Earticle

For many years researchers have investigated the relation of job satisfaction to a variety of variables, especially productivity. This interest in the study of job satisfaction is due mainly to its role as a potential predictor of other organizational factors, such as improved performance, and reduction in turnover and absenteeism. There has been general agreement in theories of management and social psychology that people who are more satisfied in their jobs will attain higher levels of productivity. Contrary to this idea, however, recently satisfaction has been causally explained in terms of productivity. The relation between productivity and satisfaction is also affected by other constructs, including role conflict and task clarity. According to the model which was developed in this study, it is argued that task clarity has a direct effect on productivity and productivity directly causes satisfaction (satisfaction with extrinsic, intrinsic and environmental rewards). Additionally, it was hypothesized that, there is a negative but low relation between role conflict and productivity, and that role conflict is both directly and indirectly related negatively to satisfaction. This study, then, examined the relation between role conflict, task clarity, productivity, and job satisfaction. The analysis utilized the data collected from 160full-time faculty members in both national and private universities. The $quot;Faculty Satisfaction with Rewards$quot; instrument was adapted for use in higher education and included three subscales : Extrinsic, Intrinsic, and Environmental Satisfaction, The $quot;Task Clarity and Role Conflict$quot; instrument was used to measure the amount of conflict and task clarity which professors experienced in their job. The third instrument, a $quot;Productivity Index$quot; was developed to measure the extent of scholarship and service activities being conducted by the professors at the University. The statistical methods used to test the hypotheses were the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis. Multiple regression analysis yielded numerical coefficients for single and multiple combinations of factors. A significant negative relation was evident between role conflict and job satisfaction, and a positive relation was found between task clarity and job satisfaction. The relation between job satisfaction, role conflict, task clarity and productivity were not significant. Role conflict and task clarity did explain a significant amount of variance in satisfaction in addition to that explained by productivity. Contrary to the hypothesis, the interaction of task clarity and role conflict did not explain a significant portion of the variance in job satisfaction in addition to that explained by the linear combination of role conflict, task clarity, and productivity. Contrary to theory, there was no significant relation between productivity and job satisfaction, role conflict, and task clarity. But the relation between job satisfaction with role conflict and task clarity was significant. Therefore administrators should bring the maximum clarification to the faculty in three areas of teaching, publication, and service to try to eliminate role conflict. Since there is not any significant relation between satisfaction and productivity, administrators apparently must seek other answers such as reward structures to influence the productivity of faculty members. For further research, this study can be expanded by considering teaching effectiveness as another index of faculty productivity. The productivity measurement should be more precise. Also tenure of full-time faculty members might be considered in future studies, because of the current debate over the nature of tenure as a faculty reward. In addition, this study should be repeated with populations from other Universities in the Republic of Korea in order to ascertain the consistency of the findings.

Productivity can be regarded as a measurment of efficient utilization of various resources, and as a point of managerial view in business entity, it would be the performance indicator of business activity. In accordance with the characteristics of resources inputed to intervening process, productivity can be classified as labor productivity, capital productivity, value-added productivity etc. Meanwhile major issue has been concentrated on analyzing the relationship between production and labor and then, productivity generally means labor productivity so far as it has no particular indication. Recently business firms in Korea have mostly confronted with many problems newly occurring such as labor problems, trade surpluses, pressure to open its market, which had never been experienced in the past. Being conscious of these situation, it is in due time to develope the proper corporate strategy to cope with those problems, and effort to find the way of improving productivity. Therfore the purpose of this study is to provide the fundamental informations for improving productivity. On the other hand it is impossible to measure, individually and precisely, which affect the labor productivity, therefore there is no choice examining these influencial factors as a whole as an alternative way. The fundamental strategies for improving labor productivity revealed in this study are as follows. 1) Encouragement of management`s consciousness to improve labor productivity. 2) Inducement of employee participation. 3) Estailishment of coopeartive labor-management relationship. 4) Innovation and technology. 5) Modernization of facilities and installments. The resolution of various problems in business entry can be ultimately found its clue on the productivity improvement, the improvement of productivity is the intention to create the more favorable future than now, and the directed goal for progress. Accordingly it should be shared with all of us as well as business entities as a nationalwide task.

William R. Cline established the East Asian model of development and talked about its feasibility and limitation. The model deals with economic growth in the East Asian Newely Industrializing Countries such as Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singafore. They are different from the South American NICS`s economic history since 1960s. They have raised the import substitution in the 1960s and have pursuited the export-led economic growth policy in the 1970s. With this development strategy, they could increase their amount of export and achieve highly economic growth in tow decades. From the point of economic development theory, the East Asian model of development has the following characteristics. First, it has been accelerated by the industrialization based on the dual economy. In the early stage of development, Korean economy as well as Taiwan could not develop very well because of their overpopulation and lack of capital stock. In that time, the dual economic structure was a really serious problem. However, they could gear up their resources efficiency by moving their resources like capital or labor from the low productivity industry to the high productivity industry and they also could increase their GNP. It is true that both Korea and Taiwan have achieved their high economic growth and development on the basis of the dual structure. Second, it has been accomplished by the highly successful economic growth which is concerned with export increase. The NICS in East Asia have made a successful export-led economic growth model since the late 1960s. The export-led economic growth model does not mean that it aims to increase only economic growth resulting from the export increase. Rather, it means that the size of export in aggregate demand is growing more rapidly than government expenditure or private investment. Third, it has been achieved by the market power and the embodiment of government policy. It implies that the East Aian countries could achieve their economic growth with the help of efficient resources distribution and utilization through the suitable market structure in connection with the appropriate policy makings. Especially such countries as Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore have changed their economic structure by making the government formulate some programs and support private business activities. Is it possible for the East Asian model of development to be generalized? It may be confronted the some limitations in terms of space and time. From the point of space term, if every developing country pursuits the export-led growth policy, they could not take effect on their goal. For the other developed countries will increase their export and they will probably counterattack against the developing countries. Saying the notion `the fallacy of composition` W.R. Cline insisted that model could not be generalized. The model may work well if pursued by a limited number of countries, it may, however, break down if a large majority of developing countries seeks to pursue it at the same time, because the resulting outpouring of manufactured exports might be more than Western economy markets could absorb. On the other hand, in case of time, Korea especially has a lot of bottlenecks which is ranging from the deteriorating dual structure to the imbalance of income distribution to the gap of production and living to the worsening environment conditions. Korean economy has, therefore, better make a new economic strategy in order to carry out its economic growth and development successfully. It could be done by the efficient resources allocation and its appropriate usage.