House of Quality, HOQ 1989 19951995 2002 65
International Council of Museums, 2005 1999 2001 2001 McLean, 1993 Lewis & Mitchell, 1991 2003 Parasuraman et al., 1985,1988 Quality Function Deployment, QFDHouse of Quality, HOQ QFD QFD Koch1997 8020 66
80 20 HOQ 1998Kotler2000 Dunlap et al.1988 1996 2001 Customer Value Irons1994 Fitzsimmons & Fitzsimmons2004 Gronroos1984 Parasuraman et al. 1985, 1988 Parasuraman et al.1985 PZB PZB 1. 2. 67
PZB TangiblesReliability ResponsivenessCommunication CredibilitySecurity CompetenceAccess Courtesy Understand & Knowing Customer Parasuraman et al.1988 SERVQUAL Assurance Empathy Expected Service, ESPerceived Service, PS PS-ES 2001Maslow PZB Dion et al., 1998Engelland et al., 2000Hsieh & Hsieh, 2001 PZB QFD 1983 1988 Mizuno & Akao, 1978 Sullivan, 19861998 2000 QFD 1992 HOQ Voice of Customer, VOC Griffin & Hauser, 1993Hauser & Clausing1988 68
1 1. WHAT WHAT VOC 2. HOW Voice of Engineering, VOE 3. WHATHOW Relationship Matrix WHAT HOW 4. HOWHOW Correlation Matrix 5. HOWHOW MUCH HOW WHAT 6. HOW HOW 69
Ohfuji et al.1996 QFD 31.5%68.5% QFD QFD FordGMChrysler3MAT&T Hewlett-PackardIBMKodak MotorolaXerox Kogure & Akao, 1983Griffin, 1992Adiano & Roth, 1994Cohen, 1995Kim & Moskowitz, 1997Prasad, 1998 Maryins & Aspinwall, 2001 Behara & Chase1993QFD SERVQUAL 2002 QFD 2001 2001 2003 Hauser, 1993 1995Laurette et al., 1999 1996Lowe et al., 2000 Govers, 20012002 Ermer, 1995 1999 2001 PZB PZB PZB QFD 921116125330 300 20280 84.85% 53.3% 46.7% 70
20~3976.4% 2015.0% 71.8% 28.3% 21.7% 46.4% 26.8% 3.2%71.6% 20,000~60,000 61.7%1 55.0% Parasuraman et al. 1988 2001 31 26 Likert 54321 7 t Parasuraman et al.1988 2001 VOC Wasserman, 1993Chan & Wu, 1998 2000 Lee & Kusiak, 2001 2002 71
VOE Chan & Wu 1998Wu20022004 Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution, TOPSISHwang & Yoon 1981 72
Hwang & Yoon, 1981 1. Normalized Decision Matrix 2. Weighted Normalized Decision Matrix 3. Ideal Solutions Negative-ideal Solutions 4. Separation Measure n 5. Relative Closeness to the Ideal Solution 6. Preference Order 1 Bartlett s KMO Maiser-meyer-olkin0.856 Eigenvalue1 Varimax 60.469% 0.4 Cronbach s 0.89080.6362 PZB 26 73
74 PZB t p0.0001 26 10 1. 4.717 4.583 4.550 4.500 4.450 4.433 4.383 4.367 4.283 4.270 4.267 2. 3.817 3.683 3.617 3.520 3.517 3.467 3.420 3.417 3.412 3.405 3. 30~3920 20~29 20 PZB HOQ VOC
3 10 75
76 1 VOE 1.2. 3. 4. 1.2. 3. 4. 1.2. 3.4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 16 9 3 1 2HOQ QFD 3
77
Kotler & Kotler1998 PZB HOQ 20~39 76.6% 71.7% 28.3% 21.7% 71.6%20,000~ 60,000 61.7% 155.0% 78
79 HOQ 1. 10 2. Koch19978020 2004 B1 Web of Life
1999 Zoological Society of London, 2004 1992 2002 5 : 41~66 2004 http:// www.zoo.gov.tw/ 1999 3 : 191~ 213 2004 http://202.39.225.136/indexc.asp 1996 2001 182: 231~253 2002 2001 2004 2 2: 151~178 2001 13 : 89~102 1995 153: 19~24 1995 8 : 22~31 1999 133: 3~9 2003 80
2003 1 : 1~26 2002 QFD 26 : 83~88 1989 12 : 53~82 1996 QFD 31: 65~79 2001 1998 2001 2001 24: 86~108 1995 2001 KanoQFD 82: 97~126 2000 14 Adiano, C. & A.V. Roth. 1994. Beyond the House of Quality : Dynamic QFD. Benchmarking : An International Journal, 11: 25~37. Behara, R. S. & R. B. Chase. 1993. Service Quality Deployment : Quality Service by Design. In Sarin, R. V.ed., Perspectives in Operations Management : Essays in Honor of Buffa, E. S.. Norwell, MA : Kluwer Academic Publisher. Chan, L. K. & M. L. Wu. 1998. Prioritizing the Technical Measures in Quality Function Deployment. Quality Engineering, 103: 467~479. Cohen, L. 1995. Quality Function Deployment : How to Make QFD Work for You. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley. Dion, P. A., R. Javalgi & J. D. Aiss. 1998. An Empirical Assessment of the Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman Service Expectations Model. The Service Industries Journal, 184: 66~86. Dunlap, B. J., M. Doston & T. M. Chambers. 1988. Perception Approach. Journal of Business Research, Vol.17, pp.175~187. Engelland, B. T., L. Workman & M. Singh. 2000. Ensuring Service Quality for Campus Career Service Centers : A Modified SERVQUAL Scale. Journal of Marketing Education, 223: 236~245. Ermer, D. S. 1995. Using QFD Becomes an Educational Experience for Students and Faculty. Quality Progress, May, pp.131~136., Fitzsimmons, J. A. & M. J. Fitzsimmons. 2004. Service Management:Operations Strategy and Information Technology, 4th ed.. N.Y. : McGraw Hill/Irwin. Govers, C. P. M. 2001. QFD not Just a Tool but a Way of Quality Management. 81
