本研究主要目的在根據落差理論建構大學校院輔諮中心輔導服務品質指標與輔導服務品質影響因素，並編製「輔導服務品質量表」及「輔導服務品質影響因素量表」以探討大學校院輔諮中心輔導服務品質現況。依此目的，本研究首先對專家學者、學務長、輔諮中心主任與學生等23人進行訪談，歸納出大學校院輔諮中心的輔導服務品質包含六大指標：「有形性」、「可靠性」、「反應性」、「保證性」、「體貼性」、「認同性」。影響輔導服務品質有四個影響因素，管理階層認知向度、品質承諾向度、輔導服務人員之知能與態度與宣導與溝通向度。 　　本研究以德懷術專家諮詢編製輔導服務品質量表與輔導服務品質影響因素量表。 　　本研究以問卷調查法探討輔導服務品質與影響因素之間的關係與大學校院輔諮中心輔導服務品質的評估。研究對象為98所大學校院輔諮中心的379位輔導老師，與24所學校的1343名學生。資料分析的方法為t考驗、單因子變異數分析、逐步多元迴歸分析。 　　主要研究結果如下： 　　第一，不同背景輔導老師方面：(一)公立學校和私立學校的輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔諮中心的輔導服務品質與輔導服務品質影響因素的評估沒有差異。(二)一般大學和技職院校輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔諮中心的輔導服務品質與其影響因素的評估沒有差異。僅在影響因素的組成因素「員工適配」方面有差異。(三)北一區、北二區、中區以及南區四區大學校院輔諮中心的輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔諮中心的輔導服務品質與輔導服務品質影響因素的評估沒有差異。僅在輔導服務品質指標的「有形性」方面有差異。(四)男性和女性輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔導服務品質的評估沒有差異，但是對影響因素的評估有差異。(五)不同年資輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔諮中心輔導服務品質與輔導服務品質影響因素的評估沒有差異。(六)不論是主任、專任輔導老師、專任心理師、資教輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔導服務品質的評估沒有差異。在影響因素方面，輔導主任的評估都較其他老師較好。(七)不論輔導老師的背景為輔諮專業、相關科系或是非輔諮專業，對於其所服務學校輔導服務品質與輔導服務品質影響因素的評估沒有差異。在影響因素方面組成因素方面有差異。(八)不同教育程度的輔導老師對於其所服務學校輔導服務品質與輔導服務品質影響因素的評估有顯著差異。 　　第二，不同背景學生方面：(一)男學生和女學生對於其所就讀學校輔導服務品質的評估有差異。(二)公立學校和私立學校學生對於其所就讀學校輔諮中心的輔導服務品質的評估沒有差異。(三)不同性質學校學生對於輔導服務品質的評估有差異。(四)不同年級學生對於輔導服務品質的評估有差異。(五)有接受輔導服務經驗的學生比無接受輔導服務經驗的學生對輔諮中心輔導服務品質的評估較好。 　　第三．輔導服務品質指標與輔導服務品質影響因素組成因素之間的關係。(一)「品質承諾」、「控制力」對於輔導服務品質的「有形性」較具有預測力。(二)「員工適配」、「目標設置」、「加強宣導」、「工作標準化」與「學生需求調查」對於輔導服務品質的「可靠性」較具有預測力。(三)「員工適配」、「水平溝通」、「加強宣導」、「學生需求調查」、「監控系統」與「工作標準化」對於輔導服務品質「反應性」較具有預測力。(四)「員工適配」、「控制力」、「加強宣導」、「水平溝通」、「監控系統」與「學生需求調查」對於輔導服務品質「保證性」較具有預測力。(五)「員工適配」、「加強宣導」、「工作標準化」對於輔導服務品質「體貼性」較具有預測力。其中「員工適配」為主要預測變項。(六) 「品質承諾」、「加強宣導」、「水平溝通」、「團隊合作」與「目標設置」對於輔導服務品質的「認同性」較具有預測力。 　　最後，根據研究結果對輔導實務工作及未來相關研究提出建議以供參考。 / The main purpose of this research was to construct fundamental indicators of counseling service quality, develop an inventory of counseling service quality, and assess counseling service quality of university counseling centers. This research was conducted under three processes. First, semistructured interviews of professional scholars, deans of student affairs, directors of counseling center and students were conducted. Six indicators of counseling service quality were obtained from analyzing the responses as follows: tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy and identification. The determinants of counseling service quality involved managers’ perception of students’ expectations, management commitment to service quality, counselors’ competence and attitude, as well as propagation and communication. Several specific criteria emerged for each of the determinants. Second, the inventory was constructed under the framework of literature review and Delphi method. The inventory was finally sent to 379 counselors and 1343 students from 24 universities in Taiwan. The data was analyzed by t-test, one-way ANOVA, and stepwise regression. Our findings are summarized below: First, regarding counselors of different backgrounds: (1) No differences were found between the public and private university counselors in perceived counseling service quality. The same results were found between counselors of differing seniority. (2) The perceived “employee-job fit” of university counselors was better than that of those from vocational university. (3) The perceived tangibility of the first district in northern universities was greater than that of southern universities. (4) There were disparities in the assessment of determinants of counseling service quality between male and female counselors. The same was true with counselors of different professional backgrounds. (5) The perceived counseling service quality of the director and counselors with doctorate degrees from the university counseling center was better than that of other counselors. Second, students with different backgrounds: (1) The perceived counseling service quality was different between males and females, universities and technological universities, different grades, and possessing or not possessing prior counseling experience. (2) No differences were found between public and private university students in perceived counseling service quality. Third, the relationship between counselor service quality indicators and factors of counselor service quality: (1) The criteria of management commitment to service quality and perceived control were the two major factors in predicting the tangibility of counseling service quality. (2) The criteria of “employee-job fit”, goal-setting, propagation-enhancement, task standardization, and student request investigation were the five major factors in predicting the reliability of counseling service quality.3. The criteria of “employee-job fit”, horizontal communication, propagation-enhancement, student request investigation, supervisory control systems, and task standardization were the six major factors in predicting the responsiveness of counseling service quality.4. The criteria of employee-job fit, perceived control, propagation-enhancement, horizontal communication, supervisory control systems, and student research orientation were the six major factors in predicting the assurance of counseling service quality. (5) The criteria of employee-job fit, propagation-enhancement, and task standardization were the six major factors in predicting the empathy of counseling service quality.(6) The criteria of management commitment to service quality, propagation-enhancement, horizontal communication, teamwork and goal-setting were the four major factors in predicting counseling service quality. Based on the results of this study, we have proposed some suggestions and provided reference materials for the counseling profession as well as for the pursuit of further research in this area.