Quality Function Deployment


www.qualimations.com

What is QFD? Benefits of QFD QFD Methodology The Four Phases

Product Planning

Design Deployment

Manufacturing Process Planning

Production Planning

Managing the QFD Process



What is QFD?



Quality Function Deployment - “Customer Driven Product / Process Development”

QFD from the Japanese -

The 3 main goals in implementing QFD are:

1.Prioritize spoken and unspoken customer wants and needs.2.Translate these needs into technical characteristics and specifications.3.Build and deliver a quality product or service by focusing everybody toward customer satisfaction.



A system for translating customer requirements into appropriate company requirements at each stage from research and product development to engineering and manufacturing to marketing/sales and distribution

Definition of Quality Function Deployment :

Prerequisites to QFD are ‘Market Research’ and ‘VOC gathering’.

As QFD is the process of building capability to meet or exceed customer demands, understanding the

market, knowing the various customer segments. what each customer segment wants, how important

these benefits are, and how well different providers of products address these benefits are some of the

key precursors to a successful QFD. These are prerequisites because it is impossible to consistently

provide products / services which will attract customers unless you have a very good understanding of

what they want.



Why was QFD developed?

1 Customers are our number one concern. Satisfied customers keep us in business. Therefore, we must have an excellent understanding of their needs.

2 Proactive product development is better than reactive product development. QFD can help a company move toward a more proactive approach.

3 Quality is a responsibility of everyone in the organization. QFD is a team methodology which encourages a broader employee involvement and focus.

4 The QFD methodology helps an organization determine the most effective applications for many engineering and analytical tools such as: Problem Solving, FMEA and Statistical Process Control.

QFD was developed in Japan in the late 1960s by Professors Yoji Akao and Shigeru Mizuno.

The Professors aimed at developing a quality assurance method that would design customer satisfaction into a

product before it was manufactured. Prior quality control methods like Ishikawa were primarily aimed at fixing a

problem during or after manufacturing.

Key Rationale:



ExcitementNeeds

PerformanceNeeds

BasicNeeds

SatisfiedCustomer

DissatisfiedCustomer

Don’t HaveDon’t Do

IncludedDo Well

ExcitementNeeds

PerformanceNeeds

BasicNeeds

SatisfiedCustomer

DissatisfiedCustomer

Don’t HaveDon’t Do

IncludedDo Well

• UNEXPECTED, PLEASANT SURPRISES• 3M CALLS THEM CUSTOMER DELIGHTS

SpokenMeasurableRange of Fulfillment

UnspokenTaken For grantedBasicSpoken If Not Met

QFD focuses on Performance Needs

and unmet Basic Needs

QFD focuses on Performance Needs

and unmet Basic Needs

RECOGNIZE 1) The Impact of Needs on the Customer2) That Customer Needs Change With Time3) The impact of Communication of Customer Wants Throughout

the Organization

Where does QFD fit?



Strategic Issues - Technical Tools - Cultural Change

Six Sigma / TQM

Quality Improvement Tools

QFD- Planning Tool

- Customer Driven

- Proactive

- Cross Functional Teams

• FMEA’s• Fault Tree Analysis• Cause-Effect Diagram• Pareto• Benchmarking

• SPC

• Check Sheets- Monitor

- Continuous Improvement

- Hold the “Gains”

Where does QFD fit?



CUSTOMERDRIVEN

REDUCESIMPLEMENTATION

TIME

Documents rationale for designIs easy to assimilateAdds structure to the informationAdapts to changes (a living document)Provides framework for sensitivity analysis

PROVIDESDOCUMENTATION

PROMOTESTEAMWORK

Creates focus on customer requirementsUses competitive information effectivelyPrioritizes resourcesIdentifies items that can be acted uponStructures resident experience/information

Decreases midstream design changeLimits post introduction problemsAvoids future development redundanciesIdentifies future application opportunitiesSurfaces missing assumptions

Based on concensusCreates communication at interfacesIdentifies actions at interfacesCreates global view out of details

Focus on Customer



Customer Requirements

Company Measures

Part Characteristics (Design)

Manufacturing Process

Production Requirements(Day to Day Operations)

QFD Overview

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

QFD:- systematic way for developing products based on the needs of the customer.




