저작자표시-비영리-변경금지 2.0 대한민국 이용자는 아래의 조건을 따르는 경우에 한하여 자유롭게
l 이 저작물을 복제, 배포, 전송, 전시, 공연 및 방송할 수 있습니다. 다음과 같은 조건을 따라야 합니다:
l 귀하는, 이 저작물의 재이용이나 배포의 경우, 이 저작물에 적용된 이용허락조건 을 명확하게 나타내어야 합니다.
l 저작권자로부터 별도의 허가를 받으면 이러한 조건들은 적용되지 않습니다.
저작권법에 따른 이용자의 권리는 위의 내용에 의하여 영향을 받지 않습니다. 이것은 이용허락규약(Legal Code)을 이해하기 쉽게 요약한 것입니다.
Disclaimer
저작자표시. 귀하는 원저작자를 표시하여야 합니다.
비영리. 귀하는 이 저작물을 영리 목적으로 이용할 수 없습니다.
변경금지. 귀하는 이 저작물을 개작, 변형 또는 가공할 수 없습니다.
A Study on Crew Education & Training
本 論文 李元乾 經營學碩士 學位論文 認准
郭圭錫 ( )
李哲榮 ( )
南奇燦 ( )
2008 12 22
차 례
Abstract
1
1 ··· 1
1. ··· 1
2. ··· 3
2 ··· 5
1. ··· 5
2. ··· 5
2
1 ··· 61. ··· 6
2. ··· 9
3. ··· 13
4. ··· 22
5. ··· 27
2 ··· 29
1. ··· 29
2. ··· 32
3. ··· 34
3 S
1 ··· 42
1. ··· 42
2. ··· 44
3. ··· 45
2 ··· 46
1. ··· 46
2. ··· 47
3. ··· 50
4. ··· 52
5. OJT ··· 54
6. · WORKSHOP ··· 57
7. ··· 59
8. ··· 60
3 ··· 61
4
1 ··· 671. ··· 67
2. ··· 68
3. ··· 69
2 ··· 74
1. ··· 74
2. ··· 78
3. ··· 88
5
1 ··· 932 ··· 96
··· 98
··· 100
표 차 례
< 2-1> ···8
< 2-2> ··· 10
< 2-3> , , ··· 13
< 2-4> OJT , ··· 14
< 2-5> Off JT , ··· 15
< 2-6> SD , ··· 15
< 2-7> ··· 28
< 2-8> ··· 35
< 2-9> ··· 36
< 2-10> ··· 38
< 2-11> ··· 40
< 3-1> ··· 43
< 3-2> 2008 ··· 45
< 3-3> ··· 46
< 3-4> ··· 48
< 3-5> ··· 49
< 3-6> ··· 50
< 3-7> ··· 52
< 3-8> ··· 53
< 3-9> (1 ) ··· 56
< 3-10> / WORKSHOP ··· 58
< 3-11> ··· 59
< 3-12> ··· 60
< 3-13> ··· 62
< 3-14> (2008 ) ··· 63
< 3-15> ··· 64
< 4-1> ··· 67
< 4-2> ··· 68
< 4-3> ··· 69
< 4-4> ··· 72
< 4-5> ··· 73
< 4-6> ··· 75
< 4-7> ··· 75
< 4-8> ··· 76
< 4-9> ··· 76
< 4-10> ··· 78
< 4-11> ··· 79
< 4-12> ···· 80
< 4-13> ···· 80
< 4-14> ···· 81
< 4-15> ··· 82
< 4-16> ··· 83
< 4-17> ··· 85
< 4-18> ··· 85
< 4-19> ·· 86
< 4-20> ··· 89
< 4-21> ··· 90
< 4-22> ··· 91
< 4-23> ··· 92
그 림 차 례
< 3-1> ··· 44
< 3-2> OJT ··· 55
< 3-3> ··· 66
Crew Education & Training
The purpose of education& training in shipping company is to develop crew's vocational abilities, to promote individual self-development through identifying individual's desire and to make crews understanding of one's role in an organization. Ultimately the purpose of education&
training is to increase ship's security and to improve in productivity. In other words, we can improve productivity by using ship which transfers cargos quickly as well as safely. If there is one thing important than the productivity of the ship then it would be ship's safe navigation and protection of marine environment. The improvement in productivity is only a matter within a company however ship's safe navigation and protection of marine environment are something between countries, an international matter. Marine accidents cause more than a loss in a single company. They cause troubles to others by destructing ocean environments, making problems international. Therefore prevention of marine accidents are one of major crew educational goals. It is this intention that makes crew education different from ordinary company education.
STCW agreement set standards of essential education processes that crews have to compulsorily take to help protect marine environments and for marine safety. Also, every country is to follow ports state control which checks crews educational states and crew's certificate.
Educating crew is, compulsory education to meet the requiring standards
of international agreement and domestic laws, professional education requiring expert knowledges to safely transfer and handle cargos, repeating education that has to be done daily to prevent safety accidents, and survival education to survive on the seas.
