Search results

The purpose of this paper is to develop the C-shaped quality function deployment (QFD) 3D Matrix for service applications.

The C-shaped QFD 3D Matrix proposed by Vezzetti et al. (2016) has been developed for simultaneous analysis of the relationships among three sets of factors of customer requirements, service design characteristics and service performance indicators. The three sets of factors have been determined and based on their interrelationships, 3D and concurrent houses of quality have been formed. Then, service design characteristics and service performance indicators have been prioritized. The obtained priorities have been also compared with traditional concurrent model of QFD.

The findings obtained from the traditional and developed approach seem different, implying that applying the C-shaped QFD 3D Matrix provides a more real perspective of concurrent engineering and the results in different set of priorities of service factors.

The case study was limited to banking services. If the developed approach is used in other institutes, the prioritization of service design characteristics and service performance indicators might be changed.

Compared to Vezzetti et al. (2016) who proposed the C-shaped QFD 3D Matrix for analyzing interrelationships among two customers and a provider, or two providers and a customer, in this paper, the C-shaped QFD 3D Matrix has been developed for analyzing interrelationships among three sets of factors of customer requirements, service design characteristics and service performance indicators.

The purpose of this research is to propose a new model for the integration of concurrent function deployment (CFD) and parameter (P) diagram in order to prioritize innovation factors.

Each of the approaches of CFD and P diagram and their features has been demonstrated and according to their common features, an integrated model has been designed in two phases. It has been examined in Sepahan Industrial Group, of which the major product is API gas pipeline network demanded by Isfahan Province Gas Organization. A questionnaire has been designed and delivered to four major units of Isfahan Province Gas Organization.

“Hydrostatic test” and “number of close end branch pipes” with the average values of 4.78 and 3.31 have been found as the first and last priorities of importance to customers, respectively. The output of the first phase includes “equipments” as the first priority of control factors, and “changing market or customers wants” as the first priority of noise factors. The results of the second phase show that “fault‐free product” and “successful innovation outcomes” are, respectively, recognized as first priorities of response factors. Finally, “successful innovation outcomes” has been determined as the first priority of response factors.

The matrixes of the two phases could become larger if the number of factors in the P diagram increases, and therefore, filling and analyzing the matrixes might become time consuming and difficult.

The proposed integrated model can be effective for almost all organizations that aim to meet the dynamic needs of markets and customers and intend to incorporate innovation in their products and services. By the new approach, determination and prioritization of innovation factors can be done based on customers' viewpoint, while in the traditional approaches this was done only from the viewpoint of engineers and designers.

Companies needing to establish competitive advantage must ensure their products are brought to market quickly, with the quality features sought by potential customers. Concurrent Engineering techniques can reduce time scales, but quality issues are more difficult, as customers’ needs are not readily available to the project team throughout the design process, so design effort may focus on satisfying a functional specification, imperfectly translated from customer requirements, rather than on satisfying the real customer needs as perceived in the market. The research reported here demonstrates how a Concurrent Engineering environment and Quality Function Deployment techniques can be brought together to provide an extended design team with valuable, shared information throughout the design process.

The problem that original design manufacturing (ODM) companies encounter with the request for quotation (RFQ) process is that there is no effective and efficient methodology for them to formulate accurate and profitable RFQs. The purpose of this paper is to present a quality function deployment (QFD)‐, concurrent engineering (CE)‐, and target costing‐based methodology for ODM companies to formulate accurate and profitable RFQs.

From eight Taiwan electronics ODM companies, 15 people are interviewed to understand their current methods for formulating RFQs and the problems of these methods. Based on the interview results, it was decided to make use of the merits of QFD, CE, and target costing by integrating them into the proposed methodology.

A case study is presented to illustrate a successful application of the proposed methodology in a case company. The case study shows integrating QFD, CE, and target costing into the proposed methodology allows the authors to effectively and efficiently formulate an accurate and profitable RFQ for the case company.

The interview sample quantity of this study is limited to eight Taiwan electronics companies, which is insufficient to represent all ODM companies in various industries. For the future research, it is suggested researchers collect more samples from different industries in order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed methodology in ODM companies from different industries.

This paper aims to integrate QFD, CE, and target costing to come up with a systematic ten‐step approach that can accurately formulate the three parts of an RFQ: the product specifications proposal, the product price quotation, and the product development schedule. By adopting this methodology, ODM companies can provide accurate and profitable RFQs to ODM customers, thus increasing their chances of obtaining ODM business.

Market presence, quality and costs are primarily decided during product development – improved in the last 15 years by the implementation of basic concurrent engineering and now further extended by enhanced quality function deployment (EQFD). Another key improvement is extended reusability, which enables greater product variety, while staying higher on learning curves. Reusability is best planned and managed by using a reusability matrix which is responsive to the voices of the customers and fully integrated into the total development process. Outlines the integration of the reusability planning and the required interface management into EQFD, and thus the integration into total quality development.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the application of C-shaped QFD 3D Matrix in comparing process characteristics (PC), performance aspects (PA) and customer requirements, simultaneously and to prioritize the first two sets, respectively.

