전통적 IPA(Importance-Performance Analysis)와 수정된 IPA의 비교연구; 순천만 습지를 대상으로

Comparison between Traditional IPA and Revised IPA; The Suncheon Bay Wetland Reserve

  • 김보미 (서울대학교 환경대학원 협동과정 조경학) ;
  • 이동근 (서울대학교 조경.지역시스템공학부)
  • Kim, Bo-Mi (Interdisciplinary program in Landscape Architecture, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Dong-Kun (Dept. of Landscape Architecture and Rural System Engineering, Seoul National University)
  • 투고 : 2016.12.19
  • 심사 : 2017.03.07
  • 발행 : 2017.04.30


수정된 IPA는 전통적 IPA와 비교시 실제 방문객 만족도가 반영된 관리전략을 수립하는데 있어 효과적인 방법이다. 그러나 전통적 IPA와 수정된 IPA의 비교연구는 제한적이다. 그러므로 본 연구에서는 순천만 습지 내 효과적인 관리전략을 구축하기 위해 전통적 IPA와 수정된 IPA를 비교분석하였다. 첫째, 수정된 IPA를 선정하기 위해 선행연구를 고찰하였고, 공간 내 방문객의 실제 만족도에 영향을 받는 관리전략과 서비스 질을 정량화 할 수 있는 적절한 방법으로 Deng(2007) 방법론을 선정하였다. 둘째, 순천만 습지 내 전통적 IPA와 수정된 IPA를 적용한 결과를 비교분석하였다. 셋째, 수정된 IPA의 관리전략과 변화된 관리요소에 관해 논의하였다. 그 결과, 전통적 IPA 결과보다 관리요구도가 더 높게 도출된 관리요소로 혼잡도가 나타났고, 관리요구도가 더 낮게 도출된 관리요소 중 집중관리에서 저우선순위로 관리전략이 변화하는 관리요소의 경우, 그늘목, 전시시설 내부, 프로그램, 가이드투어가 분석됐으며, 현 상태 유지에서 과잉노력지양으로 분석된 관리요소의 경우, 휴게시설, 낙조, 생울타리, 전시시설 외부로 도출되었다. 이는 현재 순천만 습지 내 관리전략과 비교시 전통적 IPA 결과값보다 수정된 IPA의 결과값에 더 부합된 결과로 실제 방문객들의 만족변화에 대해 탄력적인 반응을 보이는 것으로 분석되어졌다. 이를 통해 의사결정자들의 관리전략 구축시 수정된 IPA가 더 정확하고 신뢰성 높은 기초자료로 제공될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

Compared to the traditional format, the revised IPA is an effective method for selecting a management strategy as compared to the traditional IPA. Comparison between the traditional IPA and revised IPA with a management strategy has been, however, limited. Therefore, the difference between the traditional IPA and revised IPA was compared to select an effective management strategy in the Suncheon Bay Wetland Reserve. First of all, related papers were reviewed to select an appropriate revised IPA. It was found that Deng (2007)'s revised IPA was appropriate for quantifying service quality and a management strategy that affects the measurable satisfaction of visitors in the space. Second, the results of the traditional IPA were compared with the revised IPA in the Suncheon Bay Wetland Reserve and the management strategy of the revised IPA and the changes of management factors were discussed. It was found that some management factors deviated from the order of the quadrant "low priority for managers", "Concentrate management here", "Keep up the good work" were moved to the order of the quadrants "Concentrate management here", "low priority for managers" and "Possible overkill" in the revised IPA grid. The complexity as a management factor resulted in higher demand management than the traditional IPA, which moved from "low priority for managers" to "Concentrate management here". Management factors resulted in lower demand management than the traditional IPA moved from "Concentrate management here" to "low priority for managers"; these consisted of shade trees, exhibition exteriors, programs, and a guided tour. Also, management factors moved from "Keep up the good work" to "Possible overkill" consisted of relaxation facilities, glow of the setting sun, a hedge, and an exhibition interior. Over all, the revised IPA responded properly to changes in the measurable satisfaction of visitors to the Suncheon Bay Wetland Reserve. Therefore, a revised IPA should be provided for accurate and reliable guidelines when decision makers establish management strategies.


