A Case Study On Quality Function Deployment (QFD

IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE)
ISSN: 2278-1684 Volume 3, Issue 6 (Nov-Dec. 2012), PP 27-35
www.iosrjournals.org
www.iosrjournals.org 27 | Page
A Case Study on Quality Function Deployment (QFD)
Eshan S. Jaiswal
(Mechanical Department, Mewar University, India)
Abstract: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) was conceived in Japan in the late 1960's, and introduced to
America and Europe in 1983. This paper will provide a general overview of the QFD methodology and
approach to product development. Once familiarity with the tool is established, a real-life application of the
technique will be provided in a case study. The case study will illustrate how QFD was used to develop a new
tape product and provide counsel to those that may want to implement the QFD process.
Quality function deployment (QFD) is a “method to transform user demands into design quality, to
deploy the functions forming quality, and to deploy methods for achieving the design quality into subsystems
and component parts, and ultimately to specific elements of the manufacturing process.”
Keywords: Quality Function Deployment, Tape Product, Product Development, Design Quality,
Manufacturing
I. Introduction
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a quality tool that helps to translate the Voice of the Customer
(VoC) into new products that truly satisfy their needs. In this paper, QFD will be reviewed in order to
understand how it works, to highlight its strengths and weaknesses and to discuss its practical applications. The
first part of the paper will present an overview of QFD and explain the methodology. QFD will be defined and
explained by means of an example and a number of benefits and implementation problems will be revealed [1].
First conceptualized in 1966 as a method or concept for new product development under the umbrella
of Total Quality Control, Hinshitsu Tenkai (quality deployment) was developed by Dr. Shigeru Mizuno and
Yoji Akao. Yoji Akao, et al detailed methods of quality deployment in 1972. The Japan Society of Quality
Control formed a research group to specifically study Quality Function Deployment (QFD) in 1978. QFD is
used to translate customer requirements to engineering specifications. It is a link between customers - design
engineers - competitors - manufacturing. It provides an insight into the whole design and manufacturing
operation from concept to manufacture and it can dramatically improve the efficiency as production problems
are resolved early in the design phase.
It is very powerful as it incorporates the voice of the customer in the designs - hence it is likely that the
final product will be better designed to satisfy the customer's needs. Moreover, it provides an insight into the
whole design and manufacturing operation (from concept to manufacture) and it can dramatically improve the
efficiency as production problems are resolved early in the design phase.
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) was conceived in Japan in the late 1960' s, and introduced to
America and Europe in 1983. During the period between the late 1960's and early 1980's, the concept of QFD
was evolved from the belief that Total Quality Control must include not only checking of the control points
during production, but an understanding of the requirements prior to the design phase. In the late 1960's,
Japanese companies were breaking from their post World War II mode of imitation and copying to a more
original mode of product development 1, making design quality an important consideration. The need to
understand the critical design issues prior to production was acknowledged and QC process charts were widely
used to ensure that the design criteria were met during manufacturing, but there was no formal system to
translate the customer's needs into the initial design and subsequent process control points. Thus, an opportunity
was created for QFD to come to fruition as a method to check the design itself for adequacy in meeting
customer requirements and to translate those requirements to production [2].
1.1 When to use QFD:
QFD is applied in the early stages of the design phase so that the customer wants are incorporated into
the final product. Furthermore it can be used as a planning tool as it identifies the most important areas in which
the effort should focus in relation to our technical capabilities. Ask yourself these questions:
1. Why do QFD in this case?
2. What will the QFD be made of?
3. Is it the right tool at this time?
4. Is this the right place for implementation?
5. What is the goal and what is success?
6. Who all should we involve?

1.2 How to use it?
Comprehensive QFD may provide four phases:
1. Product Planning (House of Quality): Translate customer requirement into product technical requirement
to meet them.
2. Product Design: Translate technical requirement to key part characteristics or systems.
3. Process Planning: Identify key process operations necessary to achieve key part characteristics.
4. Production Planning (Process Control): Establish process control plans, maintenance plans, training plans
to control operations.
Linking these phases provides a mechanism to deploy the customer voice through to control of process
operations.
Follow these steps:
1. Learn what each element represents
2. Form a multidisciplinary team. Obtain voice of the customer from market surveys, focus groups,
observations, interviews. Identify customer requirements and ask customer to rate importance.
3. The development of the first issue of the charts is the most time consuming part. Conduct competitive
analysis by customer requirement establish a quality plan based on competitive you would like to have
for your future product.
Once this is completed regular reviews and updates require minimum time. Remember that the benefits
from an appropriately developed QFD chart are very big compared with the effort – put focus on the issues that
are important to the customer.
Benefits of QFD include better understanding of customer demands and design interactions; early
manufacturing involvement during the design process reducing iterations and focusing the design while
fostering teamwork [4].
