進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-2306201812184900
論文名稱(中文) 桃園機場捷運旅客服務品質評估與診斷-IPA-Kano模型之應用
論文名稱(英文) Service Quality Evaluation and Diagnosis for Taoyuan International Airport MRT-Application of IPA-Kano Model
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 交通管理科學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Transportation & Communication Management Science
學年度 106
學期 2
出版年 107
研究生(中文) 劉悅
研究生(英文) Yueh Liu
學號 R56051038
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 110頁
口試委員 指導教授-張有恆
口試委員-鄭永祥
口試委員-徐村和
口試委員-楊慧華
中文關鍵字 機場捷運服務品質  重要度-績效分析(IPA)  Kano二維品質模式  IPA-Kano模型 
英文關鍵字 Airport MRT Service Quality  Importance-Performance Analysis(IPA)  Kano Model  IPA-Kano Model 
學科別分類
中文摘要 國際航空運輸協會(International Air Transport Association, IATA)2017年的客運報告指出在2036年全球將會有78億人次使用航空運輸,其中又以亞太地區為全球旅運成長率最快速的地區。桃園國際機場2017年底的旅運量已逼近4500萬人次,而每年客運量皆呈現遞增的趨勢。隨著航空運輸需求量的迅速成長,大量旅客湧入機場,此時機場聯外運輸系統便扮演了一個很重要的角色。過去研究中學者指出:機場的聯外運輸系統為限制機場容量成長、影響機場整體服務品質之關鍵因素。因此,在提升機場服務品質之際,如何有效規劃機場的聯外運輸系統,是一項很重要的課題(Meredith, 1994、Fisher, 2005)。

桃園機場捷運於民國106年3月正式營運,然而營運初期在服務品質與設施上存在許多待改善的地方且根據《大眾捷運法》第28條之規定:「大眾捷運系統必須擬定服務指標,提供安全、快速、舒適的服務,報請地方主管機關核定」。因此,本研究係以改善機場捷運服務品質為目的,於直達車車廂內進行實地問卷調查,以得知旅客對機捷各個服務項目的實際評比與看法。並運用IPA-Kano模型來判定各個服務項目的屬性。最後根據服務項目所位在的模型區塊決定其優先改善順序,並提出可行性的改善策略建議供機場捷運公司做參考。

研究結果顯示,優先改善順序的前兩名是「車內大型行李放置空間(IK10)」及「車內PIDS(Passenger Information Display System)(IK13)」,其屬性分別是致命品質及慢性病品質,必須做立即的改善,以減少旅客的不滿意度。同時本研究根據各服務項目的屬性,提出相應的13項改善策略建議供機場捷運公司在服務品質提升與未來經營管理策略上做參考。此外,本研究應用的IPA-Kano模型除了避免單一使用IPA或Kano的限制與缺失,也讓研究結果更臻於完善且更具參考價值。
英文摘要 Taoyuan International Airport MRT began its commercial service in March 2017. The Airport MRT links Taoyuan International Airport, the Taoyuan station of Taiwan High Speed Rail (HSR), and the Taipei Main Station. This new facility gives travelers a new modal opportunity to access the airport. However, the services offered by Airport MRT have been criticized since some of the facilities and service performances do not meet passenger’s expectations and demands.

The aim of this research is to quantify passenger satisfaction regarding services offered by Airport MRT and then several improvement strategies are proposed to enhance the service quality in Airport MRT. The IPA-Kano model is used for categorizing and diagnosing service quality attributes and providing specific strategies for attributes in each category. This model avoids limitation and weakness when using IPA or Kano model alone and enable managers to easily grasp accurate passenger perceptions of a quality attribute and corresponding coping strategies.

The results show that “The luggage spaces on the train(IK10)” and “Passenger Information Display System(PIDS) on the train(IK13)” respectively belong to fatal category and chronic diseases, are on the first two of the improvement list and need immediate improvement. The findings of this study provide valuable information to Taoyuan Airport MRT operators for their service quality improvement and suggestions for management strategies in the future. Moreover, the application of IPA-Kano model in this study help develop better conclusions and enhance the value of this research.
