View source for Fitness for use

'''Fitness for use''' takes customers' requirements and expectations into account, which involve whether the products or services fit their uses. Since different customers may use the products in different ways, it means that products must possess multiple elements of fitness for use. Each of these elements is a [[quality]] characteristic and all of them can be classified into categories known as parameters for fitness for use<ref>S. H. Kan 2004, p.2-4</ref>. 

Fitness for use is assessed by directly comparing the quality elements of [[information]] against a set of standards that represent the corresponding acceptable quality components. To facilitate direct comparison, the standards are defined using the same elements as those used for describing data quality. Standards for information are ultimately determined by the acceptable margin of uncertainty in the final decision<ref> K. Lowell, A. Jaton 2000, p.33-36</ref>.

==Dimensions of fitness for use==
Fitness for use consists of five major dimensions:
* '''[[quality of design]]''' involves the [[product]] design concept and its specification. 
* '''quality of conformance''' reflects the match between actual products and design specifications.
* '''availability''' refers to a product's readiness for use
* '''safety''' could be assessed by calculating the [[risk]] of injury due to product usage
* '''field use''' refers to a product's conformance and condition after it reached the customers' hands
It is developed a comprehensive approach to quality that spanned a product's entire life cycle- from [[board]] room to drawing room and every point in between<ref>B. Janakiraman, R. K. Gopal 2006, p.71-72</ref>.

==The advantage of fitness for use==
The advantage of fitness for use is simply that in most cases less strict requirements can be applied. This is much more efficient in terms of the time frames needed for Risk [[Management]] activities and costs. Besides that, for many scientists, consultants and regulators, but also for general public. Fitness for use is a rather logical concept. The idea behind this conception is that, such as most common things in life, things [[need]] to be suited for a specific, appropriate purpose. A garage, for example, [[needs]] to be suitable for parking a car and not as a playground for children<ref>F. A. Swartjes 2011, p.65-66</ref>.

==Example of fitness use==
Fitness for use focuses on how well the product performs its intended function or use. For example, a Mercedes-Benz and a Jeep Cherokee both meet a fitness for use definition if one considers transportation as the intended function. However, if the definition becomes more specific and assumes that the intended use is for transportation on mountain roads and carrying fishing gear, the Jeep Cherokee has a greater fitness for use. You can also see that fitness for use is a user-based definition in that it intended to meet the needs of a specific user group<ref>R. D. Reid, N. R. Sanders 2015, p.152</ref>.

==Limitations of Fitness for use==
* Fitness for use is only an [[evaluation]] of a product from a subjective point of view, as it is based on customers' individual requirements and expectations.
* Fitness for use does not always take into account the technical specifications of the product, which may be important for its performance.
* Fitness for use does not consider the [[cost]] of the product, which is also a key factor in making a purchase decision.
* Fitness for use does not take into account the sustainability of the product, which is becoming increasingly important in today’s world.
* Fitness for use is not always applicable in cases where products are used in a way that was not intended.

==Other approaches related to Fitness for use==
* '''[[Quality Function Deployment]] (QFD)''': QFD is a [[process]] that translates [[customer]] requirements into design characteristics. It is a structured approach which involves creating a [[system]] of linked matrices that captures [[customer needs]], which can then be used to ensure that the product meets [[customer expectations]].
* '''[[Failure Mode and Effects Analysis]] ([[FMEA]])''': FMEA is a tool used to identify [[potential product]] or system failures and their associated causes and effects. It is based on the idea that problems can be prevented through the [[identification]] of potential failure points and the implementation of corrective [[action]].
* '''Design of Experiments (DOE)''': DOE is a structured approach to experimentation that involves performing a series of tests with different variables and conditions to determine how they affect the outcome. This approach is used to determine optimal process parameters and to identify potential problems.

These approaches are all related to Fitness for Use in that they are used to identify potential problems and ensure that the product meets customer expectations. Quality Function Deployment is used to translate [[customer requirements]] into design characteristics. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis is used to identify potential product or system failures and their causes and effects. Design of Experiments is used to determine optimal process parameters and to identify potential problems. All of these approaches are used to ensure that the product meets customer expectations and is fit for use. 

In summary, Quality Function Deployment, Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, and Design of Experiments are all approaches related to Fitness for Use. These approaches are used to identify potential problems, determine process parameters, and ensure that the product meets customer expectations.

==Footnotes== 
<references />

{{infobox5|list1={{i5link|a=[[Analysis of preferences]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[System safety]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Process performance]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Evaluation criteria]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Kano model]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Designed quality]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Design risk assessment]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Quality Function Deployment]]}} &mdash; {{i5link|a=[[Cost model]]}} }}

==References==
* Janakiraman B., Gopal R.K.,(2006). ''[https://books.google.pl/books?id=-Ljyx785QvUC&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Total Quality Management]'' "PHI Learning"
* Kan S.H.,(2004). ''[https://books.google.pl/books?id=EaefcL3pWJYC&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Metrics and Models in Software Quality Engineering]'' "Addison-Wesley Professional"
* Lowell K., Jaton A.,(2000). ''[https://books.google.pl/books?id=Q0hZDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Spatial Accuracy Assessment]'' "CRC Press"
* Reid R.D., Sanders N.R., (2015). ''[https://books.google.pl/books?id=9OpRCgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Operations Management]'' "John Wiley & Sons"
* Swartjes F.A., (2011). ''[https://books.google.pl/books?id=VA6Zp69BO60C&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Dealing with Contaminated Sites]'' "Springer Science & Business Media"

{{a|Karina Stefańska}}  
[[Category:Production management]]