II. QFD Methodology And The House Of Quality (HoQ)
The concept of QFD was created in Japan in the late 1960s. According to Akao (1997) after World War
II, Japanese companies used to copy and imitate product development; nevertheless, they decided to move their
approach to one based on originality. QFD was introduced, in that environment, as a concept for new product
development. It can be better understood from the definition presented below which summarises the purposes of
the technique: “QFD is a method for structured product planning and development that enables a development
team to specify clearly the customer‟s wants and needs, and then to evaluate each proposed product or service
capability systematically in terms of its impact on meeting those needs”(Cohen, 1995).
The QFD method includes building one or more matrices known as „quality tables.‟ The first matrix is
named the “House of Quality” (HoQ). It exhibits the customer‟s needs (VoC) on the left hand side, and the
technical response to meeting those needs along the top. Figure 1(a) shows each of the sections contained in the
HoQ. Every section holds important data, specific to a part of the QFD analysis. The matrix is usually
completed by a specially formed team, who follow the logical sequence suggested by the letters A to F, but the
process is flexible and the order in which the HOQ is completed depends on the team [1].
A four phases approach is accomplished by using a series of matrixes that guide the product team‟s
activities by providing standard documentation during product and process development (Figure below). Each
phase has a matrix consisting of a vertical column of “Whats” and a horizontal row of “Hows”. “Whats” are CR;
“Hows” are ways of achieving them. At each stage, the “Hows” are carried to the next phase as “Whats” [4].

Figure 1. The House of Quality [1]
Section A has a list of customer needs; Section B contains market data, strategic goal setting for the
new product and computations for prioritising the customer needs; Section C includes information to translate
the customer needs into the organisation‟s technical language; Section D contains the relationship between each
customer need and each technical response; Section E (the “roof”) assesses the interrelationships between
elements of the technical response; Section F contains the prioritisation of the technical responses, information
on the competitors and technical targets. Moving on from the HoQ, QFD comprises the building of other
matrices that help to make detailed decisions throughout the product development process, however in practice
they are rarely used (Cohen, 1995). The main reason for this is that the integration of people required to build
the subsequent matrices, will use 80 % of a company‟s employees (Amos, 1997).
In order to better understand the structure of the HoQ, a brief example is presented. It concerns the
improvement of a pizza (Sower et al, 1999); its HoQ is shown in Figure 1(b). As can be seen, the customers
want value, taste and the pizzas delivered hot. The current product is superior to competitor X on two of the
three customer requirements, but ranks equal to or below competitor Y on all three requirements. The purpose of
this product redesign project is to make the current product superior to both competitors on all three counts.
There is a strong positive correlation between the design requirements of meat and cheese and the customer
requirement of value. That means that the more meat and cheese on the pizza, the higher the value to the
customer. The roof shows that there is a strong negative correlation between meat and cheese and price, which
means that there is a trade-off to be considered. A way to provide a meaty, cheesy pizza at a low price must be
found. The bottom of the HoQ shows the target values that the design team has determined must be met to meet
the technical responses. These are the specifications for the pizza that will put the current product ahead of its
two competitors [1].
QFD uses some principles from Concurrent Engineering in that cross-functional teams are involved in
all phases of product development. Each of the four phases in a QFD process uses a matrix to translate customer
requirements from initial planning stages through production control (Becker Associates Inc, 2000).
Each phase, or matrix, represents a more specific aspect of the product's requirements. Relationships
between elements are evaluated for each phase. Only the most important aspects from each phase are deployed
into the next matrix.

Figure 2. The four phases of traditional QFD [2]
Phase 1, Product Planning:
Building the House of Quality. Led by the marketing department, Phase 1, or product planning, is also
called The House of Quality. Many organizations only get through this phase of a QFD process. Phase 1
documents customer requirements, warranty data, competitive opportunities, product measurements, competing
product measures, and the technical ability of the organization to meet each customer requirement. Getting good
data from the customer in Phase 1 is critical to the success of the entire QFD process.
Phase 2, Product Design:
This phase 2 is led by the engineering department. Product design requires creativity and innovative
team ideas. Product concepts are created during this phase and part specifications are documented. Parts that are
determined to be most important to meeting customer needs are then deployed into process planning, or Phase 3.
Phase 3, Process Planning:
Process planning comes next and is led by manufacturing engineering. During process planning,
manufacturing processes are flowcharted and process parameters (or target values) are documented.
Phase 4, Process Control:
And finally, in production planning, performance indicators are created to monitor the production
process, maintenance schedules, and skills training for operators. Also, in this phase decisions are made as to
which process poses the most risk and controls are put in place to prevent failures. The quality assurance
department in concert with manufacturing leads Phase 4[2].