論文目次 第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機 1
1.2 研究目的 3
1.3 研究範圍與限制 3
1.4 研究方法 3
1.5 研究流程 4
第二章 文獻回顧 7
2.1 桃園國際機場捷運營運現況 7
2.1.1 桃園機場捷運概述 7
2.1.2 桃園機場捷運營運概況 8
2.2 服務品質 9
2.2.1 服務品質的定義與特性 9
2.2.2 服務品質的模式 12
2.2.3 服務品質與顧客滿意度 16
2.3 機場軌道運輸聯外系統 17
2.3.1 機場軌道運輸聯外系統之種類 17
2.3.2 國外國際機場軌道運輸聯外系統之介紹 17
2.3.3軌道運輸系統服務品質相關文獻 22
2.4 IPA-Kano模型 28
2.4.1 重要度-績效分析 28
2.4.2 重要度-績效分析之相關應用 29
2.4.3 Kano二維品質模式 29
2.4.4 Kano二維品質的分類 31
2.4.5 Kano二維品質模式相關應用 34
2.4.6 IPA-Kano模型 35
2.5 小結 40
第三章 研究方法 41
3.1 問卷設計 41
3.2 問卷抽樣設計 47
3.2.1 抽樣方法 47
3.2.2 抽樣誤差與有效樣本數 47
3.3 問卷分析方法 48
3.3.1 重要度-績效分析 48
3.3.2 Kano二維品質歸類方法與計算方式 49
3.3.3 獨立樣本t檢定與ANOVA 50
第四章 調查結果與資料分析 51
4.1 樣本特性結構分析 51
4.1.1 問卷回收概況 51
4.1.2 旅客基本資料 51
4.1.3 旅運特性與搭乘經驗 52
4.2 項目分析 54
4.2.1 極端組檢定 54
4.2.2 相關分析與使用率 55
4.2.3 小結 56
4.3 IPA分析 56
4.3.1 優勢保持區 57
4.3.2 優先改善區 58
4.3.3 次要改善區 58
4.3.4 過度重視區 59
4.4 旅客分群對機捷滿意度之差異性分析 59
第五章 機場捷運服務品質評估與診斷 64
5.1 KANO二維品質分析 64
5.2 IPA-KANO模型 68
5.3 改善策略建議 73
5.4 研究方法之結果差異比較 86
第六章 結論與建議 90
6.1 結論 90
6.2 建議 94
6.3 本研究之貢獻 96
參考文獻-中文 98
參考文獻-英文 99
參考文獻-網頁 105
附錄一 桃園機場捷運旅客服務品質調查問卷 106

參考文獻 1.Ashford, N., Stanton, H.P.M and Moore,C.A (1996). Airport Operations, Vol. 55, No. 599, pp.1-8.
2.Ashley, D., & Merz, S. K. (2006). Airport Rail Links-A Post Audit. In Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), 29TH, 2006, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, Vol 29.
3.Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S. S., Omrani, H., & Panahi, A. (2011). A hybrid approach based on SERVQUAL and fuzzy TOPSIS for evaluating transportation service quality. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 61(3), 637-646.
4.Bacon, D. R. (2003). A comparison of approaches to importance-performance analysis. International Journal of Market Research, 45(1), 55-73.
5.Bates, J. J., Ashley, D. J., & Hyman, G. (1987). The nested incremental logit model: theory and application to modal choice. In 15th PTRC Summer Annual Meeting, University of Bath, England.
6.Berger, C. (1993). Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality. Center for quality management journal, 2(4), 3-36.
7.Bolton, R. N., & Drew, J. H. (1991). A longitudinal analysis of the impact of service changes on customer attitudes. The Journal of Marketing, 1-9.
8.Brady, M. K., & Cronin Jr, J. J. (2001). Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: a hierarchical approach. Journal of marketing, 65(3), 34-49.