Company Measures




QFD Overview

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Gain Depth/Professional/Career

Scores of candidates/Placements

Course Content

Training

Daily Activity of teaching and practical

(Day to Day Operations)

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to




Company Measures




QFD Overview

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Write properly and clearly

No of pens sold/Feedback

Pen Nib width/Material/Size of barrel

Manufacture to expectation

Daily production – Quality control

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to




Company Measures




QFD Overview

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Travel Cheap/Food/Quick

No of people travelled/Benchmark to others

Pricing of ticket/Food Quantity-Quality

Availability-Service

Review of fares/Food Quality checks

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to

Converted to



When should QFD be used?

1 Customers are complaining or aren’t satisfied with your product or service.

2 Market share has been consistently declining.

3 Extended development time due to excessive redesign, problem solving, or fire fighting.

4 Lack of a true customer focus in your product development process.

5 Poor communications between departments or functions.

(Over-the -wall product development).

6 Lack of efficient and/or effective teamwork.

1.Complex Product Development Initiatives1.Communications Flow Down Difficult 2.Expectations Get Lost

2.New Product Initiatives / Inventions1.Lack of Structure or Logic to the Allocation of

Development Resources.

3.Large Complex or Global Teams1.Lack of Efficient And/or Effective Processes2.Teamwork Issues

4.Extended Product Development Times 1.Excessive Redesign2.Changing Team3.Problem Solving, or Fire Fighting.



BENEFITS of QFD



Change Comparison

Proactive Company

Reactive Company

Time - 14 Months90% Complete

Production Start

Fewer and Earlier Changes

Desi

gn C

hanges

in p

roce

ss



Less Time in Development

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CYCLE TIME REDUCTION

After QFD Cycle time

Before QFD cycle time



Fewer Start-Up Problems

-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Before QFD

After QFD

Production Start

Months

TOYOTA PRODUCTION START UP PROBLEMS



Lower Start-Up Costs

Toyota Production Start-Up Costs

JAN 1977INDEX = 100

OCT 197INDEX = 80

NOV 1982INDEX =62

APRIL 1984INDEX = 39

LOSSPREPARATION(TRAINING)

Production Start



Toyota EuropeanRust Warranty

Fewer FieldProblems

BeforeQFD

AfterQFD

Warranty Cost



SatisfiedCustomers

Focus onCustomer

Satisfaction



Competitive Advantages

• Fewer and Earlier Changes

• Shorter Development Time

• Fewer Start-up Problems

• Lower Start-up Cost

• Warranty Reduction

• Knowledge Transfer

• Customer Satisfaction

The bottom line of QFD is higher quality, lower cost, shorter timing and a substantial marketing advantage.



QFD METHODOLOGY



House of QualityDOOR SYSTEM QFD

PRODUCT PLANNING MATRIX



KANO MODEL(Of Quality/Features)

PERFORMANCE

EXCITEMENT

BASIC

CUSTOMERSATISFACTION

VERY SATISFIED

VERY DISSATISFIED

• EXPECTED• TYPICAL OF ‘INVISIBLE’ PRODUCTS

• ONE-DIMENSIONAL• MOST MARKET RESEARCH

• UNEXPECTED, PLEASANT SURPRISES

• 3M CALLS THEM CUSTOMER DELIGHTS

UNSPOKEN

DEGREE OF AGREEMENT

DID NOTDO AT ALL SPOKEN

FULLY ACHIEVED

TIME

UNSPOKEN



1. Identify the Customer(s)

2. Determine Customer Requirements/Constraints

3. Prioritize each requirement

4. Competitive Benchmarking

5. Translate Customer Requirements into Measurable Engineering specifications

6. Set Target values for each Engineering Specification



Development of QFD

Step 1—List Customer Requirements (WHATs)

Step 2—List Technical Descriptors (HOWs)

Step 3—Develop a Relationship Matrix between WHATs and HOWsStep 4—Develop an Interrelationship Matrix between HOWs