How to overcome present situation of shortage of experienced and educated crews by sharp increase in merchant shipping companies, and operating effective crew education system that could meet the standards of international agreements and domestic laws are homeworks for marine companies to solve. Therefore, this study has its purpose in finding actual current problems and presenting effective crew education system by analysing and scrutinizing present situations of crew education systems.
Finding out realities of educations of crews who are on board and those waiting to be on board, and figuring out the most effective way of educating crews were main purposes of the study.
Also concentrated on proposing new crew education that could be of actual help by understanding current crew education and figuring out present problems in crew education that's being held among marine companies by analysing S marine company crew education & training
As a result of the study, it was figured that crew education must be constantly carried out. Also to enhance the crew education effects, first of all, crews under education should know the purpose and needs of the education, secondly, support and interest from management class is required, thirdly, methods and contents of education programs should be substantial, and finally, satisfaction of the education program must be high.
1
1
1.2003 .
2000 1
10 1 7
35% .(2008 5
, : Clarkson)
10 8 2008
6 ( ISL(Institute of Shipping Economics and logistics) )
2010 5
.
.
. 1980
, ,
, ,
.
5
2 (Det Norske Veritas : “DNV”
) .
. DNV ,
5 2 , 60%
.
,
P&I 2008 30%
.
.
,
. DNV
.
(Port State Control Inspection ;
“PSC Inspection" )
.
.
2.
.
. ,
.
, .
3
.
.
(International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers ; “STCW ” )
,
.
,
. ,
, .
,
.
.
,
,
. S
.
2
1.. ,
, S
, .
SPSS ,
.
2.
5 .
1 .
2 ,
, , ,
, .
3 S
, 4
, .
5
.
2
1
1.. .
.
.
.
(Education), (Training)
, ,
, ,
.
. (2004)
,
.
, ,
.
,
. . Nadler
.
, ,
, ‘ ’ ‘ ’
. (1984)
. ,
. .
Gomez-Meija, Balkin & Cardy (1995) ,
,
, .
.
< 2-1>
:Gomez Meija, D. Balkin, B., & Cardy. D. (1995) Managing Human Resources, Prentice-Hall, 1995, p.293
,
,
.
2.
1)
, ,
. ,
.
, (1987)
.
. ,
.
(Edwin B Flipo) ① , ② , ③
, ④ , ⑤
.
Pigors Myers ① ,
,
② ③
, ④ ,
,
⑤ ⑥
.
Beach .
.
①
.
②
.
③
, .
④
.
⑤
.
⑥
(1997) < 2-2>
.
< 2-2>
: , , 1997
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
, ,
.
2)
,
. ,
.
. ,
,
. ,
.
,
, .
.
. , , .
, .
,
.
( , 1993).
. , .
, .
. .
, .
, , , ,
,
.
, ,
.
3.
, ,
.
1)
,
(On the Job Training ; “OJT” ),
(Off the Job Training ; “OFF-JT”
), (Self Development ; “SD” )
,
( , 2001).
< 2-3> , ,
OJT Off JT
SD
(1) OJT
,
OJT . OJT
. ,
.
OJT · <2-4> .
< 2-4> OJT ·
, , 2004
(2) Off JT
Off JT .
.
. Off
1. .
2. Off JT .
3. .
4.
, .
5. .
6. .
7.
.
1.
. 2.
. 3.
.
4. ,
. 5.
.
< 2-5> Off JT ·
, , , 1981, p241.
(3) SD
. SD
. ,
. SD ,
< 2-6> .
< 2-6> SD ,
, ,1997
1.
. 2.
. 3.
.
1. ,
. 2.
.
1.
. 2.
.
1.
. 2.
.
(4)
. ,
, Self-leadership,
, , .
(5)
. .
(competency) .
, , .
.
.
, .
, , job aids, OJT, , ,
, , , Knowledge Base,
.
(6)
.
.
.
,
OJT .
.
(7)
.
.
. ,
,
, , , .
(8)
, ,
,
, .
, / , , ,
.
2)
.
. , , ,
.
(1)
, ,
. Bartlet(1982) Randall(1978)
,
, ,
, ,
, .
Broad Newstorm(1992)
.
, .
. ,
.
.
, .
, .
.
(2)
, ,
.
, .
(1995) , .
(1994) ,
, ,
,
.
Bramley(1991)
, .
(3)
(Rosset,1997).
,
, .
4
. ,
. ,
. ,
, . .
.
( ,1997).
(4)
.
.
. ,
.
.
4.
. ,
.
( , , , 2004).
1)
(Lecture method) ,
, ,
.
.
,
.
2)
, ,
.
, , . ,
. ,
.
, .
.
3)
(audio-visual) ,
. , TV, , ,
, .
, , ,
.
, ,
, .
4)
(Role playing) (J. L. Moreno)
(psychodrama) ,
, .
. ,
,
. ,
, ,
.
, ,
.
. .
1. , .
2. .
3. .
4. .
5)
(Case study) 1871 (C. C. Langdell)
,
. ,
, , ,
.
,
. , 10~15 ,
.
1. ( )
2.
3.
4.
,
.
6)
(business game) 1950
,
. 5~6
,
.
, , , , , ,
, , .
, .
,
.
