QFD: House of Quality

Project:
Revision:
Date:

Correlations
Positive +
Negative −
No Correlation

Relationships
Strong ●
Moderate ○
Weak ▽
Direction of Improvement
Maximize ▲
Target ◇
−
Minimize ▼
+
Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Direction of Improvement ▲ ▼ ◇ Customer Competitive Assesment
Requirements
Functional

Func. Requirement 1

Func. Requirement 2

Func. Requirement 3

Competitor #1: Product Name

Competitor #2: Product Name

Competitor #3: Product Name

Competitor #4: Product Name

Maximum Relationship
Customer Importance
Relative Weight

Customer
Weight Chart

Our Product
Requirements
(Explicit and
Row #

Row #
Implicit)
0 1 2 3 4 5

1 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 57% 8 9 Cust. Requirement 1 ● 3 3 4 1 5 1

2 ||||||| 14% 2 9 Cust. Requirement 2 ○ ● 5 4 1 2 4 2

3 |||||||||||||| 29% 4 3 Cust. Requirement 3 ○ ▽ 1 2 4 0 2 3

4 3 Cust. Requirement 4 ○ 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

8 8

9 9

10 10

11 11

12 12

13 13

14 Our Product 14
Competitor #1
15 Competitor #2 15
Competitor #3
Competitor #4
16 16
Target for Functional

Target for Functional

Target for Functional

Requirement #1

Requirement #2

Requirement #3

Target

Max Relationship 9 3 9
Technical Importance Rating 600 42.857 157.14
Relative Weight 75% 5% 20%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Weight Chart
|||||||||
||

Our Product
Competitor #1:Small Bolt
Competitor #2: Large bolt
Competitor #3: Upper part
Technical Competitive Assesment
1 3 4 2
2 3 5 1
3 0 4 5
4 1 5 4

Competitor #4: Lower part 5 5 2 1

5

Our Product
4

Competitor #1
3

Competitor #2
Competitor #3
2

Competitor #4
1
0

Column # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16