Step 5—Competitive Assessments

Step 6—Develop Prioritized Customer Requirements

Step 7—Develop Prioritized Technical Descriptors



SpecificationSpecification

Customer Voice Table

Customer Voice Table

Affinity Diagram- Analytical Hierarchical Analysis

Affinity Diagram- Analytical Hierarchical Analysis Assess Strength

Pareto Analysis

CTQ ListCTQ List

Convert SPEC to customer need statement

CustomerNeeds

CustomerNeeds

Generate importance weights for customer need statement Place customer

need and importance weight

SPEC on top of QFD



Voice of the customer Translating

for action

The items contained in this list are usually very general, vague and difficult to implement directly - they require further detailed definition.

One such item might be good ride which has a wide variety of meanings to different people.

This is a highly desirable product feature, but is not directly actionable.

WHAT WHAT HOW



WHAT

HOW HOWWHAT

COMPLEXRELATIONSHIPS

UNTANGLINGTHE WEB

RELATIONSHIPS



WHAT

HOW Kinds ofRelationships

STRONG relationship

MEDIUM relationship

WEAK relationship

Customer Wants (CTQs)

‘Process / Product’



WHAT

HOW Kinds ofRelationships

Customer Wants (CTQs)

‘Process / Product’

Low Noise

Low

cle

ara

nce

betw

een

sh

aft

an

d

bod

y

STRONG relationship

MEDIUM relationship

WEAK relationship

CQTs are the most importantMeasurable characteristics of the finished product that are linkedto the customers requirement.



WHAT

HOW

RELATIONSHIPS

HOW MUCH

How much is enough and Goal of QFD?

•Recognize the correlations between the customerrequirements and the product characteristics

•Identify the product characteristics that affectspecific customer requirements

•Recognize the correlations within the engineeringcharacteristics



WHAT

HOW

RELATIONSHIPS

HOW MUCH

Correlation MatrixStrong Positive

Positive

Negative

Strong Negative



WHAT

HOW

HOW MUCH

RELATIONSHIPS

CONFLICT!

1 2 3 4 5

= OUR COMPANY= COMPETITOR #1= COMPETITOR #2

BAD GOOD

54321BAD

GOOD

COMPETITIVE ASSESSMENTS



IMPORTANCE RATINGSVoice of the Engineer

RELATIONSHIPS

HOW

WHAT

HOW MUCH

5

3

2

1

5

2

4

2

33 89 9 13 21 25 21 18

= 1

= 3

= 9



What do I want from this vacation? Answer:

I would like the vacation to be affordable and I would like to avoid repeated questions along the lines of, “Daddy, are we there yet?” I will shorten these to the requirements “Affordable” and “Painless Trip”.

However, when I asked my wife what she wanted from this vacation, she answered, “I don’t want to be stressed.” When I asked my children, they both answered unanimously, “We want to have fun!”

We as humans have a tendency to consider what we want or perceive to be important as actually being the “key requirements”. It would be easy for me to dismiss my kids with “Vacations are always fun” or “Who couldn’t have fun at the beach” – no future action required. Similarly, I could dismiss my wife’s concerns with “Once you get to the beach, all your stresses will melt away.” Whether you are utilizing QFD for vacation planning, the design of a new MP3 player, or a new loan approval process, you must fight this natural tendency to consider your thoughts/desires/ideas as more important than the customer’s.

At the end of this phase, my requirements list boils down to: Affordable, Painless Trip, Worry Free, and Have Fun.



Affordable

Painless

Worry Free

Fun

ImportanceRating

1

2

5

3

1

2

5

3

Cost

< 1

0,0

00 R

s

Leave b

efo

re 6

Am

Use

a P

re-D

ep

C

heck

list

99

Take T

ent

an

d k

ite

Quality Characteristic

99 5

9

5

9

99

Score 9 18 27 55

Rel-Score 8% 16% 24% 50%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Use CheckList

