New Kano Model for better design decisions and hidden market opportunities

Many people wrongly assume that so-called Kano model (diagram on the right) describes the relationship between customer needs, fulfillment of product features, and satisfaction.

The1984 research, "Attractive Quality and Must-Be Quality" by N. Seraku, F. Takahashi, and N. Kano, Ph.D.,  measured satisfaction merely against the existence or absence of a feature. It did not and does not address customer needs.

Additionally, the Kano categories came from customer survey responding to inverse-paired questions. They were not and are not assigned by product engineers or producers.

The most serious error that people often make is the misleading "curved-arrow" that is often cited as shown in the above diagram. The inverse-paired question yields only two data points:  the "if" and the "if not". You can only draw a line (= linear) with two data points. It takes three data points to inscribe a curve!  This is why Glenn Mazur (QFD Institute), who translated Kano's original Japanese paper into English over two decades ago, wonders how many people who cite the Kano model actually read their study.

This problems was addressed by Mr. Harold Ross, a now retired General Motors engineer and a director of the QFD Institute. He called this the New Kano Model, which adds the necessary questions to draw the "curve" and use it to reveal hidden market segments and extrapolate better design decisions.

Using the Modern QFD tools that are taught in the QFD Black Belt^® course, you can then identify the invisible, moving target of customer satisfaction that the original Kano model does not address.

This new methodology will be presented at the 26th Symposium on QFD, December 5, 2014 in Charleston, South Carolina USA. It will include implementation examples of automotive industry, development of marketing and advertising content, as well as identifying clearer performance targets for each customer segment.

Everyone is welcomed at this symposium, regardless of your QFD knowledge.
Here is how to attend.

Why we drink beer?

As we celebrate the various holidays and new year in our own special ways, let me propose a toast – of Singha Beer!

This week, the American Society for Quality (ASQ) posted as an "Editor's Pick" on their Knowledge Center a QFD case study done by Singha Beer of Thailand. The response has generated a lot of interest and ASQ plans to post it on their home page.

Unlike most QFD applications, this case had little to do with the product, and much to do with the marketing and branding message – not what we drink but why we drink.

Here is the link to the article "Thai Brewery Deploys QFD Tools to Tap Into Consumer Motivation" (PDF) at ASQ site.

Enjoy.


PS: The QFD Institute also has a synopsis of this case study 
       "Why We Drink Beer?" (web view).

GPS Gemba shows need for Kano

In a study by Barry Brown of the Mobile Life Center in Sweden, “The Normal Natural Troubles of Driving With GPS,” global positioning system failures were often found to be the result of driver errors, such as wrong inputs, misreading display, etc.

The study is cited in a recent New York Times article by Randall Stross, a business professor at San Jose State University,  that concludes that no technology will ever eradicate this human error.

The article described Dr. Brown's field study of installing video cameras in test vehicles to capture the GPS instructions, drivers' responses, and conversations when things went wrong. In QFD, we call this "going to gemba" or the place where unscripted user behavior reveals the real truth about customer needs. Gemba visits should be done prior to development to gain knowledge, as well as during design to test and validate solutions.

The conclusion by Dr. Stross reminded me of Dr. Noriaki Kano's model of Attractive Quality Creation, where he introduced the concept of exciting and expected quality. QFD users, of course, are very familiar with the classical Kano model as well as the QFD Institute's modern New Kano Model.

Dr. Kano cites one of his early experiments with Mr. T. Yoneyama of Konica, the Japanese camera company that later merged with Minolta.

In their study at film processing and photograph printing labs (also a gemba), they noticed that the largest number of poor quality pictures were those that were out of focus or under exposed. These problems were operator error, not mechanical failures of the camera. Most of these photographs were taken by amateurs who did not have the professional skills to adjust the camera properly, but never complained to the lab or to the camera maker.

Like in the GPS study, Konica could have just blamed the unskilled customers. But with Dr. Kano's guidance, they did something different – they introduced the built-in auto flash in 1974 and the auto focus in 1977, thus revolutionizing the amateur and later professional camera industry.

In other words, if products or services fail to satisfy, makers should adopt this attitude that their design is at fault, not their customers. Positively stated, these failures are actually opportunities to create exciting products with disruptive technologies.