, ,
. ,
,
.
7)
(simulation) .
.
. ,
.
. .
.
.
5.
1)
,
,
( 1993).
, .
. , . ,
.
.
, .
.
2)
( . . . 1998).
< 2-7>
.
, . .
. .
2
1.
1912
1914 (International Convention
for the Safety of Life at Sea ; "SOLAS" ) .
1912 4 14
. ,
2 40 2208 1513
. .
1913
, 1914 SOLAS ,
1974 SOLAS , 1980
. 1974 SOLAS 1974 10 21
.
2/3 12
(Explicit Acceptance) .
6-7 ,
. 3 1
50%
(Tacit
Acceptance) .
1967 TORRY CANYON
. (MARPOL)
1974 SOLAS
,
(SUBSTANDARD VESSEL) .
, ,
(HUMAN ERROR),
.
. 1970
.
, ,
. 1976 ILO(International
Labor Organization) 147 , 1978
, , (STCW 78 the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping)
. STCW ,
,
. , ,
.
. 1995 5 IMO(International Maritime
Organization) SOLAS
SOLAS Ⅺ/4 “
,
, 74/78 SOLAS Ⅺ 1996 1 1
.
, 1993 IMO
(International Safety Management Code ; ‘ISM CODE”
) . SOLAS 9 ISM code
, ,
1998 7 1
.
2001 9 11
ISPS CODE(International code for the security of ships and port facilities),
. 2001 11 IMO 22
IMO , 2002 5 75
1
SOLAS Ⅴ ( ), Ⅺ-1 ( ), Ⅺ-2 (
) ISPS Code A (
) .
2006 ILO
2011 .
.
2.
, ,
. (SOLAS 74/78),
(STCW 1995)
.
, ,
.
.
(MLC 2006 ) 2011 .
. 1995 STCW
IMO IMO 5 5
(WHITE LIST) .
.
. .
.
, .
,
.
.
, ,
, .
, , ,
. ,
.
10 .
. .
.
, .
Simulator .
.
, ,
.
, OJT
. .
. 1
. , .
3.
, , ,
. , ,
,
.
.
STCW ,
.
1)
,
. 106 4 ,
3 , 3
. 5 .
100
53
. .
< 2-8>
( )
- 4
( )
- ‘97 12 15 1
3
( ) - 5 1
2
( )
- 5 , 5 , 4
3
( )
- , ,
, ,
, , , 3
( )
- 5 , 5 , 4
3
- 1
( - )
- 5 , 5 , 4
(5 )
2
( )
- , ,
, ,
, , ,
(5 )
1
( )
- 5 , 5 , 4
(5 )
1
( - )
-
(5 )
2
( )
- 3
( , )
-
“ ( :
2 )” “ ”
2
( )
-
2
2)
, , ,
. 5
1 .
5
. , , 1
.
.
( )
- ( ) , 1
, 1 10
( )
- ( ) ,
1 10
( )
- 30
( ) , 5
( )
- 30
( ) 5
(30 )
- 5 30
, , 1
( ) - , 1
( )
- , ,
2
( )
- (ARPA)
, 3
3)
,
, (GMDSS, Global Maritime Distress
and Safety System; “GMDSS” )
. 78
, GMDSS .
.
( ) 1
( )
- , 1 , , 1 ,
1 5
( )
- , 1 , , 1 ,
1 5
( )
- ‘95.5
, , 1 5
- 1
( ) - 2
( )
-
(5 ) 1
-
(2 ) 2
< 2-10>
- 5
- 2
GMDSS
( )
- ,
(GDMSS)
5
GMDSS
( )
-
(GDMSS)
3
(3 - , )
-
( ) 365
(4 - , )
-
( ) 365
(2,3 - , )
- 3 , 4
1 20
(4,5 - , )
- 5 , 6
1 20
4 - 4
4 1
(3 - , )
- 3 , ,
5
(4 - , )
- 4 , ,
3
( ) - 2
(3,4,5 - , ) -
3 3
( ) - 3 5
4
( ) - 4 3
3
( )
- , 3
2 4
( )
- , 4
1
(3 - , )
- 3
10
(4 - , )
- 4
5
( ) -
5
( )
- 3 2
10
- 10
-
. 6
( ) - 2
( ) 15
( ) - 2
( ) 5
( )
- 3
30 -
2
4)
.
SHS , ERS , ,
, , , ,
.
,
. ,
, .
.
< 2-11>
SHS ( ) - (Ship Handling Simulation)
, , 5
SHS ( ) -
, , 3
ERS ( )
- (Engine Room Simulation)
, 5
ERS ( ) -
, 3
SAS
- (Ship Automation simulation)
, 5
( )
- 2
( )
( ) -
10
( ) -
5
( )
- , , , TIG
( , ) 5
- 5
- 3
ISM - ISM Code 2
- 3
- , 4
- ,
3
3 S
1
S 103 , 2337 ,
, , , , LNG .
. 93
2008 1178
, .
3 .
, . S
. S
“ POS-4P
ZERO LOYALTY ”
. S / / ,
, , ,
.