Take Tentand Kite

Leave Before6 Am

Cost <10,000

CTQ



Affordable

Painless

Worry Free

Fun

ImportanceRating

1

2

5

3

1

2

5

3

Quality Characteristic

Score 9 18 27 55

Rel-Score 8% 16% 24% 50%

CTQ

Cost

< 1

0,0

00 R

s

Leave b

efo

re 6

Am

Take T

ent

an

d k

ite

Use

a P

re-D

ep

C

heck

list



Primary

Pri

mar

y

Sec

onda

ry

Secondary

Cus

tom

er R

equi

rem

ents

(WH

AT

s)

Aest

hetic

sP

erf

orm

an

ce

Reasonable Cost

Aerodynamic Look

Nice Finish

Corrosion Resistant

Lightweight

Strength

Durable

Technical Descriptors(HOWs)

MaterialSelection

Ste

el

Alu

min

um

Tita

niu

m

We

ldin

g

Die

Ca

stin

g

San

d C

ast

ing

Fo

rgin

g

ManufacturingProcess

Pow

de

r M

eta

llurg

y

Primary

Pri

mar

y

Sec

onda

ry

Secondary

Strong Positive

Positive

Negative

Strong Negative

+9

+3

-3

-9

Interrelationship between TechnicalDescriptors (correlation matrix)

HOWs vs. HOWs

Relationship betweenCustomer Requirements and

Technical DescriptorsWHATs vs. HOWs

Strong

Medium

Weak

+9

+3

+1

Cus

tom

er R

equi

rem

ents

(WH

AT

s)

Aes

thet

ics Reasonable Cost

Aerodynamic Look

Nice Finish

Corrosion Resistant

Lightweight

Strength

Durable


MaterialSelection

Ste

el

Alu

min

um

Tita

nium

We

ldin

g

Die

Ca

stin

g

San

d C

ast

ing

Fo

rgin

g


Pow

der

Me

tallu

rgy

Per

form

ance

Primary

Pri

mar

y

Sec

onda

ry

Secondary



Strong

Medium

Weak

+9

+3

+1

Cus

tom

er R

equi

rem

ents

(WH

AT

s)

Aes

thet

ics Reasonable Cost

Aerodynamic Look

Nice Finish

Corrosion Resistant

Lightweight

Strength

Durable


MaterialSelection

Ste

el

Alu

min

um

Tita

nium

We

ldin

g

Die

Ca

stin

g

San

d C

ast

ing

Fo

rgin

g


Pow

der

Me

tallu

rgy

Per

form

ance

Primary

Pri

mar

y

Sec

onda

ry

Secondary

Strong Positive

Positive

Negative

Strong Negative

+9

+3

-3

-9


HOWs vs. HOWs



Strong

Medium

Weak

+9

+3

+1

Cus

tom

er R

equi

rem

ents

(WH

AT

s)

Aes

thet

ics Reasonable Cost

Aerodynamic Look

Nice Finish

Corrosion Resistant

Lightweight

Strength

Durable


MaterialSelection

Ste

el

Alu

min

um

Tita

nium

We

ldin

g

Die

Ca

stin

g

San

d C

ast

ing

Fo

rgin

g


Pow

der

Me

tallu

rgy

Per

form

ance

Cus

tom

erC

ompe

titiv

eA

sses

smen

t

Our

Pro

duct

A’s

Pro

duct

B’s

Pro

duct

4554433

2332244

3444333

The technical competitive assessment is often useful in uncovering gaps in engineering judgment.

When a technical descriptor directly relates to a customer requirement, a comparison is made between the customer’s competitive evaluation and the objective measure ranking.

Customer requirements and technical descriptors that are strongly related should also exhibit a strong relationship in their competitive assessments.

If an organization’s technical assessment shows its product to be superior to the competition, then the customer assessment should show a superior assessment.

If the customer disagrees, then a mistake in engineering judgment has occurred and should be corrected.

