服務失誤、服務補救、認知公平與服務失誤之嚴重性干擾─ 以台灣高速鐵路服務為例

Abstract

The Taiwan High Speed Rail was opened for revenue at 7:00 am, 5th January, 2007. There was only one rail association for operation in long-distance rail transportation market before the high speed rail revenue. Now, the high speed rail transportation has been opened for revenue and as one of long-distance rail transportation tool. It means that a new rail authority/competitor is appeared in rail transpiration service. However, the passenger – being served by the rail authority, whether is truly experienced with the service promotion in rail operation service, that is worthily for rail authorities to further deliberation. According to the studies of service industry in the past, most of these studies were generally focused on the general service i.e. hotel service, restaurant service. There was rarely to deliberate in the filed of the public transportation service with the public benefits and rights involved. For example, the Tapei METRO system was partly closed for three months due to the serious typhoon – Nali Typhoon in 2001. And, there were totally 68 trains delayed in the moon holiday due to the Taiwan Rail Association (TRA) signaling system problem in 2005, which the case was totally lost more than NT$ 10 million including ticket returned and compensate to the passengers. It was the most critical lost for the Taiwan Rail Association (TRA). However, the passengers were already used to the train delayed or train missed for the TRA system, therefore, the passengers were refused to take the TRA system which was also shown in the result of the passenger numbers. Regarding the service failure for rail transportation, the rail authorities should provide the appropriate service recovery measures in order to retrieve the possible lost of the passengers. However, with referring to the service failure cases in rail transportation, most of the service recovery measures were “ticket returned” or “refunded”, therefore, it was neglected to recover the psychological influence of the passengers and rather to adopt the follow-up recovery measures to retrieve the other lost of the passenger. The service failure occurred was due to the service encounter. Once the customer’s requirements were not achieved, the process of service encounter without concern or the core service provided was far low the customer’s expectation, the service failure was occurred. Therefore, the more serious of service failure and more lost of the passenger, so it was a major factor for the customer changing the service provider. The service recovery measure is required to provide for facing the service failure or service error in each company. If the adopted recovery measures were immobilized or ineffective, the customer and company profit could be lost. Therefore, the adopted service recovery measure for recovering the service failure was to resolve the service failure problem and learned from the failure, not just responded to the customer accordingly. Regarding the assessment of service recovery measure, relevant studies indicated the customer would assess the proportion of the lost and retrieve through the perceived justice theory, and compare the similar pervious experience for judging the justice. This study will be deeply investigated in the three components: Service Failure, Service Recovery and Perceived Justice, besides one additional interference variance – the serious of service failure will be also considered for considering the impact of the service recovery. At the last part of the study, the passenger trip intended will be also considered for observing the differences between the three components and interference variance. With the result of the study, it is expected to provide the appropriate suggestion for high speed rail service.