< 3-1>
/ /
1)
2) Risk
3) 5 4)
5) PSC / MAJOR INSPECTION / 1)
2) 3) ,
1) MAJOR
2) 3)
4) OJT
5) 6) 1) 2) 3)
4) ONE STX MEMBERSHIP
1) 2) 3) 4) ,
2.
S .
,
.
OJT S
.
3.
S Internet
WebSite
, .
, 2 .
, 1
.
. 1 1
.
.
.
< 3-2> 2008
W/S 1 /
3 (5 ) 4 (5 ) 3 (5 ) 3 (4 ) 5 (1 ) 3 1 2 (6 )
1 1/21~25
2 2/12~14 2/19~22 2/19~22
3 3/4~7
4 4/1~17
5 5/6~9 5/13~16 5/13~16 6 6/10~12
7 7/1~4
8 8/19~22
9 9/2~4 9/23~26
10 10/15~17 10/28~31
11 11/11~13
12 12/2~6 12/7~19
2
1.
95 STCW
.
PSC INSPECTION ,
.
, .
< 3-3>
4
106
3 5
3 " 5
3 " 5
1
1 " 5
1.5 " 5
0.5 " 5
5 5 78
2
( / , ) 3 /2 1
5 54 , 67
5 1 /
16
5 63
2.
1)
,
(POS-4P) , /
/ / , ,
,
3 .
.
5 63
2 2 49 CFR PART 172
GMDSS
( / ) 5 /3
5
RADAR/ARPA 5 /3 16
2
ISPS SSO 2 /
SOLAS CH. XI-II
< 3-4>
VISION 2010 1.0 H
1.0 H 2.0 H 4.0 H 1.0 H
POS-4P ( ) 8.0 H
POMARIS 4.0 H
1.0 H 2.0 H
PMS 2.0 H
2.0 H 2.0 H
ISPS 1.0 H
PSC 1.0 H
IMO 2.0 H
2.0 H 2.0 H 1.0 H 1.0 H 2.0 H
/ 2.0 H
3.0 H 2.0 H 3.0 H
SHS 3DAY
( 5 )
BRTM 3DAY
ERS 3DAY
44.0 H( )
2)
/ , ,
, ,
.
1.5 3
, .
< 3-5>
(VISION 2010) 1.0 H 1.0 H 2.0 H
POS-4P ( ) 8.0 H
1.0 H
POMARIS 4.0 H
PMS 2.0 H
2.0 H 2.0 H
PSC 1.0 H
2.0 H
SHS 3DAY
( 5 )
BRTM 3DAY
ERS 3DAY
26.0 H( 13.0H)
3.
1).
,
LOYALTY , VISION
, ,
INSPECTION , 5
, POS-4P POS-4P
, ,
. .
< 3-6>
VISION 2010 1.0 H 1.0 H 2.0 H 4.0 H
POS-4P ( ) 4.0 H
1.0 H
POMARIS 4.0 H
2.0 H 2.0 H 2.0 H
PSC 1.0 H
IMO 2.0 H
2.0 H 2.0 H 2.0 H 2.0 H
2)
2 3 5 ,
POS-4P POS-4P
,
, PSC
.
. 1.0 H
3.0 H 2.0 H 4.0 H
PNEUMATIC 4.0 H
4.0 H 4.0 H 4.0 H 4.0 H
LNGC 4.0 H
16.0H
( ) 4.0 H
SIMULATION 4.0 H
SHS 3DAY
BRTM 3DAY
ERS 3DAY
36.0 H
< 3-7>
4.
MAJOR CDI INSPECTION
, . 1 /
.
, 1
. BRTM,
SHS, ERS
. COMPUTER BASE TRAINING
SIMULATION .
.
VISION 2010 1.0 H
1.0 H 2.0 H
POS-4P( ) 4.0 H
1.0 H 4.0 H 13.0 H
< 3-8>
PNEUMATIC( ) 4.0 H 1/2 5
4.0 H 3 5
2.0 H 1
- 4.0 H
1
-
4.0 H -
4.0 H -
16.0H - +
LNGC 4.0 H LNG
( ) 4.0 H 1/2 5 ( )
SIMULATION 4.0 H 1 5
SHS( ) 3DAY or
BRTM 3DAY 5
ECDIS 3DAY -
ERS( ) 3DAY 5
5. OJT STCW 95
. IN-HOUSE
OJT , /
. STCW 95
. OJT
, .
1 OJT
, .
1)
< 3-2> OJT
2)
< 3-9> (1 )
SUBJECT
1. ( )Ⅲ
( )
( )
2. /
( )
/ SOLAS 3.
( )
MARPOL
4.
(BEACHING)
IMO/OPA '90 VRP ( )
5.
6.
, DRUG & ALCOHOL
7. ( )
, ,
8. POMARIS
9.
6. · WORKSHOP
. PSC
, VISION ,
/JUNIOR , ·
, ,
,
.
, .
, 1
. .
< 3-10> / WORKSHOP
VISION 2010 1.0 H 1.0 H 1.0 H 2.0 H
/ 6.0 H
POS-4P( ) 4.0 H
1.0 H 2.0 H 2.0 H
PSC 1.0 H
2.0 H
CASE STUDY 2.0 H
2.0 H 2.0 H 2.0 H 2.0 H
BRTM 3DAY 5
27.0 H
7.
