The Comparative Study of Business Management for Senior

Care Centers in Taitung

Ji j:Jt 'fJfkff 'JE PIT h~ '$ 1iL t~ X.

Huron Ryan

Davidson

SWOT

Title of Thesis(Dissertation)The Comparative Study of Business Management for Senior Care Centers in Taitung DepartmentMaster Program in Environmental Management, Nanhua

University Graduate DateJune 2008 Degree ConferredM.B.A. Name of StudentLiu, Chia-Ying AdvisorChang, Chieh-Yao Ph.D.

Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the senior care centers

in Taitung Area and their current operations and management by

interviewing three senior care centers. From the analysis the internal

and external environments of these senior care centers. The results are

as follows:

1. The occupational rate of Taitung senior care centers are low, this

will be the big problem of the operations. However, the longer the

establishment of center will attract higher occupation rate, the

word-of-mouth is important for these centers.

2. The six dimensions of these centers are included operation strategy,

hardware facilities, operation management, human resources,

financial planning and health insurances, more or less the same.

3. This research has listed, the strengths and weaknesses, opportunities

and threats of three centers.

Finally, strategic recommendations have advocated to these centers for

future improvements.

KeywordsSenior Care Center, business management, in-depth

interview, SWOT analysis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 -----------------------------------------------7 ---------------------------------------- 7 -------------------------------------------------- 10 SWOT -------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 ----------------------------------------------- 20 -------------------------------------------- 22 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 29 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 -------------------------------------------------------- 33 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 37 -------------------------------------------------------------- 38 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 -------------------------------------------------------------- 48 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 51 -------------------------------------------------------------- 57 -------------------------------------------------------------- 60 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 66 -------------------------------------------------------------- 66 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 69 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 71 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 72 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 73 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 73 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 74 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 75 -------------------------------------------------------- 77

-------------------------------------------- 80 -------------------------------- 85

1-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 3-1 ---------------------------------------------------------------28

1-1 .........................................................................4 2-1 .........................................................7 2-2 .............................................................................8 2-3 .....................................................................9 2-4 ....................................................................................13 2-5 SWOT ...........................................................................18 2-6 SWOT ...........................................................................................19 2-7 .......................................................................20 3-1 ................................................................................................35 4-1 SW ............................................................................59 4-2 .......................................................60 4-3 ...........................................................................61 4-4 ...........................................................................62 4-5 ...........................................................................63 4-6 ...........................................................................64 4-7 ...........................................................................65

1993 149 801

2,099 5416 7.10%

( 7%)

2007 235 4630

2,295 8,360 10.26%

2007 3.58

2007 6.16

2002 2027

490

20.69%

2004

2005

1

20071,003

2001

2

2005

1.

2.

3. SWOT

4.

3

()2002

3

96

7 1-1 6

3 3

1-1 2007.04.18

1

40 1989.7

2

30 1961.1

3

80 2001.6

4

34 1999.7

4

5 49 2002.01.01

6

40 2002.11.28

7

200 2005.05.16

5

1-1

1-1

6

38

61 42

2-1

2-1

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 54 53 50 53 49 49 47 43 43 183 471 598 711 758 813 838 869 923 _ 4 10 15 20 24 27 32 37 237 528 658 779 827 886 912 944 1003

2007

7

( 69 1 26 )

( 70 11 30 )

( 2-2)

2-3

2-2

8

2-3

()()

7m2

50-300 5-49

20m2

()()

7m2

50-300 5-49

16.5m2

(2005)

9

24

()(

)24

() 24

()

()

()

()

10

1.

2. 921

3.

4.

()

1.

(

)()

2.

11

3.

()

()

()

2-4

12

2-4

1)

2)

1)

2)

3)

1)

50%

2)

3)

13

65

65

(2006)

14

SWOT

SWOT David1986

Strength

WeaknessOpportunityThreat

Porter, 1998Zack, 1999

1996SWOT

Collett1999

SWOT

SWOT

Hill and Jones1998 SWOT ()

()()

SWOT

SWOT

Andrews1980 SWOT

Collett1999 SWOT

15

SWOT

Weihrich1982 SWOT

1999 SWOT ()

()

()

()

SWOT

SWOT1980

SWOT

16

SWOT

Robinson1982 SWOT

1.

2.

3.

4.

