Kano Model

Erica Lynn Farmer

Diana Barón
CMQ/OE, CSSBB, MBB
iems.ucf.edu/research/ASQ/presentations/kano.ppt
Content
 Origins
 Purpose
 Process Model
 Key Elements
 Methodology
 Application
 Examples
Objective
 Identify voice of customer and mind of
customer using Kano Model to
understand what is valuable for the
customer
Origins of the Kano Model

 Noriaki Kano
 Professor at Tokyo Rika University
 International Consultant
 Received individual Demming Prize in 1997
Origins of the Kano Model
 Developed in the 70´s for the camera company Konica and
published in1984
 Developed foundation for an approach on “Attractive Quality
Creation” commonly referred to as the “Kano Model”
 Challenged traditional Customer Satisfaction Models that More
is better, i.e. the more you perform on each service attribute the
more satisfied the customers will be.
 Proposed new Customer Satisfaction model (Kano Model)
 Performance on product and service attributes is not equal in the
eyes of the customers
 Performance on certain categories attributes produces higher levels
of satisfaction than others.
When to use the Kano Model
 Project Selection
 Lean Six Sigma
 Design for Six Sigma

 New Product Development

 New Service Development
 Determine Market Strategies
 To better recognize what adds value
Key Elements
 Identify the Voice of the Customer-VOC and Mind of the
Customer-MOC
conscious-subconscious
 Translate Voice of the Customer into Critical to Quality
Characteristics (CTQs)
 Rank the CTQs into three categories:
 Dissatisfier - Must be’s – Cost of Entry
 Satisfier – More is better – Competitive
 Delighter – Latent Need – Differentiator
 Evaluate Current Performance
Overview
http://www.kanomodel.com/about-the-kano-model/
 Satisfacción

Eje Y – Nivel de satisfacción

del cliente.

La característica
funciona correctamente
en el producto

La característica
no funciona
correctamente en Eje X – Nivel Funcionalidad
el producto del producto

Insatisfacción
Calidad básica (must be,
expected):
•El cliente espera este tipo de
atributos en un producto
específico.
•Se mide por medio de quejas,
garantías, y reportes de falla. Sábanas
•Este tipo de atributos son obvios limpias en
en un producto un hotel.

El cumplimiento de este tipo de

Un atributos sólo llevará al cliente a un
parqueadero estado de “no-insatisfecho” . Si por el
sin espacios contrario no se cumple con estos
libres atributos, el cliente llegará a un estado
de insatisfacción absoluta.
Calidad de desempeño (one
dimensional, satisfiers,
desired):
•La satisfacción aumenta
proporcionalmente al rendimiento Más leche por
y calidad del producto. el mismo
•Los clientes demandan este tipo precio
de atributos.

Demoras en la Entre más se sobrepasen las

atención de un expectativas del cliente y se cumplan
banco con sus demandas, más feliz será un
cliente y más le comprará a la
empresa.
Calidad atractiva (attractive, Una copa de
delighter, excited): vino por parte
•Son atributos que un cliente no del restaurante
demanda ni espera de un producto.
•Causan una respuesta alta con
relación a la satisfacción del cliente.
•Si estos atributos no se
encuentran no hay insatisfacción.

No recibir Importancia
mantenimiento •Incrementa la satisfacción del
gratis en la clientes.
batería de un •Incrementan las ventas.
carro •Permite desarrollas nuevos
productos
Características a través del
tiempo:
•Los atributos atractivos se
convierten en atributos de
desempeño y luego pasan a ser
atributos básicos.
Kano Model Process

Analyze
Analyze&& Plot
Plot&&
Research
Research Strategize
Strategize
Brainstorm
Brainstorm Diagram
Diagram

