policy Institute (2017). The research method was a survey comprised of scales measuring team performance, transformational leadership, team empowerment, team absorptive capacity, team task uncertainty and team psychological safety and items for demographic information.
For preliminary research, the survey data was collected from 55 R&D team members at large companies between April 16 and 22, 2019. The main survey was collected from 328 members of 95 teams at 15 companies between April 25 and May 23, 2019. The data of 319 members of 91 teams at 15 companies (misleading or inappropriate answers excluded) was used to see the analysis level. As the team-level analysis was not validated, the data of 316 respondents from 91 teams (outliers excluded) was used for the final analysis. The data was analyzed using technical statistics such as frequencies, percentages and standard deviations, correlation coefficient and t-test via SPSS Statistics 22.0, and the structural equation modeling and mediation and moderating using structural equation modeling were conducted using Mplus 6.12. The statistical significance of the result of inferential statistics was set at p<.05.
This study resulted as follows: i) The fit indices of the structural model between team performance, transformational leadership, team empowerment and team absorptive capacity of R&D teams in large companies were all moderate, having appropriately expected the structural relationships between the variables; ii) Transformational leadership had no significant and positive effect on team performance, while positively affecting team empowerment (Ξ²=.594, pβ¨.001) and team absorptive capacity (Ξ²=.306, pβ¨.001), respectively. Team empowerment also had a positive effect respectively on team performance (Ξ²=.579, pβ¨.001) and team absorptive capacity (Ξ²=.575, pβ¨.001), which was turned out to have a positive effect on team performance (Ξ²=.332, pβ¨.001); iii) mediating effects were analyzed based on the estimation using bootstrapping. The result showed that team empowerment (Ξ²=.344, pβ¨.001) and team absorptive capacity (Ξ²=.102, pβ¨.01) significantly mediated the relationships between transformational leadership and team performance, whereas double mediation of team empowerment and team absorptive capacity on the relationships between transformational leadership and team performance was significant (Ξ²=.114, pβ¨.001); and iv) there existed no significant moderating effects of team task uncertainty on the relationships between transformational leadership and team absorptive capacity and between team empowerment and team absorptive capacity, as well as moderating effects of team psychological safety on the relationships between team absorptive capacity and team performance.
The conclusions of this study include the followings: i) Transformational leadership, team empowerment and team absorptive capacity perceived by R&D team members appropriately expect the team performance; ii) Transformational leadership perceived by R&D team members has no direct and positive effect on team performance; iii) Transformational leadership perceived by R&D team members directly and positively affects team empowerment; iv) Transformational leadership perceived by R&D team members has a direct and positive impact on team absorptive capacity; v) Team empowerment perceived by R&D team members directly and positively influences team absorptive capacity; vi) Team absorptive capacity perceived by R&D team members directly and positively affects team performance; and vii) team empowerment and team absorptive capacity perceived by R&D team members respectively have single-mediating and double-mediating effects on the paths between transformational leadership and team performance.
Based on the aforementioned conclusions, the suggestions for future research were proposed as below: i) it is needed to use objective indices to measure team performance or limit a certain agent as a team leader; ii)γfuture research needs to be conducted given the differences of R&D teams by industry; iii) circumstantial moderating variables which may affect team absorptive capacity need further research; iv) future research needs to consider non-human trust in the definition and the scales of team psychological safety; and v) team-related factors affecting R&D team performance should be explored further.