  1. Ahn, Y. J., S. H. Hyun and I. S. Kim(2015) A study on the revised importance-performance analysis; The difference of groups based on visitors' gaming involvement. Hotel Tourism Research 17(2): 272-289.
  2. Albayrak, T., M. Caber and M. Bideci(2016) Identification of hotel attributes for senior tourists by using Vavra's importance grid. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 29: 17-23.
  3. Beon, K. Y., J. Y. Lee and K. J. Kim(2013) A study on the service quality of Korean restaurants through revised IPA: Focused on Daegu. Foodservice Management Research 16(5): 171-192.
  4. Boley, B. B., N, G. McGehee and A. L. Hammett(2017) Importanceperformance analysis(IPA) of sustainable tourism initiatives: The resident perspective. Tourism Management 58: 66-77.
  5. Deng, W.(2007) Using a revised importance-performance analysis approach: The case of Taiwanese hot springs tourism. Tourism Management 28(5): 1274-1284.
  6. Deng, W., Y. F. Kuo and W. C. Chen(2008) Revised importance– performance analysis: Three threefactor theory and benchmarking. The Service Industries Journal 28(5): 1274-1284.
  7. Jung, C. and Y. S. Seo(2010) A review of the importance-performance analysis used in domestic tourism studies. Tourism Research 22(1): 119-137.
  8. Kang, S. G. and U. S. Jung(2014) Developing arboretums as edutainment spaces: Application of revised importance-performance analysis. Tourism Research 39(4): 223-240.
  9. Kano, N., N. Seraku, F. Takahashi and S. Tsuji(1984) Attractive quality and must-be quality. Hinshitsu-The Journal of Japanese Society for Quality Control 14: 39-48.
  10. Kim, C. H.(2013) The study on decision factors of sports viewing in university basketball league using revised IPA. Journal of Korean Society of Sport Policy 20: 38-80.
  11. Kim, D. H., H. Y. Kim and D. K. Kim(2015) Improvement plan of tourism preparedness for attracting tourists using revised IPA; Focusing on incentive tourists. Hotel Management Research 24(4): 145-159.
  12. Kim, J. M., S. M. Yoon and H. R. Kim(2010) An evaluation study for satisfaction of festivalscape using IPA and revised IPA. Tourism Research 25(4): 181-200.
  13. Kim, Y. R., J. S. Choi and S. H. Sin(2015) A study on the analysis importance and satisfaction of operating factors for title of government in sports event. Journal of Korean Society of Sport Policy, 5(13): 43-54.
  14. Lee, D. K. and B. M. Kim(2010) Importance-satisfaction analysis as a management strategy of Suncheon bay ecological park. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 37(6): 39-47.
  15. Lee, J. J.(2015) A study on the characteristics on Chinese cosmetic tourism using revised IPA; Focused on Chinese people who have experience in cosmetic tourism in Nanjing. Tourism Research 29(6): 201-219.
  16. Lee, H. S., S. H. Lee, M. H. Kim, H. Yim and S. H. Han(2014) A study on improvement of Gyeongsangbuk-do arboretum effective operation using the revised IPA. Journal of Korean Forest Society 339.
  17. Martilla, J. A. and J. C. James(1977) Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing. 77-79.
  18. Matzler, K., F. Bailom, H. H. Hinterhuber, B. Renzl and J. Pichler (2004) The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction: A reconsideration of the importanceperformance analysis. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(4): 271-277.
  19. No, H. J.(2006) Research Method and Statistical Anaysis by SPSS. Publisher. Heongsul.
  20. O'Neill, M. A. and A. Palmer(2004) Importance-performance analysis: A useful tool for directing continuous quality improvement in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education. 12(1): 39-52.
  21. Oh, M. J. and J. S. Rue(2016) Comparison between traditional IPA and revised IPA: An attractiveness evaluation of Incheon Chinatown. International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research. 30(7): 129-142.
  22. Oh, H(2001) Revisiting importance-performance analysis. Tourism Management. 22: 617-627.
  23. Park, S. A. and M. W. Lee(2016) An analysis of the healing effects by types of forest space; Focused on psychological restorativeness and satisfaction. Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture, 44(4): 75-85.
  24. Pyu, S. S.(2008) Importance and asymmetry in tourism importanceperformance analysis. Gyounggi Tourism Research 12: 1-14.
  25. Pyu, S. S.(2009) Improvement of importance-performance analysis study. Tourism Studies. 33(4): 227-251.
  26. Suncheon-si(2016) Request of Information Disclosure.
  27. Ting, S. C. and C. N. Chen(2002) The asymmetrical and non-linear effects of store quality attributes on customer satisfaction. Total Quality Management, 13(4): 547-569.
  28. Vavra, T. G.(1997). Improving your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction: A Guide to Creating, Conducting, Analyzing, and Reporting Customer Satisfaction Measurement Programs. ASQ Quality Press.
  29. Yin, J., X. Cao, X. Huang and X. Cao(2016) Applying the IPA-Kano model to examine environmental correlates of residential satisfaction: A case study of Xi'an. Habitat International 53: 461-472.
  30. Yoo, D. K., M. J. Joo, M. S. Kim and Y. K. Lee(2013) Determinants of dissatisfaction of franchisees using by revised IPA. Customer Satisfaction Management Research 15(4): 123-140.
  31. Yoon, Y. K., D. Y. Won and M. S. Kuok(2015) Evaluating service quality of Korean equestrian clubs using a revised IPA. The Korean Journal of Physical Education. 54(1): 315-326.
  36. Kyunghyang Newspaper(2015.12.13.) Suncheon Bay was selected as the first "Open Tourist Spot" by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.
  37. Kyunghyang Newspaper(2016.03.29.) Ecological wetland parking lot reservation system in Suncheon Bay 'tourist inconvenience'.
  38. Nocut News(2014.02.26.) AI closed Suncheon Bay for one month, petition to open a local merchant.
  39. Nocut News(2015.09.17.) Tourist inconveniences because of reed train on formation lack in Su11.) "Open tourist spots" increase ... People with disabilities and the elderly are also welcome to travel.
  40. NSP communication Newspaper (2015.12.08.) Suncheon, 'Suncheon Bay Wetland Reserve' running a winter bird watching program.