Running head: KANO MODEL
1
Discussion Board Forum Two: Kano Model
Valerie K. Delgado
Liberty University
BUSI 650: Operations Management
Dr. Bob Timmons
KANO MODEL
2
Discussion Board Forum Two: Kano Model
Key Concept Explanation
The Kano Model, also called the Kano model of excitement and basic quality by Tontini
(2007), aims to show the relationship that exists between performance and satisfaction. The
Kano Model is part of the define phase of any Six Sigma project and is responsible for
determining customer requirements by classifying them as either dissatisfiers, satisfiers, or
delighters.
Tontini (2007) termed these in easier to understand terms as basic requirements,
performance requirements, and excitement requirements, respectively. Dissatisfiers, or basic
requirements, are those that satisfy the most basic functions of a product (Tontini, 2007) such as
the spare tire in a car or air bags. These are products that are assumed to be there and do not
cause any real excitement but if they are missing, have the ability to cause dissatisfaction.
Satisfiers, or performance requirements, are traits such as gas consumption where the higher the
performance, the higher the level of satisfaction. Lastly are the delighters, or excitement
requirements, that are “key to customer satisfaction” (Tontini, 2007, p.). These are the items that
are not demanded by customers nor expected, but when they are present and have high
performance, they bring absolute delight. An example of a delighter is a free gift card at the end
of the meal that was not demanded or expected, but still pleased the customer.
Comparison
“The critical determinant of success in any industry is the customers’ perception of the
products and services offered” (Materla, Cudney, & Antony, 2017, p.660). Plain and simple, if
organizations are not focused in on what customers want they will risk growth and sustainability
KANO MODEL
3
(Materla, Cudney, & Antony, 2017). While there are hundreds, probably thousands, of articles
related to customer satisfaction, there are four here that specifically use the Kano Model as a
means of studying customer satisfaction, whether it be to aid in developing a new beer mug,
studying hotel hospitality, or even as it relates and can be used in the healthcare industry.
It is hard to discuss the Kano Model without also discussing quality. In articles by
Tontini (2007), Luor, Lu, Chien, and Wu (2012), Kuo, Chen, and Boger (2015), and Materla,
Cudney, and Antony (2017) the concept of quality, both product and service, goes hand-in-hand
with the Kano Model as it relates to customer satisfaction. Tontini (2007) along with Kuo, Chen,
and Boger (2015) ties the Kano Model to Quality Function Deployment in an effort to show that
it is not simply what is present, but the quality perceived from it and how satisfied customers are.
Luor et al. (2012) also found that the idea of quality was tied to the Kano Model in several of the
94 academic articles they reviewed. In fact, most of their keyword searches included the word
quality. Kuo, Chen, and Boger (2015) narrowed their study to the perceived satisfaction from
hotel hospitality quality in several hotels in Taichung, Taiwan and much like Tontini (2007) tied
Quality Function Deployment into the mix.
All three articles have also adjusted the terms used in the Kano Model. Tontini (2007)
uses basic, performance, and excitement requirements while Luor et al. (2012) and Kuo, Chen,
and Boger (2015) actually expand customer reactions into five categories: “attractive, one-
dimensional, must-be, indifferent and reverse” (Luor et al., 2012, p.234). Attractive attributes
that are satisfied please customers, present on-dimensional attributes please customers, must-be
attributes that are not present will displease customers, indifferent attributes neither please nor
displease customers, and reverse attributes only please customers if they are not achieved (Kuo,
Chen, & Boger, 2015).
KANO MODEL
4
Article Summary
As mentioned above, Tontini (2007) discusses the idea behind the Kano Model in his
research. He specifically studied the way in which the Kano Model, combined with quality
function deployment (QFD) could work together to design new draft beer mug products. The
QFD method has been known to deter innovative ideas while focusing too much on priority
requirements whereas the Kano Model introduces exciting customer requirements which can
spur innovativeness (Tontini, 2007). Based on customer responses to questions about the
importance of different product requirements, Tontini (2007) developed a new set of situations
that took into account the Kano Model classifications along with how important customers
thought a product or service was, in addition to how well the requirement performed. In
summary, the four new relationships were now either a basic or excitement requirement with
either low or high performance, with either equal, inferior, or superior performance when
compared to competitors.
During the study, subjects rated product importance levels and satisfaction levels of
existent and nonexistent requirements. Tontini (2007) found that some of the excitement
requirements based on the participant’s answers were that the mugs were easy to drink from, had
ergonomic body design, and resisted impacts and spills. A basic requirement included keeping
beer cold and a neutral requirement was being lightweight. Overall, what Tontini (2007) found
was that by integrating the Kano Model into Quality Function Deployment, new perspectives on
innovative feature development can be obtained and used toward new product developments.