9.Brons, M., Givoni, M., & Rietveld, P. (2009). Access to railway stations and its potential in increasing rail use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(2), 136-149.
10.Chang, Y. H., & Yeh, C. H. (2002). A survey analysis of service quality for domestic airlines. European journal of operational research, 139(1), 166-177.
11.Chen, C. M., & Ann, B. Y. (2016). Efficiencies vs. importance-performance analysis for the leading smartphone brands of Apple, Samsung and HTC. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 27(3-4), 227-249.
12.Chen, L. S., Hsu, C. C., & Chang, P. C. (2008, October). Developing a TRIZ-Kano model for creating attractive quality. In Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, 2008. WiCOM'08. 4th International Conference on (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
13.Chou, J. S., Kim, C., Tsai, P. Y., Yeh, C. P., & Son, H. (2017). Longitudinal assessment of high-speed rail service delivery, satisfaction and operations: A study of Taiwan and Korea systems. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 21(6), 2413-2428.
14.Coogan, M. A. (2000). Improving public transportation access to large airports (Vol. 62). Transportation Research Board.
15.Cunningham, L. F., Young, C. E., & Lee, M. (2002). Cross-cultural perspectives of service quality and risk in air transportation.
16.Cunningham, L., Young, C., & Lee, M. (2000). Methodological triangulation in measuring public transportation service quality. Transportation Journal, 35-47.
17. De Ona, J., de Oña, R., Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2015). Heterogeneity in perceptions of service quality among groups of railway passengers. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 9(8), 612-626.
18.Deng, W. (2007). Using a revised importance–performance analysis approach: The case of Taiwanese hot springs tourism. Tourism Management, 28(5), 1274-1284.
19.Deng, W. J., Chen, W. C., & Pei, W. (2008). Back-propagation neural network based importance–performance analysis for determining critical service attributes. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(2), 1115-1125.
20.DeVellis, P., Thomas, S. H., & Wedel, S. K. (1998). Prehospital and emergency department analgesia for air-transported patients with fractures. Prehospital Emergency Care, 2(4), 293-296.
21.Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2007). Service quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction for bus transit. Journal of public transportation, 10(3), 2.
22.Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2012). Structural equation modelling for analysing passengers’ perceptions about railway services. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 54, 96-106.
23.Fisher, L. (2005). Port of Seattle airport access study microsimulation modeling. Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
24.Givoni, M., & Banister, D. (2007). Role of the Railways in the Future of Air Transport. Transportation planning and technology, 30(1), 95-112.
25.Givoni, M., & Rietveld, P. (2007). The access journey to the railway station and its role in passengers’ satisfaction with rail travel. Transport Policy, 14(5), 357-365.
26.Grönroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of marketing, 18(4), 36-44.
27.Hwang, C., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making—methods and applications. New York: Springer.
28.Jou, R. C., Hensher, D. A., & Hsu, T. L. (2011). Airport ground access mode choice behavior after the introduction of a new mode: A case study of Taoyuan International Airport in Taiwan. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 47(3), 371-381.
29.Kano, N. (1984). Attractive quality and must-be quality. J. Jpn. Soc. Quality Control, 14, 39-48.
30.Kuo, Y. F. (2004). Integrating Kano’s model into web-community service quality. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 15(7), 925-939.
31.Kuo, Y. F., Chen, J. Y., & Deng, W. J. (2012). IPA–Kano model: A new tool for categorising and diagnosing service quality attributes. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(7-8), 731-748.
32.Lee, Y. C., & Huang, S. Y. (2009). A new fuzzy concept approach for Kano’s model. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 4479-4484.
33.Lee, Y. C., Cheng, C. C., & Yen, T. M. (2009). Integrate Kano’s model and IPA to improve order-winner criteria: a study of computer industry. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(1), 38-48.
34.Levene, Howard (1960). "Robust tests for equality of variances". In Ingram Olkin; Harold Hotelling; et al. Contributions to Probability and Statistics: Essays in Honor of Harold Hotelling. Stanford University Press. pp. 278–292.