III. QFD OBJECTIVES
Table 1 summarises some of the important objectives of QFD. It is important to note that a design project
can be considered as a mixture of all objectives. While some trading off is often unavoidable, the way to achieve
an outstanding product is to seek to optimize all elements.

Table 1. Some of the important objectives of QFD [5][6][7][8]
IV. QFD BENEFITS AND IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS
On the one hand, Hales and Staley (1995) argue that using QFD can result in the development of better
products at a price that the customer is willing to pay; moreover, based on its application in different companies,
the following advantages and benefits have been reported: Customer satisfaction (Fernandez et al, 1994),
reduction in product lead times (Hauser and Clausing, 1988), improved communications through teamwork
(Griffin and Hauser, 1992) and better designs (Mehta, 1994). In addition Bicknell and Bicknell (In Chan and
Wu (2002a)) reported that tangible benefits that are common when QFD is properly used are: a 30-50%
reduction in engineering changes, 30-50% shorter design cycles, 20-60% lower start up costs, and 20-50% fewer
warranty claims.[10]
On the other hand, an empirical study conducted by Martins and Aspinwall (2001) within the United
Kingdom (UK), identified many QFD implementation problems among the companies surveyed. The results
showed that there was a problem in western companies associated with „working in teams‟. Problems in
maintaining a commitment to the methodology and an unsuitable „organisational culture‟ were also highlighted.
Other aspects, such as „time consuming‟, „costly‟, and most important, complexity of the methodology, which
are commonly mentioned in the literature, were deemed to be only secondary. Govers (1996) declared that most
of the problems that companies have to untangle, in order to implement QFD, are related to organisational
circumstances like project definition and project management as well as team selection and team building. A
critical factor concerning project definition is the “Voice of the Customer” while with respect to project
management and team selection, it is essential to have the support of top management and the integration of a
team with receptive open-minded members who are willing to challenge established practice. The need for a
good facilitator, who knows the method very well and has the social skills to build and to manage a team, was
also mentioned[9][11].
Hauser and Clausing (1996) compared start-up and preproduction costs at Toyota auto body in 1977,
before QFD, to those costs in 1984, when QFD was well under way. HoQ meetings early on reduced costs by
more than 60 %. Appendix 10, reinforces this evidence by comparing the number of design changes at a
Japanese auto manufacturer using QFD with changes at a US automaker. Also, Hauser and Clausing considered
the difference between applying QFD in Japanese companies and not applying QFD in U.S. companies
(Appendix 10). As the Appendix shows, Japanese automaker with QFD made fewer changes than U.S. company
without QFD. Some benefits of QFD are illustrated in Table 2.
Resource QFD Objectives
Vonderembse and Raghunathan
(1997)
To drive long-term improvements in the way new products are
developed in order to create value for customers
Kathawala and Motwani
(1994); Zairi (1995)
(1) Identify the customer
(2) Determine what the customer wants
(3) Provide a way to meet the customer‟s desires
Franceschini and
Rossetto (1995)
(1) Definition of the product characteristics, which meet the real needs
of the customers.
(2) Gathering of all necessary information to set up the design of a
product or a service, without neglecting any point of view.
(3) Supplying a support to competitive benchmarking.
(4) Preservation of coherence between the planning and
manufacturing processes of a product.
(5) Provision of an audit trail from the manufacturing floor back to
customer demands.
(6) Auto documenting the project during its evolution.
Jagdev et al., 1997 (1) Identify current performance measures that are closely linked to
CR.
(2) Identify current performance measures that are redundant.
(3) Identify new customer oriented performance measures that are
required.
(4) Identify conflicts associated with different performance measures.
(5) Identify target values for customer oriented performance
measures.
(6) Assess the degree of difficulty of achieving the target value(s) for
specific performance measures.

Table 2: Major Benefits of QFD [13]
Benefits of QFD Source
Major reduction in development, time and cost,
shorter design cycle and changes. Significantly
reduces start up problems, times and costs
Ferguson (1990), Stoker (1991), Stauss (1993), Kathawala
and Motwani (1994), Dhalgaard and Kanji (1994), Kenny
(1988), Markland et al (1995, 1988), Hales (1995), Bendell
(1993), Bouchereau and Rowlands (1999, 2000a), Fortuna
(1988), Lockamy and Khurana (1995), Curry and Herbert
(1988), Zairi (1995), Howell (2000)
Leads to truly satisfy and delighted customer Ermer and Kniper (1998), Kathawala and Motwani (1994),
Kenny (1988), Lim and Tang (2000), Stauss (1993),
Howell (2000), Stoker (1991), O‟ Neal and Lafief (1992),
Markland et al (1995, 1988), Hales (1995), Bendell (1993),
Bouchereau and Rowlands (1999, 2000a), Lockamy and
Khurana (1995), Curry and Herbert (1988), Zairi (1995)
Improved Communication within the
organization. Brings together multifunctional
teams and encourage team work and participation
Designing for customers satisfaction (1994), Kathawala and
Motwani (1994), Stauss (1993), Dhalgaard and Kanji
(1994), Stoker (1991), Markland et al (1995, 1988), O‟
Neal and Lafief (1992), Hales (1995), Bendell (1993),
Fortuna (1988), Zairi (1995)
The quality and productivity of service become
more precise in a continual improvement process
and the company can reach world class.
