在建築開發市場中，建案品質、施工穩定性及建設公司履約能力，已成為消費者評估建案與建立品牌信任之重要依據。由於建築產品具有高總價及資訊不對稱等特性，建設公司之品質管理能力與市場信譽將直接影響消費者對品牌之認知與評價。然而，營建實務上，建設公司常面臨成本控制與品質提升之平衡問題，若前期品質投入不足，往往導致後續重工、修繕及交屋缺失增加，進而影響消費者對品牌之信任。因此，本研究探討不同品質成本構面對品牌價值之影響，並分析品質風險感知之中介效果，以作為建設公司進行品質成本配置決策之參考。 本研究以品質成本理論PAF模型（Prevention-Appraisal-Failure Model）為基礎，將品質成本區分為預防成本、鑑定成本與失敗成本三大構面，並結合品質風險感知與品牌價值建立研究架構。研究採問卷調查蒐集資料，並透過SPSS進行資料整理與前置統計分析，再運用結構方程模型（Structural Equation Modeling， SEM）進行研究模型驗證與假說檢驗。 研究結果顯示，預防成本、鑑定成本及失敗成本皆對品質風險感知具有顯著正向影響，其中以失敗成本之影響程度最高。品質風險感知亦對品牌價值具有顯著正向影響，顯示受訪者愈重視建案品質風險議題，愈傾向透過建設公司品牌作為評估與降低風險的重要依據。此外，品質風險感知在品質成本配置與品牌價值之間具有部分中介效果，其中預防成本與鑑定成本具有顯著中介效果，而失敗成本之中介效果未達統計顯著水準。 綜合而言，品質成本管理不應僅著重於降低短期成本，而應重視前期品質投入與品質成本配置之合理性。研究結果可作為建設公司品質管理、成本控制及品牌經營策略之參考依據。;In the real estate development industry， project quality， construction stability， and developers′ con-tractual fulfillment have become critical factors influencing consumers′ trust in developers′ brands. Due to the high value of housing products and information asymmetry in the real estate market， developers′ quality management capability and market reputation directly influence consumers′ perceptions of brand value. In practice， developers must balance cost control with quality improvement， as insufficient ear-ly-stage quality investment may lead to rework， repair costs， and handover defects， thereby reducing consumers′ trust in developers′ brands. Therefore， this study investigates the effects of different quality cost components on brand value and examines the mediating role of perceived quality risk to provide a reference for quality cost allocation. Based on the Prevention–Appraisal–Failure (PAF) model， quality costs are classified into preven-tion， appraisal， and failure costs to establish a research framework linking perceived quality risk and brand value. Questionnaire data were analyzed using SPSS for data processing and preliminary statis-tical analyses， followed by Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to validate the research model and test the hypotheses. The results indicate that prevention， appraisal， and failure costs each have significant positive ef-fects on perceived quality risk， with failure costs having the strongest effect. Perceived quality risk also has a significant positive effect on brand value， indicating that consumers rely more on developers′ brands when placing greater importance on quality-related risks. Furthermore， perceived quality risk par-tially mediates the relationship between quality costs and brand value. Significant mediation effects were found for prevention and appraisal costs， whereas the mediating effect of failure costs was not statistically significant. Overall， quality cost management should emphasize early-stage quality investment and appropri-ate quality cost allocation rather than focusing solely on short-term cost reduction. The findings provide practical guidance for quality management， cost control， and brand management strategies.