A three dimensional matrix has been developed with three sets of PC, PA and customers’ requirements and C-shaped matrix has been applied for simultaneous comparison of the dimensions and prioritization of the subsets of PC and PA. The proposed approach has been examined in a post bank.

Findings confirm the possibility of simultaneous comparison and prioritization of the three sets of dimensions of this study in post bank services. In addition, “growth and learning” and “bilateral relationship with suppliers” had the first priorities among PA and PC, respectively.

While the proposed approach has many advantages, filling the matrixes is time-consuming. Since illustrating the 3D matrix was not possible, the matrix was separated into five two-dimensional matrixes.

Compared to the studied literature, the proposed approach is practically new in the post bank services.

This study aims to develop a comprehensive set of determinants and sub-determinant of eco-innovation (EI) and to propose an approach for their structuring and prioritisation.

A framework was developed based on a literature review, interpretive structural modelling (ISM) was used to structure the main determinants and the results were transferred into a six-phase quality function deployment (QFD) for prioritising the sub-determinants. The statistical population included 15 experts and the middle/top managers of 130 knowledge-based companies.

Based on the results of the driving power and dependence diagram from the ISM, a seven-level classification of the main determinants has been used. The QFD results indicated ‘meeting environmental law standards’; ‘scale to support innovative strategies’; ‘commitment to continually improve and make eco-innovations’; ‘technological advisory oriented to environment’; ‘product and process EI oriented methods’; ‘improvements in energy efficiency across the company and the market’ and ‘reputation, brand image, and profit margin’ as the priorities of the sub-determinants of eco-innovation in the phases of the developed QFD.

The findings of this study provide evidence of the usefulness of decision-making approaches such as ISM and QFD in resolving environmental problems, which is helpful to analysts and practitioners in the field of EI.

The novel ISM+EID₂ approach proposed distinguishes this study from previous studies. The approach allows elaboration on the model presented by de Pacheco et al. (2017) by adding nine empirically derived sub-determinants.

The purpose of this paper is to propose an integrative approach for improving failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA).

An extensive literature review on FMEA has been performed. Then, an integrative approach has been proposed based on literature review. The proposed approach is an integration of FMEA and quality function deployment (QFD). The proposed approach includes a two-phase QFD. In the first phase, failure modes are prioritized based on failure effects and in the second phase, failure causes are prioritized based on failure modes. The proposed approach has been examined in a case example at the blast furnace operation of a steel-manufacturing company.

Results of the case example indicated that stove shell crack in hot blast blower, pump failure in cooling water supply pump and bleeder valves failed to operate are the first three important failure modes. In addition, fire and explosion are the most important failure effects. Also, improper maintenance, over pressure and excess temperature are the most important failure causes. Findings also indicated that the proposed approach with the consideration of interrelationships among failure effects, failure mode and failure causes can influence and adjust risk priority number (RPN) in FMEA.

As manufacturing departments are mostly dealing with failure effects and modes of machinery and maintenance departments are mostly dealing with causes of failures, the proposed model can support better coordination and integration between the two departments. Such support seems to be more important in firms with continuous production lines wherein line interruption influences response to customers more seriously. A wide range of future study opportunities indicates the attractiveness and contribution of the subject to the knowledge of FMEA.

Although the literature indicates that in most of studies the outcomes of QFD were entered into FMEA and in some studies the RPN of FMEA was entered into QFD as importance rating, the proposed approach is a true type of the so-called “integration of FMEA and QFD” because the three main elements of FMEA formed the structure of QFD. In other words, the proposed approach can be considered as an innovation in the FMEA structure, not as a data provider prior to it or a data receiver after it.

The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic review and analysis of existing research articles on new product development (NPD) published in the 12-year period starting from 1998 to 2009.

To explore the articles related to NPD, four key words namely new product, product design, product development and product innovation were used in combination of title or abstract or keyword of the articles through several knowledge databases. The abstracts of journal papers were read and a decision as to whether article belongs to any NPD research issue or not was made. In total, 1,127 research articles were categorized systematically and then analyzed on various principal NPD information groups.

Analysis of selected articles led to a certain level of dispersion in the publication of NPD research in different journals. It is found that more attention needs to be on knowledge and creativity management, communication and information transfer in any NPD process.

By observing extended literature from authors reviewing articles from various journals, growth in research, and variety of topics covered in NPD, a broad systematic multi journal review of NPD literature is clearly overdue. The authors have developed a comprehensive listing of publications on NPD where they have classified the surveyed papers according to various principal NPD information groups like: published year, NPD research stream, type of organization studied (industrial/consumer/service), level of innovation (high/moderate/low), NPD focus on frameworks, performance perspective (success, failure or both), NPD research design (conceptual/empirical and qualitative/quantitative) and NPD relevant best practice element. Based on the classification scheme, the issues were analyzed from the system's perspective and their implications to NPD research.