- 期刊
- OpenAccess
運動觀光之績效評估指標研究－以全民奧林匹克恆春海上長泳賽為例
A Performance Evaluation Indicators Study of Sport Tourism: A Case of Olympic Heng-Chun Open Water Swimming
摘要
近年來，我國各地運動觀光賽會的數量急速增加，但因政府財政緊縮，使得補助經費日益減少，降低運動觀光賽會之品質。因此如何提昇賽會活動之整體績效，將有限的資源做最有效的運用，為目前各運動觀光承辦單位所需注重之重要議題。 本文採個案研究方式，以平衡計分卡的觀念，探討個案運動觀光績效評估現況，另依訪談與文獻分析彙整衡量指標，以深入訪談及問卷調查，經由因素分析，並以賽會承辦組織人員與賽會管理專家學者之觀點，選取可實際用於運動觀光組織績效衡量之指標，供其他運動觀光賽會組織與相同願景目標之團體以及活動等建立績效衡量之參考。因此本研究以2005年全民奧林匹克恆春海上長泳賽為例，研究工具採取問卷調查與訪談方式，並將所得資料以重要性分析、因素分析、單因子變異數分析等進行分析。 研究結果顯示，本研究的所有指標中，在組織內部人員以及賽會專家學者的重要性認知選取上，平均值都大於3.9，顯示皆認為這些指標，對於運動觀光賽會在評估以及衡量績效上都非常重要。在各構面整體績效衡量指標方面，「顧客構面」平均值最高為4.386，其次為「學習與成長構面」、「企業內部流程構面」，而「財務構面」受重視程度為最低。 另外因素分析結果顯示，在不同樣本特徵之重要性認知差異分析方面，受試群體在年齡特徵上之不同，於指標重要程度之選取上會產生顯著差異。
並列摘要
The purpose of this study was to increase the event achievements of sport tourism then apply the limited resources to effective usage. This is a major issue for handling unit of sport tourism. This study based on the single case research, using the balanced scorecard point method to analyze the single case of current performance evaluation situation. Through survey and interview of staff and management levels, their point of view can be taken into account to use in the actual case of performance evaluation indicators standard, and use as a reference for future achievement evaluation indicators of other sports organizations. The collected data were analyzed by analysis of importance recognition, factor analysis and independent sample one-way ANOVA. The major findings reveal all the indicators of staff and experts' importance recognition are greater than 3.9, it means these indicators are all important for evaluate and measure performance of sport tourism event. For the entire performance evaluation in other perspectives, ”customer perspective” has the highest average value which score is 4.386, the next are” innovation and learning Perspective” and ”internal business perspective”, and ”financial perspective” is the least cherished. Viewing the aspect of different sample factor's importance recognition, the choices of importance level on the index, due to the age differences of interviewee, will cause a significant difference.