Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
Korean Academic Society of Business Administration
[ Article ]
korean management review - Vol. 45, No. 5, pp.1623-1644
ISSN: 1226-1874 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Oct 2016
Received 28 Jan 2016 Revised 10 May 2016 Accepted 02 Jun 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2016.45.5.1623

조직학습과 지위: 한국 대학의 연구개발 투자, 2007-2013년

정대훈* ; 신동엽**
*(주저자, 교신저자) 연세대학교 경영대학 immaqsad2009@gmail.com
**(공저자) 연세대학교 경영대학 dshin@yonsei.ac.kr
Organizational Learning and Status: R&D Investments by Korean Universities, 2007-2013
Daehun Chung* ; Dongyoub Shin**
*Yonsei School of Business, First Author and Corresponding Author
**Yonsei School of Business, Co-Author

초록

본 논문은 환경으로부터의 피드백에 대한 조직의 적응 메커니즘인 조직학습이 연구개발 투자에 미치는 영향을 지위가 어떻게 조절하는지를 연구한다. 연구개발 투자에 대한 기존 조직학습 논문들은 대부분 조직 자신의 성과피드백으로부터의 경험적 학습과 다른 조직들의 경험을 통한 대리학습이 연구개발 투자에 미치는 영향을 분석하였다. 하지만 기존 연구들은 두 종류의 조직학습이 연구개발 투자에 미치는 효과가 조직마다 다르게 나타나는 메커니즘에 대해서는 상대적으로 관심이 낮았다. 본 논문에서는 경험적 학습과 대리학습이 연구개발 투자에 미치는 영향이 조직별로 다른 주된 원인이 조직지위에 있다고 보고, 조직지위에 따라 두 종류의 조직학습이 연구개발 투자에 미치는 영향이 달라질 것이라고 주장한다. 즉 본 논문에서는 조직의 지위가 높을수록 연구개발 투자에서 경험적 학습이나 대리학습으로부터 받는 영향이 작을 것이라고 예측한다. 이러한 가설을 검증하기 위해 본 연구는 2007년부터 2013년까지의 한국 대학들의 연구개발 투자에 관한 자료들을 실증적으로 분석한 결과 모든 가설들이 지지되었다.

Abstract

This paper examines whether and how status moderates the effects of organizational learning, which is the key adaptive mechanism to environmental feedbacks, on R&D investment. Most existing learning papers on R&D analyzed the effects of experiential learning and/or vicarious learning on R&D expenditures. However, those existing studies paid scant attention to the fact that such effects from the two types of organizational learning often varied across organizations. To explain this variation, the current paper focuses on the moderating effects of status which we view as the main cause of such differences of learning effects across organizations. That is, we predict that organizational status will reduce the effects of experiential and vicarious learning on R&D investment. To test the hypotheses empirically, this paper analyzed an original data-set of Korean universities’ R&D investments 2007-2013. According to the results of the empirical analysis, all the hypotheses were supported.

Keywords:

Organizational Learning, Status, Performance Feedback, Vicarious Learning, R&D Investment

키워드:

