Two broad questions are under constant debate in performance research. The first one is how to describe and measure performance itself. The second is how to explain its change or continuity. The basic factors generating organizational performance have already been identified, or at least nominally defined, but how, when, and where these factors influence performance seems to require more research.
This study argues (1) that organizational performance is a function of both structural parameters and organization actions or strategies interacting to its environments, and (2) that the notion of strategic groups can meaningfully be extended to the corporate level and the dynamic aspect of strategy.
To explore relevant research questions, I collected the longitudinal data (1980, 1985, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993) for this study from all of the commercial banks in the Korean financial industry. In addition to objective data, survey data gathered through questionaires were complemented for this study. Since the 1980s, as pressures for the internationalization of Korea's financial markets have intensified, there has been increasing deregulation of the financial services industry in Korea. This structural change has pressed the commercial banks, as well as the other financial sectors, to seek new profitable sources or to develop management techniques to improve their performance.
Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), which presents relative efficiencies of decision-making units performing similar tasks, I measured performance differences among the commercial banks to offer information regarding management efficiency by finding inefficient banks and identifying the inefficient parts and the degree of their inefficiencies. Strategic group merbership was defined in terms of similarity of strategic scope and resource deployment commitments.
The major findings of this study are as follows. (1) The description of organizational performance is not a question of a priori definition, but rather a question of empirical investigation. Also a multi-dimension and multi-level phenonenon such as organizational performance can hardly be captured by one or two indicators alone. (2) Though the estimated results measured with DEA may vary according to the choice of input-output variables, DEA model used in this study considers and reflects both asset and cost efficiency. (3) Environmental determinism bases its explanation of organizational performance mainly on the structural features of the environment, and especially on industrial structure and competitive forces. But as environment has changed, already established determinants of organizational performance are less powerful than before. (4) Recognizing that the basis for organizational performance has changed is essential to develop a different frame of referent for considering issues of strategy. The results suggest that explanations of organizational performance are more dynamic and context dependent than most of the previous studies indicate.
The major contributions of this study may be (1) the development of more qualified insight into determinants of organizational performance by the linkages between the theories of strategic management and resource-based view of firm, (2) the investigation of the process which has an impact of environmental changes on the dynamics of organizational adaptation and the profitability of banks through the dynamic analysis of performance differences and changes in a single intraindustry, and (3) the presentation of the extended notion of strategic groups by comprehensive procedure for empirically testing strategic group membership-performance link, not at the single-business but in the corporate level, also not in the static but in the dynamic perspective.
본 연구는 조직성과의 차이와 그 원인에 대한 동태적 분석을 통하여, 조직성과 결정요인에 관한 기존연구의 한계를 극복하고 새로운 분석틀을 모색해 보는데 그 목적이 있다. 이제까지 논의된 본 연구의 결과를 전술한 연구문제별로 요약하여 보면 [표 14-1]와 같다.
◁표 삽입▷(원문을 참조하세요)
