Earticle

초록

한국어

고용서비스 우수기관 인증제는 정부가 고용서비스에 대한 표준적인 인증기준을 설정하고 이를 달성한 우수한 기관을 인증･공표함으로써 고용서비스 품질향상 촉진 및 구인･구직자의 합리적인 선택을 지원하기 위한 목적에서 도입되었다. 본 연구는 민간고용서비스기관 중 우수기관 인증을 받은 기관의 인증 이후 정량적인 성과와 정성적인 성과향상을 인증제 사업의 간접적인 효과로 보고 이를 중심으로 연구, 분석한 논문이다. 인증기관의 정량적인 성과측면에서 인증 전･후 성과분석 결과, 최초 인증시점과 재인증 신청시 재무성과, 구인･구직실적, 취업실적 등에서 구인실적을 제외하고는 인증이 큰 의미가 없는 것으로 나타났으며 또한 미인증기관과 취업실적성과 비교에서도 유의미한 차이를 확인 할 수 없는 것으로 분석되었다. 그러나 정성적 성과향상측면에서는 인증신청과정에서 전반적인 사업점검에 도움이 되었다는 점과 더불어 인증기관 선정이 기관의 인지도와 자부심, 전반적인 서비스품질에 미치는 영향 등, 어느 정도 성과가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 결론적으로 고용서비스 우수기관 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제는 정량적인 측면에서 성과는 분명하지 않지만 정성적 측면에서는 분명한 성과가 있는 것으로 확인되었다. 그리고 인증기관 중 상당수의 기관이 정부의 취업지원 민간위탁사업에 참여하고 있다는 사실은 인증이 곧 정부 민간위탁사업자 선정을 위한 기초 자료로도 활용 될 수 있다는 가능성을 충분히 인지시켜 주는 동시에 나아가 고용서비스 우수기관 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제를 통한 민간고용서비스 활성화의 가능성을 보여주고 있다는 것도 예측할 수 있는 부분이다. 본 연구의 한계점은 민간고용서비스 우수기관 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제의 효과성 분석에 있어 인증기관의 인증이후 정량적인 성과와 정성적인 성과향상을 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제 사업의 간접적인 효과로만 보았고 인증기관과 미인증기관 간의 비교를 통해 통계적인 유의미성을 확인하지 못했다는 점은 미리 밝혀 두고자 한다.

영어

Certification system has been established under government’s purpose of not only supporting reasonable choice between employers and employees but also promoting quality improvement in employment service through setting standardized certification conditions and certifying, announcing agencies that accomplished the standard. This is a thesis that sees private employment agencies’ qualitative and quantitative performance improvement after receiving excellent agency certificate, as an indirect effect of certification system. Among financial, job searching and job posting results, quantitative performance was meaningful only in job offering result before and after analyzing performance results. Also, analysis showed that there were no meaningful difference in employment result even after comparing with uncertified agencies. However, in the aspect of qualitative improvement, it was helpful in examining overall business in process of applying for certificate. Also, sense of selected certified agency helped the service agencies’ awareness improvement, pride, and impact to overall service quality. So it can be said that it was effective in qualitative aspect to some extent. In case of free employment agency it can be said that the certificate system is partially effective, for evaluation point was increased by 45.41, and number of employees is increased by 4.79 (49.49%) In qualitative aspect, among 49 applicants, those selected 31 (63.3%) agencies applied for government’s private consignment business. 29 of them were selected consisting of 16 free of charge, 10 paid, and 3 information providing service. During job fair period in 2013 and group counseling program, certified agencies showed excellent performance. To some extent, other aspects of qualitative improvement can be seen such as examining overall business in the application process (3.94), sense of selected agency’s awareness(3.63), pride(3.98), influence to service quality(3.65). In conclusion, it was identified that certification system showed distinctive result in qualitative aspect even though quantitative result was not obvious. Also, the fact that a sizable number of certified agencies are participating in government’s employment supporting private consignment business is, certification can be used as a basic reference for government’s selection of private consignment business. Furthermore, we can predict that it shows the possibility of vitalizing private employment service through certificate system. Although this research revealed selected excellent agency’s qualitative and quantitative improvement before and after its certification as indirect effect, the limitation of this research exists in not identifying statistical verification through comparing certified agencies with non-certified agencies. In the middle of the study in 2011, a survey was implemented to identify difference between certified and non-certified agencies. To maintain equivalence of those groups, types and size were considered and 340 agencies were composed as a candidate for a comparison group against 28 certified agencies. Content of questionnaire was composed of job posting and job searching results to identify difference between certified and non-certified agencies’ improvement. PSM analysis method was put to use to select appropriate comparison group among which didn’t participate in the certification system. Among 28 certified agencies, 26 responded. 23 agencies were selected as an independent gropu for 3 of them were skipped because they had different business model such as providing job information. Also, among 340 non-certified agencies, 115(33.8%) responded and were included in comparison group afterwards. To make comparison group (115 agencies) statistically equivalent to independent group (23 agencies), propensity score matching method was applied. Only small number of variables such as business type, average number of employees in 2011, average number of job counselors in 2011 were utilized to calculate propensity score. After matching propensity score with certified and non-certified groups in decimal digit level of 0.001, only 12 agencies among 23 could secure comparison group. As a result, only 24 agencies (certified 12 and non-certified 12) were analyzed. Although increasing rates in number of regular workers, daily workers and both were declining, certified agencies’ declining tendency was numerically stable. However, it didn’t show statistical significance. However, statistical significance were not seen in number of employees, job seekers, job openings. While number of the employed daily workers from non-certified agencies and both regular and daily workers from certified agencies were increased, it didn’t show statistical significance. In conclusion, further analysis of improvement difference comparing certified agencies with non-certified agencies is needed.

목차

국문 요약
 Ⅰ. 문제제기 및 연구목적
 Ⅱ. 민간고용서비스 현황 및 실적
 Ⅲ. 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제 현황및 실적
  3.1 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제도 개념 및의의
  3.2 고용서비스 우수기관 인증제 사업 현황
 Ⅳ. 실증분석 및 결과
  4.1 주요 분석 내용 및 분석자료
  4.2 고용서비스 우수기관 성과향상 정도 분석
  4.3 재인증 신청기관 성과향상 정도 분석
 Ⅴ. 결론 및 한계점
  5.1 요약 및 결론
  5.2 추가분석 결과와 한계점 및 제언
 참고문헌
 Abstract

저자

• 김호원 [ Kim, Ho-Won | 한국고용정보원 부연구위원 ] 제1저자
• 이종구 [ Lee, Jong-Gu | 경희대학교 후마니타스칼리지 교수 ] 교신저자

참고문헌