Designing for customers satisfaction (1994), Kanko (1991),
Ermer and Kniper (1998), Howell (2000), Stoker (1991),
Markland et al (1995, 1988), O‟ Neal and Lafief (1992),
Hales (1995), Bendell (1993), Fortuna (1988), Zairi (1995)
QFD clarifies the customer priority for
competitive advantage, Marketing advantage
through improve market acceptability – leading
to increase market share and better reaction to
marketing opportunities
Ferguson (1990), Lim and Tang (2000), Dhalgaard and
Kanji (1994), Stoker (1991), Markland et al (1995, 1988),
Hales (1995), Bendell (1993), Fortuna (1988), Lockamy
and Khurana (1995), Curry and Herbert (1988), Zairi
(1995)
Enables one to focus proactively on CR early in
the design stage. Critical items identified for
parameter design and product planning is much
easier to carry out. Also, ensure consistency
between the planning and the production process.
Ferguson (1990), Ermer and Kniper (1998), Kathawala and
Motwani (1994), Stauss (1993), Dhalgaard and Kanji
(1994), O‟ Neal and Lafief (1992), Zairi (1995)
QFD is not always easy to implement, and companies have faced problems using QFD, particularly in large,
complex systems (Harding et al., 2001). Govers (2001) emphasised that “QFD is not just a tool but has to
become a way of management”. He also categorized problems of QFD in three groups as: methodological
problems, organizational problems and Problems concerning product policy. Table 3, presents some regular
problems of QFD.
Problems of QFD Source
If all relational matrixes combined into a single
deployment, the size of each of the combined
relational matrixes would be very large. Completing
QFD late, does not let the changes be implemented.
It takes a long time to develop a QFD chart fully.
Kathawala and Motwani (1994); Dahlgaard and
Kanji (1994); Prasad (2000); Zairi (1995); Dale et
al. (1998); Bouchereau and Rowlands (1999,
2000a); Designing for customer satisfaction (1994)
QFD is a qualitative method. Due to the ambiguity
in the voice of the customer, many of the answers
that customers give are difficult to categorize as
demands.
Dahlgaard and Kanji (1994); Bouchereau and
Rowlands (1999, 2000a); Designing for customer
satisfaction (1994)
It can be difficult to determine the connection
between customer demands and technical
properties. Organizations do not extend the use of
QFD past the product planning stage.
Dahlgaard and Kanji (1994); Dale et al. (1998);
Bouchereau and Rowlands (1999, 2000a)
QFD is not appropriate for all applications. For
example, in the automotive industry there are only a
limited number of potential customers; the customer
identifies their needs and the supplier acts to satisfy
Dale et al. (1998); Bouchereau and Rowlands
(1999, 2000a)

them. For a product of limited complexity and a
small supplier base, the effort required to complete
a thorough QFD analysis might be justified by
customers. Setting target values in the HoQ is
imprecise. Strengths between relationships are ill-
defined.
Table 3. Some regular problems of QFD [13]
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, an attempt was made to demonstrate the capabilities and weaknesses of QFD which has
been regarded as one of the most important advanced quality engineering techniques. QFD has been found to
have some considerable problems, most of which seem to affect adversely its employment. Examples of some of
the most important ones are: ambiguity in the voice of the customer (VoC), managing large HoQ and conflicts
between Customers‟ requirements (CR). In spite of the above problems, there are however a wide range of
benefits and advantages associated with using such a customer satisfaction quality design technique, which
make it beneficial to designing quality. QFD is a quality design and improvement technique and relatively is
closer to the customers than other techniques. Also, QFD can serve as a flexible framework, which can be
modified, extended, and be combined with other quality design and improvement techniques. There are still not
enough publications about the use of QFD in service areas. However, comparing with other quality design
techniques, QFD has the potential to be the most suitable technique for designing quality from customers‟ point
of view. It is believed that the present investigation will provide some good research opportunities; For instance,
emphasising on enhancing QFD‟s capabilities and improving the associated problems with this technique. The
flexibility of QFD has facilitated its integration with other advanced quality engineering techniques. However,
the following recommendations are made to enhance the capabilities of QFD:
1) More care should be taken to the beginning phases of QFD process (e.g. first house of quality) and new
models should be proposed to improve the evaluation of the input data (e.g. customers‟ requirements),
before entering into other HoQs.
