Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Performance Evaluation Indicators of Communalized Recreation Services for Public University Sports Facilities
|Abstract:||本研究旨在探討大學運動設施提供社區休閒服務之績效評估，研究方法採問卷調查法，研究對象包括專家模糊權重分析、提供構面之大學體育室管理單位與使用構面之社區居民。首先以專家德爾菲法（Delphi Method）建構學校運動設施社區化休閒服務績效評估之指標類目，並經模糊分析層級程序法（Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, FAHP）分析指標權重值，同時將指標類目編製成「大學運動設施社區化休閒服務績效評估研究問卷」，抽取32所公立大學校院，分別對「休閒服務提供構面」之管理單位大學體育室（有效問卷83份，回收率86.5%） 與「休閒服務使用構面」之社區居民（有效問卷560份，回收率87.5%）進行調查。研究發現：一、本研究建構之指標類目在休閒服務提供構面共獲得六個主指標和二十三個次指標；另在休閒服務使用構面，共獲得五個主指標和十八個次指標。二、指標權重值經FAHP分析結果顯示：提供構面首重「設施安全管理」；使用構面則最注重「服務人員服務滿意情形」。三、經問卷調查所得，提供構面在休閒服務重要性認同度之指標排序與FAHP所獲之權重值排序相同，顯示管理單位之實務面與專家學者看法一致。使用構面則在「服務人員服務滿意情形」和FAHP所獲一致認為最重要，顯示消費者最在意被服務時的互動愉悅感受。四、使用構面在休閒服務評估項目之重要性認同度平均數皆高於實際的滿意度，顯示管理單位在休閒服務的提供仍有很大的改進空間以彌補期望落差。依此研究結論，提出運動休閒服務應重視設施之安全管理，提供專業服務人力以符合社區居民所需，提高服務滿意度並在體育專業服務上貢獻所長。|
This study shows the performance of communalized recreation services of sports facilities in public universities. Participants of this study were expert scholars, sports facility managers of athletic departments in public universities, and community residents. This study used the Delphi method for the literature review to categorize a series of systematic evaluation indicators. These indicators were further applied to develop an instrument. A questionnaire was distributed to the respondents, sports facility managers (recovery rate was 86.5%), and community residents (recovery rate was 87.5%) to evaluate the performance of recreation services in public universities. The instrument used in this study was developed using the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Questionnaire (FAHP) for evaluating the performance of recreation services in university athletic departments. The results are described as follows: (1) We found 6 major and 23 minor indicators regarding services offered and identified 5 major and 18 minor indicators on recreation services usage; (2) Loading for each hierarchy showed that the security of facility management and community resident satisfaction were the most important factors; (3) The order of indicators for the importance of recreation services was the same as the order for FAHP. This finding shows that participant responses for the importance of recreation services in actual situations are consistent with theoretical situations; and (4) The response of participants on the importance of recreation services in usage is higher than user satisfaction; this shows that improvement in recreation services is still needed. These results suggest that university athletic departments should promote recreation services and focus on facility management security and professional development for personnel to improve recreation services.
|Appears in Collections:||教師著作|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.