한국항해항만학회지 (Journal of Navigation and Port Research)

  • 제46권6호
  • /
  • Pages.530-537
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 1598-5725(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2093-8470(eISSN)
한국항해항만학회 (Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

AHP를 활용한 우리나라 예선서비스 품질평가 모형 개발 연구

Development of Quality Evaluation Model for Tug Service in Korea using AHP

  • 김성기 (경상국립대학교 국제통상학부) ;
  • 최상균 (한국해양수산개발원) ;
  • 김찬호 (한국해양수산개발원)
  • Sung-ki, Kim (Department of International Trade, Gyeonsang National University) ;
  • Sang-gyun, Choi (Port Policy & Operation Department, Korea Maritime Institute) ;
  • Chan-ho, Kim (Port Policy & Operation Department, Korea Maritime Institute)
  • 투고 : 2022.09.02
  • 심사 : 2022.10.19
  • 발행 : 2022.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

예선서비스는 항만 안전 확보를 위해 필수적인 서비스이다. 하지만, 상대적으로 낮은 예선시장 진입장벽으로 인해, 예선업체의 수는 증가하였으며, 이에 업체 간 과당경쟁 발생과 서비스의 질적 저하에 대한 우려가 높아지고 있다. 이를 해결하기 위해 예선업자에 대한 서비스 품질평가 제도 마련이 시급하지만, 아직까지 본격적인 시행은 요원한 상황이다. 본 연구의 목적은 예선서비스의 품질 향상과 함께 공공재적 성격을 강화하기 위한 수단으로 인식되는 예선서비스 평가 제도의 시행을 위해 실제적으로 적용이 가능한 예선서비스 품질평가 모형을 개발하는 것이다. 이를 위해 문헌 및 사례연구, 전문가 인터뷰 등을 통해 2개의 대분류와 8개의 중분류, 25개의 세부 평가지표로 구성된 평가모형을 개발하였으며, AHP 분석을 시행하여 평가 항목의 상대적인 중요도를 도출하고 배점의 근거를 마련하였다. 분석 결과, 경영평가보다는 이용자만족도의 가중치가 높은 것으로 나타났다. 또한, 경영평가의 세부지표별 가중치는 시설관리-경영관리-재무건전성 순으로 나타나 서비스에 직접적으로 활용하는 시설의 관리가 중요한 것으로 분석되었다. 이용자만족도는 안전성-정시성-서비스만족도-편리성-투명성 순으로 나타나 안전성 확보가 최우선이며, 예선서비스 제공을 위한 프로세스의 편리성과 투명성보다 안전성과 정시성 같은 서비스 본연의 품질 개선이 우선적으로 필요한 것으로 분석되었다.

Tug services are essential services to ensure port safety. However, due to the relatively low barrier to entry into the tug service market, the number of service companies has increased, which has led to growing concerns about excessive competition among companies and poor service quality. To solve these problems, it is necessary to prepare a service quality evaluation system, but full-fledged implementation remains far away. The purpose of this study is to develop a tug service quality evaluation model that can be practically applied. To this end, an evaluation model consisting of two major categories, eight middle categories, and 25 detailed evaluation indicators was developed through a literature review, case studies, and expert interviews. AHP analysis is also conducted to derive the relative importance of the evaluation items. As a result of the analysis, it was found that the weight of user satisfaction was higher than that of management evaluation. In addition, the weights for each detailed indicator of management evaluation were in descending order of facility management, company management, and financial soundness, and it was analyzed that the management of facilities directly used for services was important. User satisfaction is in descending order of safety, punctuality, service satisfaction convenience, and transparency. These results show that securing safety is a top priority, and that the inherent quality of services such as safety and punctuality is more urgent than those of the convenience and transparency of the process in terms of providing preliminary services.

키워드

과제정보

본 연구는 해양수산부 재원으로 지원을 받아 수행한 "항만 예선서비스 평가모델 개발연구"의 일부분을 학술지 목적에 맞도록 수정 및 보완하여 작성하였으며, 한국해양수산개발원" 미래 리스크 대응한 해양수산 대전략 구축 사업"의 지원을 받아 수행하였다.