2) The effectiveness of QFD should be improved through its integration with other quality engineering
techniques which could improve the functioning of traditional QFD at its early stages with respect to:
competitive analysis, correlation matrixes, determining critical items, number of phases needed and
components of its phases.
3) Enhancements must be designed to take place, with a focus on current problems associated with QFD
(e.g. ambiguity in VoC, managing large HoQ and conflicts between CR).
Reference
[1] D.J. Delgado & E.M. Aspinwall, (2003) “QFD Methodology and Practical applications – A Review”, Proceedings of the Ninth
Annual Postgraduate Research Symposium, School of Engineering, The University of Birmingham, 1-5
[2] Akao, Y., ed. (1990). Quality Function Deployment, Productivity Press, Cambridge MA, Becker Associates Inc
[3] Robin Rawlings-Quinn, “QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD): A CASE STUDY”,
[4] Dr. Arash Shahin, Quality Function Deployment: A Comprehensive Review, Department of Management, University of Isfahan,
Isfahan, Iran
[5] Vonderembse, M.A. and Raghunathan, T.S. (1997) Quality function deployment‟s impact on product development, International
Journal of Quality Science, Vol.2, No.4, pp. 253-271.
[6] Kathawala, Y. and Motwani, J. (1994) Implementing quality function deployment - A system approach, The TQM Magazine, Vol.6,
No.6, pp. 31-37.
[7] Franceschini, F. and Rossetto, S. (1995) QFD: the problem of comparing technical/engineering design requirements, Research in
Engineering Design, Vol.7, pp. 270-278.
[8] Jagdev, H., Bradley, P., and Molloy, O. (1997) A QFD based performance measurement tool, Computers in Industry, Vol.33, pp.
357-366.
[9] Hales, R. and Staley, D., (1995) “ Mix target costing, QFD for successful new products”, Marketing News, 29(1), 18
[10] Chan, L.K. and Wu, M.L., 2002a, Quality Function Deployment: A comprehensive review of its concepts and methods, Quality
Engineering, 15(1), 23-35
[11] Chan, L. K. and Wu, M. L., 2002b, Quality function deployment: A literature review, European Journal of Operational Research,
143(2002), 463-497
[12] Ferguson, I. (1990) Process design, TQM Magazine, Vol.2, No.2, April, 103-108.
[13] Adiano, C. and Roth, A.V. (1994) Beyond the house of quality: Dynamic QFD, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol.1,
No.1, 25-37.
[14] Akao, Y. (1990) Quality function deployment (QFD) – Integrating customers‟ requirements into product design, English translation
copyright, Productivity Press, USA.
[15] Akao, Y., Ono, S., Harada, A., Tanaka, H., Iwasawa, K. (1983) Quality deployment including cost, reliability, and technology,
Quality, Vol.13, No.3, 61-77.
[16] American Supplier Institute (1994) Quality Function Deployment (service QFD): 3-day workshop, ASI Press, Dearborn,
MI.Antonacopoulou, E. and Kandampully, J. (2000) Alchemy: The transformation to service excellence, The Learning
Organization, Vol.7, No.1, 13-22.
[17] Azzolini, M. and Shillaber, J. (1993) Internal service quality: Winning from the inside out, Quality Progress, November, 75-78.

[18] Barnett, W.D. and Raja, M.K. (1995) Application of QFD to the software development process, International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, Vol.12, No.6, 24-42.
[19] Bendell, T. (1993) Quality: Measuring and monitoring, The Century Business, UK, 150-164.Betts, M. (1990) QFD integrated with
software engineering, Transactions of The Second Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, Novi, MI, 442-459.Bicheno, J.
(1994) The Quality 50: a guide gurus, tools, wastes, techniques and systems, PICSIE Books.Bier, I.D. and Cornesky, R. (2001)
Using QFD to construct a higher education curriculum, Quality Progress, April, 64-68.Bode, J. and Fung, R.Y.K. (1998) Cost
engineering with quality function deployment, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol.35, No. 3/4, 587-590.
[20] Bouchereau, V. and Rowlands, H. (1999) Analytical approaches to QFD, Manufacturing Engineer, Vol.78, No.6, December, 249-
254.
[21] Bouchereau, V. and Rowlands, H. (2000a) Methods and techniques to help quality function deployment (QFD), Benchmarking: An
International Journal, Vol.7, No.1, 8-19.
[22] Bouchereau, V. and Rowlands, H. (2000b) Quality function deployment: The unused tool, Engineering Management Journal,
Vol.10, No.1, February, 45-52.
