Kano Modelinin Kalite Fonksiyon Göçerimi Planlama Matrisinde Kullanımı

Öz

Kalite Fonksiyon Göçerimi (KFG) müşteri ihtiyaç, istek ve beklentilerini tanımlayarak, bu ihtiyaçlar ile uyumlu ürün ve hizmet geliştirmede kullanılmak üzere geliştirilmiş, Toplam Kalite felsefesini benimseyen firmalarda uygulama imkanı bulabilen ve pazarda rekabet etme avantajı sağlayan en önemli metodolojilerden birisidir. Kano Modeli, belirli bir ürün ve hizmetle ilgili müşteri ihtiyaçlarının müşteri memnuniyetine aynı oranda katkıda bulunmadığı varsayımıyla ürünle ilgili bu gereksinimleri temel, doğrusal ve heyecan verici ihtiyaçlar olarak sınıflandırmayı sağlayan bir yöntemdir.KFG planlama matrisine Kano modelinin dahil edilmesi, müşteriye daha fazla değer katacak ürün ve hizmetlerin geliştirilmesine ve bu sayede müşteri memnuniyetinin ötesine geçerek uzun dönemde müşteri bağlılığının yaratılmasına imkan vermektedir. Kano modeli analizine dayanarak, her bir müşteri ihtiyacına ait iyileştirme oranının düzeltilmesi için tahmini bir dönüşüm fonksiyonu önerilir. Böylece her bir ihtiyacın ham önem düzeyi arzu edilen müşteri memnuniyet performansını gerçekleştirmek için düzeltilir. Bu çalışmada Kano modelinin KFG planlama matrisi içinde uygun bir dönüşüm fonksiyonu yardımıyla kullanımı, gıda sanayinde faaliyet gösteren bir firmada gerçekleştirilen uygulamayla gösterilmeye çalışılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kalite fonksiyon göçerimi (KFG), kano model, müşteri memnuniyeti

Use of the Kano’s Model in the Quality Function Deployment Planning Matrix

Öz

Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is one of the most important methods developed for identifying customer requirements and needs and helping in developing products and services according to those needs for companies adopting Total Quality Management approach. Besides, this approach gives them a competitive advantage in their markets. Kano’s model assumes that meeting customer requirements does not contribute to customer satisfaction proportionally for each requirement type and departing from this viewpoint it categorizes customer requirements into three main groups (i.e. expected, existing and exciting).Integrating Kano’s model into QFD planning matrix makes it possible to develop better products and services and gives a chance to attain a satisfaction level that is well beyond just meeting expectations which results in long-term customer loyalty. Based on the Kano Model analysis, an approximate transformation function is proposed to adjust the improvement ratio of each customer requirements. Customers’ raw priorities are thereby adjusted accordingly for achieving the desired customer satisfaction performance. An example of the firm that displays activity is presented to illustrate the use of Kano’s Model in QFD

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Quality function deployment (QFD), kano model, customer satisfaction

Kaynakça

1. Bertolini, M., Carmignani, G. (2010) “A QFD-Based Technique to Select And Manage Reverse E-Auctions” Strategic Outsourcing: An International Journal, 3(2):128- 143.
2. Chen, M.C., Chang, K.C., Hsu, C.L and Yang, I.C (2011) “Understanding the Relationship Between Ser- vice Convenience and Customer Satisfaction in Home Delivery by Kano Model” Asia PaciŞc Journal of Marke- ting and Logistics, 23(3):386-410.
3. Chien, T.K., Su, C.T (2003) “Using the QFD Con- cept to Resolve Customer Satisfaction Strategy Deci- sons” International Journal of Quality & Reliability Ma- nagement, 20(3):345-359.
4. Day, R.G. (1998) Kalite Fonksiyon Yayılımı-Bir Şirke- tin Müşterileri İle Bütünleştirilmesi İstanbul, Cem Ofset.
5. Elroy, W. M (2003) “Combining Perceptual and Behavioral Data for Reporting Overall Web Site Perfor- mance” Journal of Online Research, 1-18
6. Esteghlalian, A., Verma, B., Foutz, T. and Thomp- son, S. (1998) “Customer Focused Approach to Design” Academic Research Library, 5(6): 1-7.
7. Han, C.H., Kim, J.K. and Choi S.H. (2004) “Pri- oritizing Engineering Characteristics in Quality Functi- on Deployment with Incomplete Information: A Linear Partial Ordering Approach” International Journal of Pro- duction Economics, 98:235-249.
8. Hassan, Adnan, Baksh, M.S.N, Shaharoun, A.M. (2000) “Issues in Quality Engineering Research” Inter- national Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17(8):858-875.

