Page 261 - Design for Six Sigma a Roadmap for Product Development

Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 231

Importance to the Customer

Direction of Improvement
Maximize 1.0 Know My Business and Offers Save Money/Enhance Probability Know Our Products and Processes
Target 0.0 Meet Time Expectations Do it Right the First Time
Minimize –1.0 Consultative Talk to One Person Answer Questions Courteous Adequate Follow-Up

1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Direction of Improvement 1
Available Products 1 2.0
Professional Staff 2 3.0
Flexible Processes 3 4.0
Knowledgeable Staff 4 4.0
Easy-to-Use Products 5 4.0
Speedy Processes 6 5.0
Cost-Effective Products 7 5.0
Accuracy 8 5.0
9
Figure 7.6 The WHATs, the HOWs, and the relationship matrix.

This was highlighted as the weakest WHAT but not weak enough to
warrant the analysis above. However, the team is encouraged to
strengthen this situation by a CTS with a strong relationship.

Weak HOWs. The team needs to look for blank or weak HOWs (in
which all entries are inverted deltas). This situation occurs when CTSs
are included that don’t really reflect the customer attributes being
addressed by the QFD. The black belt (BB) and the BB team may con-
sider eliminating the CTSs from further deployment if it does not
relate basic quality or performance attributes in the Kano model. The
theme of DFSS is to be customer-driven and work on the right items;
otherwise, we are creating a design “hidden factory.”
In our example, the CTS “adequate follow-up” is weak (rated 13 on the
importance rating scale). However, the WHAT “easy-to-use products”
has no strong relationship with any CTSs, and eliminating “adequate
follow-up” may weaken the delivery of this WHAT even further.