[23] Brusch, M., Trilk, H., Dinse, C. and Treppa, A. (2001) Gemeinsam Starker – Integration von quality function deployment und target
costing, Qualitat und Zuverlassigkeit, Vol.46, No.10, 1306-1321.
[24] Burchill, G. and Fine, C.H. (1997) Time versus market orientation in product concept development: Empirically-based theory
generation, Management Science, Vol.43, No.4, 465-478.
[25] Chan, L.K. and Wu, M.L. (1998) Prioritizing the technical measures in quality function deployment, Quality Engineering, Vol.10,
No.3, 67-479.
[26] Chan, L.K. and Wu, M.L. (2002) Quality function deployment: A literature review, European Journal of Operational Research,
Article In Press, Uncorrected Proof, Available online 1 April, 1-35.Cheng Lim, P., Aquilano, N.J., and Jacobs, F.R. (1999) An
innovative framework for health care performance measurement, Managing Service Quality, Vol.9, No.6, 423-433.
[27] Chow-Chua, C. and Komaran, Raj (2002) Managing service quality by combining voice of the service provider and voice of their
customers, Managing Service Quality, Vol.12, No.2, 77-86.
[28] Clausing, D. and Pugh, S. (1991) Enhanced quality function deployment, Proceedings of The Design and Productivity International
Conference, February 6-8, Honolulu, HI.Cohen, L. (1995) Quality function deployment – How to make QFD work for you,
Addison Wesley Longman Inc., USA.Conti, T. (1989) Process management and quality function deployment, Quality Progress,
December, 45-48.Cook, H.E. and Wu, A. (2001) On the valuation of goods and selection of the best design alternative, Research in
Engineering Design, Vol.13, No.1, 42-54.
[29] Cristiano, J.J., Liker, J.K., and White, Ch.C. (2000) Customer-driven product development through quality function deployment in
the U.S. and Japan, Journal of Production Innovation Management, Vol. 17, No.4, 286-308.
[30] Crow, K. (1996) Customer-focused development with QFD, 8 pages.Curry, A. and Herbert, D. (1998) Continuous improvement in
public services: a way forward, Managing Service Quality, Vol.8, No.5, 339-349.
[31] Dahlgaard, K. and Kanji (1994) Break down barriers between departments, Advances in Total Quality Management, 81-89.Dale,
B., Boaden, R., Wilcox, M., and McQuarter, R. (1998) Use of quality management techniques and tools: An examination of some
key issues, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol.16, No.4-6, 305-325.
[32] Dean, E.B. (1998) Quality function deployment: From the perspective of competitive advantage. Designing for customer
satisfaction (1994) Management Decision, Vol.32, No.5, 37-38.
[33] Dube, L., Johnson, M.D. and Renaghan, L.M. (1999) Adapting the QFD approach to extended service transactions, Production and
Operations Management, Vol.8, No.3, 301-317.
[34] Ellis, R.L. (1998) QFD: A tool to sharpen measurement, Public Manager, Vol.27, No.2, 33-36.
[35] Ermer, D.S. and Kniper, M.K. (1998) Delighting the customer: quality function deployment for quality service design, Total
Quality Management, Vol.9, No.4/5, S86-S91.
[36] Evans, J.R. and Lindsay, W.M. (1993) The management and control of quality, West Publishing Company, Second edition, USA,
150-166.Evbuomwan, N.F.O., Sivalognathan, S. and Jebb, A. (1994) Concurrent design with design function deployment,
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Concurrent Engineering and Electronic Design Automation, 7–8 April, UK.
[37] Ferguson, I. (1990) Process design, TQM Magazine, Vol.2, No.2, April, 103-108.
[38] Field, S.W. and Swift, K.G. (1996), Effecting a quality change: an engineering approach, Arnold, UK, 56.Garside, J.A. and
Appleton, E. (1996) QFD – Will it do for new product introduction what JIT did for manufacture?, Advanced Manufacturing
Processes-Systems and Technologies (AMPST 96), 753-765.Hallberg, N., Timpka, T., Eriksson, H. (1999) The medical software
quality deployment method, Methods of Information in Medicine, Vol.38, No.1, 66-73.
[39] Hales, R., Lyman, D. and Norman, R. (1994) QFD and the expanded house of quality, Quality Digest, February. Jagdev, H.,
Bradley, P., and Molloy, O. (1997) A QFD based performance measurement tool, Computers in Industry, Vol.33, 357-366.
[40] Kathawala, Y. and Motwani, J. (1994) Implementing quality function deployment - A system approach, The TQM Magazine, Vol.6,
No.6, 31-37.
