Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Kano Model CN : Customers' Need FR : Functional Requirement (Study…
Kano Model
CN : Customers' Need
FR : Functional Requirement
Study Background
Main Related Issue
Requirement Prioritization
Requirement Classification
Customer Preference
Lacking Equipped
(我不懂 明明有R)
Quantitative Assessment
Assistance of decision making
on engineering design
Focus only on customers' perspectives
while producers' are implicit
(好啦這點我承認)
Feasbility
Development/Production Cost
Proposal
Comparison of
original Kano/
Analytical Kano(A-Kano in brief)
Differences of
A-Kano
Kano Indices
Quantitative Measurement
Kano Classifier
Criteria Setting to classify CN
based on Kano Indices
Configuration Index
Decision Factor of selecting FR
Kano Evaluator
Surplus-based performance indicator
leveraging customers' satisfaction /producers' capacity
Distinguish between CN/FR
Customer perceives CN rather than FR
Well understanding CN, change to be explicit and objective
+consideration of economic scale +實現在 FR
When it comes to a combination of product attributes
->Customer Perception can be explicitly measured as overall customer satisfaction
When it comes to desired product attributes,
->The legacy producer capacity has to be assessed
Kano Indices
Factors
X: respond of dysfunctional question
=negative result，放X軸
Y : respond of functional question
=positive，放Y軸
2-dimension Diagram
我個人覺得這樣的設計等於告訴世人
"我只care 原始Kano Model Diagram的的第一象限"
ri :importance index
denote the overall importance
of fi to si
ri=|ri向量|=根號(xi平方+yi平方)
o<=ri<=根號2
ri=根號2 : one-dimension
0<ri<根號2 : 可能是must-be或attractive
alpha i : satisfaction index
determine the relative level of xi & yi
Scale
output=X+Y,且設計between 0~1
超出1 : questionable
低於0 : reverse 或 questionable
以上皆不考慮(Q不考慮, R就設計相反就好)
Asymmetric Design : Positive>Negative
因考慮到實際作答受試者tendancy易向positive傾
Kano Classifiers
有3個threshold做基準
r0
2.alpha L
3.alpha H
劃分2-dimension diagram成4區域
判斷 : ri___r0?
ri<=ro
Indifferent FR
如果ri<=r0(半徑比r0小 畫
出來的扇形/半圓比r0畫出來的還要內圈)
就不重要，稱indifferent FR，實務上表不用管他
*不是真的指此範圍內都是indifferent factor，
但就producer資源有限角度來看，不重要這樣
ri>r0
判斷 : alpha i的範圍?
0<alpha i< alpha L
Must-be FR
alpha H>alpha i<拍/2
Attractive FR
alpha L < alpha i < alpha H
One-dimension FR
Sesitivity Analysis
Configuration Index
a FR with a higher configuration index pi
is more likely to be included
in product configuration
ri : 成正比
FR with a great influence on customers' satisfaction/dissatisfaction
are more likely to be included in product configuration
alpha i : 成反比
表示隨著alpha i增加
(must be
->過渡到one-dimension
->過渡到attractive)
priorities就越來越降低
Kano Evaluator
Using shared surplus(以下二者比值)
to estimate the value of planned product
1.consumer surplus
2.producer surplus
E=U/C
U : overall consumers' satisfication
U : Σzipi
summation of configuration indices
zi是個binary variable
zi=1, when f1 is incluede in product configuration
zi=0, if not
C : overall cycle time index
Every product configured from available attribute level is justified based on its expected cycle time
大概有點像IE化那樣
所以接下來會假設所以時間服從Normal Distribution
將P(expected price to be)考慮進去
C服從Normal Distribution
Application on
decision making:
Elicitation
Analysis
Fulfillment of CNs
Identification of FR
Turn CNs into FR's manifest
用F{fi| i=1,2,....I}進行以下分析
Division of market segments
conduct market investigations
for accurate differentiation
Conjoint Analysis
聯合分析
Perceptual Mapping
知覺圖
Data Mining
4,Computation of
Kano Indices
2-dimension diagram
Kano Survey
5.Product Configuration Design
and Evaluation
Kano Classifiers
r0
alpha L
alpha H
Sensitivity Analysis
DOE
#
Configuration Index
Genetic Algorithms(GAs)
Kano Evaluator
#
#
E=U/C
追求Optimized E
#
