P. Koomsap, Balasooriya Rallage Yasara Dharmerathne, Duangthida Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya
{"title":"检查常见错误,以便成功地利用Kano模型并提出改进建议","authors":"P. Koomsap, Balasooriya Rallage Yasara Dharmerathne, Duangthida Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya","doi":"10.1080/09544828.2023.2245533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Kano model has been recognised for almost forty years as an effective tool for revealing implicit customer ideas that are often unclear and difficult to describe by relating the fulfilment of offering quality attributes to customer satisfaction. So has the Kano methodology for realising the model in practice in product design and development, strategic thinking, business planning, etc. Despite their success, it has long been reported that the Kano classification of customer requirements needs to reflect the level of customer satisfaction accurately. Researchers have focused on increasing the model’s accuracy throughout the years, especially by introducing much more quantitative approaches to the Kano categorisation. Still, the traditional one remains well-accepted in practice as it is the most straightforward logical procedure that non-experts can follow. Rather than introducing complexity, this research focuses on improving the traditional Kano model without altering its procedure by creating awareness of common mistakes when implementing the model and suggesting incorporating a couple of steps to avoid them. It is crucial to understand the selection of the five answer choices and their compatibility with the Kano evaluation table. Few case studies are available to illustrate how sensitive to common mistakes the outcomes are.","PeriodicalId":50207,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Design","volume":"34 1","pages":"591 - 615"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examination of common mistakes for successful leveraging the Kano model and proposal for enhancement\",\"authors\":\"P. Koomsap, Balasooriya Rallage Yasara Dharmerathne, Duangthida Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09544828.2023.2245533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Kano model has been recognised for almost forty years as an effective tool for revealing implicit customer ideas that are often unclear and difficult to describe by relating the fulfilment of offering quality attributes to customer satisfaction. So has the Kano methodology for realising the model in practice in product design and development, strategic thinking, business planning, etc. Despite their success, it has long been reported that the Kano classification of customer requirements needs to reflect the level of customer satisfaction accurately. Researchers have focused on increasing the model’s accuracy throughout the years, especially by introducing much more quantitative approaches to the Kano categorisation. Still, the traditional one remains well-accepted in practice as it is the most straightforward logical procedure that non-experts can follow. Rather than introducing complexity, this research focuses on improving the traditional Kano model without altering its procedure by creating awareness of common mistakes when implementing the model and suggesting incorporating a couple of steps to avoid them. It is crucial to understand the selection of the five answer choices and their compatibility with the Kano evaluation table. Few case studies are available to illustrate how sensitive to common mistakes the outcomes are.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Engineering Design\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"591 - 615\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Engineering Design\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2023.2245533\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Design","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2023.2245533","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Examination of common mistakes for successful leveraging the Kano model and proposal for enhancement
The Kano model has been recognised for almost forty years as an effective tool for revealing implicit customer ideas that are often unclear and difficult to describe by relating the fulfilment of offering quality attributes to customer satisfaction. So has the Kano methodology for realising the model in practice in product design and development, strategic thinking, business planning, etc. Despite their success, it has long been reported that the Kano classification of customer requirements needs to reflect the level of customer satisfaction accurately. Researchers have focused on increasing the model’s accuracy throughout the years, especially by introducing much more quantitative approaches to the Kano categorisation. Still, the traditional one remains well-accepted in practice as it is the most straightforward logical procedure that non-experts can follow. Rather than introducing complexity, this research focuses on improving the traditional Kano model without altering its procedure by creating awareness of common mistakes when implementing the model and suggesting incorporating a couple of steps to avoid them. It is crucial to understand the selection of the five answer choices and their compatibility with the Kano evaluation table. Few case studies are available to illustrate how sensitive to common mistakes the outcomes are.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Engineering Design is a leading international publication that provides an essential forum for dialogue on important issues across all disciplines and aspects of the design of engineered products and systems. The Journal publishes pioneering, contemporary, best industrial practice as well as authoritative research, studies and review papers on the underlying principles of design, its management, practice, techniques and methodologies, rather than specific domain applications.
We welcome papers that examine the following topics:
Engineering design aesthetics, style and form-
Big data analytics in engineering design-
Collaborative design in engineering-
Engineering concept design-
Creativity and innovation in engineering-
Engineering design architectures-
Design costing in engineering
Design education and pedagogy in engineering-
Engineering design for X, e.g. manufacturability, assembly, environment, sustainability-
Engineering design management-
Design risk and uncertainty in engineering-
Engineering design theory and methodology-
Designing product platforms, modularity and reuse in engineering-
Emotive design, e.g. Kansei engineering-
Ergonomics, styling and the design process-
Evolutionary design activity in engineering (product improvement & refinement)-
Global and distributed engineering design-
Inclusive design and assistive engineering technology-
Engineering industrial design and total design-
Integrated engineering design development-
Knowledge and information management in engineering-
Engineering maintainability, sustainability, safety and standards-
Multi, inter and trans disciplinary engineering design-
New engineering product design and development-
Engineering product introduction process[...]