臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著時代的進步，國人的生活水準提高，大眾的食品消費由對「量」的需求轉為對「質」的要求。進而影響民眾對於食品安全與品質的需求。近年來食品發生或是危害至消費者健康之食品問題頻傳，因為食品相較於一般產品較為特殊，很容易直接影響到消費者的身體健康，也使得消費者提高對食品相關事件的危機意識。當食品市場發生品質與安全的危害事件時，其危機不僅造成消費者的健康危機，同時也擴及至企業；企業對於危機所展現的處理方式與溝通策略，也將會影響消費者對於企業之信心。

藉由文獻收集可知，目前國內發表之危機相關論文，大多以個案探討方式，本研究欲以企業角度瞭解食品企業在危機處理的實際策略與作為，以及消費者心中對於危機的想法為何。因此，本研究透過半結構式深度訪談，共訪問六家食品企業的公關業務相關負責人，以瞭解目前食品企業危機處理概況;同時再以問卷調查方式瞭解一般民眾平時對於食品事件的瞭解程度、組織與公眾關係是否影響購物因素、以及危機發生時消費者能接受的處理與溝通方式。

藉由雙向的資料收集並且進行分析所得知的結果顯示，食品企業目前有朝向建立危機處理小組的方向發展，也不定期的更改書面的危機處理資料，而部分受訪問對象則表示，預防危機，是平時必須也是最重要的危機處理影響因素。消費者的調查結果則是顯示，消費者對於重大食品事件仍有深刻印象，在選購食品時，消費者會考慮原產國、是否有認驗證標示，但對其標示內容的信任度仍有保留。在危機發生時，消費者能接受的食品企業之處理模式，是以「進行修正行動」、「承認/道歉」、「提供訊息」為主要選擇。女性比男性的危機溝通需求程度較高；經歷過食品危害事件之消費者，其危機責任與自我效能影響危機溝通需求的程度較未有此經歷之消費者高。

藉由本研究期能給予食品企業在危機處理上的建議，使業者能在平時或危機處理時更貼近消費者真正的需求。

People raised their life quality along with the progress of times, so that the consumption of food was changed from “the demand of quantity“ “the request of quality“ , which affected the public focus on the food safety and quality. In recent years, the issues of food hygiene and the food problems were endangered the public that happened frequently. Since foods were specific than other general products which were easy to effect the health of people directly, that was the reason why consumers increased their concern on crisises of the food problems. When the food companies meet the crisis of quality and safety problems about their products, that was not only caused the damage of health to the consumer, but also spread to the business. The way of handle competence and the communicative strategy about the crisis also influenced the consumers’ s reliance to the company.

By collecting the references, most of research related to the crisis used the way of case discussion, this research is stand on the degree of companies to realize the behavior and the strategy when they faced the crisis, and survey on the thoughts of consumers. Accordingly, this research used the deep interview through the way of Semi-structural to visit the public professional managers in the six food companies, in order to figure out the general situations about the method of companies to cope during the crisis. In addition, this research also used the questionnaire to realize the consumer’s understanding of food problems, the organization with the public relations whether affected their purchasing factor or not, and the communicative ways which they accept. The revealed than the food companies looked for seting up the crisis-handled groups and updating the information of crisis nonscheduled. According to the survey on the public professional managers, the most important influence of crisis-handled was “ prevented the crisises “. On the part of the questionnaire for the consumers revealed that they still remember the serious food events, hence they considered “the certificated labels” and “the country of origin” when they purchased the food products, but the attitude toward the reliance on the content of labels is reserved. When the crisis happened, the main selections that the consumers can accept about the handling model of food companies were “corrective or proactive work”, “admission of fault/apology”, “instructive information”. Moreover, the degree of demand level in females was higher than males; the consumers underwent the food crisis whose “Crisis Responsibility” and “Self-efficacy” influenced the degree level of demand for the crisis communication was higher than the others who did not undergo.

This study can contribute the suggestions to the food companies when they are handling the crisis and approaching the further development of the reality demand among the companies and consumers.

