House of Quality Example

• An interactive HOQ example – by Professor Robert Hunt, C/-Macquarie University

Graduate School of ManagementMacquarie UniversityNew South Wales Australia

• HOQ template

Easy to put on

Com fortable when hanging

F its over d ifferent clothes

Accessib le gear loops

Does not restrict m ovem ent

Lightw eight

Safe

A ttractive

TECHNICAL PR IO RITIES

PER CENTAG E O F TO TAL

54 81.2 63 23.4 70.2 191.6 98.6 30

9 13 10 4 12 31 16 5

O ur product

Com petitor A 's product

Com petitor B 's product

DESIG N TARG ETS

Y

Y

Y

174g

193g

157g

250

321

198

5

3

6

4

5

4

4m m

8m m

3m m

1

4

1

4

5

3

Y 160g 250 8 6 4m m 2 4

Perform ancem easures

S ize ofrange

Technicaldeta ils

D IRECTIO N O F IM PRO VEM EN T

CUSTO M ERREQ UIREM ENTS

TECHNICALREQ UIREM ENTS

2

5

1

3

5

3

5

2

+

-

+ +-

--Key to roof / corre lation

m atrix sym bols+ Positive / Supporting- Negative / Tradeoff

S trong interre lationship

M edium interre ltionship

W eak interre lationship

Key to in terre lationship m atrix sym bols

PLANNING M ATRIX

3

1

2

3

1

2

4

5

3

4

2

5

1.2

1.2

1.6

1.1

1.0

1.4

2.6

1.2

11.2

4

3

3

4

2

4

4

2

3

2

2

1

5

3

5

5

3

3

4

3

1.2

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.2

1.2

1.0

1.1

1.0

1.4 8.4

3.0

3.0

6.0

2.6

7

22

3

8

29

8

16

7

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) 1141-1151

• 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

Engineeringcharacteristics

Productioncharacteristics

Processcharacteristics

Partcharacteristics

Customer requirements

Product Planning

Part Design

Process Planning

ProductionPlanning

Targets