Primary

Pri

mar

y

Sec

onda

ry

Secondary

TechnicalCompetitiveAssessment

Our Product

A’s Product

B’s Product

Strong Positive

Positive

Negative

Strong Negative

+9

+3

-3

-9


HOWs vs. HOWs



Strong

Medium

Weak

+9

+3

+1

Cus

tom

er R

equi

rem

ents

(WH

AT

s)

Aes

thet

ics Reasonable Cost

Aerodynamic Look

Nice Finish

Corrosion Resistant

Lightweight

Strength

Durable


MaterialSelection

Ste

el

Alu

min

um

Tita

nium

We

ldin

g

Die

Ca

stin

g

San

d C

ast

ing

Fo

rgin

g


Pow

der

Me

tallu

rgy

Per

form

ance

Cus

tom

erC

ompe

titiv

eA

sses

smen

t

Our

Pro

duct

A’s

Pro

duct

B’s

Pro

duct

4554433

2332244

3444333

0 0 5 0 5 0 0 05 0 0 4 0 0 0 0

0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0



The technical competitive assessment is often useful in uncovering gaps in engineering judgment. When a technical descriptor directly relates to a customer requirement, a comparison is made between the customer’s competitive evaluation and the objective measure ranking.

Develop Prioritized Customer RequirementsThe prioritized customer requirements make up a block of columns corresponding to each customer requirement in the house of quality on the right side of the customer competitive assessment as shown in Figure. These prioritized customer requirements contain columns for importance to customer, target value, scale-up factor, sales point, and an absolute weight.

Absolute Weight and Percent

Pri

orit

ized

Cus

tom

erR

equi

rem

ents

Prioritized TechnicalDescriptors

Primary

Pri

mar

y

Sec

onda

ry

Secondary

Degree of Technical Difficulty

Relative Weight and Percent

Target Value

TechnicalCompetitiveAssessment

Our Product

A’s Product

B’s Product

Strong Positive

Positive

Negative

Strong Negative

+9

+3

-3

-9


HOWs vs. HOWs

1 6 9 4 7 3 6 95 5 5 4 5 0 0 0



Strong

Medium

Weak

+9

+3

+1

Cus

tom

er R

equi

rem

ents

(WH

AT

s)

Aes

thet

ics Reasonable Cost

Aerodynamic Look

Nice Finish

Corrosion Resistant

Lightweight

Strength

Durable


MaterialSelection

Ste

el

Alu

min

um

Tita

nium

We

ldin

g

Die

Ca

stin

g

San

d C

ast

ing

Fo

rgin

g


Pow

der

Me

tallu

rgy

Per

form

ance

Cus

tom

erC

ompe

titiv

eA

sses

smen

t

Our

Pro

duct

A’s

Pro

duct

B’s

Pro

duct

Impo

rtan

ce to

Cus

tom

er

Tar

get V

alue

Sca

le-u

p F

acto

r

Sal

es P

oint

Abs

olut

e W

eigh

t and

Per

cent

4554433

2332244

3444333

0 0 5 0 5 0 0 05 0 0 4 0 0 0 0

0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0

8552753

4444433

1.3

111

1.3

11

1.5

1.5

1

1211

168521853

168 227 193 162 92 122 132 125

251 401 303 213 167 203 165 171

Organizational Difficulty



The Four Phases of QFDThe Four Phases of QFD

The Next stage

The above process is then repeated in a slightly simplified way for the next three project phases.

The main difference with the subsequent phases however, is that in

Phase 2 the process becomes a translation of the voice of the engineer in to the voice of the part design specifications.

phase 3, the part design specifications get translated into the voice of manufacturing planning.

phase 4, the voice of manufacturing is translated into the voice of production planning.



HOW

HOW

WHAT

WHAT

HOW MUCH

HOW MUCH

RELATIONSHIPS

RELATIONSHIPS



Deploying the “Voice of the Customer”

PHASE 1 PHASE 11 PHASE 111 PHASE IV

PRODUCT DESIGN MANUFACTURING PROCESS PRODUCTION

PLANNING DEPLOYMENT PLANNING PLANNING

COMPANYMEASURES

NEW NEW NEW

PARTCHARACTERISTICS

KEY PROCESSOPERATIONS

PRODUCTIONREQUIREMENTS



Deploying the “Voice of the Customer”

