조직침묵의 원인에 관한 메타분석

A Meta-Analysis on the Causes of Organizational Silence

이 연구는 지난 12년간 국내 조직침묵 원인 분석 연구를 종합하여 메타분석을 수행하였다. 조직침묵 관련 선행연구의 한계점은 3가지다. 첫째, 유사변수들이 반복 검증되고 있다. 둘째, 개인적 특성(연령, 학력, 직위 등)에 따른 침묵태도 차이를 규명한 연구가 부족하다. 셋째, 민간과 공공 조직 간 침묵현상의 차이를 규명한 연구가 지극히 제한적이다. 선행연구의 한계를 극복하기 위해 메타분석을 수행하였다. 분석단위는 2009년~2020년 2월까지, 학술 논문 중 메타분석 요건을 갖춘 63편이다. 연구 내용은 첫째, 조직침묵 원인연구의 효과크기를 종합하고, 영향력을 비교분석하였다. 이를 통해 Milliken, Morrison, & Hewlin(2003)의 모형을 교차 검증하고, 한국적 차원의 조직침묵 발생 모델을 제시하였다. 둘째, 개인적 특성에 따른 침묵의 발생 차이를 살펴보았다. 끝으로, 메타회귀분석을 통해 민간과 공공을 구분하여 조직침묵의 발생 양상 차이를 비교하였다. 주요 분석결과, 첫째, 상사와의 관계가 조직침묵을 저감하는 핵심요인이었다. 둘째, 직위가 높을수록 체념적･방어적 침묵을 감소시키고, 학력이 높을수록 체념적 침묵이 감소했다. 셋째, 조직침묵 발현은 민간과 공공의 차이가 없었다. 이상 분석결과를 토대로 8가지 함의점을 제안하였다.

This study performed meta-analysis by synthesizing research on the causes of silencing in Korea for the past 12 years. There are three major limitations of previous research. First, similar variables are being repeatedly verified; Second, there is a lack of research to identify differences in silent attitudes according to individual characteristics (age, educational background, position, etc.), and third, study identifying differences in silence between private and public organizations is extremely limited. Meta-analysis was performed to overcome the limitations of previous studies. The unit of analysis is from 2009 to February 2020, 63 of the academic papers with meta-analysis requirements. The contents of this study are as follows. First, the effect size of the study on the cause of silence was synthesized, and the influence was compared and analyzed. Through this, the model of the cause of silence by Milliken, Morrison, & Hewlin(2003) was cross-validated, and a model of the occurrence of silence at the Korean level was visually presented. Second, the difference in the occurrence of silence according to personal characteristics was examined. Finally, through meta-regression analysis, the differences in the patterns of organizational silence were compared by distinguishing between the private and public organizations. As a result of major analysis, first, the relationship with the boss was identified as a key factor in reducing organizational silence. Second, it was found that the higher the position, the less acquiescent and defensive silence, and the higher the education, the less acquiescent silence. Third, there was no difference between the private and public in the manifestation of organizational silence. Based on the above analysis results, eight implications were proposed.