從服務創新、服務品質與組織績效三面向探討台灣醫療產業之未來規劃

The Future Planning of Taiwan Health Care Industry—From Service Innovation, Service Quality and Organizational Performance Perspective

邵瑜珮(Yu-Pei Shao)

指導教授 ： 郭瑞祥 ； 蔣明晃 ； 余峻瑜

國立臺灣大學/管理學院/商學研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.00303

摘要

醫療服務產業長年成本高昂、資源不足、成效無法提升的問題，近年來備受關注，多位學者包含Michael Porter以及Clayton M. Christensen，皆著書探討醫療服務產業未來應有之發展。Porter認為，醫療服務提供者應聚焦於價值，提供高品質、低成本的醫療服務，重視成果上的競爭；Christensen指出，成果競爭在某些營運模式上有其難度，醫療服務提供者應從破壞性創新之觀點切入，他將醫療產業分為三種不同的營運模式，每個營運模式各自有其管理重點。
Porter指出，醫療服務產業於管理理論引進與管理思維上，較其他產業緩慢且過時，醫療服務提供者不應侷限於醫療產業之舊有思維，該多借鏡其他產業中管理理論之發展。醫療照護本身屬服務業，在服務業中，服務創新、服務品質以及組織績效都是過去學者熱烈探討之議題。然以往從未有學者抱持整合觀點，同時由此三大領域綜合探討產業之管理重點，大多仍僅探討三大領域的兩兩關係。
服務創新、服務品質與組織績效間事實上存在緊密關係，應被整合探討。服務創新會影響顧客服務品質認知，並能同時提升服務品質與組織績效，此外，在顧客服務品質預期逐漸上升的同時，服務創新將能使組織更不費力的追上顧客預期；再者，不同營運模式的創新活動，意味著不同需求類型的顧客，其對品質與績效重點之看法也有所不一，故需不同的品質管理方式與績效評估系統，以確保資源的正確投入。另一方面，組織可藉由評估結果的回饋，找出更多的創新驅動因子，讓創新活動能不間斷地持續在組織中發酵。
因此，本研究為了從更大的角度一窺醫療產業之未來發展與規劃，補足以往文獻不足之處，將從上述三大領域研究：（一）服務創新、服務品質與組織績效間於醫療服務產業的互動狀況。（二）從醫療服務創新為首要切入點，了解其對服務品質與組織績效的影響，並提出執行架構。（三）找出更多的服務創新、品質提升的空間與機會，進而提升醫療服務組織之績效。
而從本研究的探討中得知，三種營運模式之創新管理、品質、與企業績效重點皆有所差異。在問題解決工作坊中，重視信任關係、專業人才、努力提升醫療成果保證性；加值流程事業聚焦於標準化、效率、多樣化需求區隔、服務體驗、共同生產、資訊提供等；促進網絡則以社群網絡的情感與資訊交流為其核心概念。
創新可從服務創新四面向（新顧客介面、新服務概念、新服務傳遞系統、科技選項）、品質三面向（互動品質、環境品質、成果品質）、或組織績效四構面（財務、顧客、內部流程、學習與成長）觀之，擴大創新概念的來源基底。此外，也可從品質與組織績效角度去思考，完整化服務創新構面的設計。上述皆能讓組織以更方便、更有效的方法找到創新的驅動力，持續不斷的創新、醫療服務產業品質與績效同時提升也尌不再是難事。

關鍵字

服務創新 ； 服務品質 ； 組織績效 ； 醫療產業 ； 營運模式創新

並列摘要

The problems of high cost, insufficient resource and inability to raise the result in health care service industry are being noticed recently. Many researchers all publish to discuss the future development of health care service industry, including Michael and Clayton M. Christensen. Porter suggested that the health care service providers should focus on value, provide high quality services with low cost, and compete on results. Christensen mentioned that it is difficult to compete on results in some business models. Health care service providers should take the viewpoint of disruptive innovation. He separated the health care into three business models, and each business model has its own management focus.
Porter indicated that the introduction of management theory and philosophy in health care service industry is much slower than other industries. Health care service providers should jump out of the bracket and take examples from other industries. Health care is a service industry. Service innovation, service quality, and organizational performance are popular issues in the service domain. But it is lack of integrated discussion of three domains; most of them only center on the mutual relationships between the two.
Service innovation will affect perceived service quality and raise both service quality level and organizational performance. Besides, the customers’ expectations of service quality will elevate as the progress of service quality. Service providers can catch up the expectations more easily by service innovation. Moreover, the innovation activities in different business models mean customers with different needs types. They all see quality and performance differently, which need different quality management and performance measurement systems. On the other hand, the feedbacks of measurement outcomes can create many innovation drivers. As a result, there will be plenty of innovation activities in organization continuously.
In order to overcome the short comings of past researches, this research will focus on: (1) the interaction of service innovation, service quality and organizational performance in health care service industry. (2) Discuss the impact of healthcare innovation on service quality and organizational performance, and also the development of execute frameworks. (3) Identify more opportunities of service innovation and service quality improvement, which will lead the progress of health care service organizations’ performance.
According to this research, the focus of innovation management, quality and organizational performance are differently in three business models. Solution shop centers on trust, professional employees, and the result progress. Value-adding process businesses pay attention to standardization, efficiency, variety of needs, service experience, co-production, and information. Facilitate networks focus on the interaction of emotions and information between members in social networks.

並列關鍵字

Service Innovation ； Service Quality ； Organizational Performance ； Health Care Industry ； Business Model Innovation

參考文獻

2. 郭乃文，2005，台灣醫療品質指標計畫對醫院醫療品質及績效之影響，財團法人醫院評鑑暨醫療品質策進會TQIP研究報告。

4. 蔡宗宏、洪陵鎧，2008，病人知覺醫師行為與組織因素對其醫病關係滿意之影響，醫管期刊，9 (3)，頁222-242。

3. 郭夢菲，2007，台大兒童醫院經營策略之探討，台大管理學院碩士在職專班商學組未出版碩士論文。

1. Agarwal, S., Erramilli, M. K., & Dev, C. S. (2003). Market Orientation and Performance in Service Firms: Role of Innovation. Journal of Services Marketing , 17 (1), pp. 68-82.

3. Auh, S., Bell, S. J., McLeod, C. S., & Shih, E. (2007). Co-production and Customer Loyalty in Ffinancial Services. Journal of Retailing , 83 (3), pp. 359-370.