메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
성태경 (전주대학교 경영학부)
저널정보
기술경영경제학회 기술혁신연구 기술혁신연구 제8권 제2호
발행연도
2000.1
수록면
19 - 65 (47page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This study analyzes the development of technological infrastructure(TI) and technological infrastructure policy(TIP) to enhance the technological capabilities of small and mid-sized manufacturing enterprises(SMEs) in the U.S. and Korea in terms of the technological system(TS) concept, which is composed of technological infrastructure, industrial organization, and institutional infrastructure. In order to analyze the internal dynamics of the system, such as incentive mechanisms, the interaction among economic actors, and the policy implementation process, we compare the MEP(Manufacturing Extension Partnership) system of the U.S. and the Joong-Jin-Gong system of Korea. Among many similarities, contrasts, and insights from each country's effort to construct TI and TS, the main findings are as follows. (1) Both the MEP system and the Joong-Jin-Cong system are TI-led or government-led type TS. However, the nation-wide picture is different: in the U.S., most TSs including the MEP system., are classified as TI-led type; in Korea, many TI-assisted or private sector-led TSs have been developed since the early 1960s. (2) the MEP system, as a representative case of the U.S., is less stable than the Joong-Jin-Gong system of Korea in terms of financing and political cycle. (3) The MEP system is a more complex and cooperative network than the Joong-Jin-Gong system. NIST, as a critical mass, generates the system, bridges various institutions, and influences the development of the system by providing funding. (4) Regarding TI components, TSs in both countries focus on utilizing off-the-shelf technologies rather than advanced technologies. However, the direction of movement is different: in the U.S., TSs have come to emphasize existing technologies to counterbalance an innovation system that has been highly focused toward new technologies; in Korea, TSs have been moving from focusing on a higher diffusion rate of imported process technologies to stressing new technology development. (5) Personnel and staffing, embodying technological capability, is an important concern in both countries. But the human capital infrastructure of the U.S. system is more efficient and industry-oriented than that of the Korean system due to a more flexible labor market. (6) While the U.S. has a strong tradition of state and local autonomy in constructing TI and TS to fit SMEs's specific need, Korea has a centralized and bureaucratically-led policy implementation process.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0