臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著科技發達及人們對於時間的要求越來越高，速食業也因應快速而形成，追求速度已是個各業者努力的方向，速度對摩斯漢堡是很重要的改善課題，於2009年推出電話訂餐速速CALL專線449-2626，希望透過此專線改善顧客到店取餐久候的問題。
本研究目的將著眼於call center之現況探討，透過問卷調查及統計方法之運用，以探討驗證科技接受模式(Technology Acceptance Model, TAM)應用在call center上之結果。
本研究以摩斯漢堡顧客為研究對象，分為兩群，分別對已使用過摩斯漢堡call center之消費者及未使用過摩斯漢堡call center之消費者，進行問卷以了解消費者對call center的認知及消費行為。
本研究調查期間為2009年5月1日至6月5日，為期36天；共發放1200份問卷(電子郵件800份與紙本400份)，有效回收475份(含電子郵件285份與紙本190份，其中已使用call center者之問卷262份，未使用call center者之問卷213份)，回收率39.58%。
本研究發放對象有（1）以電子郵件寄發給摩斯漢堡的常客，（2）委請店舖店長協助發放問卷給來店消費的顧客填寫，（3）委請有至摩斯漢堡用餐過的親朋好友填寫。透過信度分析、敘述性統計分析、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析、
皮爾森相關分析、迴歸分析等方法進行分析。
本研究發現所建構之模式關係與假設皆獲得統計檢定支持，亦即（1）創新對知覺易用、知覺有用的關係不論是已使用call center或是未使用call center的受訪者，其創新對知覺易用及知覺有用正向關係，所以消費者創新越高會讓其對call center愈能知覺有用及知覺易用。（2）知覺易用與知覺有用的關係：不論是已使用call center或是未使用call center的受訪者，知覺易用對知覺有用正向關係，所以消費者知覺易用越高會讓其對call center愈能知覺有用。（3）知覺有用、知覺易用對(再)使用意願的關係：不論是已使用call center或是未使用call center的受訪者，知覺易用及知覺有用會對其(再)使用意願有正向關係，所以知覺有用及知覺易用越高會讓消費者(再)使用意願提高。
關鍵字：自助式科技服務、科技接受模式、創新

Accompanying with the advancement in technology and people''s increasing demand on time-saving, fast-food industry and the rapid formation of the pursuit of speed becomes the developing direction among various industries. Speed is the very important issue for Mos Hamburg to improve, therefore, Mos Hamburg launched reservation line CALL 449-2626 and hope to improve customer’s problem of long waiting for meal through this access.
The purpose of this study focuses on the exploration of the call center and its performance by using a questionnaire survey and the use of statistical methods to explore the Technology Acceptance Model validation (Technology Acceptance Model, TAM) used in the call center.
This study targets Mos Hamburg’s customers for the research objects, who were divided into two groups respectively; one group has used the Mos Hamburg call center and the other group does not use the call center, to understand customer’s awareness to the call center and customer behavior through conducting a questionnaire.
In this study, the survey period lasted 36 days, from May 1 to June 5, 2009 with a total number of 1200 questionnaires distributed (800 by e-mail and 400 by paper copies), the effective responses contain 475 copies (including 285 of e-mails and 190 of paper copies, of which 262 copies has ever used call center and the other 213 has not used call center yet), 39.58% of response rate.
The research objects of this study are (1) the regular customers of Moss Hamburg (questionnaire by email), (2) through the assistance from the branch shop managers to ask the customers consuming at the shops for filling out the questionnaire, (3) to invite friends and relatives who have experience consuming at Mos Hamburg to fill out the questionnaire. All collected data were analyzed through the methods of reliability analysis, descriptive statistical analysis, independent samples t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson correlation analysis and regression analysis.
The study found that the model relations constructed with the study and all the hypotheses are supported by the test statistics made in this study, namely, (1) No matter a relationship between the call center has been in use or not used by the respondents, innovation is positively associated with the perceived ease of use and the perceived usefulness; therefore the higher the consumer innovation of its call center will be perceived more useful and easy-to-use perception. (2) The relationship between perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness: whether it has been in use for call center or not from the respondents, who perceived ease of use appears the positive relationship with perceived usefulness, so the higher the consumer’s perceived ease of use, the higher perception of the call center can be perceived more useful. (3) The relationship of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use against the willingness of reuse: whether it has been in use for call center or not from the respondents, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness are positive to the willingness of reuse; therefore the higher the perceived ease of use allow consumers (again) to increase the willingness of (re)use.