, ,
/ /PMS/
.
< 3-11>
1.0 H 1
1.0 H 2.0 H
ISM/ISPS 1.0 H
POMARIS 2.0 H
8.
,
.
ONE STX MEMBER LOYALTY , VISION
, ,
,
, INSPECTION ,
5 ,
.
< 3-12>
: 2, : 1,
: 1, : 1,
IT : 1, : 2, 775
: 2, : 1
IT : 1, : 2 106
: 3, : 1
: 1, IT : 1 : 2
98
-
MANAGER
- / / /IT
: 1, : 1
: 2 291
MANAGER
(2008. 10 )
3
S 10
, .
. ,
. 10 ,
.
1)
< 3-13> 10 S
, ,
, .
, ,
. 2005
, .
< 3-13> :
2)
< 3-14> 2007 S
, .
10%
. ,
.
. .
1999 1,035 240 231 416 0 49 34 250 1,220
2000 954 235 231 371 0 65 129 290 1,321
2001 912 247 200 219 18 53 68 255 1,060
2002 875 205 192 241 0 56 46 201 941
2003 785 203 171 268 13 47 41 230 973
2004 751 192 144 361 0 49 38 264 1,048
2005 761 305 114 356 20 66 50 431 1,342
2006 713 235 120 315 54 73 53 446 1,296
2007 752 231 116 426 49 68 60 469 1,419
2008 788 280 121 415 110 61 80 514 1,581
9,507 2,373 1,640 3,388 264 587 599 3,350 12,201
< 3-14> :
3)
. .
.
. S
< 3-15>
. .
LOYALTY .
A B / HRD
170 10 10 20 40 250
WORKSHOP 120 35 0 0 65 220
85 0 0 0 35 120
78 6 6 0 22 112
386 0 12 38 0 436
928 0 0 0 0 928
225 0 0 0 0 225
1,992 51 28 58 162 2,291
< 3-15>
4)
S
. .
, , .
HUMAN ERROR 80%
. HUMAN ERROR
. HUMAN ERROR
.
. .
.
.
. S ,
. S
/ /
42% 10% 58% 74% 0% 0% 0% 7%
27% 12% 64% 53% 9% 33% 0% 2%
0% 0% 60% 43% 39% 43% 1% 14%
0% 0% 78% 69% 22% 29% 1% 2%
44% 19% 51% 62% 5% 17% 0% 2%
POS-4P .
POS-4P , / /
ZERO
1993 .
.
, 1:10:30 ,
. POS-4P TBM, 1
,
.
Human Error . , ,
, .
(Fault) (Error) , (Human Error) .
,
. ' ' ' ' POS-4P
Human Error
. POS-4P ZERO ,
, . ZERO
, .
ZERO .
. ,
POS-4P . POS-4P
, . ,
.
POS-4P
. 4.5% 10
1%
. .
76
38 26
12 8 9 3 12
4.5
2.5
1.8
1.03 0.72 0.64
0.2
0.68
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
'92 '93 '94 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
재해건수 재해율
< 3-3>
4
1
1.
1)
( ) S
. 2008 9 10 10 17
Workshop, ,
111 111 .
11 100 .
< 4-1>
2)
SPSS(Statistical Package for the Social Science)
, , , ,
. ,
. ,
. .
111 111 100% 11 100
2.
, ,
① ② ③
, ④ , ⑤ , ⑥
.
. , ,
.
16 .
.
< 4-2>
Ⅰ -
, , , ,
Ⅱ
- . . . .
Ⅲ -
-
Ⅳ
- - -
Ⅴ
- - - -
Ⅵ -
3.
1)
S ,
. ,
, , , .
< 4-3>
50~59 36%(36 )
20~29 32% .
20
.
50%
. 18%
.
5 48%
16~20 17%, 21
16%, 10~15 12%, 5~10 7%
. 5
, 15 45%
.
/ 34%
2 25%, 18%, 1 15%, 3 8%
.
( ) 1 , Workshop 2
,
.
2)
62%, 18%,
20% , .
.
.
.
40%, 32%, 23%, 4%
.
.
33%, 27%,
16%, 18%, 6%
.
20%, 13%, ·
67%
. ,
. ·
.
53%,
21%, 22%, 4%
.
.
< 4-4>
3)
. ,
,
78%
.
.
< 4-5>
.
그렇지않다 그저그렇다 그렇다 매우그렇다
빈도 1 12 67 20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
그저그렇다 그렇다 매우그렇다
빈도 7 63 30
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
그렇지않다 그저그렇다 그렇다 매우그렇다
빈도 5 17 62 16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
그렇지않다 그저그렇다 그렇다 매우그렇다
빈도 3 17 58 22
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2
1.
1)
13
. Direct Oblimin
.
(Factor) 3 , 69.7%
. KMO(Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin)
(MSA) 0.867 3 ,
(Bartlett's Test) Sig.(p) = 0.000 .
