研究生: |
謝維安 Wei-An Hsieh |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
為人設計,與人設計:無障礙公共運輸服務設計的困境與突破 Design for People, Design with People: The Complexities and Breakouts of Service Design in Accessible Public Transportation |
指導教授: |
唐玄輝
Hsien-Hui Tang |
口試委員: |
董芳武
Fang-Wu Tung 陳書儀 Shu-Yi Chen |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
設計學院 - 設計系 Department of Design |
論文出版年: | 2021 |
畢業學年度: | 109 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 120 |
中文關鍵詞: | 視覺障礙 、公共運輸 、無障礙公共服務設計 |
外文關鍵詞: | Visual impairment, Public transportation, Accessible public service design |
相關次數: | 點閱:241 下載:9 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
弱勢族群的公共運輸服務創新之所以困難,在於須滿足使用者易用性的同時,也不能折損利害關係人的權益;同時又須符合福利政策的比例與效益原則,在有限資源下提升弱勢族群的服務品質。公部門為快速回應社會需求,往往欠缺問題成因的追溯,直觀地以科技導向解決問題;沒有以使用者為中心設計的公共服務,易因缺乏易用性而遭致民怨,且無法實際解決使用者問題。
本文以2019年科技部前瞻及應用科技司之「輔助視障者公車搭乘計畫」作為研究個案,探討服務設計作為策略工具,如何協助對應公共服務這類範圍模糊、無直觀解方的棘手問題。研究目的透過EyeBus個案分析,探討服務設計如何突破困境與降低複雜性。研究目標為(1)釐清無障礙公共運輸服務創新的複雜性;(2)分析服務設計方法能如何降低其複雜性,提出可擴大實施的解決方案;(3)以個案分析服務設計者實踐解決方案所遭遇的困難,並提出相關行動建議。
研究結果解構無障礙公共運輸的複雜性,列出七大創新限制,供後續創新者評估方案可行性;並釐清EyeBus個案的三項設計特性,補充包容性服務設計原則;再針對公共服務的實踐,提出關係人導入資源的重要性。綜上所述,本研究提供降低公共服務複雜性的方法與觀念,期許幫助更多的公共服務者,並協助實現更多滿足民眾需求的創新。
Public service innovation for the underprivileged minority is challenging for meeting users’ needs while avoiding compromising stakeholders’ rights. Commonly, to quickly respond to social needs, public sectors often take technology-oriented solutions instead of clarifying the underlying complexity. Lacking user-centered design, public services are often criticized for low usability and result in unsatisfaction and even more significant problems. Can service design, as a strategic method to counter issues with poorly defined parameters, non-binary solutions, help drive better public innovation?
Through a case study of EyeBus, the research purpose is to explore how service design is used to understand and decrease the complexities of bus-riding experiences for the visually impaired. The research objectives are (1) to clarify the complexities in the process of accessible public service design; (2) to analyze how service design resolved the difficulties; (3) to present the thinking and executions of the EyeBus service design process for future references.
The research highlights seven constraints of accessible public transport innovation, and three accessible service design principles. Also, it presents how service design approaches can break through the challenges. At last, the research shed lights on the vitality of collaborations among stakeholders on the road of launching a public service. Through providing a case study of practicing public service design, we expect to promote more demand-oriented innovations and to drive more public interests.
中文文獻
1. 交通部(2017)。公路公共運輸多元推升計畫。臺北市:作者。
2. 交通部(2019)。發展大眾運輸條例。臺北市:作者。
3. 何舒軒、宋同正(2014)。綜論服務設計學術研究發展。設計學報,19(2)。
4. 宋世祥(2020)。百工裡的人類學家2 厚數據的創新課:5大洞察心法╳6種視覺化工具,掌握人類學家式的系統思考,精準切入使用者情境。臺北市:果力文化。
5. 李永駿(2011)。應用先進技術輔助視障者使用公共運輸服務之探討。臺北市:交通部運輸研究所。
6. 李仲彬(2018)。與生俱來與後天培養:影響公務人員創新態度與行為的因素分析。公共行政學報,54,1-40。
7. 李宗勳(2004)。公私協力與委外化的效應與價值:一項進行中的治理改造工程。公共行政學報,12,41-77。
8. 李俊達主持(2015)。政府吸納社會創新強化公共治理之研究(國家發展委員會委託研究報告,NDC-DSD-103-003)。臺北市:台灣競爭力論壇學會。
9. 李森光(2017)。重度視障者使用大眾交通工具之研究 以五位台北市重度視覺障礙者為例(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號100NTNU5284039)
10. 俞靜庭(2020)。以服務設計思維建立標準化人員服務SOP:以臺灣長照巴士司機為例(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號108NTUS5619045)
11. 胡龍騰(2017)。政府績效管理指標設計:如何既K、且P、又I。國土及公共治理季刊,5(3),68-79。
12. 孫煒(2016)。台灣地方社會服務契約委外的績效與競爭。公共行政學報,51,1-33。
13. 張恆豪、顏詩耕(2011)。從慈善邁向權利:臺灣身心障礙福利的發展與挑戰。社區發展季刊,133,402-416。
14. 陳中舜(2018)。「拼經濟」是引領改革的大旗?還是錯誤政策的遮羞布?經濟前瞻,176(2),118-121。
15. 陳敦源、朱斌妤、蕭乃沂、黃東益、廖洲棚、曾憲立(2020)。政府數位轉型:一本必讀的入門書。臺北市:五南圖書。
16. 曾冠球(2017)。協力治理觀點下公共管理者的挑戰與能力建立。文官制度季刊,3,27-52。
17. 楊振甫(2016)。變革式服務設計於可持續社會創新之價值共創(博士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。(系統編號104NTUS5619032)
18. 廖慧燕(2009)。建築物無障礙設施設計規範解說手冊。臺北市:內政部。
英文文獻
19. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543-571.