17

2-5 SWOT

( ) ( )

- -

/

- - - - -

- - - - - -

(1994)

SWOT

Weihrich1982

SWOT

2 2SOWO

STWT

(2-6)

1.(SOMaxMax)

(Niche)SO

MaxMax

Niche

2.(STMaxMin)

18

ST

MaxMin

3.(WOMinMax)

WOMinMax

4.(WTMinMin)

WTMinMin

2-6 SWOT

(S) (W)

(O) SO MaxMax

WO MinMax

(T) ST MaxMin

WT MinMin

Weihrich(1982), The TOWS Matrix-A Tool for Situational Analysis ,

Long Range Planning, 15(2), p.60

(

)

SWOT

19

1993 2006

10% 2007

10.21% 2-8 25 9

12.5%

12.66% 15

2-7

96 12

96 12

22,958,360 2,343,092 10.21%

2,629,269 314,515 11.96% 1,520,555 140,401 9.23% 3,798,015 285,770 7.52% 460,398 58,043 12.61% 1,934,968 153,263 7.92% 495,821 55,151 11.12% 560,163 72,871 13.01% 1,550,896 131,809 8.50% 1,314,354 151,746 11.55% 533,717 69,325 12.99% 725,672 104,697 14.43% 551,345 83,200 15.09% 1,105,403 138,678 12.55% 1,244,313 122,901 9.88% 889,563 106,776 12.00% 233,660 29,582 12.66% 343,302 41,351 12.05% 92,390 13,873 15.02%

20

390,397 41,147 10.54% 399,035 36,760 9.21% 1,055,898 81,878 7.75% 273,075 28,536 10.45% 764,658 69,509 9.09% 81,547 10,329 12.67% 9,946 981 9.86%

12.5%

16 3515.2526 2007

12 233,660 123,197 110,463 29,583

12.66%

1-1

7 1 8 1 7

1961 2005

2007 8

652 334 51%

7 471 292

128 164 59% 3

320 184 57% 4

171 108 63%

4 182 2 1022 20

1856 627.4

857.2

21

:

1. 2007

DEA

(Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA)

SFA(Stochastic Frontier

Approach, SFA)

93

DEA

1

2

3

45

22

2. 2006

-

71.8%

10.3%

47.1%8.8%

67.6%35.5%

3. 2006

-

20 7

23

4. 2005

1

2

3

5. 2004

43

3013

24

6. 2003

-

1.

2 .

7. 2003

-

84

8. 2003

10

25

9. 2002

119

26

10. 2002

-

50

SWOT

27

3-1

2005

SWOT

3-1

(SW)

(OT)

28

1.(Exploratory Studies)

Analysis of Insight-Stimulating Examples

2.(Descriptive Studies)

3.(Causal Studies)

(Exploratory Case Study)

29

(1996)

(1) Hunt1989(Ideas)(Concepts)

(Frame- Works)

(2) Wallendorf and Belk1989

(3) Spiggle1994(Ideas)

(Concepts)(Frame-Works)

(Descriptive Studies)

(1)

(2)

(3) Wimmer & Dominick (1987)

()

2005

30

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

96

3

31

(1)

(2)(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8) (9)

(

2003)

32

(In-depth interview)

(2002)

(

2003)

33

:

()

()

2005

34

XXXXXXXXX

3-1

35

36

SWOT

(2003)

37

1966

19691971

1990

1998

20016

200770

90%

1060

174190%

38

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

39

32

418

1,200

1. 23

2. UV

3.

4.

5.

6.

1. 20,000/

2. 21,000~25,000/

3. 15,000~18,000/

4. 1,000/

21,000

40

2005 5 16

6 21

1999

1. 3000

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

41

1.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

2.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

11

1.

42

2.

3.

4.

21,000 23,000 25,000

1. 5,000 /( 6,000/) 2. 3. 4. 25,000 ( )

1,000 1. 800~ 600

2. 3.

1964227

43

19646

1964919653

19684

1972

1988

721

1961~1968

1989

1995

2001 2004 2007

44

1. 24

2.

3.

4.

1. 60

2. 60

3.

1.

2.

3.

45

4.

2004 3

5

5.

6.

2003

1

95%

85%

5171

2312

18

1151100

1

46

21,000/

47

1.5

1.5

18,600

65 55 50

48

1994

1998

50 62.3 95 75 66.8 81

2007

235 4630 2,295

8,360 10.26%

49

1997

1998

50

:

51

2008424

831

2008421

55

2008430

702001

6DM

51

200775~90%

17

1280%

15,000~25,000

$25,000/

52

200

2005

2004

3

200750%

2%

(96)

95%4%1%

2418

19

12.5

53

19,000~25,000

/13

25,000/80,000~100,000/

()3-4

40

1989

2

2007100%

54

200478

11

1:1

96%96%

21,000/

16,000~20,000

55

56

2005

34 31 AHP

0.02 9 22

SW

$25,000

SW

57

SW

100%

2

11.25

SW 4-1

58

4-1 SW

SStrength WWeakness

1.