PHASE 1 PHASE 11 PHASE 111 PHASE IV

PRODUCT DESIGN MANUFACTURING PROCESS PRODUCTION

PLANNING DEPLOYMENT PLANNING PLANNING

DOOR CLOSEEASILY

ETC

ETC

CLOSINGEFFORT @7 FT LBS

COMP LOADDEFL RPM

EXTRUDER

WEATHER STRIP



Design Requirements

Cus

tom

erR

equi

rem

ents

Production Requirements

Key

Pro

cess

Ope

ratio

ns

PHASE IPRODUCT PLANNING

(Begins with Customer Requirements)

PHASE IVPRODUCTION PLANNING

(Ends with Prototype and Production Launch)

PHASE IIIPROCESS PLANNING

PHASE IIPART DEVELOPMENT

Part Quality Characteristics

Des

ign

Req

uire

men

ts

Key Process Operations

Part

Qua

lity

Cha

ract

eris

tics



• Provide the time

• Demonstrate your commitment

• Push for progress, but not too hard

• Be realistic

• Review the charts - make sure you understand

• Set priorities if needed

• Help the team through the rough spots

• Keep asking the right questions

• Spans a major portion of the product development process

• Identify key milestones

• Major projects will require 50-60 hours of meetings

• Meetings are used to coordinate activities and update charts

• Most of the work happens outside the meetings

Management Support of the Team

Timing



Common Pitfalls

• Blank rowsUnfulfilled customer wants

• Blank columnsUnnecessary requirementsIncomplete customer wants

• Rows or columns with only weak relationships

Banking a lot on “maybe’s”

• Unmeasurable “HOWs”Difficult to do what can’t be measured

• Too many relationshipsMore than 50% relationships make it hard

to prioritise

• Opportunities to excel

• Negative correlationsTry to eliminateTrade off if needed

• Conflicting competitive assessments

• QFD on everything

• Inadequate priorities

• Lack of teamworkWrong participantsTurf issuesLack of team skillsLack of support

• Too much “chart focus”

• Handling trade-offs

• Too much internal focus

• “Stuck on tradition”

• “Hurry up and get done”

• Failure to integrate QFD

What to look for



• How was the voice of the customer determined?

• How were the design requirements (etc) determined? Challenge the usual in-house standards.

• How do we compare to our competition?

• What opportunities can we identify to gain a competitive edge?

• What further information do we need? How can we get it?

• How can we proceed with what we have?

• What trade-off decisions are needed?

• What can I do to help?

• The process may look simple, but requires effort.

• Many of the entries look obvious - after they are written down.

• If there aren’t some “tough spots” the first time, it probably isn’t being done right!

• Focus on the end-user customer.

• Charts are not the objective.

• Charts are the means of achieving the objective.

• Find reasons to succeed, not excuses for failure.

Some “Right Questions” Points to Remember



ANALYZING THE QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD) MATRIX

QFD is an excellent design analysis and synthesis mechanism. It provides a framework for analyzing a functional need or deficiency leading to the synthesis of customer-focused system requirements.



Identification of potential inconsistencies within a QFD matrix and the implication of these inconsistencies on system requirements

Identification of potential and strategic opportunities implied within a QFD matrix and the nature of these opportunities and their exploitation by a strategic product planning team

Representation of above knowledge and other heuristics within an embedded expert system for increasingly mature responsiveness of the approach and its tailoring to a domain/business area.



Ignored Customer Requirements

An ignored customer requirement is identified by an empty row in the QFD matrix, as shown in the figure. Appropriate design parameters to address the customer requirement in question may not have been identified. Since customer requirements drive subsequent design and development activities, it is important to address this inconsistency early in the process. Furthermore, while customer requirement priorities are established from customer input, relationships between requirements and any precedence's or dependencies should also play a role. ‘WHAT’s which drive other customer requirements should be ranked highest



Redundant Design Parameters

A redundant or unnecessary design parameter is indicated by an unfilled column in the QFD matrix, as shown in figure . Upon investigation, it may be necessary to remove this design requirement. However, it is critical thatdesign requirements be identified by a cross-functional team to ensure completeness while realizing that designparameters are driven by customer requirements.