目錄 頁次
目錄……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….Ⅰ
表目錄……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Ⅲ
圖目錄……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Ⅴ
第一章 緒論………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1
1.1研究背景與動機……………………………………………………………………………………………1
1.2研究目的……………………………………………………………………………………………………….9
1.3研究流程……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………………………………………………..12
2.1危機………………………………………………………………………………………………………………14
2.1.1危機的定義…………………………………………………………………………………………..14
2.1.2危機的類別…………………………………………………………………………………………..15
2.2危機溝通……………………………………………………………………………………………………….17
2.2.1危機溝通的目標對象…………………………………………………………………………..19
2.2.2關係建立………………………………………………………………………………………………20
2.3企業形象修復策略……………………………………………………………………………….........21
第三章 研究方法與研究設計……………………………………………………………………….28
3.1研究方法………………………………………………………………………………………………………28
3.1.1質性研究與量化研究…………………………………………………………………………..28
3.1.2半結構式深度訪談………………………………………………………………………………30
3.2目前國內食品企業的危機管理的概況探討………………………………………………..31
3.2.1訪談對象選取………………………………………………………………………………………31
3.2.2半結構式深度訪談內容………………………………………………………………………32
3.3消費者對於食品企業應有的危機處理方式分析………………………………………..33
3.3.1 研究變數…………………………………………………………………………………………….33
3.3.2問卷設計……………………………………………………………………………………………..38
3.3.3研究對象與調查方法………………………………………………………………………….42
3.3.4分析方法……………………………………………………………………………………………..43
3.3.5研究假設……………………………………………………………………………………………..45
3.4研究架構………………………………………………………………………………………………………46



第四章 台灣食品企業危機處理概況………………………………………………………….47
4.1訪談對象概要………………………………………………………………………………………………47
4.2訪談內容………………………………………………………………………………………………………48
4.2.1 A食品企業……………………………………………………………………………………….48
4.2.2 G食品企業……………………………………………………………………………………….50
4.2.3 M食品企業………………………………………………………………………………………52
4.2.4 N食品企業……………………………………………………………………………………….54
4.2.5 P食品企業………………………………………………………………………………………..56
4.2.6 W食品企業………………………………………………………………………………………58
4.3小結……………………………………………………………………............................................59
第五章 消費者危機處理認知分析………………………………………………………………61
5.1樣本基本資料分析………………………………………………………………………………………61
5.1.1樣本基本人口統計變數整理………………………………………………………………61
5.1.2消費者食品事件認知情形…………………………………………………………………..63
5.1.3組織與公眾關係…………………………………………………………………………………. 64
5.1.4危機責任…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 67
5.1.5危機溝通需求………………………………………………………………………………………68
5.1.6自我效能…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 69
5.1.7企業形象修復策略………………………………………………………………………………70
5.2假設檢定………………………………………………………………………………………………………75
5.3組織與公眾關係、危機責任、自我效能與危機溝通需求之迴歸分析……..84
第六章 結論與建議………………………………………………………………………………………….87
6.1結論………………………………………………………………………………………………………………87
6.2建議………………………………………………………………………………………………………………89
參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………………………..90
附錄 研究問卷……………………………………………………………………………………94







表目錄 頁次
表1-1 食品中毒案件食品被汙染或處置錯誤之場所分類表……………………………….2
表1-2 2004至2010年國內所發生的食品相關事件……………………………………………6
表1-3 國內對食品危機相關研究之碩博士論文………………………………………………….8
表2-1 危機的分類………………………………………………………………………………………………16
表2-2 黃懿慧(2001) 所提出之形象修復策略……………………………………………………26
表3-1 質性與量化研究的比較分析……………………………………………………………………28
表3-2 本研究質性訪談食品企業研究對象………………………………………………………..32
表4-1 本研究半結構質性訪談對象……………………………………………………………………47
表5-1 樣本基本資料分析……………………………………………………………………………………61
表5-2 消費者對於過去所發生的食品事件的印象程度…………………………………….63
表5-3 消費者平時透過何種媒體管道得知食品資訊…………………………………………63
表5-4 消費者食品事件認知情形交叉表……………………………………………………………64
表5-5 組織與公眾關係……………………………………………………………………………………….64
表5-6 組織與公眾關係各題項平均數………………………………………………………………..66
表5-7 危機責任…………………………………………………………………………………………………..67
表5-8 危機責任各題項平均數…………………………………………………….........................67
表5-9 危機溝通需求…………………………………………………………………………………………..68
表5-10 危機溝通需求各題項平均……………………………………………………………………….68
表5-11 自我效能…………………………………………………………………………………………………..69
表5-12 自我效能各題項平均……………………………………………………………………………….69
表5-13 形象修復策略(外在-蓄意)………………………………………………………………………..70
表5-14 形象修復策略(內在-非蓄意)…………………………………………………………………….71
表5-15 形象修復策略(內在-蓄意)……………………………………………………………………….73
表5-16 組織與公眾關係、危機責任、危機溝通需求以及自我效能與性別之平均數t檢定………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..75
表5-17 組織與公眾關係、危機責任、危機溝通需求以及自我效能與年齡之變異數分析……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………76
表5-18 組織與公眾關係、危機責任、危機溝通需求以及自我效能與年齡之事後檢定……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….77
表5-19 組織與公眾關係與性別之平均數t檢定………………………………………………….77
表5-20 組織與公眾關係與年齡之變異數分析…………………………………………………….78
表5-21 組織與公眾關係與年齡之事後檢定………………………………………………………..79
表5-22 組織與公眾關係與是否發生過食品危害事件之平均數t檢定……………….80
表5-23 危機溝通需求與性別之平均數t檢定……………………………………………………..81
表5-24 危機溝通需求與年齡之變異數分析………………………………………………………..82
表5-25 危機溝通需求與年齡事後檢定………………………………………………………………..82
表5-26 組織與公眾關係、危機責任、自我效能與危機溝通需求之迴歸分析….84
表5-27 有食品危害事件經歷者的迴歸分析………………………………………………………..85
表5-28 無食品危害事件經歷者之迴歸分析………………………………………………………..86



