目錄
中文摘要 I
英文摘要 IV
誌謝 VI
目錄 VII
表目錄 IX
圖目錄 XI
第壹章　緒論 1
第一節 研究背景及動機 1
第二節 研究目的 5
第三節 研究範圍 5
第四節 研究流程 6
第貳章 文獻探討 7
第一節 自助服務科技 7
第二節 科技接受模式 11
第三節 創新 14
第四節 知覺易用與知覺有用 17
第五節 (再)使用意願 18
第六節 構念間的關係 20
第叄章 研究方法 24
第一節 研究架構 24
第二節 研究變數的定義與衡量 24
第三節 研究對象與資料蒐集方法 26
第四節 問卷設計與前測 27
第五節 資料分析方法 28
第一節 受訪者資料描述 30
第二節 信度分析 34
第三節 交叉分析 35
第四節 各構念描述性統計分析 40
第五節 皮爾森相關分析 42
第六節 各構念之迴歸分析 43
第伍章 結論與建議 47
第一節 研究發現 47
第二節 理論與管理意涵 48
第三節 研究限制與未來研究方向 52
參考文獻 54
附件、研究問卷 58

表目錄
表1-2 三大速食業電話訂餐服務內容比較表 2
表2-1自助服務技術的類型 9
表 2-2 自助服務科技分類與實例 10
表 2-5 科技接受模式主要變項間的關係 22
表3-1 本研究各構念衡量項目彙總表 26
表3- 1前測之信度分析 27
表4-1 受訪者輪廓詳細表 31
表4-2 已使用CALLＣENTERR顧客消費行為分析(N=262) 32
表4-3 未使用CALL CENTER受訪者之消費行為分析(N=213) 33
表4-4 消費行為差異表 34
表4-5 未使用CALL CNETER受訪者不使用原因分析 34
表4-6 量表之信度值 35
表 4-7 性別對(再)使用意願之T檢定 35
表4-8 年齡對已使用CALL CENTER再使用意願之差異分析 36
表4-9 年齡對未使用CALL CENTER使用意願之差異分析 36
表4-10 教育程度對已使用CALL CENTER再使用意願之差異分析 37
表4-11 教育程度對未使用CALL CENTER使用意願之差異分析 37
表4-12 職業對已使用CALL CENTER再使用意願之差異分析 38
表4-13 職業對未使用CALL CENTER使用意願之差異分析 38
表4-14 平均可支配所得對已使用CALL CENTER再使用意願之差異分析 39
表4-15 平均可支配所得對未使用CALL CENTER使用意願之差異分析 39
表4-16 已使用CALL CENTER各構面之平均數與標準差 40
表4-17 未使用CALL CENTER各構面之平均數與標準差 41
表4-18 已使用與未使用相同題目之比較 42
表4-19 已使用及未使用CALL CENTER各構面之矩陣 43
表4-20 已使用CALL CENTER知覺有用之多元迴歸分析 44
表4-21 未使用CALL CENTER知覺有用之多元迴歸分析 44
表4-22 已使用過CALL CENTER創新之簡單迴歸分析 45
表4-23 未使用CALL CENTER創新之簡單迴歸分析 45
表4-24 已使用CALL CENTER使用意願之多元迴歸分析 46
表4-25 未使用CALL CENTER使用意願之多元迴歸分析 46
表5-1 研究結果 47
表5-2 已使用CALL CENTER目標客群 51

圖目錄

圖1-1 摩斯漢堡電話訂餐服務流程 4
圖1- 2 研究流程 6
圖2-1 理性行動理論 11
圖2-2 科技接受模式理論 12
圖2-3 擴充的科技接受模式 TAM2 模型 13
圖3- 1 研究架構 24
圖5-1電話訂餐海報 49
圖5-2 電話訂餐流程 50
圖5-3 贈品圖 51

