Earticle

This study investigates the changes in factors influencing aircraft utilization based on aircraft types during the pandemic period. The analysis categorizes the periods into three phases: pre-pandemic, during the pandemic, and post-pandemic, while the aircraft types are classified into two groups (C-class and E-class or higher). Utilizing SHAP and Random Forest methodologies, the study analyzes the importance of various factors for each group and examines the significance of differences in importance across the specified periods and aircraft types through group difference testing. The findings reveal that for C-class aircraft, the importance of the USD/KRW exchange rate and the lagging composite index was notably high before the pandemic. However, during the pandemic, there was a substantial surge in the significance of the JPY/KRW exchange rate, and post-pandemic, the importance of economic indicators increased. E-class or higher aircraft exhibited a similar trend, with a significant rise in the importance of the CNY/KRW exchange rate observed after the pandemic. The Kruskal-Wallis test confirmed that most average changes among the groups were not statistically significant, except for the C-class aircraft in the Random Forest analysis. This indicates that there were no substantial changes in the underlying factors between the pre-pandemic and post-pandemic periods, suggesting that the impact of the pandemic on airline fleet utilization extends beyond short-term changes. Furthermore, the findings highlight the need for airlines to enhance their sensitivity to external environments and develop utilization strategies in volatile markets. Additionally, there is a possibility that long-term dependency on network strategies may become more pronounced than reliance on external factors like the pandemic. By providing an in-depth analysis of the pandemic's impact on aircraft utilization, this study contributes to the formulation of effective utilization strategies for airlines navigating an uncertain economic environment.

본 연구는 유통물류 프랜차이즈산업의 계약주체로 정의되는 가맹본부인 본사의 임직원과 가맹점인 대리점주간, 그리고 공간적으로 분리된 수도권 종사자와 지방권 종사자 집단 간을 대상으로, 인식된 요인인 관리자리더십, 의사소통, 교육훈련, 브랜드, 관계결속, 몰입, 대리점의 경영성과, 재계약의도 등 8개 요인에 대하여 각각의 인식차이를 조사한 실증연구 논문이다. 통계프로그램은 SPSS18.0을 이용한 분석과 두 개 집단 간의 평균차이를 검정하는 T검증을 실시하여 다음과 같은 연구결과를 얻었다첫째, 계약주체인 본사와 대리점간의 검증결과, 인식된 8개요인중 의사소통, 교육훈련, 몰입, 대리점의 경영성과, 재계약의도는 본사의 임직원과 대리점주간 인식차이가 있는 것으로 조사됐고, 관리자리더십, 브랜드, 관계결속 등 3개 요인은 인식차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 공간적으로 분리된 수도권과 지방권 종사자 대상의 검증결과, 관리자리더십, 교육훈련, 브랜드, 관계결속, 몰입, 대리점 경영성과, 재계약의도는 상호 인식차이가 존재하지 않는 것으로 조사됐고, 인식된 8개의 요인 중 의사소통 하나만이 수도권종사자와 지방권 종사자간에 지각의 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구의 의의로는, 유통물류산업 경로기관 주체들에게 인식된 동일한 요인에 대해 상호간에 발생하고 있는 인식차이를 연구한 것으로, 가맹본부와 대리점주간, 수도권과 지방권으로 분리된 집단 간의 노력과 인식차이 최소화를 위한 상호배려로 경쟁력 있고, 상생할 수 있는 수단을 제공함에 있다.

This study is an empirical paper to investigate differences in perception about 8 factors such as manager leadership, communication, education training brand, relationship commitment, immersion, business performance of franchisee and re-contraction intention for the relationship between the employees of headquarter that is headquarter of the franchises defined as the subject of the contract in distribution logistics industry and owners of the franchisee, between capital area group separated spatially and local area group. The results from this study by conducting an analysis using SPSS18.0 and T-test program that verified average differences between two groups were as follows. First, with regard to verification results of the relationship between headquarter that is the subject of the conduct and franchisee, it indicated there were differences in perception between the employees of headquarter and the owners of franchisee for communication, education training, immersion, business performance of franchisee and re-contraction intention of 8 factors perceived, but there were not significant differences in perception for 3 factors such as manager leadership, brand, relationship commitment. Second, with regard to verification results of capital ares group separated spatially and local area group, it showed there were not differences in mutual recognition for manager leadership, education training, brand, immersion, business performance of the franchisee, re-contraction intention, only communication of 8 factors recognized had differences between capital area group and local area group.