조직학습, 조직지위, 성과피드백, 대리학습, 연구개발

References

  • 교육부 (2013), 대학정보공시 양식 및 지침, 서울, 한국대학교육협의회.
  • Audia, P. G., and H. R. Greve(2006), “Less Likely to Fail: Low Performance, Firm Size, and Factory Expansion in the Shipbuilding Industry,” Management Science, 52, 83-94. [https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0446]
  • Bandura, A.(1977), “Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,” Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191]
  • Baum, J. A. C., S. X. Li, and J. M. Usher(2000), “Making the Next Move: How Experiential and Vicarious Learning Shape the Locations of Chains’ Acquisitions,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 766-801. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2667019]
  • Becker, M., C. T. Knudsen, and J. G. March(2006), “Schumpeter, Winter, and the Sources of Novelty,” Industrial and Corporate Change, 15, 353-371. [https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtl003]
  • Benjamin, B. A., and J. M. Podolny(1999), “Status, Quality, and Social Order in the California Wine Industry,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 563-589. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2666962]
  • Bromiley, P.(1991), “Testing a Causal Model of Corporate Risk Taking and Performance,” Academy of Management Journal, 34, 37-59. [https://doi.org/10.5465/256301]
  • Bingham, C. B., and J. P. Davis (2012), “Learning Sequences: Their Existence, Effect and Evolution,” Academy of Management Journal, 55, 611-641. [https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0331]
  • Campbell, W. K., and C. Sedikides(1999), “Self-threat Magnifies the Self-serving Bias: A Meta-analytic Integration,” Review of General Psychology, 3, 23-43. [https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.3.1.23]
  • Chattopadhyay, P., W. H. Glick, and G. P. Huber (2001), “Organizational Actions in Response to Threats and Opportunities,” Academy of Management Journal, 44, 937-955. [https://doi.org/10.2307/3069439]
  • Chen, W. R.(2008), “Determinants of Firms’ Backward-and Forward-looking R&D Search Behavior,” Organization Science, 19, 602-622. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0320]
  • Chen, W. R., and K. D. Miller(2007), “Situational and Institutional Determinants of Firms' R&D Search Intensity,” Strategic Management Journal, 28, 369-381. [https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.594]
  • Chen, Y., R. S. Peterson, D. J. Phillips, J. M. Podolny, and C. L. Ridgeway(2012), “Bringing Status to the Table-attaining, Maintaining, and Experiencing Status in Organizations and Markets,” Organization Science, 23, 299-307. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0668]
  • Cohen, W. M., and D. A. Levinthal(1989), “Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D,” The Economic Journal, 99, 569-596. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2233763]
  • Cyert, R. M., and J. G. March(1963), A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Davis, G. F., and H. R. Greve(1997), “Corporate Elite Networks and Governance Changes in the 1980s,” American Journal of Sociology, 103, 1-37. [https://doi.org/10.1086/231170]
  • Desai, V. M.(2008), “Constrained Growth: How Experience, Legitimacy, and Age Influence Risk Taking in Organizations,” Organization Science, 19, 594-608. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0335]
  • DiMaggio, P. J., and W. W. Powell(1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,” American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101]
  • Duncan, G. J., K. A. Magnuson, and J. Ludwig(2004), “The Endogeneity Problem in Developmental Studies,” Research in Human Development, 1, 59-80. [https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2004.9683330]
  • Elsbach, K. D., and R. M. Kramer(1996), “Members' Responses to Organizational Identity Threats: Encountering and Countering the Business Week Rankings,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 442-476. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2393938]
  • Ethiraj, S. J., and D. Levinthal(2009), “Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals,” Organization Science, 20, 4-21. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0358]
  • Galaskiewicz, J., and R. Burt(1991), “Interorganization Contagion in Corporate Philanthropy,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 88-105. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2393431]
  • Greve, H. R.(1998), “Performance, Aspirations, and Risky Organizational Change,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 58-86. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2393591]
  • Greve, H. R.(2003), “A Behavioral Theory of R&D Expenditures and Innovation: Evidence from Shipbuilding,” Academy of Management Journal, 46, 685-702. [https://doi.org/10.2307/30040661]
  • Greve, H. R.(2008), “A Behavioral Theory of Firm Growth: Sequential Attention to Size and Performance Goals,” Academy of Management Journal, 51, 476-494. [https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.32625975]
  • Hannan, M. T., and J. Freeman(1984), “Structural Inertia and Organizational Change,” American Sociological Review, 49, 149-164. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2095567]
  • Hayward, M. L. A., and D. C. Hambrick(1997), “Explaining the Premiums Paid for Large Acquisitions: Evidence of CEO Hubris,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 103-127. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2393810]
  • Haunschild, P. R., and A. S. Miner(1997), “Modes of Interorganizational Imitation: The Effects of Outcome Salience and Uncertainty,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 472-500. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2393735]
  • Haveman, H. A.(1993), “Follow the Leader: Mimetic Isomorphism and Entry into New Markets,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 593-627. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2393338]
  • Henisz, W. J., and A. Delios (2001), “Uncertainty, Imitation, and Plant Location: Japanese Multinational Corporations, 1990-1996,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 443-475. [https://doi.org/10.2307/3094871]