20. Bason, C. (2010). Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society. Bristol: The Policy Press.
21. Bason, C. (2013). Design-led innovation in government. Social Innovation Review, 11(2), 15-17.
22. Bernstein, E. (2014). The transparency trap. Harvard Business Review, 92(10), 58-66.
23. Bue, O. L., & Begnum, M. E. (2018). Towards inclusive service design in the digital society: current practices and future recommendations. DS, 91, 14-17.
24. Cook, L. S., Bowen, D. E., Chase, R. B., Dasu, S., Stewart, D. M., & Tansik, D. A. (2002). Human issues in service design. Journal of Operations Management, 20(2), 159-174.
25. Cox, M. D., Green, L., Borodako, K., & Sangiorgi, D. (2015). Designing for public sector innovation in the UK: Design strategies for paradigm shifts. Foresight, 17(4), 332-348.
26. Cross, N. (1999). Natural intelligence in design. Design Studies, 20(1), 25-39.
27. Halvorsen, T., Hauknes, J., Miles, I., & Røste, R. (2005). Innovation in the public sector on the differences between public and private sector innovation. Oslo, Norway: NIFU STEP.
28. Heinonen, K., & Strandvik, T. (2015). Customer-dominant logic: foundations and implications. Journal of Services Marketing.
29. Hsieh W. A., & Tang, H. H. (2021). Design for People, Design with People: The Complexities and Breakouts of Public Service Design in Practice. In Stephanidis, C., Antona, M., & Ntoa, S. (Eds.) International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 41-48). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-78635-9
30. Jeon, Y. (2019). Problem-solving design-platform model based on the methodological distinctiveness of service design. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 5(4), 78.
31. Jurca, G., Hellmann, T. D., & Maurer, F. (2014, July). Integrating agile and user-centered design: A systematic mapping and review of evaluation and validation studies of agile-UX. Proceedings 2014 Agile Conference, AGILE 2014. pp. 24–32.
32. Kallio, H., Pietilä, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi‐structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965.
33. Kettl, D. F. (2000). The global public management revolution: A report on the transformation of governance. Brookings Institution Press.
34. Leinonkoski, H. (2012). Service design - An approach to better public services? A civil Servant's View. Working Papers.
35. McDonald, S. (2005). Studying actions in context: a qualitative shadowing method for organizational research. Qualitative research, 5(4), 455-473.
36. Mukhtar, M., Ismail, M. N., & Yahya, Y. (2012). A hierarchical classification of co-creation models and techniques to aid in product or service design. Computers in Industry, 63(4), 289-297.
37. Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34-43.
38. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co‐creating unique value with customers. Strategy & leadership.
39. Prendeville, S., & Bocken, N. (2017). Sustainable business models through service design. Procedia Manufacturing, 8, 292-299.
40. Shostack, G.L. (1984). Designing services that deliver. Harvard Business Review, 62(1), 133-139.
41. Sochor, J., Karlsson, I. M., & Strömberg, H. (2016). Trying out mobility as a service: Experiences from a field trial and implications for understanding demand. Transportation Research Record, 2542(1), 57-64.
42. Stickdorn, M., Hormess, M. E., Lawrence, A., & Schneider, J. (2018). This is service design doing: Applying service design thinking in the real world. Sebastopol, Canada: O'Reilly Media, Inc.
43. Tett, G. (2015). The silo effect: The peril of expertise and the promise of breaking down barriers. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
44. Thomas, G. (2021). How to do your case study. London, England: Sage Publications Limited.
45. Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2019). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795-825.
46. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 36(1), 1-10.
47. World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability 2011. World Health Organization.
48. Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321-332.
