Assessing the Institutional Legitimacy of Research and Technology Organisations in South Korea

Abstract

This article examines the institutional legitimacy of public Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs) in South Korea (Korea hereafter), a catching-up economy. It reports the results of content analysis carried out on 200 articles, columns and interviews appearing in major Korean newspapers from February 1998 to October 2008 to assess the degree of institutional legitimacy that Korean RTOs enjoy. The results indicate that these RTOs have not achieved sufficient institutional legitimacy to maintain organisational sustainability. Not only have the governance and management systems of these organisations changed following each election of a new government in Korea, but the results also reveal discrepancies in opinions of RTOs amongst government policymakers, RTO researchers/managers, and opinion leaders in the country’s science and technology societies. Periodic policy direction inconsistencies are also identified. Taken together, these factors have hindered the institutional legitimacy of Korean RTOs. Drawing on the results of this analysis, this article suggests new policy directions for increasing the institutional legitimacy of RTOs in catching up and developing countries

Keywords

Institutional legitimacy Research and technology organizations (RTOs)Content analysis Korean case

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahn, B.J. (1984), Sources of Legitimacy in China and North Korea. The Journal of Asiatic Studies, 71(January), pp. 357–72.

Carlsson B. and Taymaz, E. (1995), The Importance of Economic Competence in Economic growth: A Micro-to-macro Analysis. In B. Carlsson , (Ed.), Technological Systems and Economic Performance: The Case of Factory Automation, pp. 359–89. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer.

Chang, Y.C. , Yang, P.Y. and Chen, N.H. (2009), The Determinants of Academic Research Commercial Performance: Towards an Organizational Ambidexterity Perspective. Research Policy, 38(6), pp. 936–46.

Cho, H.D. , Whang, Y.S. , Kim, W.D. , Sung, T.K. , Lee, D.H. , Lee, B.H. , Kang, Y.J. and Lee, K. (2007), The Evolution of Public Research Systems of Major Countries and Policy Recommendations for Korea (in Korean). Seoul: STEPI.

Cho, H.D. , Whang, Y.S. , Lee, S.J. , Lee, B.H. , Whang, J.T. and Kim, J.Y. (2008), An Analysis of Sustainability of Government-supported Research Institutes and Policy Recommendations (in Korean). Seoul: STEPI.

Collingwood, V. and Logister, L. (2007), Perceptions of the Legitimacy of International NGOs. In A. Vedder , (Ed.), NGO Involvement in International Governance and Policy: Sources of Legitimacy, pp. 21–57. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983), The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147–60.

Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J. (1975), Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), pp. 122–36.

Hsu, J.P. and Yeo, K.T. (1996), A Systemic Approach to Re-engineer a Public Research Institute (PRI) for Commercialization. International Journal of Project Management, 14(6), pp. 387–93.

10.

Krippendorff, K. (2004), Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

11.

Kim, Y.B. , Lee, B.H. and Lim, Y. (1999), A Comparative Study of Managerial Features between Public and Private R&D Organizations in Korea: Managerial and Policy Implications for Public R&D Organizations. International Journal of Technology Management, 17(3), pp. 281–311.

12.

KISTEP (Korea Institute of Science and Technology Evaluation Panning) (2009), Survey of R&D in Korea, Seoul.

13.

Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977), Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structures as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), pp. 340–63.

14.

Meyer, J.W. and Scott, W.R. (1983), Centralization and the Legitimacy Problems of Local Government. In J.W. Meyer and W.R. Scott , (Eds), Organizational Environment: Ritual and Rationality, pp. 199–215. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

15.

OECD (2008), The Country Review of Innovation Policy in Korea. Paris: OECD.

16.

Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. , (Eds), (1991), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

17.

Poti, B. and Reale, E. (2000), Convergence and Differentiation in Institutional Change among European Public Research Systems: The Decreasing Role of Public Research Institutes. Science and Public Policy, 27(6), pp. 421–31.

18.

Sanz-Menendez, L. and Cruz-Castro, L. (2003), Coping with Environmental Pressures: Public Research Organizations Responses to Funding Crises. Research Policy, 32(8), pp. 1293–1308.

19.

Scharpf, F.W. (1997), Games Real Actors Play: Actor-centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

20.

Scott, W.R. (1987), Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

21.

Scott, W.R. (1991), Unpacking Institutional Arguments. In W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio , (Eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, pp. 164–82. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

22.

Simpson, B. (2004), After the Reforms: How Have Public Science Research Organizations Changed?. R&D Management, 34(3), pp. 253–66.

23.

Simpson, B. and Powell, M. (1999), Designing Research Organizations for Science Innovation. Long Range Planning, 32(4), pp. 441–51.

24.

Solingen, E. (1993), Between Markets and the State: Scientists in Comparative Perspective. Comparative Politics, 26(1), pp. 21–51.

25.

Suchman, M.C. (1995), Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approach. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), pp. 571–610.

26.

Thomas, D.E. (2007), How Do Reputation and Legitimacy Affect Organizational Performance?. International Journal of Management, 24(1), pp. 108–16.

27.

Van Kersbergen, K. and van Waarden, F. (2001), Shift in Governance: Problems of Legitimacy and Accountability. The Hague: NWO.

28.

Whelan, R.C. (2000), Management of Scientific Institutions. NPL 1995–9: The Transition from Agency to Government-owned Contractor Operated (GOCO). R&D Management, 30(4), pp. 313–22.