Résumé
The purpose of this study were to investigate the job analysis questionnaire was mailed to 250 dietitians who are members of The Korean dietic association practice group in self-operated foodservices(hereafter group A)and 250 dietitians who are employed in contracted foodservice companies(hereafter group B). Completed questionnaires were received from 285 dietitians(121 in self-operated, 164 in contracted) ; a response rate of 57%. Statistical data analysis was completed using the SAS/win packages for descriptive analysis, t-test, chi-square-test, The results of this study can be summarized as follows. 1. The dietic training or internship experiences were significantly different between the two sample group(p<.001), but the perceptions of needs for training or internship were not different between and they thought one to six month training would be needed for the job. 2. The question about the time needed in order to perform an expert job was answered significantly differently(p<.001) 3. Group A usually took part in obligatory continuing education and short-term training courses, and group B usually took part in obligatory continuing education and on-the-job trainings, respectively. However both group perceived all three types of educations would be needed for performing the job better. 4. As for the physical demands of the job, a certain degree of accuracy and dexterity for physical tasks and equipment operations was needed for the job. Concerning the mental demands, they answered that their job needs considerable creativity and judgement for planing and performing their tasks was needed. 5. As for responsibilities, group B's responsibilities were heavier than group A's(p<.001) and need for confidentiality was also greater for group B than for group A(p<.001). 6. As for the supervising role differences, group A rarely received supervision from others and they were given directions only in essential situations, whereas group B was usually supervised when planing and performing their job and tasks, showing significant difference in positions between the two sample groups(p<.001). But each group supervised co-workers and employees in their department. 7. With regard to personal contact, both groups frequently contacted people in their department and other departments at the company and sometimes people outside the company. 8. Concerning the work environment, there were some risks and discomforts in the physical environment and there was no significant difference between the two sample groups.