以IPA模式探討鹿港地區古蹟旅遊滿意度之研究

Using the IPA Method to Evaluate Visits' Satisfaction of Lukang Area

張清源(Ching-Yuan Chang)；賴恒生(Heng-Sheng Lai)；王照欽(Chao-Chin Wang)

古蹟旅遊 ； IPA分析法 ； 鹿港 ； heritage tourism ； importance-performance analysis ； Lukang

休閒觀光與運動健康學報

5卷1期（2014 / 12 / 31）

70 - 92

繁體中文

本研究的主要目的在：1.瞭解鹿港遊客對古蹟旅遊重要度與滿意度的看法。2.依據古蹟旅遊重要度與滿意度進行IPA管理矩陣分析。研究對象為在鹿港地區從事古蹟旅遊的450名遊客。本研究使用工具為「古蹟旅遊重要度與滿意度問卷」。並將所蒐集的資料以描述統計、IPA分析法進行探討。研究結果發現：1.鹿港遊客對於古蹟旅遊較為重視的前五個題項依序為：（1）周邊停車方便；（2）廁所清潔衛生；（3）鹿港豐富的古蹟文化；（4）搭大眾運輸到鹿港便利；（5）鹿港古蹟建築維護。2.鹿港遊客對於古蹟旅遊較滿意的前五個題項依序為：（1）鹿港旅遊能增加家庭情感；（2）古蹟之路標指示牌明確；（3）鹿港古蹟建築維護；（4）解說員解說內容清楚；（5）鹿港能紓解壓力與焦慮。3.「繼續保持」的題項共有六題，依序為：（1）搭大眾運輸到鹿港便利；（2）服務員處理遊客抱怨速度；（3）鹿港古蹟建築維護；（4）鹿港能紓解壓力與焦慮；（5）鹿港旅遊能增加家庭情感；（6）鹿港旅遊能增進社交人際關係。4.「加強改善重點」的題項共有七題，依序為：（1）周邊停車方便；（2）聯外交通便利；（3）周邊人行道規劃；（4）景觀美感特別；（5）旅遊環境清潔衛生；（6）廁所清潔衛生；（7）鹿港豐富的古蹟文化。5.「優先順序較低」的題項共有九題，依序為：（1） 公共休憩設施；（2）提供之旅遊資訊服務；（3）服務人員之服務態度；（4）地方藝術文物展示；（5）小吃價格合理；（6）紀念品價格合理；（7）周邊停車場價格合理；（8）解說員的解說幫助我更加瞭解鹿港；（9）解說員與遊客互動方式。6.「供給過度」的題項共有五題，依序為：（1）攤販管理方式；（2）古蹟之路標指示牌明確；（3）當地居民的態度和善；（4）解說員解說內容清楚；（5）解說的參觀路線安排。最後，依據本研究依據研究結果進行討論並提出具體建議。

The purposes of this study were: 1. to investigate the experience of importamceperformace and satisfaction of heritgage customers in Lukang; 2. to explore the satisfaction of heritgage by appling importance-performance analysis (IPA). There were 450 heritgage customers drawn from the Lukang. All the participants were administered with Importance and Satisfaction Questionnaire of Heritage Tourism and Revisit Intention Questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed by descriptive analysis and importance-performance analysis. The findings were as follows: 1. the customers played importance on (1) convenient parking; (2) hygiene of lavatory; (3) historic culture; (4) convenience of mass transit; (5) historic preservation. 2. The customer satisfied with (1) family emotion contact; (2) direction and warning boards; (3) historic preservation; (4) Interpretation Service of guide; (5) Stress Relief. 3. Six variables fell into quadrant ＂Keep up the good work＂; (1) convenience of mass transit; (2) effectively handle customer complaints; (3) historic preservation; (4) Stress Relief; (5) family emotion contact; (6) improvement the interpersonal relationship. 4. Seven variables fell into quadrant ＂Focus efforts here＂: (1) convenient parking; (2) travel convenience; (3) planning of pavement; (4) landscape architect; (5) hygiene of environment; (6) hygiene of lavatory; (7) historic culture. 5. Nine variables fell into quadrant ＂Low priority＂: (1) public recreational facilities; (2) travel information service; (3) service attitude; (4) artifacts display; (5) price rationality of snack; (6) price rationality of souvenirs; (7) fee rationality of parking; (8) Interpretation of guide; (9) interactive relationship of guide. 6. Five variables fell into quadrant＂Possible overkill＂: (1) the management of street vendors; (2) direction and warning boards; (3) inhabitant friendly; (4) Interpretation Service of guide; (5) visitor route. Finally, based on the research findings, the discussion was further posed and the upcoming research directions were proposed.