Practical suggestions were proposed for the improvement of team performance perceived by R&D team members, based on the conclusions: i) circumstantial factors which can maximize the effectiveness of transformational leadership of R&D team leaders should be found; ii) psychological empowerment, not a structural one, needs to be exercised in the process of team empowerment; and iii) it is needed to create an environment where R&D team members can demonstrate their team absorptive capacity.μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ λͺ©μ μ λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ λ° ν μ±κ³Όμ ꡬ쑰μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό κ²μ¦νκ³ , ꡬ쑰 λͺ¨νμ νΉμ κ²½λ‘μμ ν κ³Όμ
λΆνμ€μ±κ³Ό ν μ¬λ¦¬μ μμ μ μ‘°μ ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό κ²μ¦νλλ° μμλ€. μ°κ΅¬ λͺ©μ μ λ¬μ±νκΈ° μν΄ μ²«μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ λ° ν μ±κ³Ό κ°μ ꡬ쑰μ λͺ¨νμ κ²μ¦νμλ€. λμ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ λ° ν μ±κ³Ό κ° μν₯κ΄κ³λ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νμλ€. μ
μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°νμ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ λ° ν μ±κ³Όμ ꡬ쑰μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμ ν ν‘μμλμ΄ κ°λ 맀κ°ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νμλ€. λ·μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°νμ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ λ° ν μ±κ³Όμ ꡬ쑰μ κ΄κ³μμ ν κ³Όμ
λΆνμ€μ±μ μ‘°μ ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νμλ€. λ€μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°νμ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ λ° ν μ±κ³Όμ ꡬ쑰μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μ¬λ¦¬μ μμ μ μ‘°μ ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νμλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ λμμ κ΅λ΄ λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄λ€. κ·Έλ¬λ μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νλμ΄ μ μΌμ΄λμ§ μλ λκΈ°μ
μ μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°ν νΉμ±μ λν μ νν μ‘°μ¬κ° μ΄λ ΅κΈ° λλ¬Έμ κ³ΌνκΈ°μ μ μ±
μ°κ΅¬μ(2017)μμ λ°νν κΈ°μ
μ μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°ν¬μμ μ±κ³Ό λ³΄κ³ μμ μ μλ 2016λ
λ μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° ν¬μκ·λͺ¨ μμλ₯Ό κ³ λ €νμ¬ μμ 50κ° λκΈ°μ
리μ€νΈλ₯Ό νμ©νμλ€. μ‘°μ¬λꡬλ‘λ ν μ±κ³Ό, λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλ, ν κ³Όμ
λΆνμ€μ±, ν μ¬λ¦¬μ μμ μ²λμ μΈκ΅¬ν΅κ³νμ λ¬ΈνμΌλ‘ ꡬμ±λ μ€λ¬Έμ§λ₯Ό μ¬μ©νμλ€.
μλ£ μμ§μ μλΉμ‘°μ¬μ κ²½μ°, 2019λ
4μ 16μΌλΆν° 4μ 22μΌκΉμ§ λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° μ°κ΅¬μ 55λͺ
μ λμμΌλ‘ μ€μλμλ€. λ³Έμ‘°μ¬μ κ²½μ°, 2019λ
4μ 25μΌλΆν° 5μ 23μΌκΉμ§ μ΄λ£¨μ΄μ‘μΌλ©°, 15κ° κΈ°μ
μ 95κ° ν, 328λͺ
μ μλ£λ₯Ό νμν ν λΆμ μ ν μλ΅μ μ μΈνκ³ , 15κ° κΈ°μ
μ 91κ° ν, 319λͺ
μλ£λ₯Ό νμ©νμ¬ λΆμ μμ€μ νμΈνμλ€. ν μμ€ λΆμμ νλΉμ±μ κ²ν ν κ²°κ³Ό, νλΉμ±μ΄ μΆ©μ‘±λμ§ μμ 91κ° νμ μμλ 319λͺ
μ μλ΅ μλ£ μ€ μ΄μμΉλ₯Ό μ μΈν 316λͺ
μ μλ΅ μλ£λ₯Ό μ΅μ’