, 0.5
. 3 ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’
. ‘ ’ 4
4 1( ) , ‘
’ 4 2(
) 4 . ‘ ’
5 5 .
3
.
.
< 4-6> ( )
: KMO(Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) (MSA): 0.867, Bartlett's Test: Sig.(P)=0.000
< 4-7>
: , : Kaiser
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 0.857 0.236 0.166 0.848 0.174 0.235 0.816 0.222 0.323 0.787 0.236 0.346 0.150 0.877 0.179 0.120 0.875 0.120 0.181 0.692 0.201
OJT 0.302 0.683 0.129
0.152 0.057 0.792 0.292 0.207 0.783 0.380 0.273 0.691 0.255 0.381 0.510 0.308 0.403 0.501
(Eigenvalues) 3.313 3.099 2.649
Factor Eigenvalue Difference Cumulative
1 3.313 25.486 25.486
2 3.099 23.839 49.325
3 2.649 20.277 69.702
2)
16
. Direct Oblimin
.
(Factor) 3 , 77%
. KMO(Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) (MSA) 0.879,
(Bartlett's Test) Sig.(p) = 0.000 .
1 ‘ ’, 2 ‘ ’, 3 ‘
’ . 1 ‘ ’
.
.
< 4-8> ( )
: KMO(Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) (MSA): 0.879, Bartlett's Test: Sig.(P)=0.000
< 4-9>
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 0.707 0.010 0.421 0.684 0.434 0.463 0.623 0.241 0.125 0.602 0.142 0.102 0.552 0.341 0.344 0.532 0.378 0.465 0.521 0.062 0.348 0.504 0.382 0.456
Factor Eigenvalue Difference Cumulative
1 4.050 31.564 31.564
2 2.544 25.273 56.837
3 2.262 20.217 77.054
: , : Kaiser
0.439 0.778 0.139 0.375 0.772 0.138 0.335 0.735 0.317 0.215 0.615 0.351 0.151 0.254 0.745 0.314 0.338 0.737 0.421 0.174 0.682 0.463 0.288 0.640
(Eigenvalues) 4.050 2.544 2.262
2.
1)
3 , ,
. 3
.
5 .
.
(1)
F 14.92 0.000
. 0.297% .
2
‘ ’, ‘ ’ ,
.
< 4-10>
B( ) 0.336 0.340 -0.012
β( ) 0.317 0.305 -0.013
T(P) 2.017(0.046) 2.549(0.012) -0.093(0.926)
R2 = 0.297 , F(P) = 14.921(0.000)
(2)
F 30.705 0.000 .
0.474% .
1
‘ ’ ,
. .
< 4-11>
(3)
F 28.156 0.000 .
0.451% .
1 ‘ ’ ,
.
.
B( ) 0.654 0.211 0.088
β( ) 0.512 0.157 0.082
T(P) 3.766(0.000) 1.516(0.133) 0.670(0.504)
R2 = 0.474 , F(P) = 30.705(0.000)
< 4-12>
(4)
F 23.745 0.000 .
0.408% .
2 ‘ ’ ‘ ’ ,
.
.
< 4-13>
(5)
F 39.130 0.000
. 0.536% .
2 ‘ ’ ‘ ’ ,
B( ) 0.441 0.185 0.194
β( ) 0.390 0.155 0.203
T(P) 2.810(0.006) 1.466(0.146) 1.627(0.107)
R2 = 0.451 , F(P) = 28.156(0.000)
B( ) 0.384 0.310 0.159
β( ) 0.320 0.245 0.158
T(P) 2.219(0.029) 2.232(0.028) 1.215(0.227)
R2 = 0.408 , F(P) = 23.745(0.000)
.
.
< 4-14>
B( ) 0.626 0.252 -0.011
β( ) 0.579 0.221 -0.012
T(P) 4.538(0.000) 2.276(0.025) -0.107(0.915)
R2 = 0.536 , F(P) = 39.130(0.000)
2)
(1)
.
4 , 5
4 . F 5.284,
0.000 0.05
. R2 36% .
0.026 .
‘
’ 0.259 0.028
,
.
< 4-15>
Standardized Estimate
Standard
Error t Value Pr > ｜ ｜t
-0.008 0.152 -0.050 0.960
0.114 0.144 0.690 0.492
-0.098 0.151 -0.672 0.503
0.084 0.117 0.598 0.551
-0.024 0.121 -0.174 0.862
0.160 0.119 1.148 0.254
-0.100 0.112 -0.856 0.394
0.259 0.106 2.235 0.028
-0.003 0.086 -0.028 0.978
0.142 0.113 1.273 0.261
0.051 0.123 0.360 0.720
:
(2)
13
. F 7.334, 0.000
0.05
, R2 45% .
‘ ’ 0.429
0.001 .
‘ ’ 0.347
0.014 ,
.