  • Hollander, E. P.(1958), “Conformity, Status, and Idiosyncrasy Credit,” Psychological Review, 65, 117-127. [https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042501]
  • Hollander, E. P.(1960), “Competence and Conformity in the Acceptance of Influence,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 365-369. [https://doi.org/10.1037/h0049199]
  • Ketchen, D. J., and T. B. Palmer(1999), “Strategic Responses to Poor Organizational Performance: A Test of Competing Perspectives,” Journal of Management, 25, 683-706. [https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500504]
  • Kim, H., H. Kim, and P. M. Lee(2008), “Ownership Structure and the Relationship between Financial Slack and R&D Investments: Evidence from Korean Firms,” Organization Science, 19, 404-418. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0360]
  • Kim, J., S. Finkelstein, and J. Haleblian(2015), “All Aspirations are not Created Equal: The Differential Effects of Historical and Social Aspirations on Acquisitions Behavior,” Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1361-1388. [https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.1102]
  • Kraatz, M. S.(1998), “Learning by Association? Interorganizational Networks and Adaptation to Environmental Change,” Academy of Management Journal, 41, 621-643. [https://doi.org/10.5465/256961]
  • Levitt, B., and J. G. March(1988), “Organizational Learning,” Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319-340. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535]
  • Lounsbury, M.(2002), “Institutional Transformation and Status Mobility: The Professionalization of the Field of Finance,” Academy of Management Journal, 45, 255-266. [https://doi.org/10.2307/3069295]
  • March, J. G.(1991), “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning,” Organization Science, 2, 71-87. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71]
  • March, J. G., and H. Simon(1958), Organizations, New York: Wiley.
  • Martins, L. L.(2005), “A Model of the Effects of Reputational Rankings on Organizational Change,” Organization Science, 16, 701-720. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0144]
  • Miller, K. D., and W. Chen(2004), “Variable Organizational Risk Preferences: Tests of the March-Shapira Model,” Academy of Management Journal, 47, 105-115. [https://doi.org/10.2307/20159563]
  • Mishina, Y., B. J. Dykes, E. S. Block, and T. G. Pollock(2010), “Why "Good" Firms Do Bad Things: The Effects of High Aspirations, High Expectations, and Prominence on the Incidence of Corporate Illegality,” Academy of Management Journal, 53, 701-722. [https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.52814578]
  • Nelson, R., and S. Winter(1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
  • Nohria, N., and R. Gulati(1996), “Is Slack Good or Bad for Innovation?,” Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1245-1264. [https://doi.org/10.5465/256998]
  • Pearce, J. L.(2010), Status in Management and Organizations, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Phillips, D. J., and E. W. Zuckerman(2001), “‘Middle-status Conformity: Theoretical Restatement and Empirical Demonstration in Two Markets,” American Journal of Sociology, 107, 379-429. [https://doi.org/10.1086/324072]
  • Podolny, J. M.(1993), “A Status-based Model of Market Competition,” American Journal of Sociology, 98, 829-872. [https://doi.org/10.1086/230091]
  • Shimizu, K.(2007), “Prospect Theory, Behavioral Theory, and The Threat-rigidity Thesis: Combinative Effects on Organizational Decisions to Divest Formerly Acquired Units,” Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1495-1514. [https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.28226158]
  • Shipilov, A. V., and S. X. Li(2008), “Can You Have Your Cake and Eat It Too? Structural Holes’ Influence on Status Accumulation and Market Performance in Collaborative Networks,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 73-108. [https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.53.1.73]
  • Shipilov, A. V., S. X. Li, and H. R. Greve(2011), “The Prince and the Pauper: Search and Brokerage in the Initiation of Status-heterophilous Ties,” Organization Science, 22, 1418-1434. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0594]
  • Short, J. C., and T. B. Palmer(2003), “Organizational Performance Referents: An Empirical Examination of Their Content and Influences,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 90, 209-224. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00530-7]
  • Singh, J. V.(1986), “Performance, Slack, and Risk Taking in Organizational Decision Making,” Academy of Management Journal, 29, 562-585. [https://doi.org/10.5465/256224]
  • Staw, B. M., L. E. Sandelands, and J. E. Dutton (1981), “Threat Rigidity Effects in Organizational Behavior: A Multilevel Analysis,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 501-524. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2392337]
  • Talyor, S. E., and S. T. Fiske(1975), “Point of View and Perceptions of Causality,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 439-445. [https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077095]
  • Tyler, B. B., and T. Caner(2016), “New Product Introductions below Aspirations, Slack and R&D Alliances: A Behavioral Perspective,” Strategic Management Journal, 37, 896-910. [https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2367]
  • Wooldridge, J. M.(2002), Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Zahra, S. A., and G. George(2002), “Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension,” Academy of Management Review, 27, 185-203. [https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.6587995]
  • Zhao, W., and X. Zhou(2011). “Status Inconsistency and Product Valuation in the California Wine Market,” Organization Science, 22, 1435-1448. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0597]

• 정대훈은 현재 연세대학교 경영대학 박사과정에 재학 중이다. 연세대학교 경영학과를 졸업하고 동대학원에서 석사학위를 취득하였으며, 주 연구 관심사는 조직학습, 조직지위, 제도이론 등이다.

• 신동엽은 현재 연세대학교 경영대학 매니지먼트분야 교수로 있다. 연세대학교 경영학과를 졸업하고 미국 예일대학에서 박사학위를 취득하였다. 주 연구 관심사는 제도이론, 사회운동, 사회네트워크, 경영패러다임 변화 등이며, 경영학연구와 인사조직연구를 비롯한 국내 학술지와 Administrative Science Quarterly, Organization Science, Poetic 등의 국제 학술지에 논문을 게재하였다.