網路資料
49. ARINC (2009). Study to address options for enabling the blind and visually impaired community to denominate U.S. currency. Retrieved from
https://www.moneyfactory.gov/images/ARINC_Final_Report_7-26-09.pdf
50. Chadwick, N. (2018) The history of mobility as a service. Retrieved from
https://www.mobilleo.com/news/the-history-of-mobility-as-a-service/
51. Design Council (2010). What is service design? Retrieved from
http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/about-design/Types-of-design/Service-design/What-is-service-design/
52. Gibbons, S. (2017) Service blueprints: Definition. Retrieved from
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/service-blueprints-definition/
53. Microsoft (2016). Inclusive toolkit manual. Retrieved from
https://www.microsoft.com/design/inclusive/
54. Nessler, D. (2016). How to apply a design thinking, HCD, UX or any creative process from scratch. Retrieved from
https://medium.com/digital-experience-design/how-to-apply-a-design-thinking-hcd-ux-or-any-creative-process-from-scratch-b8786efbf812
55. UMAJI(2019)。交通部、美創及遠傳電信攜手打造一個適合臺灣的MaaS交通行動服務整合平台。取自:
https://www.metropia.com/umaji
56. 內政部(2019)。民國108年12月戶口統計速報表。取自:
https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/portal/346
57. 田習如、吳和懋(2016)。87%指標不及格、十大部會6成在放牛班——政府KPI大體檢。商業週刊。取自:
https://www.businessweekly.com.tw/archive/Article/Index?StrId=61749
58. 汪育儒(2018年12月18日)。身障者不想再上演公車驚魂記。蘋果日報即時論壇。取自:
https://tw.appledaily.com/forum/20181218/GUFCGYVSOVQ7HLNMHJO3KTAVP4/
59. 阮筱琪(2020年10月12日)。公車讓座鈴如何兼顧需求與隱私?臺灣讀報教育資源網。取自:
https://nie.mdnkids.com/teaching2.html?s=18AC00000WUOYUP&fbclid=IwAR1PZs2jmALK-OkQDaeO2jYnVCH8p1IeK-AaMo4mbOCTqwFURg-j8iOhSo8
60. 唐玄輝(2019)。新服務設計的內涵。取自:
https://medium.com/ditl/%E6%96%B0%E6%9C%8D%E5%8B%99%E8%A8%AD%E8%A8%88%E7%9A%84%E5%85%A7%E6%B6%B5-31f2319588a4
61. 國家通訊傳播委員會無障礙網路空間服務網(2020)。02 網站無障礙規範2 1版草案說明與推動規劃。取自:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQVVnoumaEo&ab_channel=%E5%9C%8B%E5%AE%B6%E9%80%9A%E8%A8%8A%E5%82%B3%E6%92%AD%E5%A7%94%E5%93%A1%E6%9C%83%E7%84%A1%E9%9A%9C%E7%A4%99%E7%B6%B2%E8%B7%AF%E7%A9%BA%E9%96%93%E6%9C%8D%E5%8B%99%E7%B6%B2
62. 張凱翔(2015年1月4日)。蚊子館揮之不去 閒置無解。喀報。取自:
https://castnet.nctu.edu.tw/index.php/castnet/article/7505?issueID=540
63. 許容瑄、黃俐榛、林奕辰、莊珺茹、謝承學(2019)。血汗惡名背後的真相「一例一休」後公車業勞資說不出的苦衷。大學報。取自:
https://unews.nccu.edu.tw/unews/%E8%A1%80%E6%B1%97%E6%83%A1%E5%90%8D%E8%83%8C%E5%BE%8C%E7%9A%84%E7%9C%9F%E7%9B%B8%E3%80%80%E3%80%8C%E4%B8%80%E4%BE%8B%E4%B8%80%E4%BC%91%E3%80%8D%E5%BE%8C%E5%85%AC%E8%BB%8A%E6%A5%AD%E5%8B%9E%E8%B3%87/
64. 陳秋雲(2021年1月13日)。臺中友善公車App遭質疑假友善 視障者:公車常過站不停。經濟日報。取自:
https://money.udn.com/money/story/12524/5170482
65. 黃建豪(2018年8月6日)。公車駕駛協助視障者比例不到3成。自由時報。取自:
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/local/paper/1222724
66. 黃建豪(2019年2月23日)。北市公車站牌改智慧型 1200座有難度。自由時報。取自:
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/local/paper/1269385
67. 葉冠妤(2015年11月11日)。北市推視障好行APP 3公車站就花300萬。自由時報。取自:
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/breakingnews/1537254
68. 劉榮(2013年3月4日)。低底盤公車到站廣播擾人清夢。自由時報。取自:
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/local/paper/658763
69. 蔡思培(2020年11月16日)。北市有聲號誌涵蓋率僅8% 提醒聲聽不見。自由時報。取自:
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/paper/1412873
70. 衛生福利部(2018)。105年身心障礙者生活狀況及需求調查報告。取自:
https://www.mohw.gov.tw/dl-15903-559e7d0b-5b5a-4178-9128-a9045f078654.html
71. 衛生福利部(2020)。身心障礙者人數按季。取自:
https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/cp-2976-13815-113.html