< 4-16>
0.146 0.148 0.946 0.347
OJT 0.064 0.088 0.562 0.576
Model: F value (5.284), Pr > F (<.0001), R2 (0.360)
Standardized Estimate
Standard
Error t Value Pr > ｜ ｜t
0.357 0.147 2.509 0.014
-0.196 0.139 -1.287 0.201
s -0.082 0.146 -0.607 0.545
0.429 0.113 3.3 0.001
0.082 0.117 0.645 0.52
-0.122 0.115 -0.947 0.346
0.124 0.108 1.147 0.255
0.109 0.102 1.017 0.312
:
(3)
‘
’ 4
. F 21.473, 0.000
0.05 ,
R2 45% .
‘
’ 0.005
,
.
-0.058 0.083 -0.61 0.543
0.016 0.109 0.159 0.874
0.082 0.119 0.629 0.531
0.054 0.143 0.377 0.707
OJT 0.106 0.085 1.016 0.312
Model: F value (7.334), Pr > F (<.0001), R2 (0.454)
< 4-17>
:
(4)
4
. F 11.466, 0.000
0.05 ,
R2 28% .
‘ OJT
’ 0.014
.
< 4-18>
:
Standardized Estimate
Standard
Error t Value Pr > ｜ ｜t
0.220 0.105 1.708 0.091
0.187 0.099 1.361 0.177
-0.018 0.108 -0.142 0.887
0.363 0.087 2.868 0.005
Model: F value (21.473), Pr > F (<0.001), R2 (0.453)
Standardized Estimate
Standard
Error t Value Pr > ｜ ｜t
0.098 0.160 0.671 0.504
-0.074 0.152 -0.478 0.634
0.232 0.165 1.612 0.110
OJT 0.357 0.133 2.495 0.014
Model: F value (11.466), Pr > F (<0.001), R2 (0.280)
(5)
16
. F 10.097, 0.000
0.05 ,
R2 59.5% .
‘
’, ‘ ’ ‘
’ ,
,
.
< 4-19>
Standardized Estimate
Standard
Error t Value Pr > ｜ ｜t
0.165 0.085 1.676 0.098
-0.089 0.100 -0.690 0.492
0.110 0.083 0.959 0.341
-0.024 0.068 -0.271 0.787
0.052 0.112 0.522 0.603
-0.137 0.082 -1.461 0.148
0.176 0.093 1.767 0.081
0.201 0.065 2.351 0.021
0.254 0.074 3.007 0.003
-0.124 0.065 -1.528 0.130
0.227 0.054 2.967 0.004
:
0.157 0.073 1.587 0.116
-0.098 0.063 -1.092 0.278
0.087 0.079 0.825 0.412
0.067 0.090 0.614 0.541
0.032 0.088 0.287 0.775
Model: F value (10.097), Pr > F (<0.001), R2 (0.595)
3.
1)
4
.
30 60 20
50 .
50 20
10.078 0.000
. 50
Loyalty 20
Junior Loyalty .
5.522
0.000 , 30 20
.
30 Senior
20 Junior
.
60 , 30 , 40 , 50 , 20 20
. 20
20 .
< 4-20>
2)
4 ,
.
, .
F ‘ ’, ‘
’, ‘ ’ .
.
. .
F(P)
20-29 32 3.914 0.502 0.089
1.804 (0.134)
30-39 10 4.325 0.355 0.112
40-49 20 4.150 0.469 0.105
50-59 36 4.035 0.522 0.087
60-69 2 3.750 0.354 0.250
20-29 32 3.631 0.443 0.078
10.078 (0.000)
30-39 10 4.200 0.411 0.130
40-49 20 4.220 0.506 0.113
50-59 36 4.278 0.441 0.074
60-69 2 4.200 0.566 0.400
20-29 32 3.617 0.394 0.070
5.522 (0.000)
30-39 10 4.169 0.429 0.136
40-49 20 4.034 0.417 0.093
50-59 36 3.936 0.380 0.063
60-69 2 3.969 0.928 0.656
20-29 32 3.474 0.456 0.081
12.752 (0.000)
30-39 10 4.100 0.410 0.130
40-49 20 4.083 0.421 0.094
50-59 36 4.074 0.387 0.065
60-69 2 4.583 0.118 0.083
< 4-21>
3)
4
. 5-10
. 5 ‘
’
. 5-10 Senior
1 .
5 Junior
.
F(P) 22 4.136 0.461 0.098
2.147 (0.099) 27 3.917 0.416 0.080
50 4.050 0.535 0.076 22 4.300 0.473 0.101
4.849 (0.003) 27 4.163 0.384 0.074
50 3.868 0.567 0.080 22 4.068 0.402 0.086
5.118 (0.003) 27 3.884 0.296 0.057
50 3.768 0.474 0.067 22 4.167 0.349 0.074
6.443 (0.001) 27 3.944 0.333 0.064
50 3.730 0.567 0.080
< 4-22>
4)
, 3 (3 ), 2 (2 ), 1
(1 )
. 95%
.
1
. , 2
.