[41] Kauffmann, P., Unal, R., Fernandez, A. and Keating C. (2000) A model for allocating resources to research programs by evaluating
technical importance and research productivity, Engineering Management Journal, Vol.12, No.1, 5.
[42] Leo Lo, T.; Kolence, Kenneth W. (1994) House of quality and service management, CMG Proceedings, Vol.1, pp. 521-532.
[43] Lim, P.Ch. and Tang, N.K.H. (2000), The development of a model for total quality health care, Managing Service Quality, Vol.10,
No.2, 103-111.
[44] Liu, X.F. (2001) Software quality function deployment, IEEE Potentials, Vol.19, No.5, 14-16.
[45] Locascio, A. and Thurston, D.L. (1993) Multiattribute design optimization using QFD, Proceedings of the 2nd Industrial
Engineering Research Conference, Industrial Engineering and Management Press.Lockamy III, A. and Khurana, A. (1995) Quality
function deployment: total quality management for new product design, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
Vol.12, No.6, 73-84.
[46] Mallon, J.C. and Mulligan, D.E. (1993) Quality function deployment – A system for meeting customers‟ needs, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, Vol.119, September, 516-531.
[47] Markland, R.E., Vickery, Sh.K., and Davis, R.A. (1995) Operations management – Concepts in manufacturing and services, West
Publishing Company, USA, 164-171.Markland, R.E., Vickery, Sh.K., Davis, R.A., and Sounderpandian, J. (1998) Operations
management – Concepts in manufacturing and services, South-Western College Publishing, Second edition, USA, 179.Martins, A.
and Aspinwall, E.M. (2001), Quality function deployment: an empirical study in the UK, Total Quality Management, Vol.12, No.5,
575-588.
[48] Masud, A.S.M. and Dean, E.B. (1993) Using fuzzy sets in quality function deployment, Proceedings of the Second Industrial
Engineering Research Conference, Industrial Engineering and Management Press.Matsuda, L.M., Evora, Y.D. and Boan, F.S.

(2000) Quality function deployment method – QFD – in the planning of nursing service, Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, Vol.8,
No.5, 97-105.
[49] Matzler, K. and 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, Vol.18, No.1, 25-38.
[50] Mazur, G.H. (1993) QFD for Service Industries, from Voice of Customer to Task Deployment, The Fifth Symposium on Quality
Function Deployment, Novi, Michigan, Japan Business Consultants, Ltd., 485- 503.Menks, D., Ahmed, A. and Fu, K. (2000)
Quality function deployment, SENG 613 Team Work, Software Engineering Research Network, University of Galgary, Fourth of
December.Mersha, T. and Adlakha, V. (1992) Attributes of service quality: the consumers‟ perspective, International Journal of
Service Industry Management, Vol.3, No.3, 34-45.
[51] Nakui, S.C. (1991) Comprehensive QFD system, Transactions of The Third Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, June 24-
25, Novi, MI, 137-152.O‟Neal, Ch.R. and Lafief, W.C. (1992) Maketing‟s lead role in total quality, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol.21, No.2, May, 133 143.Ouyang, S., Fai, J., Wang, Q. and Kim, J. (1997) Quality function deployment,
Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, Partovi, F.Y. (1999) A quality function deployment approach to strategic
capital budgeting, Engineering Economist, Vol.44, No.3, 239- 260.
[52] Partovi, F.Y. (2001) An analytic model to quantify strategic service vision, International Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol.12, No.5, 476-499.
[53] Prasad, B. (1993) Product planning optimization using quality function deployment, AI in Optimal Design and Manufacturing,
Edited by Z. Dong, series editor M. Jamshidi, Englewood, NJ, Prentice Hall, 117– 152.Prasad, B. (1996) Concurrent Engineering
Fundamentals, Integrated Product and Process Organization, Vol.1.
[54] Prasad, B. (1998a) Review of QFD and related deployment techniques, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Vol.17, No.3, 221-234.
[55] Prasad, B. (1998b) Synthesis of market research data through a combined effort of QFD, value engineering and value graph
techniques, Quantitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol.1, No.3, 156- 172.
[56] Pun, K.F., Chin, K.S., and Lau, H. (2000) A QFD/hoshin approach for service quality deployment: A case study, Managing Service
Quality, Vol.10, No.3, 156-169.
[57] Rajala, M. and Savolainen, T. (1996) A framework for customer oriented business process modelling, Computer Integrated
Manufacturing System, Vol.9, No.3, 127-135.
[58] Reich, Y. (1995) Computational quality function deployment in knowledge intensive engineering, Proceedings of the IFIP WG5.2
First Workshop on Knowledge Intensive CAD, Helsinki, Finland.Ross, Ph.J. (1998) The role of Taguchi methods and design of
experiments in QFD , Quality Progress, June, 41-47.Scheurell, D.M. (1992) Concurrent engineering and the entire QFD process:
one year after start-up of a new mill, Transactions of the Fifth Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, Novi, MI: QFD
Institute.Schmidt, R. (1997) The implementation of simultaneous engineering in the stage of product concept development: A
process oriented improvement of quality function deployment, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.100, No.2, 293-314.