圖目錄 頁次
圖1-1 食品中毒案件食品被汙染或處置錯誤之場所分類圖………………………………3
圖1-2 民國88至97年因食品工廠產生食品中毒案件數…………………………………….3
圖1-3 民國88至97年因食品工廠產生食品中毒人數統計…………………………………4
圖1-4 研究流程…………………………………………………………………………………………………..11
圖2-1 危機之類型………………………………………………………………………………………………15
圖2-2 危機公關模式…………………………………………………………………………………………..17
圖2-3 危機溝通與媒體效能模式……………………………………………………………………….18
圖2-4 情境危機溝通模式……………………………………………………………………………………21
圖3-1 研究架構…………………………………………………………………………………………………..46
圖5-1 形象修復策略(外在-蓄意)………………………………………………………………………..71
圖5-2 形象修復策略(內在-非蓄意)……………………………………………………………………72
圖5-3 形象修復策略(內在-蓄意)……………………………………………………………………….74
圖5-4 組織與公眾關係、危機責任、自我效能與危機溝通需求之迴歸……………..84

一、英文部分
1.Bandura, A.,(1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2),122-147.
2.Benoit, W.L.,(1997). Image repair discourse and crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 23(2):177-186.
3.Birchard,(2001).Europe tackles consumers fears over food safety. Policy and Pelple ,April:1274.
4.BoltonBlair, I., Cowan, C., Jackson, V., Kennedy, J., McDowell, D., (2005) Consumer food safety knowledgesegmentation of Irish home food preparers based on food safety knowledge and practice, British FoodJournal,107(7):441-452.
5.Coombs,W.T.,(1995). Choosing the Right Word:The Development of Guidelines for the Selection of the"Appropriate" Crisis-Response Strategies. Management Communication Quarterly, p.p.447-476.
6.Coombs, W.T.& Holladay, S.J.,(1996). Communication and attributions in a crisis:An experimental study of crisis communication. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8(4):279-295.
7.Coombs, W.T. (1998). An analytic framework for crisis situations:Better responses from a better understanding of the situation. Journal of Public Relations Research, 10(3):177-191.
8.Coombs, W.T.,(1999). Ongoing crisis communication:Planning,managing,and responding. CA:Sage: Thousand Oaks.
9.Coombs, W.T.& Holladay, S.J., (2002). Helping crisis communication theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(2):165-186.
10.Fearn-BanksK.,(1996). Crisis Communications-A Casebook Approach. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
11.Grunig, J.E.&Hunt, T.,(1984). Identifying organizational linkage to publics. FW:Holt,Reinhart and Winston.
12.Hermann, C.F.,(1972). Some Issues in the study of international crisis. International crisis: insight from behavioral research.
13.Hon, L.C.,&Grunig, J.E.,(1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations. The Institute for Public Relations, Commission on PR Measurement and Evaluation.Gainsville,FL.
14.Huang, L., Kan, K., & Fu, T. (1999). Consumer willingness-to-pay for food safety in Taiwan: A binary-ordinal Probit model of analysis. Journal of Consumer Affairs,33(1):76-91.
15.Huang, Y.H.,(2001). OPRA:A cross-cultural,multiple-item cale for measuring organization-public relationship. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13(1),p.61-90.
16.Kim, H.J.,(2008).Restoring reputation beyond a racial crisis:The effects of CSR and crisis response on organizational responsibility,reputation,and word-of-mouth intention. Paper presented to the 11th Annual International Public Relations Research Conferenc. Miami.
17.Kvale, S.,(1996). Interview:An introduction to qualitive research interviewing. CA:Sage.
18.Lerbinger, O.,(1997). The crisis manager:Facing Risk and Responsibility. Mahwah,NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19.MaCrosky, J.C.,(1997).An introduction to rhetorical communication. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
20.Marra, F.J.,(1998).Crisis communication plan:poor predictors of excellence crisis public relations. Public Relations Review, 24(4):461-474.
21.Ni, L.,(2006). Relationships as organizational resources:Examing public relations impact through its connection with organizational stratrgies. Public Relations Review, 32(3):276-281.
22.Palmer, R.,(1969). Hermeneutics:Interpretation theory in Schleiermacher,Dilthey,Heidegger,and Gadamer. Evanston,IL: Northwestern University Press.
23.Pearson, C.M.,&Clair, J.A.,(1998). Reframing crisis managment. Academy of Management Review, 23(1):59-76.
24.Polkighorne, D.E.,(2006). A agenda for the second generation of qualitative studies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being., 1,68-77.
25.Riethmuller& Morison, J.P. (1995). A comparative survey of beef consumption behaviour in Australia, Japan and the United States. Agricultural and Resource Management ServicesPty Ltd, Parkside.
26.Röhr Lüddecke, K., Drusch, S., Müller, M. J. & Alvenslebn, R. V.,( 2005). Food quality and safety consumerperception and public health concern, Food Control, Vol. 16, p.p. 649-655.
27.Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., (1990). Basic of Qualitation Research: Grounded theory procedures & techniques. CA: Sage.
28.Van Manen, M., (1997). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Ontario: State University of New York.