F(P)
5 48 4.078 0.539 0.078
1.452 (0.223)
5-10 7 4.393 0.244 0.092
10-15 12 3.917 0.456 0.132
16-20 17 3.912 0.492 0.119
21 16 4.016 0.442 0.111
5 48 3.913 0.596 0.086
1.912 (0.115)
5-10 7 4.286 0.445 0.168
10-15 12 4.067 0.323 0.093
16-20 17 4.247 0.536 0.130
21 16 4.138 0.384 0.096
5 48 3.815 0.488 0.070
0.996 (0.414)
5-10 7 4.143 0.314 0.119
10-15 12 3.839 0.344 0.099
16-20 17 3.934 0.375 0.091
21 16 3.918 0.464 0.116
5 48 3.764 0.586 0.085
1.997 (0.101)
5-10 7 4.024 0.641 0.242
10-15 12 3.889 0.239 0.069
16-20 17 4.020 0.276 0.067
21 16 4.115 0.450 0.113
< 4-23>
F(P)
18 4.181 0.452 0.107
5.717 (0.000)
3 8 4.219 0.574 0.203
2 25 3.800 0.421 0.084
1 15 4.433 0.395 0.102
/ 34 3.934 0.478 0.082
18 4.322 0.407 0.096
12.368 (0.000)
3 8 3.700 0.321 0.113
2 25 3.600 0.462 0.092
1 15 4.387 0.381 0.098
/ 34 4.171 0.483 0.083
18 4.115 0.379 0.089
9.441 (0.000)
3 8 3.656 0.331 0.117
2 25 3.600 0.407 0.081
1 15 4.254 0.375 0.097
/ 34 3.842 0.377 0.065
18 4.167 0.318 0.075
8.999 (0.000)
3 8 3.542 0.396 0.140
2 25 3.520 0.491 0.098
1 15 4.078 0.530 0.137
/ 34 4.034 0.424 0.073
5
1.
S
, , ,
, .
,
,
, ,
. ,
,
.
, ,
, ,
.
, ,
,
. ,
,
.
,
.
, , , ,
, Loyalty
.
.
, ,
, .
. ,
.
.
. .
, .
.
,
,
. ,
. , ,
, .
,
.
, .
.
.
,
.
2.
S
.
, Plan
.
.
.
, ·
.
. ,
.
.
.
, , , , ,
.
.
, Retention
Rate 80% .
. .
. ,
.
.
.
1.
2.
1.
설 문 지
?
.
.
,
.
.
.
2008 9
본 연구의 내용은 통계법 제 조
( )柲 8
에 의거하여 비밀이 보장되며 통계적, 목적 이외 에는 사용되지 않습니다.
다음은 귀하의
I. 개인적 사항에 관한 문항 사항입니다.
해당되는 항목에 표기하여 주시기 바랍니다.
다음은
II. 교육 훈련의 일반적인 사항에 관한 문항입니다.
해당 하는 것에 V표 해 주십시오.
다음은
III. 교육 훈련의 목적과 필요성 측면에 관한 문항입니다.
해당 하는 것에 V표 해 주십시오.
다음은
IV. 교육 훈련의 전반적인 체계에 관한 문항입니다.
해당 하는 것에 V표 해 주십시오.
강사의 능력 1.
자기 동기부여 2.
교육훈련 내용 3.
V. 다음은 교육의 효과 및 성과에 관한 문항입니다 해당 하는 것에. V표 해 주십시오.
다음은 I.
Ⅴ 교육 훈련의 만족도 측면에 관한 문항입니다 해당 하는 것에. V표 해 주십 시오.
감사의 글
늦게 시작한 공부였기에 열심히 하고자 하는 의욕은 앞섰지만 실행은 의욕을 따라가지 못했던 것 같습니다.
직장 생활과 학업을 동시에 한다는 것이 결코 쉽지만은 않다는 것도 알게 되었습니다. 하지만 무엇을 하던지 간에 열심히 살아야한다는 진리 아닌 진리도 알게 되었습니다.
일상의 직장생활에서 탈피하여 보다 진취적인 도전을 위해, 그리고 공부하는 아버지의 모습으로 모범을 보이기 위해 시작한 이 과정에 고 이던 아들 녀석이 어렵사리 원하는 대학에 들어 간 것으로3 절반의 성공은 달성하였다고 위안을 삼고자 합니다.
부족하나마 오늘의 결실이 있기까지 부족한 저를 이끌어 주시고 세심한 지도와 격려를 해주신 남기찬 지도교수님께 머리 숙여 깊은 감사를 드립니다. 그리고 논문심사를 맡아주신 이철영 교수님과 심사 위원장이신 곽 규석 교수님께도 심심한 감사의 말씀을 드립니다.
또한 제가 학위 과정을 끝낼 수 있도록 배려 해 주신 이 권희 전무님과 임직원 여러분께도 깊이 감사드립니다.
가사와 직장의 1인 2역을 하면서도 언제나 밝은 미소로 용기와 희망을 준 아내에게도 고마운 마음을 전합니다.
특히 논문 작성과정에서 많은 도움을 주신 이 경구 후배님께 깊이 감사드립니다.
끝으로 자료정리와 설문지의 배포와 회수에 큰 도움을 준 양승희 과장과 인력관리실 직원 여러분께도 고마운 마음을 전합니다.
그리고 여러 가지로 부족한 저를 위해 격려해주고 아껴주신 주위의 모든 분들께도 따뜻한 마음 잊지 않겠습니다. 감사합니다.