• Research available • Analyze results from • Develop Customer • Determine Project

data sources data collection Requirement Matrix selection
• Determine data • Brainstorm list of • Record • Product Development
collection strategy features and Questionnaire results • Service Development
• Design data collection functionality in Matrix and • Identify Marketing
instruments • Develop Functional Summarize Strategy
• Collect and and Dysfunctional • Plot results on Kano
summarize data Questionnaire Model
• Distribute
Questionnaire
1. Research: information sources
 Must Be’s - focus groups, lawsuits and
regulations, buzz on Internet
 Satisfiers - competitive analysis, interviews,
surveys, search logs, usability testing, customer
forums
 Delighters - field research, marketing/branding
vision, industrial design, packaging, call center
data, site logs
Analyze & Brainstorm
 Analyze data from available sources
 Brainstorm list of features and functionality
 Determine type of requirements:
 Output Requirements
 Service Requirements
 Kano Model Requirements Survey
 User Survey
 “Functional form” vs. “Dysfunctional Form” (the exactly the same wording but
one is positive and one negative)
 “How would you feel if the product had feature X?”
 “How would you feel if the product didn’t have feature X?”
 Kano Questionnaire Answers:
 I like it.
 I expect it.
 I’m neutral.
 I can tolerate it.
 I dislike it.
Example: Requirements Questionnaire

way

way
Example: Requirements Survey
 Functional vs. Dysfunctional Comparison
*Para cada par de preguntas de cada requerimiento de cada persona
use esta tabla de manera que identifique que tipo de requisito es ese para esa persona
 Evaluation Customer Requirements
Totalice para cada requerimiento cuantas personas lo clasificaron como A, E, O etc.
El requerimiento tendrá la clasificación que la mayoría de personas le dieron

C.R. A E O R Q I Total Grade

1 3 6 14 23 O
2 5 6 11 1 23 O
3 6 1 4 1 11 23 I
4 13 10 23 E
5 11 1 2 9 23 A
Customer Requirement is:
C.R.: Customer Requirement
A: Attractive R: Reverse Q: Questionable Result
E: Expected O: One Dimensional I: Indifferent
Plot & Diagram

*El requerimiento simplemente se dibuja como una estrella cerca de la línea o curva que representa
su categoría ( no es una ubicación exacta)
Axis Corrected h ttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/0050370303002.png
 Alternative Kano evaluation table with types of reversals
shown

Berger, Charles, et al. "Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality." Center for Quality Management Journal 2.4 (1993): p34.
 Kano diagram with reversal items

Berger, Charles, et al. "Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality." Center for Quality Management Journal 2.4 (1993): p36.
Kano Model & Quality function
deployment
Results of
Kano
model
Strategize
 Project Selection
 Lean Six Sigma
 Design for Six Sigma
 Organizational Strategy
 Dissatisfier – Must be’s – Cost of Entry
 Satisfier – More is better – Competitive
 Delighter – Latent Need – Differentiator
Application
 Break into Teams
 Select Team Leader
 Select Scribe
 Select Presenter
 Scenario – You work for a Hotel chain and your company is trying to
identify Voice of the Customer information to improve Hotel
performance.
 Instructions:
 Brainstorm important characteristics you expect when staying at a Hotel
 Identify whether they are a Must be, Expected or a Delighter from a
Business Client perspective and from a vacationer perspective
 Add in what the current performance is for the Hotel
 Example Results
The same characteristic may be classified differently by different types of customers
Getting deeper

Berger, C., Blauth, R., Boger, D., Bolster, C., Burchill, G., DuMouchel, W., ... &
Walden, D. (1993). Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined
quality. Center for Quality Management Journal, 2(4), 3-36.*See file in
folder

http://books.google.com.co/books?
id=XXuh9yuQ1OwC&pg=PA8&dq=kano+model&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QIcMUb
_yOZDU9ASH5oCwDg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=kano
%20model&f=false

Goodpasture, J. C. (2003). Quantitative methods in project management.

Boca Raton, Fla: J. Ross Pub.

2
8
References
 Walder, D., (1993). Kano’s model for understanding customer-
defined quality. Center For Quality of Management Journal, 39, 65 –
69.
 Jacobs, R., (1997). Evaluating customer satisfaction with media
products and services. European Media Management Journal, 32,
11 – 18.
 Ungvari, S., (1999). Adding the third dimension to auqlity. Triz
Journal, 40, 31 – 35.
 Sauerwein, E., Bailom, F., Matzler, K., & Hinterhuber, H. (1996).
The kano model: How to delight your customers. International
Working Seminar on Production Economics, 19, 313 - 327
 Zultner, R.E. & Mazur, G. H. ( 2006). The Kano Model: Recent
Developments. The eighteenth symposium on Quality Function
Deployment.