λΆμμ νμ©νμλ€. μλ£ λΆμμ SPSS Statistics 22.0μ μ΄μ©νμ¬ λΉλ, λ°±λΆμ¨, νκ· , νμ€νΈμ°¨ λ±μ κΈ°μ ν΅κ³μ μκ΄κ΄κ³ λΆμ, t-κ²μ μ μ€μνμμΌλ©°, Mplus 6.12λ₯Ό μ΄μ©νμ¬ κ΅¬μ‘°λ°©μ μ λͺ¨ν λΆμ, μ μ¬μ‘°μ ꡬ쑰방μ μ λͺ¨ν λΆμμ μ€μνμλ€. μΆλ¦¬ν΅κ³ κ²°κ³Όμ λν ν΅κ³μ μ μμ±μ .05λ₯Ό κΈ°μ€μΌλ‘ νλ¨νμλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°κ³Όλ 첫째, λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°νμ μ±κ³Όμ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° ν ν‘μμλ κ° κ΅¬μ‘°λͺ¨νμ λν μ ν©λλ λͺ¨λ μνΈν κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ λ³μΈ κ° κ΅¬μ‘°μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νλΉνκ² μμΈ‘νμλ€. λμ§Έ, λ³νμ 리λμμ ν μ±κ³Όμ μ μν μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉμ§ μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬μΌλ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμλ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.594, pβ¨.001)μ λ―Έμ³€μΌλ©°, ν ν‘μμλμλ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(Ξ²=.306, pβ¨.001). λν ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ ν μ±κ³Ό(Ξ²=.579, pβ¨.001)μ ν ν‘μμλ(Ξ²=.575, pβ¨.001) κ°κ°μ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ§μ§λ§μΌλ‘ ν ν‘μμλλ ν μ±κ³Όμ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.332, pβ¨.001)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μ
μ§Έ, 맀κ°ν¨κ³Όλ λΆνΈμ€νΈλνμ μν μΆμ μ ν΅ν΄ λΆμνμλ€. λΆμ κ²°κ³Ό, λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν μ±κ³Όμ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ(Ξ²=.344, pβ¨.001)μ ν ν‘μμλ(Ξ²=.102, pβ¨.01)μ μ μν 맀κ°ν¨κ³Όκ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬μΌλ©°, λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν μ±κ³Όμ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλμ μ΄μ€ 맀κ°ν¨κ³Ό λν μ μν κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(Ξ²=.114, pβ¨.001).λ·μ§Έ, ꡬ쑰λͺ¨νμμ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν ν‘μμλμ κ΄κ³, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμ ν ν‘μμλμ κ΄κ³μμ ν κ³Όμ
λΆνμ€μ±μ μ‘°μ ν¨κ³Όμ ν ν‘μμλκ³Ό ν μ±κ³Όμ κ΄κ³μμ ν μ¬λ¦¬μ μμ μ μ‘°μ ν¨κ³Όλ μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°λ‘ μΌλ‘λ 첫째, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ, ν ν‘μμλμ ν μ±κ³Όλ₯Ό μμΈ‘νλλ° μ ν©νλ€. λμ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν 리λμ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν μ±κ³Όμ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉμ§ μλλ€. μ
μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν 리λμ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ·μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν 리λμ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν ν‘μμλμ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ€μ―μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ ν ν‘μμλμ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μ¬μ―μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν ν ν‘μμλμ ν μ±κ³Όμ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μΌκ³±μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμν ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμ ν ν‘μμλμ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν μ±κ³Ό κ° κ²½λ‘λ₯Ό κ°κ° λ¨μΌλ§€κ°, μ΄μ€λ§€κ° νλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°λ‘ μ ν΅ν΄ νμ μ°κ΅¬λ₯Ό μν μ μΈμ μ μνλ©΄ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€. 