한국의 혁신형 R&D 중소기업의 프로핏센터의 성공적 도입 사례

Abstract

90년대 외환위기 이후, 구조조정 등 커다란 환경적 변화 속에서 근로자들의 의식에는 큰 변화가 발생하였고, 이에 상응하여 기업의 관리시스템도 함께 변모하게 되었다. 하지만 성과중심경영에 대한 이해가 낮은 현실에서, 국내 기업들의 성급한 성과관리제도 도입은 많은 부작용을 발생하였다. 성과관리제도와 관련하여 폭넓은 선행 연구들이 이루어져왔다. 하지만 국내 중소기업, 특히 혁신형 R&D 중소기업의 특수성을 반영하여 대안을 제시하는 연구는 상대적으로 부족하다. 이들 기업이 국내 경제 환경에 차지하는 비중을 고려할 때, 매우 아쉬운 대목이다. 더욱이 혁신형 R&D 기업은 인적자원에 대한 의존도가 높기 때문에, 인적자원을 확보하고, 유지할 수 있는 성과관리 및 보상시스템에 대한 연구가 동시에 필요하다. 국내 혁신형 R&D 중소기업은 성과관리 측면에서는 첫째, 임직원에게 형식적이며 공정하지 못한 평가로 인지되고 있으며, 둘째로는 무리한 대기업식 성과관리시스템 도입으로 인하여 불필요한 관리지표만 증가하는 낭비가 발생되고 있다. 또는 보상시스템 측면에서는 회계정보의 낮은 신뢰성 및 불투명한 경영 등의 문제로 인하여 보상시스템 본연의 기능을 제대로 발휘하지 못하고 있는 실정이다. 따라서 본 연구는 한국의 혁신형 R&D 중소기에게 기업 특성에 부합하며, 동시에 공정한 성과지표가 필요하다는 과제를 도출하게 되었다. 그리고 그 대안으로 프로핏센터 도입을 제시하고자 한다. 프로핏센터는 관리 목적에 따라 책임중심점에게 관리해야할 범위(지표)를 명확히 하며, 정량적인 성과측정이 가능하여 보상제도로서 활용에 몹시 용이하기 때문이다. 더불어 강력한 사업부제 하, 권한위임(empowerment)을 통하여 빠르게 변하는 환경에 유연하게 대응이 가능하기 때문에 혁신형 R&D 중소기업에게 주는 이점이 클 것으로 기대된다. 국내외 많은 기업들이 프로핏센터를 성과관리 및 보상시스템으로 활용을 시도하고 있지만, 국내 혁신형 R&D 중소기업이 벤치마킹할만한 사례는 제한적이다. 사업부제를 취하는 대기업의 등의 사례는 중소기업의 현실과 맞지 않기 때문이다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 프로핏센터 도입의 대표적인 성공사례로 꼽히는 교세라의 아메바경영과 안산시에 소재한 혁신형 R&D 중소기업인 ‘D사’의 사례를 살피고자 한다. | After the foreign exchange crisis in 1990s, large environmental adjustments in businesses, for example, reconstruction of companies, induced a big change in laborers’ awareness, and enterprises changed their management systems accordingly. Traditional seniority system was removed, and performance-based system was introduced. However, the introduction of such system in many enterprises without its full understanding caused many side effects. Compared to the large sized enterprises, small and middle sized enterprises (SMEs) are going through many difficulties in adopting performance management system (PMS). Although there are big differences in environments and resources between the international and domestic large sized enterprises and the SMEs, quite a number of SMEs are carelessly benchmarking the PMS without having enough examination and understanding. Introduction of performance-based system outwardly without its actual system management could distort its purpose and create side effects by making it seen as a mean to strengthen the intensity of labor. Meanwhile, the innovating R&D SMEs that compete by technical innovations are having even more difficulties with performance management. Each of those enterprises has distinct and strong characteristics due to its own business characteristic and relatively small business scale. Thus benchmarking a typical PMS could not be easy. Usually many enterprises use balanced score card (BSC) as their performance indicator to bring both quantitative and qualitative index of evaluations. However, if the SMEs use the BSC arduously, it could increase unnecessary paperworks as a result of creating unnecessary performance indicator. Thus, the purpose of this research is to suggest the direction of developing a clean and fair performance indicator that also reflects the true scale and the business characteristics of Korean innovating R&D SMEs. Extensive studies on the PMS have been conducted previously. But there are relatively less studies done on the PMS in domestic SMEs, especially those that have involved distinct qualities of the innovating R&D SMEs to suggest an alternative for them. Considering the effects of those enterprises on domestic economic environment, having only few studies involving them is very disappointing. Besides, since the innovating R&D SMEs depend a lot on human resources, conducting research on PMS and reward system in order to secure and maintain major human resources is crucial. Thus this research would seek for the optimized PMS and the reward system for the innovating R&D SMEs. As mentioned earlier, a suitable performance indicator is necessary for successful performance management in the innovating R&D SMEs. There are cases where performance indicators are producing waste because many of them, including the BSC, that are being used by many enterprises, are not appropriate for the SMEs. Therefore this study suggests adopting profit center. The profit center allows setting an accurate range (index) of management by responsibility center depending on the purpose of management, and is also an effective application for the reward system because it allows quantitative performance evaluation. Many of enterprises that tried adopting the profit center ended up in attempts only, and there are only few cases where