9. Jane, A., Corbella, D. and Salvador, M. (2003) “Ci- tizens’ Role in Health Service:Satisfaction Behaviour: Kano’s Model, Part 1” Quality Management in Health Care, 12(1):64-71.
10. Kano, N. (2001) “Life Cycle and Creation of Attrac- tive Quality” University of Linkoping Fourth International QMOD Conference on Quality Management and Organisational Development, Linköping, Sweden, 18-36.
11. Kano, N., Seraku, N., Takahashi, F. and Tsuji, S. (1984) “Attractive Quality Must-Be Quality” The Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, 14(2):39-48.
12. Kwong, C. K., Bai, H.(2002) “A Fuzzy AHP App- roach to the Determination of Importance Weights of Customer Requirement in Quality Function Deploy- ment” Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing; 13(5):367- 377.
13. Lin, Y., Pekkarinen, S. (2011) “QFD-Based Modular Logistics Service Design” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(5):344–356.
14. Lofgren, M, Witell, L. (2005) “Kano’s Theory of Attractive Quality and Packaging” Quality Management Journal 12(3):7-20.
15. Matzler, K., Hinterhuber, H.H. (1998) “How to Make Product Development Projects more Successful by Integrating Kano’s Model of Customer Satisfaction into Quality Function Deployment” Technovation, 18(1):25- 38.
16. Sahney, S. (2011) “Delighting Customers of Mana- gement Education in India: A Student Perspective, Part II” The TQM Journal, 23(5):531-548.
17. Shahin, A. (2004) “Integration of FMEA and the Kano Model: An Exploratory Examination” Interna- tional Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 21(7):731-746.
18. Shiu, M.L, Jiang, J.C., Tu, M.H. (2007) “Recons- truct QFD for Integrated Product and Process Deve- lopment Management” The TQM Magazine, 19(5):403- 418.
19. Sofyalioğlu, Ç. (2006) “Kalite Fonksiyon Göçerimi ve Gıda Sanayinde Uygulanabilirliği: Kano Modeli ile Bütünleşik Bir Yaklaşım” Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Manisa, Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Ensti- tüsü.
20. Sofyalioğlu, Ç., Kartal, B. (2005) “An Emprical Study on The Use of Kano’s Model in a Higher Edu- cation Institution in Turkey” Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Business, 11 th International Symposium on Quality Function Deployment 26-30 th September, Ku- şadası, Turkey.
21. Tan, K.C., Shen, X.X. (2000) “Integrating Kano’s Model in the Planning Matrix of Quality Function Dep- loyment” Total Quality Management, 11(8):1141-1151.
22. Tanik, M. (2010) “Improving Order Handling Pro- cess by Using QFD and FMEA Methodologies: A Case Study” International Journal of Quality & Reliability Ma- nagement, 27(4):404-423.
23. Tontini, G. (2000) “Identification of Customer Att- ractive and Must Be Requirements Using a Modified Kano’s Method: Guidelines and Case Study” Quality Congress, 54:728-734.
24. Wang, T., Ji, P. (2010) “Understanding Customer Needs Through Quantitative Analysis pf Kano’s Model” International Journal of Quality &Reliability Manage- ment, 27(2):173-184.
25. Walden D. (1993) “A Special Issue on Kano’s Met- hods for Understanding Customer- Defined Quality” Center of Quality Management Journal, 2(4):3-28.
26. Witell, L.N., Fundin, A. (2005) “Dynamics of Ser- vice Attributes: A Test of Kano’s Theory of Attractive Quality” International Journal of Service Industry Mana- gement, 16(2):152-168.