참고문헌

  1. Cakir, E., Fiskin, R. and Sevgili, C.(2021), "Investigation of tugboat accidents severity: An application of association rule mining algorithms", Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 209, 107470.
  2. Cronin, J. J. and Taylor, S. A.(1992), "Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, pp. 55-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299205600304
  3. Jang, W. J.(2020), "An Evaluation of Business Performance for Water Transportation Company Groups Using the Integrated Fuzzy AHP-PROMETHEE Method", Journal of Navigation and Port Research, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 319-325. https://doi.org/10.5394/KINPR.2020.44.4.319
  4. Jon, J. S.(2000), "A Study on the Status and the Development of Tug Business in Korea", Sogang Journal of Business, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 293-313.
  5. Kang, B. G. and Park. H. G.(2020), "A Study on the Determinants of Port Competitiveness using AHP - Focused on the Comparative Analysis between Metropolitan and Chungcheong Regions-", Korea Logistics Review, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 17-35.
  6. Kang, L., Meng, Q. and Tan, K. C.(2020), "Tugboat scheduling under ship arrival and tugging process time uncertainty", Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 144, 102125.
  7. Kim, K. H.(2009), "Empirical Study on Cooperative Ship Operation and A Free Contract on the Towage Market", Journal of Korea Port Economic Association, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 67-92.
  8. Kwon, S. H., Jeong, W. L. and Moon, S. B.(2021), "A Relative Importance Evaluation of Bridge Navigational Equipment Using AHP", Journal of Navigation and Port Research, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 9-15. https://doi.org/10.5394/KINPR.2021.45.1.9
  9. Lee, J. H. and Kim, H. D.(2019), "The Effects of Tug Service Quality on the Shipping Business Firms' Satisfaction and Reliability", The e-Business Studies, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 317-332.
  10. Lim, H. J., Jo, E. J., Ji, B., Hong, S. I. and Yoo, S. H.(2021), "Investigation of OTT Service Operations Using SERVQUAL Method and Importance-Performance Analysis", Journal of the Korean Production and Operations Management Society, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 253-276. https://doi.org/10.32956/kopoms.2021.32.3.253
  11. Liu, W. L. and Jang, H. Y.(2013), "A Relatively Importance Analysis on Smartphone's Functional Attributes Using AHP Method", Management & Information Systems Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 61-81. https://doi.org/10.29214/damis.2013.32.3.004
  12. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport(2017), Management and Service Evaluation Tips for Public Transportation Operators, Instruction No. 901, https://www.law.go.kr
  13. Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries(2020), Act on The Arrival, Departure, Etc. of Ships, Act No. 17007, https://www.law.go.kr
  14. Parasuaman, A., Zeithaml, A. and Berry, L. L.(1985), "A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, pp. 41-50.
  15. Parasuaman, A., Zeithaml, A. and Berry, L. L.(1988), "SERVQUAL: A Multiple item Scale for Measuring Customer Perceptions of Service Quality", Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp. 12-40.
  16. Park, B. H., Lee, D. W. and Kim, Y. S.(2005), "Measuring Service Quality of Management Consulting", Journal of the Korean society for Quality Management, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 47-58.
  17. Rodrigues, L. L., Barkur, G., Varambally, K. V. M. and Motlagh, F. G.(2011),. "Comparison of SERVQUAL and SERVPERF metrics: an empirical study", The TQM Journal, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 629-643. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542731111175248
  18. Song, K. W. and Lee. Y(2013). "Re-scaling for Improving the Consistency of the AHP Method", Social Science Research Review, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 271-288.
  19. Teas, R. K.(1993). "Expectations, performance evaluation, and consumers' perceptions of quality", Journal of marketing, Vol. 57, No. 4, pp. 18-34.
  20. Wei, X., Meng, Q., Lim, A. and Jia, S.(2021), "Dynamic tugboat scheduling for container ports", Maritime Policy & Management, DOI: 10.1080/03088839.2021.1953175.
  21. Xu, Q., Mao, J. and Jin, Z.(2012), "Simulated annealing-based ant colony algorithm for tugboat scheduling optimization", Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Vol. 2012, 246978.
  22. Yeou, Y. H. and Ryoo, D. K.(2013), "A Study on the Evaluation of Improvement Factors of Tug Services in Korea", Journal of Navigation and Port Research, Vol. 37, No. 5, pp. 559-565. https://doi.org/10.5394/KINPR.2013.37.5.559