here - ERIM - Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A validation Study of House of Quality key performance indicators service quality may be complex whereas it can be simple and unidimensional in others (Babakus and Boller 1992). Tan and Pawitra (2001) discus two other areas of improvement. The SERVQUAL model assumes a linear relationship between customer satisfaction and service performance attributes. Low customer satisfaction therefore would be a result of low attribute performance. This is not necessarily true; in case of satiation or when the attribute is taken for granted, paying more attention to a specific attribute will not always result in higher customer satisfaction. On the other hand, unexpected or delightful attributes can have a great impact on customer’s satisfaction. The third limitation according to Tan and Pawitra (2001) is that although the SERVQUAL model is a good method to identify service gaps, it is not able to indicate how the gaps can be closed or how to translate the gaps into innovation. Tan and Pawitra (2001) therefore integrated the SERVQUAL model (Parasuraman et al 1988) and the Kano model (Kano et al, 1984) into Quality function Deployment (Akao 1990) in order to further service excellence. The customer satisfaction evaluations of different service attributes are used as input for improvement and innovation. The Kano model will be discussed in section 2.5.2. The concept of Quality Function Deployment will be presented in section 2.5. The above described approach by Tan and Pawitra (2001) will be used as a foundation for this research. Member satisfaction of different online union related attributes will be measured and integrated into the House of Quality to guide improvement and innovation of the online union. 2.5 Quality Function Deployment The original term Quality Function Deployment is derived from six Chinese characters: “hin shitsu ki no ten kai”, this can be translated into “quality (hin shitsu) function (kino) deployment (ten kai)’. Together the Japanese characters mean “how do we understand the quality that our customers expect and make it happen in a dynamic way” (Cohen, 1995). The concept of Quality Function Deployment (QFD) was originated in the early 1970’s as a means to motivate engineers to consider quality early in the design process. Akao (1990) described the method of QFD as “a method for developing a design quality aimed at satisfying the customer and then translating the customer’s demand into design targets and major quality assurance points to be used throughout the production phase”. In line with Akao’s definition, the definition of Hauser and 34
A validation Study of House of Quality key performance indicators Clausing (1988) is more concerned with teamwork and communications; “quality function deployment focuses and coordinates skills within an organization, first to design, then to manufacture and market goods that customers want to purchase and will continue to purchase”. Although QFD is originally developed for productdevelopment, it has been used in the service industry for quite a while. QFD is a good way to get a clear identification of the detailed steps which are necessary to perform a service. In case of the online labour union we can identify the members as keystone customers. They have most influence in determining the succes or failure of this new concept. Other groups in this case are the Unie itself and third parties like employer organisations and the government. 2.5.1 The Four-Phase Model Within the theory of QFD there are two dominant models. The first model is the Four-Phase model which is also known as the Clausing model or the American Supplier Institute (ASI) model. Second model is Akao’s Matrix of Matrices Model. While the Four-Phase model provides a blueprint for product/ service development and therefore covers basic product/ service development steps, the Matrix of Matrices model is also designed for Total Quality Management (TQM). The Four-Phase model is easier in style and therefore more widely used, although in the content the two models don’t differ that much. For this research we will focus on the Four-Phase model. The Four-Phase model divides a product or service development process into four phases. For each phase a matrix in style of a house is used (Figure - 4). Figure - 4 The Four-Phase model of QFD (Cohen 1995) The first phase of the model is used to collect the customer requirements and attributes for a product or service; the needs of the customers. These needs are called WHAT’S. In this phase of the model the WHAT’S need to be transformed into technical requirements called the HOW’S. The second phase will have to transform the technical requirements from the first phase 35
Page 1 and 2: A validation Study of House of Qual
Page 33: A validation Study of House of Qual
Page 85 and 86:
A validation Study of House of Qual
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
show all

here - ERIM - Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?