35.Liu, J., & Gao, H. (2007). Study on railway transport service quality evaluation. In Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, 2007. WiCom 2007. International Conference on (pp. 3313-3316). IEEE.
36.Löfgren, M., & Witell, L. (2008). Two decades of using Kano's theory of attractive quality: a literature review. Quality Management Journal, 15(1), 59-75.
37.Mandalapu, S. R., & Sproule, W. J. (1995). Airport ground access: Rail transit alternatives. Transportation research record, (1503), 111-117.
38.Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. The journal of marketing, 77-79.
39.Martinez, J. A., & Martinez, L. (2010). Some insights on conceptualizing and measuring service quality. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(1), 29-42.
40.Matzler, K., & Hinterhuber, H. H. (1998). How to make product development projects more successful by integrating Kano's model of customer satisfaction into quality function deployment. Technovation, 18(1), 25-38.
41.Matzler, K., Bailom, F., Hinterhuber, H. H., Renzl, B., & Pichler, J. (2004). The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction: a reconsideration of the importance–performance analysis. Industrial marketing management, 33(4), 271-277.
42.Meng, Q., Jiang, X., He, L., & Guo, X. (2015). Integration of fuzzy theory into Kano model for classification of service quality elements: A case study in a machinery industry of China. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 8(5), 1661.
43.Meredith, J., “Airports and congestion, Airport Capacity and Development Funding,” Proceedings of the 10th World Airports Conference held in Hong Kong on 29 Nov-1 Dec, 1994, pp. 196-203.
44.Mikulić, J., & Prebežac, D. (2008). Prioritizing improvement of service attributes using impact range-performance analysis and impact-asymmetry analysis. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 18(6), 559-576.
45.Monteiro, A. B., & Hansen, M. (1996). Improvements to airport ground access and behavior of multiple airport system: BART extension to San Francisco International Airport. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1562), 38-47.
46.Nathanail, E. (2008). Measuring the quality of service for passengers on the Hellenic railways. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(1), 48-66.
47.Nilsson, J. E., Hultkrantz, L., & Karlström, U. (2008). The Arlanda airport rail link: lessons learned from a Swedish construction project. Review of Network Economics, 7(1).
48.Nilsson-Witell, L., & Fundin, A. (2005). Dynamics of service attributes: a test of Kano's theory of attractive quality. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16(2), 152-168.
49.Pal, M. N., & Choudhury, K. (2009). Exploring the dimensionality of service quality: an application of topsis in the Indian banking industry. Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, 26(01), 115-133.
50.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. the Journal of Marketing, 41-50.
51.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A Multiple Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. J. of Ret. 64: 12-40.
52.Potra, S. A., Izvercian, M., Pugna, A. P., & Dahlgaard, J. J. (2017). The HWWP, a refined IVA-Kano model for designing new delightful products or services. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(1-2), 104-117.
53.Rust, R. T., & Oliver, R. L. (Eds.). (1993). Service quality: New directions in theory and practice. Sage Publications.
54.Sauerwein, E., Bailom, F., Matzler, K., & Hinterhuber, H. H. (1996, February). The Kano model: How to delight your customers. In International Working Seminar on Production Economics (Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 313-327).
55.Schank, J., & N. H. M. Wilson. Airport Access via Rail Transit: What Works and What Doesn't. Presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington D.C., 2000.
56.Shahin, A. (2004). Integration of FMEA and the Kano model: An exploratory examination. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 21(7), 731-746.
57.Song, Z. B., An, Y. M., & Zheng, P. (2006). IPA analysis of tourism destination image: A case study of Xi'an residents' perception on the tourism destination image of Hainan, China. Tourism Tribune, 21(10), 26-32.
58.Tam, M. L., Lam, W. H., & Lo, H. P. (2008). Modeling air passenger travel behavior on airport ground access mode choices. Transportmetrica, 4(2), 135-153.
59.Tam, M. L., Lam, W. H., & Lo, H. P. (2010). Incorporating passenger perceived service quality in airport ground access mode choice model. Transportmetrica, 6(1), 3-17.