[59] Schubert, M.A. (1989) Quality function deployment: A means of integrating reliability throughout development, Proceedings of
The Society of American Value Engineers Conference, 93-98.Shen, X.X., Tan, K.C., and Xie, M. (2000) An integrative approach to
innovative product development using Kano‟s model and QFD, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol.3, No.2, 91-99.
[60] Shin, J.S. and Kim, K.J. (2000) Effect and choice of the weighting scale in QFD, Quality Engineering, Vol.12, No.3, 347-356.
[61] Smith, J.A. and Angeli, I.I. (1995) The use of quality function deployment to help adopt a total quality strategy, Total Quality
Management, Vol.6, No.1, 35-44.
[62] Sower, V.E., Savoie, M.J., and Renick, S. (1999) An introduction to quality management and engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc., USA,
45.Stauss, B. (1993) Service problem deployment: Transformation of problem information into problem prevention activities,
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.4, No.2, 41-62.
[63] Stocker, G.D. (1991) Quality function deployment: listening to the voice of the customer, American Production and Inventory
Control Society – The Performance Advantage 1, September, 44-48.Storen, S. (1997) Sustainable product design – Is there more to
it than science, systems and computers?, Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol.6, No.1, 3-9.
[64] Stuart, F.I. and Tax, S.S. (1996) Planning for service quality: an integrative approach, International Journal of Service Industry
Management, Vol.7, No.4, 58-77.
[65] Swanson, R. (1993) Quality benchmark deployment, Quality Progress, December, 81-84.Taguchi, G. and Clausing, D.P. (1990)
Robust quality. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68, 65–75.
[66] Taguchi, S. (1987) Taguchi Methods and QFD: HOWs and WHYs for Management, American Supplier Institute Press, Dearborn,
MI. Tottie, M. and Lager, T. (1995) QFD: Linking the customer to the product development part, R&D Management, Vol.25, 257-
267.
[67] Trappey, C.V.,Trappey, A.J.C. and Hwang, S.J. (1996) A computerized quality function deployment approach for retail services,
Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol.30, No.4, 611-622.
[68] Ur Rahman, Sh. (1995) Product development stages and associated quality management approaches, The TQM Magazine, Vol.7,
No.6, 25-30.
[69] Vairaktarakis, G.L. (1999) Optimization tools for design and marketing of new/improved products using the house of quality,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol.17, 645-663.
[70] Verma, D., Chilakapati, R. and Fabrycky, W.J. (1998) Analysing a quality function deployment matrix: An expert system-based
approach to identify inconsistencies and opportunities, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol.9, No.3, 251-261.
[71] Vonderembse, M.A. and Raghunathan, T.S. (1997) Quality function deployment‟s impact on product development, International
Journal of Quality Science, Vol.2, No.4, 253-271.
[72] Witter, J., Clausing, D., Laufenberg, L., De Andrade, R.S. (1995) Reusability – The key to corporate agility: Its integration with
enhanced quality function deployment, World Class Design to Manufacture, Vol.2, No.1, 25-33.
[73] Yilmaz, M.R. and Chatterjee, S. (1997) Deming and the quality of software development, Business Horizons, Vol.40, No.6, 51-58.
[74] Xie, M., Goh, T.N., and Wang, H. (1998) A study of sensitivity of “customer voice” in QFD analysis International Journal of
Industrial Engineering, Vol.5, No.4, 301-307.
[75] Zairi, M. (1995) Quality function deployment - A main pillar for successful total quality management and product development,
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol.12, No.6, 9- 23.
[76] Zhang, Y., Wang, H.P. and Zhang, C. (1999) Green QFD-II: A life cycle approach for environmentally consious manufacturing by
integrating LCA and LCC into QFD matrixes, International Journal of Production Research, Vol.37, No.5, 1075-1091.
[77] Zhao, X., Bai, Ch. and Hui, Y. V. (2002) An empirical assessment and application of SERVQUAL in a Mainland Chinese
department store, Total Quality Management, Vol.13, No.2, 241-254.
[78] Zultner, R.E. (1994) Software quality function deployment: The first five years - Lessons learned, ASQC 48th Annual Quality
Congress Proceedings, 783-793.

A Case Study On Quality Function Deployment (QFD

More Related Content

Similar to A Case Study On Quality Function Deployment (QFD (20)

More from Tye Rausch (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A Case Study On Quality Function Deployment (QFD