첫째, ν μ±κ³Όμ μΈ‘μ μ μμ΄ κ°κ΄μ μΈ μ§νλ₯Ό νμ©νκ±°λ μΈ‘μ 주체λ₯Ό νμ₯μΌλ‘ νμ νμ¬ μ°κ΅¬λ₯Ό μνν νμκ° μλ€. λμ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°νμ μ
μ’
λ³ μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό κ³ λ €ν μ°κ΅¬λ₯Ό μνν΄μΌ νλ€. μ
μ§Έ, ν ν‘μμλμ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ μν©μ μ‘°μ λ³μΈμ λν μΆκ°μ μΈ μ°κ΅¬κ° νμνλ€. λ·μ§Έ, ν μ¬λ¦¬μ μμ μ κ°λ
λ° μΈ‘μ λꡬμ μμ΄ λΉμΈμ μ λ’° μΈ‘λ©΄μ κ³ λ €ν νμ μ°κ΅¬κ° νμνλ€. λ€μ―μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°ν μ±κ³Όμ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ ν κ΄λ ¨ μμΈμ μΆκ°μ μΌλ‘ νμν νμκ° μλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°λ‘ μ ν΅ν΄ μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμμ΄ μΈμνλ ν μ±κ³Ό μμ€μ ν₯μμν€κΈ° μν μ€μ²μ μ μΈμ μ μνλ©΄ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€. 첫째, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°ν 리λκ° λ°ννλ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν¨κ³Όμ±μ κ·Ήλνν μ μλ μν©μ μμΈμ ꡬλͺ
ν΄ λκ°μΌ νλ€. λμ§Έ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ μ€μ² κ³Όμ μμ ꡬ쑰μ μνμλ¨ΌνΈκ° μλ μ¬λ¦¬μ μνμλ¨ΌνΈκ° μ€μ²λ μ μλλ‘ ν΄μΌ νλ€. μ
μ§Έ, μ°κ΅¬κ°λ° νμλ€μ΄ ν ν‘μμλμ μ€μ²ν μ μλ νκ²½μ μ‘°μ±ν΄μ£Όμ΄μΌ νλ€.I. μλ‘ 1
1. μ°κ΅¬μ νμμ± 1
2. μ°κ΅¬μ λͺ©μ 5
3. μ°κ΅¬ λ¬Έμ 5
4. μ©μ΄μ μ μ 7
5. μ°κ΅¬μ μ ν 9
II. μ΄λ‘ μ λ°°κ²½ 10
1. λκΈ°μ
μ°κ΅¬κ°λ°ν 10
2. ν μ±κ³Ό 13
3. ν μ±κ³Ό κ΄λ ¨ μ£Όμ λ³μΈ 20
4. ν μ±κ³Ό κ΄λ ¨ λ³μΈ κ° κ΄κ³ 46
III. μ°κ΅¬λ°©λ² 66
1. μ°κ΅¬λͺ¨ν 66
2. μ°κ΅¬λμ 67
3. μλ£μμ§ 71
4. μ‘°μ¬λꡬ 76
5. μλ£λΆμ 87
IV. μ°κ΅¬ κ²°κ³Ό λ° λ
Όμ 91
1. κ΄μ°°λ³μΈ λΆμ 91
2. μΈ‘μ λͺ¨ν λΆμ 95
3. ꡬ쑰λͺ¨ν λΆμ λ° λͺ¨νμμ 99
4. μ΅μ’
ꡬ쑰λͺ¨ν λΆμ 101
5. μ°κ΅¬ κ²°κ³Όμ λν λ
Όμ 112
V. μμ½, κ²°λ‘ λ° μ μΈ 126
1. μμ½ 126
2. κ²°λ‘ 128
3. μ μΈ 130
μ°Έκ³ λ¬Έν 135
λΆλ‘ 163Docto
The Structural Relationship among Learning, Leaders Transformational Leadership, Empowerment and Cohesiveness of Teams in Large Corporations
νμλ
Όλ¬Έ (μμ¬)-- μμΈλνκ΅ λνμ : λμ°μ
κ΅μ‘κ³Ό, 2015. 7. κΉμ§λͺ¨.μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ λͺ©μ μ λκΈ°μ
νμ νμ΅κ³Ό νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμ, μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° μμ§λ ₯μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νλ λ° μλ€. ꡬ체μ μΈ λͺ©νλ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€. 첫째, λκΈ°μ
νμ νμ΅κ³Ό νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° ν μμ§λ ₯ κ°μ ꡬ쑰μ λͺ¨νμ μ€μ νκ³ , μ€μ ν λͺ¨νμ΄ λ³μΈ κ° κ΅¬μ‘°μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό μ ν©νκ² μμΈ‘νλμ§ κ²μ¦νλ€. λμ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅, ν μμ§λ ₯ λ° ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ κ°μ μν₯ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νλ€. μ
μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμ ν μμ§λ ₯ λ° ν νμ΅ κ°μ μν₯ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νλ€. λ·μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ ν μμ§λ ₯κ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ μν₯ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νλ€. λ€μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° ν μμ§λ ₯μ΄ κ°λ λ¨μΌλ§€κ°ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νλ€. μ¬μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° μμ§λ ₯μ΄ κ°λ μ΄μ€λ§€κ°ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό ꡬλͺ
νλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ λͺ¨μ§λ¨μ λκΈ°μ
μ’
μ¬μμ΄λ©°, λͺ©ν λͺ¨μ§λ¨μ λͺ©ν λͺ¨μ§λ¨μ λνμ곡νμμμμ μ 곡νλ 1000λ κΈ°μ
(맀μΆμ‘ μ)μ κΈ°λ₯νμ΄λ€. λ³Έ μ‘°μ¬μ μλ£ μμ§μ μ°νΈμ‘°μ¬ λ° μ¨λΌμΈ μ€λ¬Έ μμ€ν
(KSDC)λ₯Ό ν΅ν μ μνμ§μ νμ©νμμΌλ©°, μ΄ 28κ° κΈ°μ
μ 88κ° κΈ°λ₯ν, 588λͺ
μ΄ μλ΅ν μλ£λ₯Ό ν보νμλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μμ μμ§λ μλ£λ SPSS Statistics 22.0μ AMOS 21.0 ν΅κ³νλ‘κ·Έλ¨μ νμ©νμ¬ λΆμνμμΌλ©°, λͺ¨λ λΆμμ μμ΄μ ν΅κ³μ μ μμμ€μ 5%λ‘ μ€μ νμλ€. μ£Όμ ν΅κ³λ°©λ²μΌλ‘λ λΉλ, λ°±λΆμ¨, νκ· , νμ€νΈμ°¨ λ±μ κΈ°μ ν΅κ³κΈ°λ²μ νμ©νκ³ , λ³μΈ κ°μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό λ°νκΈ° μν΄ μκ΄κ΄κ³ λΆμμ νμ©νμμΌλ©°, ꡬ쑰방μ μ λͺ¨νμ ν΅ν΄ κ° κ²½λ‘κ³μμ μ μλλ₯Ό νμΈνμλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°κ³Όλ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€. 첫째, λκΈ°μ
νμ νμ΅κ³Ό νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° μμ§λ ₯ κ°μ ꡬ쑰μ λͺ¨νμ λν μ ν©λλ μνΈν κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ λ³μΈ κ° κ΅¬μ‘°μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νλΉνκ² μμΈ‘νμλ€. λμ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν νμ΅μ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.436)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬μΌλ©°, ν μμ§λ ₯μλ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.350)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λν νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈμλ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.748)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μ
μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ ν μμ§λ ₯μ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.520)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬μΌλ©°, ν νμ΅μλ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.425)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ·μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ ν μμ§λ ₯μ ν νμ΅μ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯(Ξ²=.211)μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ€μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ μ μλ―Έν κ°μ ν¨κ³Ό(Ξ=.198)κ° λνλ¬μΌλ, νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μμ§λ ₯μ μ μλ―Έν κ°μ ν¨κ³Όκ° λνλμ§ μμλ€. μ¬μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° μμ§λ ₯ μμ μ μλ―Έν κ°μ ν¨κ³Όκ° λνλμ§ μμλ€.
