한국적 인적자원관리의 이론개발을 위한 기반연구

초록

Korea Academy of Management launched the research project “Korea-Type Management (K-Management)” in 2012. As a part of this project, this study focuses on Korea-type human resource management (K-HRM). We define K-HRM as “the process of adopting and implementing practices consistent with policies and guiding principles reflecting Korean values and institutional contexts in order to achieve desirable performance through people.” Hence, the purpose of this study is to lay the groundwork for K-HRM theory. To achieve this, we first described human resource management (HRM) in Korea for three time periods: pre~1987; 1987~1997; and post~1997. We then reviewed 70 papers that have addressed K-HRM or HRM in Korea published in various Korean academic journals and international academic journals listed in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). Finally, we made recommendations for the further development of K-HRM theory in future research. Human resources were a major factor behind the success of Korea, one of poorest countries in the world in the 1960s which has now become the 10th largest economy globally and a member of the OECD. Korea and Korean firms are good examples of the idea that human resources provide a competitive advantage. To understand K-HRM, we have to look at how HRM operates in Korean firms. Although the roots of HRM in Korean firms are not clear, the formation of HR departments and HRM systems began with industrialization in the 1960s. This study analyzes the historical development of Korean HRM after the 1960s. We classify three periods of Korean HRM based on historical events and points of inflection: the establishment of the Korean internal labor market (1960s~1987), the exploration of new HRM (1987~1997), and the pursuit of performance-based HRM (1997~current). (1) The establishment of the Korean internal labor market. From the 1960s to the 1980s, rapid economic development was the main national priority for Korea. Although various strategies were implemented, Korean firms adopted people-based rather than job-based HRM. Behind this, there was a lack of skilled workers, an underdeveloped external craft labor market, and a strong desire for economic development. Characteristics of the Korean internal labor market (ILM) included large scale public hiring, seniority-based compensation, position-based grade systems, discrimination of blue collar with white collar workers, evaluation systems for control purposes, and development systems for team work. (2) The exploration of new HRM. It was 1987 when democratization in terms of both politics and industry first arrived in Korea. There was an increased focus on the needs of workers (especially blue collar workers), which had been suppressed in the name of economic development. Korean firms explored various ways to balance the needs of workers and competitiveness, adopting and experimenting with various HRM practices. However, these trials were not very successful. (3) The pursuit of performance-based HRM. The 1997 financial crisis was another turning point in modern Korean history. As seen in the cases of POSCO and Samsung Electronics, major changes in Korean HRM, aided by increased labor flexibility, included yeonbongje (merit pay), profit sharing, productivity incentives, and performance management systems. Currently, a new HRM paradigm shift is occurring in Korean firms, though many aspects of the traditional Korean ILM still remain. The coexistence of traditional and modern HRM makes it difficult to understand and interpret the characteristics of Korean HRM. It is also not easy to predict the future of Korean HRM due to the new challenges facing Korean society such as aging and the legislation of a mandatory retirement age. As a result, Korean firms face having to solve old HR problems and while preparing for new challenges. After describing the development of K-HRM, we report and discuss the results of a literature review of HRM in Korea. We reviewed a total of 70 studies that meet both of the following selection criteria; (1) empirical studies published in major Korean journals, or empirical studies published in international journals listed in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), (2) studies testing theoretical hypotheses using data collected from Korean firms and employees in Korean firms, focusing on individual HR practices (staffing, training and development, compensation, performance appraisal) or human resource management systems such as high-performance, high-commitment and high-involvement systems. Among these previous studies, most research before the beginning of the 1990s was dedicated to reviews of theoretical perspectives or applications of HRM, rather than empirical investigations. This trend started to change in the middle of the 1990s, when more publications included statistical analyses of empirical data. More recently, especially after the Asian financial crisis, there has been an increasing tendency to examine the relationship between HRM and firm performance. There was also found to be a significant lack of publications in SSCI journals compared to publications in Korean journals. Since the mid-2000s, however, there has been a constant increase in number of studies directly related to HRM in Korea published in international journals. The number of empirical studies in Korea dramatically increased in the late 2000s, and a more diverse range of theories have been introduced to explain the relationship between HRM and both organizational- and individual-level outcomes. The difference between the two time periods is especially evident in the following aspects. In terms of the level of analysis, organizational-level studies are more frequent than individual-level studies. The statistical research methods also evolved so that researchers could more accurately test and address how HR practices or systems affected employees and organizations using more sophisticated methods, such as hierarchical linear modeling and panel data analysis. In terms of theoretical application, we found 27 different theories and perspectives used to predict the relationship between HRM and firm performance, employee attitudes and employee behavior. In predicting the relationship between firm performance and individual HR practices or HR systems, a universal approach, which includes the best-configuration approach, was most frequently applied. On the other hand, the contingency approach and resource-based theory (RBT) were frequently the focus of organizational-level studies. For individual-level studies investigating the impact of HR practices, such as compensation, on employee attitudes and behaviors, organizational justice theory and expectancy theory were the most frequently applied theoretical perspectives. We caution that one should not evaluate all of the human resource management research only based on this study’s overall summary of past empirical studies and theoretical applications. However, it is evident that there has been significant improvement in HRM research in terms of the quantity and quality of the publications. In addition, the results of studies that look at the relationship between HRM and both firm performance and individual-level outcomes have contributed to the increasing competitiveness of Korean firms. Despite these improvements in HRM research in Korea, few studies have paid direct attention to exploring ‘Korea-type’ HRM, which is HRM that reflects Korean values and institutional contexts (e.g., politics, culture, society). In other words, although previous empirical studies on HRM in Korea have found that HR clearly affects firm performance, employee attitudes, and employee behavior, it is difficult to find answers to questions like, “What are the results of studies on ‘Korea-type’ or ‘Korea-specific’ HR?”Conducting K-HRM research is a complex task. We discussed five dichotomies that can complicate K-HRM research: (1) norm vs. reality (between philosophical base and management systems); (2) values vs. environments (between principles and environments); (3) principles vs. practices (between principles and management systems); (4) practices vs. operation (between practices and people); and (5) subject vs. object (between people and performance). The papers we reviewed did not fully reflect these issues. Rather than presenting a balanced view, previous studies have tended to focus on one or the other of the divisions. Hence, future research needs to pay more attention to these issues. Finally, we offered recommendations for future research on K-HRM. First, we suggest that researchers conduct more indigenous Korean management research on topics reflecting Korean values and ethos. Second, we also suggest that more focus should be given to universality-oriented Korean indigenous management research. In this case, theoretical frameworks, research models, or concepts developed in Western countries can be utilized but the constructs or models need to be adapted to reflect Korean values and ethos. By doing this, we can add value to established theoretical frameworks by providing a complementary view. Our third suggestion is to design research that reveals the unique features of Korean management through a comparative approach. By doing this, we can delineate the country-specific or culture-specific features of Korean HRM. Fourth, inter-disciplinary or multi-disciplinary research is recommended. In particular, utilizing the academic disciplines of humanities and social sciences is required to enable the accurate interpretation and evaluation of K-HRM phenomena and theories. Finally, academic associations and journals need to provide an institutional setting that encourages the aforementioned research suggestions. For example, academic journals could change the evaluation criteria in their review process to encourage more K-HRM papers that do not employ typical empirical research methods.

키워드