2.

3.

$25,000

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1. 100%

2.

2 3.

4. 11.25

5.

59

4-2

200 70 40

4-2

2001 6 2005 6 1989 1 32 42 35

70 200 40 7 3 19 DM DM

60

4-3

3,000

18%

24

2

4-3

1,200

3,000

3

61

4-4 100%

75%~90% 50%

4-4

75%~90% 50% 100%

62

95%4%1%

4-5

17 19 11

12 12.5 11.25 80% 100% 100%

63

21,000

/

25,000

4-6

15,000~25,000 / 19,000~25,000 / 21,000 /

/

/

16,000~20,000

$25,000/

25,000 /

8 ~10 /

64

4-7

() 3-4

65

SWOT

2007 12.66% 25

8

51% 25

25%

100%

66

100%75%~ 90% 50%

11.25

12 12.511.25

8

15,000 ~25,000

25,000 /

67

SWOT

68

69

2003

70

2005

71

72

1. 2003

2. 2006

3. 2002

4. 2001

5. 1996 Cooper, Donald R. and C. William Emory

6. 2006-

7. 199414

3pp.246-254

8. 1996pp.15-23~15-34

9. 200121

pp.91-109

10. 2002-

11. 1999Robbins, Stephen P. & De Cenzo, David A.

p.256

12. 2005

13. 2004

106pp.5-17

14. 2002

73

15. 2006-

16. 2005

17. 2003-

18. (1994)

19. 1999Charles W.L.Hill and Careth R. Jones

pp.46-51

20. 2004

21. 199831

5pp.23-32

22. 2002

23. 2003

24. 2003-

25. 2003

26. 2007 DEA

1. Andrews, K.(1980), Directors responsibility for corporate strategy, Harvard

Business Review, 59(6), pp.174-188.

2. Collett, S.(1999), SWOT Analysis, Computer World, 33(29), p.58.

74

3. David, F.R.(1986), Fundamentals of Strategic Management, N.J.: Prentice- Hall,

p.9.

4. Hill and Jones(1998), Strategic Management Theory, N.Y.: Houghton Mifflin

Company.

5. Hunt, R.G.(1989), Cognitive Style and Decision Making, Organizational

Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44(3), pp.436-454.

6. Porter, M.E.(1991), Towards A Dynamic Theory of Strategy, Strategic

Management Journal, 12, pp.95-117.

7. Robinson W. A. (1982), Sales Promotion Management, Chicago: Crain Books.

8. Satty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill.

9. Spiggle, S.(1994), Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data in Consumer

Research, Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), pp.491-504.

10. Wallendorf and Belk (1989), The Sacred And The Profane In Consumer Behavior,

Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), pp.1-38.

11. Weihrich, H.1982, The Tows Matrix: A Tool for Situational Analysis, N.Y.:

McGraw -Hill, pp.17-36.

12. Weihrich(1982), The TOWS Matrix-A Tool for Situational Analysis , Long

Range Planning, 15(2), p.60

13. Wimmer, R.D. and Dominick, J.R.(1987), Mass Media Research: An

Introduction, (2nd Edition) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, pp.155-157.

14. Zack, M. (1999), Developing a Knowledge Strategy, California Management

Review, 41(3), spring, pp.125-143.

1. http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/04/new04.asp 2.

http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/04/12/12.htm 3. http://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/ 4. http://www.ltcpa.org.tw/public/choose_01.html

5. http://www.everg.org.tw/

75

http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/04/new04.asphttp://sowf.moi.gov.tw/04/12/12.htmhttp://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/http://www.ltcpa.org.tw/public/choose_01.html%E5%8F%B0%E7%81%A3%E9%95%B7%E6%9C%9F%E7%85%A7%E8%AD%B7%E5%B0%88%E6%A5%AD%E5%8D%94%E6%9C%83%E7%B6%B2%E7%AB%99http://www.everg.org.tw/

6. http://www.proech.org.tw/ 7.

http://blog.sina.com.tw/shengshizi/ 8. 2005

http://www.read.com.tw/web/hypage.cgi?HYPAGE=subject/sub_aging_society.asp

76

http://www.proech.org.tw/http://blog.sina.com.tw/shengshizi/http://www.read.com.tw/web/hypage.cgi?HYPAGE=subject/sub_aging_society.asphttp://www.read.com.tw/web/hypage.cgi?HYPAGE=subject/sub_aging_society.asp

XXXXXXXXX

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

77

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

1.

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

1.

2.

3.

78

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

1.

2.

3.

4.

79

()

80

()

81

()

82

83

84

()

85

()

86

87

1