# Efficiency of Public R&D Management Agency and Its Improvement toward Open Innovation
## 4 Analysis of Relative Efficiency of Planning and Evaluation Cost
### Discussion  
#### 4.3.1 DEA as the Tool of Analysis of the R&D Efficiency  
DEA analysis measured the relative efficiency of R&D management agencies by using a model with manpower and planning and evaluation cost as input factors and project cost and number of projects as output factors, and suggested the causes of inefficiency and efficiency targets.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**DMU**} & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Ministry**} & **R\&D** & **TE** & **PTE** & **SE** & **Cause of** & **Returns to** \\  & **Management** & **(CCR)** & **(BCC)** & **(TE/PTE)** & **Inefficiency** & **Scale** \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Agency** & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{MSIT} & NRF & 1.00 & 1.00 & 1.00 & - & CRS \\ \cline{2-7}  & IITP & 0.25 & 0.38 & 0.66 & PTE & DRS \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{MOTIE} & KEIT & 0.32 & 0.36 & 0.90 & PTE & DRS \\ \cline{2-7}  & KIAT & 0.71 & 0.82 & 0.87 & PTE & DRS \\ \cline{2-7}  & KEETEP & 0.65 & 1.00 & 0.65 & SE & DRS \\ \hline MSS & TIPA & 0.25 & 0.26 & 0.98 & PTE & DRS \\ \hline MOF & KIMST & 0.67 & 0.78 & 0.86 & PTE & DRS \\ \hline MOLIT & KAIA & 0.37 & 0.50 & 0.75 & PTE & DRS \\ \hline MOHW & KHIDI & 0.55 & 1.00 & 0.55 & SE & DRS \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{MCST} & KOCCA & 0.36 & 0.39 & 0.91 & PTE & IRS \\ \cline{2-7}  & Korea Copyright & \multirow{2}{*}{0.64} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.64} & \multirow{2}{*}{SE} & \multirow{2}{*}{IRS} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Commission & & & & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Korea Sports & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{-} & \multirow{2}{*}{CRS} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Promotion & & & & & \\ \cline{2-7}  & Foundation & & & & & \\ \hline MAFRA & IPET & 0.70 & 0.88 & 0.80 & SE & DRS \\ \hline Korea Forest & \multirow{2}{*}{KOFPI} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{-} & \multirow{2}{*}{CRS} \\ \cline{2-7} Service & & & & & & \\ \hline ME & KEITI & 0.41 & 0.72 & 0.57 & SE & DRS \\ \hline Korea Meteorological & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & Korea & \multirow{2}{*}{0.72} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.77} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.94} & \multirow{2}{*}{PTE} & \multirow{2}{*}{DRS} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Meteorological & Institute & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{NSSC} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.22} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.42} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.52} & \multirow{2}{*}{PTE} & \multirow{2}{*}{IRS} \\ \cline{2-7}  & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{NSSC} & \multirow{2}{*}{Mean} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.58} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.72} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.80} & \multirow{2}{*}{PTE: 9} & \multirow{2}{*}{CRS: 3} \\ \cline{2-7}  & SD & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Max} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{1.00} & \multirow{2}{*}{SE: 5} & \multirow{2}{*}{IRS: 3} \\ \cline{2-7}  & Min & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: Efficiency analysis results of R&D agencies.  
As a result of the analysis, first, out of the 17 R&D agencies, 6 were found to be efficient and 11 were found to be inefficient. The cause of inefficiency was found to be higher in pure technical efficiency than in scale efficiency. Second, as a result of the analysis of economies of scale, 11 agencies out of all agencies were found to be in a state of DRS, in which the rate of increase in revenue was lower than the rate of increase in size. Third, as a result of congestion analysis, it was found that among the input factors, the frequency and scale of congestion were higher in the planning and evaluation cost than in the manpower.