二、中文部分
1.吳英璋, & 溫明晶(2005)從整體學業自我效能感談青少年偏差行為與犯罪行為之形成. 警政署政風室日新法律半年刊, 5:34-44.
2.吳宜臻(1998)企業議題管理與危機管理-策略的整合與理論模式建構. 1998傳播管理研討會.國立中山大學傳播管理研究所.
3.吳宜臻(2000)危機溝通策略與媒體效能之模式建構-關於腸病毒風暴的個案研究. 新聞學研究, (62):1-34.
4.陳玉玲(2005)千面人勒索事件之影響與因應(一)-台灣千面人事件之歷史回顧. 新竹: 食品工業發產研究所.
5.陳玉玲(2005)千面人勒索事件之影響與因應(二)-毒蠻牛事件之市場影響. 新竹: 食品工業發展研究所.
6.陳玉玲(2005)千面人勒索事件之影響與因應(三)-業者之因應方式. 新竹: 食品工業發展研究所.
7.朱延智(2002)企業危機管理. 台北: 五南.
8.吳宜臻(2002)危機傳播:公共關係與語藝觀點的理論與實證. 台北: 五南.
9.畢恆達(2001)空間就是權力. 台北: 心靈工坊.
10.張全芳(2008)統計就是要這樣跑. 台北市: 心理出版社.
11.張岩松(2008)危機管理案例精選精析. 北京: 中國社會科學出版社.
12.高淑清(2008)質性研究的18堂課:首航初探之旅. 高雄: 麗文文化.
13.黃懿慧(2001)危機回應:淺談形象修復策略. 公關雜誌, 42:43-46.
14.黃丙喜、馮志能、劉遠忠. (2009). 動態危機管理. 台北: 商周出版p.40-42.
15.詹中原(2004)危機管理-理論架構. 台北: 聯經.
16.潘淑滿(2003)質性研究-理論與應用. 台北: 心理出版社股份有限公司.
17.楊世瑩(2008)SPSS統計分析實務. 台北: 旗標出版股份有限公司.
18.歐用生(1995)質的研究. 台北: 五南.
19.蕭文龍(2009)多變量分析最佳入門實用書. 台北市: 碁峰資訊股份有限公司.
20.李瑞玉(2001)重大災難事件中央政府危機溝通策略之研究-以九二一大地震的新聞報導為例. 國立師範大學大眾傳播研究所碩士論文.p.p.20-46.
21.吳佳靜(2000)台灣主要都會區蔬菜食用安全特徵價格之研究，國立中興大學農產運銷學系碩士論文.
22.洪興助(2005)320大選後總統府前群眾抗爭活動之危機管理研究. 國立台北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文, p.p.21-57.
23.陳禹廷(2009)企業網站表現對毒奶粉危機溝通需求之影響:組織-公眾關係之中介效果檢驗. 世新大學公共關係暨廣告學系碩士論文, p.p.33-34.
24.黃儀蓁和李明聰(2005)消費者社經背景與食品安全議題擔心程度之相關研究，2005中華觀光管理學會研討會.
25.黃志揚(2005)企業因應負面訊息之危機處理研究. 國立中興大學高階經理人碩士在職專班碩士論文.
26.趙君平(2009)重大公眾事件政府危機溝通策略之研究-以中國大陸毒奶粉事件為例. 國立台灣大學國家發展研究所碩士論文.
27.鄭淑瑛(2006)危機情境、反應策略與關鍵公眾之關係管理效果-以「寶路狗飼料中毒事件」為例.輔仁大學傳播學研究所碩士論文.
28.行政院衛生署食品資訊網2010/06. http://food.doh.gov.tw/FoodNew/.
29.取自於中時電子報2006/06/23.http://news.chinatimes.com/.