Biblical Integration
KANO MODEL
5
There are a few biblical references that can be tied to ideas that are included in the Kano
Model and the idea of quality and satisfaction. The first is in relation to the idea of perspective
and using and the Kano Model to determine what it is that customers want and desire, in other
words, gaining new perspectives. James 1:5 says that if we lack wisdom, to look to God. In this
case, if a company is unsure of how to better compete, what better way than to ask those who are
ultimately responsible, their customers. Along the same lines of knowledge is Matthew 25:21
(KJV) where sometimes it seems difficult to follow all of the commandments for lack of
knowledge or other reasons, and potentially a lack of excitement, but in the end, trusting the
process will pay off. If companies can remember that creating value for customers is at the
forefront of their success and they trust the process through which the Kano Model can provide,
they can ultimately share in the excitement of growth opportunities.
Application
A real world example using the Kano Model is in reference to automobiles and the
features customers deem as dissatisfiers, satisfiers, and delighters. A dissatisfier example is the
spare tire that comes standard with most automobiles. Manufacturers may include a temporary
tire while others include a full size tire. Either way, most customers do not consider which type
of spare is included since they see this a standard feature and are more concerned with other
features the car has to offer. A satisfier when purchasing an automobile would be the price.
There will inevitably be a price point at which the customer goes from satisfied to dissatisfied.
The higher the price rises, the more dissatisfied they are and the lower the price goes, the more
satisfied they are. Lastly, delighters in the automobile industry include items such as theater
lighting that automatically dim at night and features such as park assist.
KANO MODEL
6
Annotated Bibliography
Kuo, C., Chen, H., & Boger, E. (2015). Implementing city hotel service quality
enhancements: Integration of Kano and QFD Analytical Models. Journal of
Hospitality Marketing & Management, 25(6), 748-770.
In this article the authors seek to understand what it is that satisfies customers in
terms of hotel hospitality using both the Kano and QFD models. They studied
two similarly located competitive luxury hotels in Taichung, Taiwan to determine
the best way for hotel management to ensure customer contentment and
faithfulness. They begin by discussing overall service quality in the hotel
industry due to its need in order to be successful and developed a questionnaire.
They then placed customer requirement satisfaction levels into Kano Model
categories as either attractive, one-dimensional, must-be, indifferent, or reverse.
Next they used the Quality Function Deployment Model to identify what
customers required the most and how to achieve them which identified 27 total
quality attributes, five of which were most important above all others. Overall,
they found that both hotels had a very similar average satisfaction rating amongst
those surveyed but that the S Hotel needed to focus on improving soft services,
such as employee attitudes, whereas the E Hotel needed to focus on improving
hard services, such as amenities and parking.
Luor, T., Lu, H., Chien, K., & Wu, T. (2012). Contribution to quality research: A literature
review of Kano’s model from 1998 to 2012. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 26(3-4), 234-247.
KANO MODEL
7
The authors of this article were most interested in studying the research that has
been done on the Kano Model from 1998 to 2012. Using the keywords “Kano”
and “quality” they uncovered over 90 articles that could be classified into either
business economics, engineering, operations research management, or computer
science subject areas. The authors then developed a rating system to compute the
impact the articles had as well as the authors themselves by how many times they
were cited for their work on the Kano Model. They found that more than half of
the articles were found in five top journals and over 30 of the 94 articles came
from Taiwan. Out of the 94 articles, five authors had contributed three or more
articles while over 80 authors had contributed less than three. Out of the 94
articles, one article by Matzler and Hinterhuber in 1998 was cited over 100 times,
double that of the second most cited article. Overall, the authors found
considerable researchers, articles, and contributions to the study of the Kano
Model.
Materla, T., Cudney, E., & Antony, J. (2017). The application of Kano model in the
healthcare industry: a systematic literature review. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 30(5-6), 660-681.
In this article, the authors sought out to determine how the Kano Model could be
integrated with other quality models to determine customer requirements that will
aid in improving the quality of healthcare services offered. Their hope in this
study was to identify ways that healthcare providers could understand the service
quality needs of customers and then use the information to develop long-term
improvement strategies.
KANO MODEL
8
Tontini, G. (2007). Integrating the Kano Model and QFD for designing new products.
Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(6), 599-612.
In this article, the author sought to discover the impact of integrating the Kano
Model with Quality Function Deployment (QFD) in the design and development
of a new draft beer mug. In his initial research he realized that although it is
imperative to continually increase customer satisfaction, it can be crippling to
avoid their dissatisfaction. He goes on to explain QFD and the Kano Model, but
then proposes a new method that integrates the two, where an adjustment to
quality satisfaction factor is used to give categories a numerical value. He
sampled a total of 289 subjects where he found that over 60% of them use draft
beer mugs. Of these 185 subjects, each was asked to rate, on a scale of -3 to 3,
their satisfaction with two levels of requirements on seven different categories.
From this data he was able to move forward with five potential new designs
where he then studied the satisfaction levels of 44 potential customers who ranked
the new designs on a scale from 1 to 5 based on their preference. From these
answers, the new design was chosen which several respondents mentioned liking
the new ergonomic body, rubber insulation, and ergonomic border.