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°λ‘ μΌλ‘λ 첫째, μ΄ μ°κ΅¬μμ μ€μ ν λ³μΈ κ° κ΅¬μ‘°μ κ΄κ³ λͺ¨νμ λκΈ°μ
νμλ€μ λμμΌλ‘ ν μ€μ¦μλ£λ₯Ό λΆμνκΈ°μ μ ν©νλ©°, λ
립λ³μΈκ³Ό μ’
μλ³μΈ κ°μ ꡬ쑰μ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νλΉνκ² μμΈ‘νλ€. λμ§Έ, νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμμ ν νμ΅μ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ©°, ν μμ§λ ₯κ³Ό ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ κ°κ° ν νμ΅μ μ§μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μ
μ§Έ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ ν μμ§λ ₯κ³Ό ν νμ΅μ κ°κ° μ§μ μ μΈ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ·μ§Έ, ν μμ§λ ₯μ ν νμ΅μ μ§μ μ μΈ μν₯μ μ£Όλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λ€μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈλ κ°μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬μΌλ, νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μμ§λ ₯μ κ°μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯ κ΄κ³κ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μ¬μ―μ§Έ, λκΈ°μ
μ νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμκ³Ό ν νμ΅ κ°μ κ΄κ³μμ ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° μμ§λ ₯ μμ κ°μ μ μΈ μ μ μν₯ κ΄κ³κ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€.
μ΄μ κ°μ κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό ν λλ‘ λ€μκ³Ό κ°μ μ¬νμ μ μΈνμλ€. 첫째, ν νμ΅μ μν₯μ μ€ μ μλ μ¬λ¦¬μ μμλΏλ§ μλλΌ λ€μν λ§₯λ½μ μμλ€μ κ³ λ €ν νμκ° μλ€. λμ§Έ, νμ νΉμ±μ κ³ λ €νμ¬ λ³΄λ€ λ€μνκ³ μΈλΆνλ μ°κ΅¬κ° μΆκ°μ μΌλ‘ μ§νλ νμκ° μλ€. μ
μ§Έ, ν νμ΅μ ꡬλͺ
νλ λ€μν μ°κ΅¬ λ°©λ²μ΄ μΆκ°μ μΌλ‘ κ³ λ €λ νμκ° μλ€.The purpose of this study was to identify a structural relationship among team learning, leaders transformational leadership, empowerment and cohesiveness of teams in large corporations. Specific objectives to accomplish the research goal were as follows: First, to identify the fit indices of hypothetical structural model of team learning, team leaders transformational leadership, team empowerment and team cohesiveness of team in large corporationsSecond, to identify the relationship among team leaders transformational leadership, team learning, team cohesiveness and team empowermentThird, to identify the relationship among team empowerment, team cohesiveness and team learningFourth, to identify the relationship among team cohesiveness and team learningFifth, to identify the mediation effect of team empowerment and team cohesiveness between team leaders transformational leadership, team learning. Sixth, to identify the dual mediation effect of team empowerment and team cohesiveness between team leaders transformational leadership, team learning.
The population for this study was team of large-sized corporations in Korea. However, due to the difficulty of counting all teams in large corporations, this study was restricted to the target population as employees of 1,000 companies list by the KCCI(Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry). The data were collected by the KSDC(Korea Social science Data Center) and questionnaire. After screening the data, 588 responses from 88 teams were used for statistical analysis.
All data analysis was accomplished using the SPSS Statistics 22.0 and AMOS 21.0 version. An alpha level of 5% was established prior for determining significance. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis. To estimate parameters of proposed research model, structural equation modeling analysis was used.
The findings of the study were as follows: First, the fit indices of hypothetical structural model of team learning, team leaders transformational leadership, team empowerment and team cohesiveness were suitably identified. Second, team leaders transformational leadership had a statistically significant effect on team learning(Ξ²=.436)on team cohesiveness(Ξ²=.350) and on team empowerment(Ξ²=.748). Third, team empowerment had a statistically significant effect on team cohesiveness(Ξ²=.520)on team learning(Ξ²=.425). Fourth, team cohesiveness had a statistically significant effect on team learning(Ξ²=.211). Fifth, team leaders transformational leadership had a statistically significant effect on team learning with the single mediation effect of team empowerment (Ξ=.198)did not have a statistically significant effect on team learning with the single mediation effect of team cohesiveness. Sixth, team cohesiveness had a statistically significant effect on team learning(Ξ²=.211). Seventh, team leaders transformational leadership did not have a statistically significant effect on team learning with the dual mediation effect of team empowerment and team cohesiveness.
