House of Quality Example An interactive HOQ exampleHOQ –by Professor Robert Hunt, C/-Macquarie University Graduate School of Management Macquarie University New South Wales Australia HOQ template

Metrics calculation Priorities calculation

Kano’s Model Reference: Integrating Kano’s model in the planning matrix of quality function deployment; K.C. Tan, X.X. Shen, Total Quality Management, Vol:11 No:8 (2000) The quality of a product/service determined by customer satisfaction  factor this into the planning matrix of the QFD process Kano’s model characterizes three distinct attributes through which the customer satisfaction is affected Performance Satisfaction One-dimensional Must-be Attractive

Kano’s Model One-dimensional attributes: customer satisfaction is proportional to the level of performance. Ex: mileage/gallon for a new car Attractive attributes: criteria will greatly, positively influence the satisfactory level of customers. Ex: add-on features of a car, GPS system, etc.. Must be attributes: criteria must have for a product. These are usually taken for granted and the fulfillment of these will not lead to more satisfaction. Ex: safety of a product, seat belt/airbag It can be integrated into the QFD by modifying the Improvement ratio (IR) using the following formula –(IR) adjusted =(IR) k, where k is a parameter determined by the designer –k=1/2 for Must be, =1 for One-D, =2 for Attractive –IR is calculated directly as the ratio between the planned rating (PR) and our product (OP) –Ex: item 5: IR=5/2=2.5, this is a must-be for the customer, use k=1/2  (2.5) 1/2 =1.58, close to the IF=1.6 used. item 1: IR=4/3=1.3, it is deemed an attractive attribute, use k=2  (1.3) 2 =1.8 higher than IF=1.2 using the original formula

Application of QFD process sequentially to structure product, part, process, and production Engineering characteristics Production characteristics Process characteristics Part characteristics Customer requirements Product Planning Part Design Process Planning Production Planning Targets