성차에 근거한 여성인적자원개발에 관한 비판적 검토

A Critical Review of Human Resource Development for Women Based on Gender Differences

본 연구를 통해서 성차에 근거한 여성인적자원개발에 관해 살펴보고자 하였다. 먼저 개인개발, 경력개발 등 인적자원개발과 관련한 43개 키워드로 대상 문헌 3,126건을 검색하였다. 그리고 이 중 성별에 따른 상관성 분석을 실시한 논문 257건을 추출하였다. 이들 문헌에는 모두 1,388개의 변수가 있었는데, 이를 KJ법에 의해 대‧중‧소그룹으로 분류하였다. 이 과정에는 교수 1인, 박사 1인, 박사과정 5인이 참여하였으며 최종 대그룹은 13가지였다. 끝으로 관심 그룹인 ‘교육훈련 만족도’와 ‘교육훈련 후 취업유무’에 대한 메타분석을 통해 여성인적자원개발을 위한 시사점을 모색했다. 연구결과 성별에 따른 유의한 차이가 있는 논문은 13.62%에 불과했으며 문항에 따라 결과가 상이한 논문의 비중이 58.75%로 가장 많았다. 13개의 대그룹 가운데 성별에 따른 유의한 차이가 있는 비율이 가장 높은 것은 ‘HRD 관련 만족도’로 57.58%였으며, 38개의 중그룹에서는 ‘임파워먼트’가 75%로 제일 높았다. ‘교육훈련만족도’와 ‘교육훈련 후 취업유무’에 대한 메타분석 결과 각각의 효과크기는 0.07과 -0.05로 이것은 코헨(Cohen, J.)이 제시한 기준에 의하면 작은 효과크기(ESsm ≤ .20)에 해당되었다.

Recently, there have been many discussions on human resource development (HRD) for women. There are mainly two groups with different views. One group asserts that we give existing HRD opportunities to women more frequently. The other brings to a conclusion that special HRD programs for women are necessary. The former highlights gender discrimination, the latter on gender differences. Studies on gender differences have been carried out for a long time and produced various results. But any investigation to demonstrate gender differences, whether for the superiority of one gender or for the equality, is likely to be conducted on a researcher’s biased view. In addition, a research in a laboratory has a weakness because of the nature of HRD that deals with the field of organizations. Therefore, this study took a different approach and reviewed general articles in the discipline of HRD instead of specific researches in gender differences generated from labs. In the beginning, I searched articles with 43 key words related to HRD. I discovered 3,126 articles and among them 257 studies were analyzed to have the correlation between result and gender. There were 1,388 variables, which I tried to divide into groups with KJ method. In that process 1 professor, 1 doctor and 5 PhD candidates worked together. After categorizing, I examined in details the ‘T&D satisfaction’ and ‘the state of employment after completion of a course’ by utilizing a meta- analytic approach. At the end implications for HRD were presented. The result of this study is as follows: The ratio of articles which had a meaningful difference between men and women was no more than 13.62%. Among 13 Large Groups ‘satisfaction with HRD’ had the highest proportion of 57.58% and in Medium Groups ‘empowerment’ was 75%. Meta-analyses of ‘T&D satisfaction’ and ‘the state of employment after completion of a course’ showed small effective sizes(0.07, -0.05) which were based on the criteria suggested by Cohen.