total system of profit center has been developed. In contrast, a Japanese enterprise called Kyosera, and a Korean innovating R&D “D” SME have successfully adopted the profit center. Kyosera is a pioneering enterprise that has realized the profit center with a very high degree of completeness, and domestic “D” enterprise has benchmarked Kyosera and made the profit center more suitable to the Korean business characteristics. Thus this article would end up with analyzing the mechanisms of profit centers in these enterprises, and suggesting the direction of developments to domestic innovating R&D SMEs.; After the foreign exchange crisis in 1990s, large environmental adjustments in businesses, for example, reconstruction of companies, induced a big change in laborers’ awareness, and enterprises changed their management systems accordingly. Traditional seniority system was removed, and performance-based system was introduced. However, the introduction of such system in many enterprises without its full understanding caused many side effects. Compared to the large sized enterprises, small and middle sized enterprises (SMEs) are going through many difficulties in adopting performance management system (PMS). Although there are big differences in environments and resources between the international and domestic large sized enterprises and the SMEs, quite a number of SMEs are carelessly benchmarking the PMS without having enough examination and understanding. Introduction of performance-based system outwardly without its actual system management could distort its purpose and create side effects by making it seen as a mean to strengthen the intensity of labor. Meanwhile, the innovating R&D SMEs that compete by technical innovations are having even more difficulties with performance management. Each of those enterprises has distinct and strong characteristics due to its own business characteristic and relatively small business scale. Thus benchmarking a typical PMS could not be easy. Usually many enterprises use balanced score card (BSC) as their performance indicator to bring both quantitative and qualitative index of evaluations. However, if the SMEs use the BSC arduously, it could increase unnecessary paperworks as a result of creating unnecessary performance indicator. Thus, the purpose of this research is to suggest the direction of developing a clean and fair performance indicator that also reflects the true scale and the business characteristics of Korean innovating R&D SMEs. Extensive studies on the PMS have been conducted previously. But there are relatively less studies done on the PMS in domestic SMEs, especially those that have involved distinct qualities of the innovating R&D SMEs to suggest an alternative for them. Considering the effects of those enterprises on domestic economic environment, having only few studies involving them is very disappointing. Besides, since the innovating R&D SMEs depend a lot on human resources, conducting research on PMS and reward system in order to secure and maintain major human resources is crucial. Thus this research would seek for the optimized PMS and the reward system for the innovating R&D SMEs. As mentioned earlier, a suitable performance indicator is necessary for successful performance management in the innovating R&D SMEs. There are cases where performance indicators are producing waste because many of them, including the BSC, that are being used by many enterprises, are not appropriate for the SMEs. Therefore this study suggests adopting profit center. The profit center allows setting an accurate range (index) of management by responsibility center depending on the purpose of management, and is also an effective application for the reward system because it allows quantitative performance evaluation. Many of enterprises that tried adopting the profit center ended up in attempts only, and there are only few cases where total system of profit center has been developed. In contrast, a Japanese enterprise called Kyosera, and a Korean innovating R&D “D” SME have successfully adopted the profit center. Kyosera is a pioneering enterprise that has realized the profit center with a very high degree of completeness, and domestic “D” enterprise has benchmarked Kyosera and made the profit center more suitable to the Korean business characteristics. Thus this article would end up with analyzing the mechanisms of profit centers in these enterprises, and suggesting the direction of developments to domestic innovating R&D SMEs.