一、中文部分
台灣連鎖店年鑑，台灣連鎖暨加盟協會，2005-2009。
林宜洵，「消費者採用電腦無線上網之行為研究」，台北大學企管所碩士論文，2004。
林震岩，「多變量分析－SPSS的操作與應用」，智勝文化，2007。
施欣怡，「消費者採用行動資訊服務行為之研究」，台北大學企管所碩士論文，2004
高翊群，「行動導覽服務使用者接受模式分析-創新擴散之觀點」，大同大學資訊經營研究所碩士論文，2007。
張澄宇「以消費者創新性及科技接受模式探討網路報稅的採用」，台北大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，2004。
張紹勳，”兩性採用資訊技術的徑路比較”，管理評論，第21卷，第四期，2002年，頁19-45
劉立偉，「行動生活、行動秘書、專門找店與找店專門自助服務科技採用因素與態度、意圖之探討-以手機加值服務為例」，國立中正大學企業管理研究所，2006。
謝至豪，「中文維基百科編輯者之系統接受度研究」，世新大學資訊傳播學系碩士論文，2005。
二、英文部分
Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., and Todd, P. A., (1992) “Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 227-247
Bateson, J. E. G. (1985), “Self-service Consumer: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of Retailing, 61, No. 3, pp. 49-76.
Betz, F. (1987). Managing technology-competing through new ventures,Innovation and corporate research, New York: Prentice Hall.
Binter, M. J., S. W. Brown, and M. L. Meuter (2000), “Technology Infusion in Service Encounters,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28, No. 4, pp. 138-149
Chacke, G. K. (1988). Technology Management–Application to coporate markets and military missions, New York : Praeger.
Dabholkar, P. A. (1994), “Incorporating Choice into an Attitudinal Framework: Analyzing Models of Mental Comparison Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21, No. 2, pp. 100-18.
Daft, R. L. (1978). A dual-core model of organizational innovation,Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 193-210.
Damanpour, F. (1987). The adoption of technological, administrative,and ancillary innovations: Impact of organizational factors.Journal of Management, 13(4), 675-688.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., and Warshaw, P.R.(1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology：A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models, Management Science,35(8), p985
Dewar, R. D., and Dutton, J. E. (1986). The adoption of radical and in-cremental innovations: An empirical study, Management Science,32(2), 1422-1433.
Ettlie, J., Bridges, W., and O’Keefe, R. (1984). Organization strategy and structural differences for radical versus incremental innovation.Management Science, 30(2), 682-695.
Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I.(1975). Beliefs, Attitude,Intentions and Behavior: An Introduction totheory and Research. Addition-Wesley, Boston,MA. p16.
Frolick, M. N., and Chen, L. D., “Assessing M-commerce opportunities,” Information Systems Management, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 53-61, 2004
Globerson, S. and M. J. Maggard (1991), “A conceptual Model of Self-Service,” International Journal of Operation Production Management, 11, No. 4, Pp. 33-43.
Hartwick, J. and Barki, H., “Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use,” Management Science (40), 1994, pp.440-465.
Hendry, J. (2001). “Technology Readiness and Educational Choice: Is there a Relationship between Technology Readiness and the Decision to Study On-line.” ANZMAC2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge, pp.509-512
Kimberly, J. R., and Evanisko, M. J. (1981). Organizational innovation:The influence of individual, organizational, and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and administrative innovations. Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 689-713.
Lee, Y., Kozar, K, A and Larsen,K R.T.( 2003). The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12, p.760
Lovelock, C. H. and R. F. Young (1979), “Look to Consumers to Increase Productivity,” Harvard Business Review, 57, No. 3, pp. 168-178.
Malhotra, Y. and D. F. Galletta (1999). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to Account for Social Influence:Theoretical Bases and Empirical Validation. Thirty-Second Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) January 1999, Maui, Hawaii.
Mathieson, K., “Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior,” Information Systems Research (2), 1991, pp.173-191.
Meuter, M. L., A. L. Ostrom, R. I. Roundtree, and M. J. Bitner (2000), “Self-Service Technologies: Understanding Customer Satisfaction with Technology-Based Service Encounters,” Journal of Marketing, 64, No. 3, pp. 50-64.
Meuter, M. L., A. L. Ostrom, R. I. Roundtree, and M. J. Bitner (2000), “Self-Service Technologies: Understanding Customer Satisfaction with Technology-Based Service Encounters,” Journal of Marketing, 64, No. 3, pp. 50-64.
Mick, D.G., and Fournier, S. (1998), “Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies.” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.25(September), pp.123-143.
Nord, W. R. and Tucker, S. (1987), Implementing routine and radical innovation, Massachusetts: Lexington Books.
Parasuraman, A. (2000), "Technology Readiness Index: A Multiple-Item Scale to Measure Readiness to Embrace New Technologies." Journal of Service Research, Vol.2, No.4, pp.307-320.
Parasuraman, A. (2000), "Technology Readiness Index: A Multiple-Item Scale to Measure Readiness to Embrace New Technologies." Journal of Service Research, Vol.2, No.4, pp.307-320.
Porter, M. E., and Miler, V. E. (1985). How information gives you competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review, 63(4), 149-160.
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovation, New York: Free Press,79-86.
Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovation (3rd ed.), New York:Free Press, 65-74.
Straub, D., Limayem, M., and Karahanna-Evaristo, E., “Measuring system usage: implications for IS theory testing”, Management Science, vol.41, no.8, pp. 1328-1342,1995
Taylor, S., ＆ Todd, P. A. (1995). “Decomposition and Cross Effects in the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Study of Consumer Adoption Intentions,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12,pp.137-155
Taylor, S., ＆ Todd, P. A. (1995). “Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Text of Competing Models,”Information Systems Research, 6(2), p.144-176.Rogers, E. M. (1983). The Diffusion of Innovations, New York: Free Press
Utterback, J. M., and Abernathy, W. J. (1975). A dynamic model of process and product innovation, Omega, 3(6), 590-607.
Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F. D, “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies,” Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186-205, 2000
Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F. D., (2000). “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies”. Management Science, Vol. 46,No. 2, Feb., 186-204.