Based on the study, major conclusions of this study were as follows: First, a structural equation model among team learning, team leaders transformational leadership, team empowerment and team cohesiveness was suitable to empirical analysis on research variables. Second, team leaders transformational leadership had a positive direct effect on team learning, team cohesiveness and team empowerment. Third, team empowerment had a positive direct effect on team learning and team cohesiveness. Forth, team cohesiveness had a positive direct effect on team learning. Fifth, team leaders transformational leadership had a indirect effect on team learning with the single mediation effect of team empowerment and did not have a indirect effect on team learning with the single mediation effect of team cohesiveness. Sixth, team leaders transformational leadership did not have a indirect effect on team learning with the dual mediation effect of team empowerment and team cohesiveness.
Several recommendations for future researches were suggested as follows: First, further research needs to identify the contextual factors that lead to team learning. Second, further research needs to specify teams characteristics. Third, further research need to use diverse research methods for team learning such as qualitative research and hierarchial linear model.I. μλ‘
1. μ°κ΅¬μ νμμ±
2. μ°κ΅¬μ λͺ©μ
3. μ°κ΅¬μ κ°μ€
4. μ©μ΄μ μ μ
5. μ°κ΅¬μ μ ν
II. μ΄λ‘ μ λ°°κ²½
1. ν
2. ν νμ΅
3. νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° μμ§λ ₯
4. νμ₯ λ³νμ 리λμ, ν μνμλ¨ΌνΈ λ° ν μμ§λ ₯κ³Ό ν νμ΅μ κ΄κ³
III. μ°κ΅¬ λ°©λ²
1. μ°κ΅¬λͺ¨ν
2. μ°κ΅¬λμ
3. μ‘°μ¬λꡬ
4. μλ£μμ§
5. μλ£λΆμ
IV. μ°κ΅¬ κ²°κ³Ό λ° λ
Όμ
1. μλ£μ μΌλ°μ νΉμ±
2. μΈ‘μ λͺ¨νμ λΆμ
3. κ°μ€μ λͺ¨νμ λΆμ
4. ν νμ΅κ³Ό κ΄λ ¨ λ³μΈλ€ κ°μ μν₯ κ΄κ³ λΆμ
5. λ
Όμ
V. μμ½, κ²°λ‘ λ° μ μΈ
1. μμ½
2. κ²°λ‘
3. μ μΈ
μ°Έκ³ λ¬Έν
λΆλ‘Maste
(A)Case study of 7th grader`s understanding of the equal sign
νμλ
Όλ¬Έ(μμ¬) --μμΈλνκ΅ λνμ :μνκ΅μ‘κ³Ό,2007.Maste
Clinical features and follow-up results of pulsating polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy treated with photodynamic therapy
PURPOSE: βTo report on the clinical course of pulsating polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV) treated with photodynamic therapy (PDT).
METHODS: β A total of 63 eyes of 58 consecutive patients diagnosed with PCV, treated with PDT and followed up for at least 6months were enrolled. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), fluorescein angiography and high-speed indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) using confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (HRA) were performed.
RESULTS: β Of the 63 PCV eyes, 14 eyes (22.2%) of 14 patients were classified as having pulsating PCV. The mean age of pulsating PCV patients was 60.6Β±7.0years (48-69years), which was younger than non-pulsating PCV patients (65.7years, p=0.035). The mean follow-up period was 23.9Β±10.7months, and PDT was administered 1.6Β±0.9 times to pulsating PCV patients. The mean logMAR BCVAs were 0.85Β±0.47 at presentation and 0.71Β±0.52 at final examination. Extensive haemorrhagic events were more common in pulsating than in non-pulsating PCV patients (57.1% versus 26.5%, p=0.032). However, the risk of haemorrhage within 3months of PDT was similar for both pulsating PCV and the remaining patients (14.3% versus 20%, p=0.723).
CONCLUSION: β Pulsating PCV showed distinctive features including a relatively younger patient age at presentation, and a haemorrhagic tendency (especially extensive). However, the use of PDT did not directly increase the risk of haemorrhage in pulsating PCV patients.ope