Weak Correlation for Significant Customer Requirements:

Few additional inconsistencies are as unambiguous as the first two cases. Accordingly, judgement of the product planning team and historical experience play a role in the delineation of inconsistencies. The representation of this inconsistency, along with others, in the expert system implementation allows for an adjustment of the minimum threshold (or tailoring of the tolerance of a design team). As shown in figure , an importantcustomer requirement, may (at best) have weak correlation with a single design parameter. This may require areassessment of the implementation approach or the fundamental technology solution to satisfy the functional need or deficiency. Design parameters which sufficiently respond to customer requirements and associated priorities must be identified.



Percentage Fill of Matrix

While not an inconsistency, an over-populated QFD matrix, may inhibit meaningful translation of customer requirements into focused design requirements. An over-populated QFD matrix may imply that customer requirements are too broadly defined; and need to be further refined.



Conflicting Customer and TechnicalBenchmarking

Consider the customer requirement ‘Like face-to-face’, with ‘high’ correlation with parameters ‘4’ and ‘5’. Customer benchmarking indicates System 1 is ‘excellent’ while Systems 2 and 3 rate as ‘satisfied’ by thecustomers. However, the technical assessment for parameters ‘4’ and ‘5’ indicates that System 1 ranks lowest for‘4’ and all systems are at par for ‘5’. This contradiction may suggest a dichotomy between customer articulation and the product team’s understanding of requirements. Accordingly, inconsistency in the correlation between customer and design requirements is implied and must be sufficiently addressed..



Difference in Perceived Importance and Satisfaction:

A difference in perceived customer importance and associated satisfaction is indicated if a customer is extremely dissatisfied with a requirement or product feature/ functionality for which the priority was articulated as being very low.



Identification of StrategicOpportunities:

During conceptual design, parameter target setting and concept selection provide a significant opportunity to exploit strategic market opportunities for greater economic gain. Analysis of information synthesized within a QFD matrix can provide insight to identify these opportunities. This is particularly true if the product planning team approaches customer requirements from a “functional” point of view, rather than focusing on improving any particular implementation of a product feature or functionality. An example is depicted in the figure, where the customer has expressed severe dissatisfaction with regard to an important requirement. Apart from implying that there are major gains to be exploited by any of the competitors in this area, this could also indicate a lack of technology in the present field to make the necessary improvement, and becomes a relevant research focus area.



Identification of StrategicOpportunities:

During conceptual design, parameter target setting and concept selection provide a significant opportunity to exploit strategic market opportunities for greater economic gain. Analysis of information synthesized within a QFD matrix can provide insight to identify these opportunities. This is particularly true if the product planning team approaches customer requirements from a “functional” point of view, rather than focusing on improving any particular implementation of a product feature or functionality. An example is depicted in Figure 10, where the customer has expressed severe dissatisfaction with regard to an important requirement. Apart from implying that there are major gains to be exploited by any of the competitors in this area, this could also indicate a lack of technology in the present field to make the necessary improvement, and becomes a relevant research focus area.



Customer Request:

There is too much damage to bumpers in low-speed collisions. Customer wants a better bumper. Small dent soon develops into damage.

An Automobile Bumper



Step 1: Identify Customer(s)

– Repair Department

– Automobile Owner

– Manufacturing Plant

– Sales Force




Step 2: Determine Customer Requirements/Constraints

– I want something that looks nice (basic)

– It must hold my license plate (performance)

– I want it strong enough not to dent (excitement)

– It must protect my tail-lights and head-lights (performance)

– I don’t want to pay too much (basic)




Step 3: Prioritize Customer Requirements




Put prioritized Customer Requirements into a House of Quality Chart




Step 4: Competition Benchmarking– Identify Competitors

– Test and Analyze Competitor Products

– Reverse Engineer Competitor Products

– Rate Competitor Products against customer requirements/constraints




Put competitive benchmarking information into

House of Quality Chart




Steps 5 and 6: Translate Customer Requirements into Measurable Engineering Specifications and define target values– Specify how license plate will be held

– Specify how to resist dents through material yield strength, young's modulus, etc.

– Specify with a dollar amount the term ‘inexpensive’



Develop a sample QFD house of Quality For a simple process.

Quality Function Deployment

Documents

Transcript of Quality Function Deployment