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
학위논문
저자정보

홍인섭 (광운대학교, 광운대학교 대학원)

지도교수
정석재
발행연도
2021
저작권
광운대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.

이용수12

표지
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
한국군은 변화하는 대내외 환경에 적응하고 효율적인 국방운영을 위하
여 2008년에 민간 기업이 군 장비의 운영유지를 책임지는 성과기반군수
(PBL: Performance Based Logistics) 제도를 도입하여 사업을 확대해
왔으며, 그 결과 부품 조달 및 정비 기간 단축으로 장비 가동률을 향상
시키고 보유 부품 재고를 감축하여 전체 후속군수지원 비용을 절감하는
효과를 달성하였다.
이러한 성과를 토대로 국방부는 성과기반군수(PBL) 사업을 확대하는
정책을 추진하고 있으나 적용대상 장비를 선정하는데 있어 객관적이고
타당한 기준이 부재하여 적용 장비를 확대하는데 애로를 겪고 있다.
따라서, 본 연구는 성과기반군수(PBL) 적용 적합장비에 대한 객관적
판단요소(핵심요인)와 이를 정량화한 수치를 제공하여, 향후 성과기반군
수(PBL) 사업 선정의 객관적 기준을 제시하는 것을 목표로 하였다.
연구 방법으로 성과기반군수(PBL) 적용을 위한 선정 핵심요인을 도출
하기 위하여 델파이 기법을 활용한 전문가 설문을 2회에 걸쳐 실시하였
다. 설문 분석결과, ‘장비가동률’, ‘보급불가동률’, ‘업체 참여의지/능력’,
‘예산절감 가능성’, ‘부품조달기간’, ‘외주정비기간’, ‘창급 정비기술 확보
가능성’, ‘임무기여도’가 적합성 평가(CVR) 결과 성과기반군수(PBL) 적
용을 위한 선정 핵심요인으로 도출되었으며, 이렇게 선정된 8개 핵심요
인의 중요도(가중치)는 5점 척도로 각각 구하였다.
이후 핵심요인별 평가수준을 정하여 컨조인트 방법에 따라 대안 카드
별 우선순위를 정하는 3차 설문을 실시하여 각 요인의 수준별 효용성을
산출하였다.
이를 통해 핵심요인과 요인별 수준에 따른 가중치를 결합한 성과기반
군수(PBL) 적용 적합성 판단 수리모형을 제시하였고, 중간값으로 34.162
점을 계산하여 성과기반군수(PBL) 적용 판단시 기준점으로 활용할 수
있도록 정책적 제언을 하였다. 단, 정성적 지표를 제외하고 평가하였을
때는 중간값으로 21.928점을 제시하였다.
연구결과를 종합하여 설명하자면 다음과 같다. 임무중요도가 높은 무
기체계가 가동률이 75%미만으로 전투준비태세가 낮은 상태에서 성과기
반군수(PBL)를 적용시 예산절감 효과를 기대할 수 있을 때 성과기반군
수(PBL) 적용이 가장 필요하며, 반대로 장비가동률을 80% 이상으로 운
영 중이며, 창급 정비기술을 대부분 확보하였거나 할 수 있으며, 부품 보
급 지연에 따른 불가동이 5%미만이거나, 90일 이내에 확보할 수 있다면
성과기반군수(PBL) 적용이 불필요하다는 사실을 객관적 지표로 확인할
수 있다.
본 연구는 객관적 데이터에 기반하여 성과기반군수(PBL) 적용 적합성
판단을 위한 핵심요인를 선정하고, 요소별 수준에 대한 효용도를 계산하
여 이를 종합적으로 판단할 수 있는 수리모형과 그 기준값을 제시하였다
는데 의의가 있으며, 향후 본 연구결과가 국방정책에 반영되어 활용되기
를 기대한다.

목차

I. 서 론 ························································································· 1
1. 연구 배경 및 목적 ····················································································· 1
2. 연구 방법 ·································································································· 3
3. 논문의 구성 ······························································································ 5
II. 선행연구 ······················································································ 6
1. 성과기반군수(PBL) ·················································································· 6
가. 개념의 태동 ··························································································· 7
나. 개념의 정의 ··························································································· 7
다. 적용 목적 ······························································································ 9
라. 제도 시행근거 ······················································································· 9
마. 성과기반계약의 특징 ·········································································· 11
바. 적용 대상사업 선정 ············································································ 12
사. 기대효과 ······························································································ 13
아. 한국군 추진경과 ················································································· 21
자. 성과지표 운영 ····················································································· 22
차. 한국군 성과기반군수 적용 성과 ························································ 24
카. 한국군 성과기반군수 성과에 대한 검증 ··········································· 26
타. 성과기반군수 확대를 위한 연구 필요성 대두 ·································· 27
2. 다기준 의사결정 방법 ··············································································· 29
가. 개념 및 종류 ······················································································· 29
나. 다 기준 의사결정 방법의 필요성 ······················································ 31
다. 다 기준 의사결정 방법 적용사례 ······················································ 32
라. 본 연구의 적용기법 ············································································ 32
III. 성과기반군수 적용 적합성 분석 ············································· 37
1. 자료 수집 ································································································· 37
2. 델파이 분석을 통한 핵심요인 선정 및 가중치 분석 ···························· 39
가. 핵심요인 식별(1차 설문) ··································································· 39
나. 타당도 분석을 통한 핵심요인 선정(2차 설문) ································ 41
다. 선정지표 평가 ····················································································· 46
3. 컨조인트 기법을 활용한 요인의 수준별 효용성 분석 ·························· 47
가. 컨조인트 방법론 ················································································· 47
나. 속성별 가용수준 설정 ········································································ 47
다. 컨조인트 분석 대안 카드 생성 ························································· 49
라. 컨조인트 적용방법 ············································································· 50
마. 컨조인트 분석결과 ············································································· 52
바. 분석결과 요약 ····················································································· 57
IV. 성과기반군수 적용 적합성 수리모형 제시 ···························· 59
1. 속성별 가중치 부여 ················································································· 59
2. 지표 및 속성 가중치에 따른 계산식 ····················································· 60
3. 종합 판단 ································································································· 61
4. 수리모형에 대한 검증 ············································································· 62
V. 결론 및 논의 ············································································ 66
1. 연구결과 요약 ·························································································· 66
2. 향후 연구방향 ·························································································· 67
<참 고 문 헌> ·································································································· 68
<1차 설문지> ··································································································· 70
<2차 설문지> ··································································································· 74
<3차 설문지> ··································································································· 78

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0