International Journal of Production Economics, 69, pp.151~159. Griffin, A. 1992. Evaluating QFD s Use in US Firms as a Process for Developing. Products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 93:171~187 Griffin, A. & J. R. Hauser. 1993. The Voice of the Customer. Marketing Science, 121: 1~27. Gronroos, C. 1984. A Service Quality Model and Marketing Implications. European Journal of Marketing, 18 4: 36~44. Hauser, J. R. 1993. How Puritan-Bennett Used the House of Quality. Sloan Management Review, 343: 61~ 70. Hauser, J. R. & D. Clausing. 1988. The House of Quality. Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp.63~73. Hsieh, Y. M. & A. T. Hsieh. 2001. Enhancement of Service Quality with Job Standardization. The Service Industries Journal, 213: 147~166. Hwang, C. L. & K. Yoon. 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making : Methods. and Applications. N.Y. : Springer- Verlag. International Council of MuseumICOM 2005. http://icom.museum/. Irons, K. 1994. Managing Service Companies : Strategies for Success. Cambridge, MA : The University Press. Kim, K. J. & H. Moskowitz. 1997. Quality Function Deployment : Optimizing Product Designs. In Wang, B. ed., Integrated Product, Process and Enterprise Design. pp.64~90. Chapman & Hall. Koch, R. 1997. The 80/20 Principle : The Secret of Achieving More with Less. London : Nicholas Brealey Publishing Ltd. 2001 80/20 Kogure, M. & Y. Akao. 1983. Quality Function Deployment and Company Wide Quality Control in Japan : A Strategy for Assuring that Quality is Built into Products. pp.25~29. Quality Progress, Oct.. Kotler, N. & P. Kotler. 1998. Museum Strategy and Marketing : Designing Missions, Building Audiences, Generating Revenues and Resources. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass Publishers. Kotler, P. 2000. Marketing Management, 10th ed.. Englewood Cliffs N.J. : Prentice-Hall. Laurette, D., M. D. Johnson & L. M. Renaghan. 1999. Adapting the QFD Approach to Extended Service Transactions. Production and Operations Management Society, 83: 301~317. Lee, G. H. & A. Kusiak. 2001. The House of Quality for Design Rule Priority. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 17, pp.288~296. Lewis, B. R. & V. W. Mitchell. 1991. Defining and Measuring the Quality of Customer Service. Marketing Intelligence Planning, 5, Fall, pp.11~17. Lowe, A., K. Ridgway & H. Atkinson. 2000. QFD in New Production Technology Evaluation. International Journal of Production Economics, 67, pp.103~112. McLean, F. C. 1993. Marketing in Museums : A Contextual Analysis. International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, Dec., 82
pp.11~27. Maryins, A. & E. M. Aspinwall. 2001. Quality Function Deployment : An Empirical in the UK. Total Quality Management, 125: 575~588. Mizuno, S. & Y. Akao. 1978. Quality Function Deployment : A Company Wide Quality Approach. JUSE Press. 1978 Parasuraman, A., V. A. Zeithaml & L. L. Berry. 1985. A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implication for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, Vol.49, pp.41~50. Parasuraman, A., V. A. Zeithaml & L. L. Berry. 1988. SERVQUAL : A Multiple-item Scale for Measuring Customer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, Vol.64, pp.12~40. Prasad, B. 1998. Review of QFD and Related Deployment Techniques. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 17 3: 221~234. Sullivan, L. P. 1986. Quality Function Deployment. Quality Progress, Jun., pp.39~50. Wasserman, G. S. 1993. On How to Prioritize Design Requirements During the QFD Planning Process. IIE Transactions, 253: 59~65. Wu, H. H. 2002. A Comparative Study of Using Grey Relational Analysis in Multiple Attribute Decision Making Problems. Quality Engineering, 15 2: 209~217. Zoological Society of London. 2004. Web of Life,http://www.weboflife. co.uk/ weboflife/. 9311994328 83
Study on Service Quality Improvement among Nonprofit Organizations:Analysis of Taipei Zoo Education Center Using the House of Quality Model Shih-Yen Lin* Abstract The objective of this study is to explore service quality in nonprofit organizations. Taking the Taipei Zoo Education Center as an example, we applied empirical research methods. To enhance visitor s learning outcomes, the education center must improve service quality and customer satisfaction. Considering unique ways of operation, we applied PZB model to establish appropriate service quality assessment and understand service quality gaps. After moderating customer feedback and analyzing service quality data, we integrated the various departments by implementing house of quality (HOQ) and decision-making tools to ensure customized service and prioritization of quality technology to achieve effective management. The primary results showed that the top five quality technologies being implemented are permanent exhibition and educational activities, multimedia programs, online information, guided tours and ecological displays. Keywords : zoo, nonprofit organizations, service quality, House of Quality (HOQ), decisionmaking * Assistant Professor, Department of Bio-Industry and Agribusiness Administration, National Chiayi University 84