60.Tontini, G., & Silveira, A. (2007). Identification of satisfaction attributes using competitive analysis of the improvement gap. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(5), 482-500.
61.Tsamboulas, D. A., & Nikoleris, A. (2008). Passengers’ willingness to pay for airport ground access time savings. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(10), 1274-1282.
62.Wang, C. H. (2016). A novel approach to conduct the importance-satisfaction analysis for acquiring typical user groups in business-intelligence systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 673-681.
63.Wang, T., & Ji, P. (2010). Understanding customer needs through quantitative analysis of Kano's model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(2), 173-184.
64.Wen, C. H., Lan, L. W., & Chen, C. H. (2005, January). Passengers perception on service quality and their choice for intercity bus services. In Transportation Research Board, 84th Annual Meeting.
65.Wu, H. H., Tang, Y. T., & Shyu, J. W. (2010). An integrated approach of Kano's model and Importance-Performance Analysis in identifying key success factors. African Journal of Business Management, 4(15), 3238.
66.Yamashita, Y., Takahira, T., & Hibino, N. (2005). A Measurement of Additional Effects of a Narita Airport Access Train.
67.Yang, C. C. (2005). The refined Kano's model and its application. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 16(10), 1127-1137.
68.Yu, S. Y., Park, J., Kim, J., Lee, H., & Yoon, H. J. (2014). A case study of customer satisfaction for information technology solutions. Journal of Central South University, 21(11), 4279-4285.
69.張有恆,2007,軌道運輸管理,華泰文化。
70.張有恆,2017,現代運輸學(四版),華泰文化。
71.朱旭,2017,回顧機場捷運,土木水利會刊,Vol 44,No.2。
72.郭德賓,2016,服務品質與顧客關係管理-理論與實務,五南出版。
73.吳明隆,2007,SPSS操作與應用問卷統計分析實務,五南出版。
74.邱皓政,2000,量化研究與統計分析:SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析,五南出版。
75.楊賀評,2009,捷運系統旅客服務品質準則之選取與評估-以高雄捷運系統為例,國立成功大學交通管理科學系碩士論文。
76.林雅琪,2011,高雄國際機場服務品質評估與改善策略-整合IPA、三因子理論與QFD模式,國立成功大學交通管理科學系碩士論文。
77.潘婉茹,2008,結合Kano模式與IPA檢視國道客運之服務品質屬性-以國光客運為例,國立彰化師範大學行銷與流通管理研究所碩士論文。
78.宋彥青、楊志文、曾依蘋、蘇秋如、何佩螢,2015,桃園國際機場聯外捷運定價策略評估. 運輸學刊, 27(1), 123-158。
79.林立竹,2017,市區預辦登機服務之關鍵成功因素分析,國立高雄餐旅大學觀光研究所碩士論文。
80.胡凱傑、李太雨、丘志文,2009,以Kano模式與重要度績效分析探討亞洲主要貨櫃港口之服務品質,中華民國運輸學會98年學術論文國際研討會,1451-1478。
81.桃園國際機場公司出國訪查報告,2014,香港國際機場及香港地鐵預辦登機參訪報告書。
82.International Air Rail Organization, http://iaro.com/
83.International Civil Aviation Organization, https://www.icao.int/Pages/default.aspx
84.International Air Transport Association, http://www.iata.org/Pages/default.aspx
85.Narita Airport Express, http://www.jreast.co.jp/e/nex/
86.Incheon Airport Express, http://www.arex.or.kr/main.do
87.London Heathrow Express, https://www.heathrowexpress.com/
88.桃園機場捷運公司,https://www.tymetro.com.tw/cht/index.php
89.香港地鐵公司(MTR Corporation), http://www.mtr.com.hk/
90.桃園機場公司,http://www.taoyuan-airport.com
91.交通部民用航空局,https://www.caa.gov.tw/big5/index.asp


論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2019-06-07起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2019-06-07起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw