Kano model: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Text cleaning) |
||
| (56 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Kano | The man behind this model is a Japanese instructor named '''Noriaki Kano'''. The '''Kano model''' is a complex approach to understand [[customer]] [[needs]] and desires and their value to various attributes of products and services <ref> Conway [[management]] (2020), p.1 </ref>. | ||
==Introduction of the model== | |||
This tool aims to help answer the following questions <ref> Conway management (2020), p.1 </ref>: | |||
* What do customers appreciate? | |||
* What do customers expect? | |||
* What excites customers? | |||
*What do customers appreciate? | |||
*What do customers expect? | |||
*What excites customers? | |||
Customers often don't identify these needs, but they are impressed when some unexpected attributes are delivered. | Customers often don't identify these needs, but they are impressed when some unexpected attributes are delivered. | ||
===Multi-attribute product model=== | ===Multi-attribute product model=== | ||
The multi-attribute [[product]] model (MAP) is the conceptual basis that is used to measure [[attitude]]. A product from the customer's perspective can be described as a specific basket of attributes that provides the basic functionality of the product category under consideration and a set of necessary or added peripheral features, which constitute distinctive elements (attributes) of a product and whose importance and degree of presence may be perceived differently by potential customers and thus influence their choice <ref> Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.107 </ref>. | |||
The multi-attribute product model (MAP) is the conceptual basis that is used to measure attitude. A product from the customer's perspective can be described as a specific basket of attributes that provides the basic functionality of the product category under consideration and a set of necessary or added peripheral features, which constitute distinctive elements (attributes) of a product and whose importance and degree of presence may be perceived differently by potential customers and thus influence their choice. | |||
===Kano’s idea=== | ===Kano’s idea=== | ||
Kano's basic idea will be explained now. By "attribute" we mean the benefit sought by the customer: it is the attribute that generates [[service]], satisfaction and is used as a criterion for choice. Attributes can be functional, intangible, perceptual or affective. An attribute is in fact a variable; it may take on different values reflecting the degree of presence of the attribute in the [[brand]] being evaluated. The higher the performance of the attribute, the higher the satisfaction but not proportionally. Attributes can be ranked according to the impact they have on [[customer satisfaction]] <ref> Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.111 </ref>. | |||
==Kano’s diagram== | |||
The Kano diagram expresses customer satisfaction as a function of the attribute. The vertical axis represents the level of satisfaction: bottom = dissatisfied and top = satisfied. The horizontal axis represents the extent to which expectations were met: left = [[Need]] not fulfilled and right = Need well fullfilled. More and more peripheral attributes are being added <ref> Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.111 </ref>. These attributes can be classified according to the impact they have on customer satisfaction. We can thus distinguish 3 types of attributes <ref> Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.112 </ref>: | |||
[[File:Kanodiagram.png|right|thumb|Fig. 1 Kano's diagram]] | |||
* '''Basic attributes''': indispensable in the eyes of customers. They rarely notice them, but their [[absence]] will lead to complaints. These basic attributes are called "basic" because an increase in their performance beyond the minimum required will not increase customer satisfaction. | |||
The Kano diagram expresses customer satisfaction as a function of the attribute. The vertical axis represents the level of satisfaction: bottom = dissatisfied and top = satisfied. The horizontal axis represents the extent to which expectations were met: left = Need not fulfilled and right = Need well fullfilled. More and more peripheral attributes are being added. These attributes can be classified according to the impact they have on customer satisfaction. We can thus distinguish 3 types of attributes: | Example: I buy a bicycle at the sports shop. I hope to use it on the road and to protect myself from accidents, I need it to have brakes. ➔ ''Less than proportional increase in satisfaction.'' | ||
* '''Performance attributes''': they continue to increase customer satisfaction as their performance increases. There is no saturation in the eyes of the customer. These attributes offer brands the opportunity to stand out as they serve as a comparison between competing offers. | |||
[[File: | Example: As I use my bike to go to [[work]], and I have to carry it up and down the stairs. I prefer my bike to be lighter. The lighter it is, the more satisfied I am. ➔ ''Proportional increase in satisfaction.'' | ||
* '''Excitement attributes''': They are the attributes that, when present, the customers say "wow". These are unexpected and highly valued benefits. Their absence does not cause dissatisfaction, but their presence inspires satisfaction more than proportional to their performance. It can be a determining factor in choice. | |||
*Basic attributes: indispensable in the eyes of customers. They rarely notice them, but their absence will lead to complaints. These basic attributes are called "basic" because an increase in their performance beyond the minimum required will not increase customer satisfaction. | Example: The small detail that will change the game. In my case, I prefer a clean design and a sober colour. So I would choose a black bike without accessories rather than a coloured bike with lots of accessories. ➔ ''More than proportional increase in satisfaction''. | ||
Example: I buy a bicycle at the sports shop. I hope to use it on the road and to protect myself from accidents, I need it to have brakes. | '''Caution''': Competitors will follow the trend and excitement attributes will become performance attributes and then eventually core performance attributes, and eventually core attributes. Buyers will only choose only exceptional attributes. The attributes that stand out will potentially be The attributes that stand out will be potentially decisive in the choice [[process]]. It is therefore necessary to find the right balance between performance and satisfaction <ref> Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.114 </ref>. | ||
➔ Less than proportional increase in satisfaction. | |||
*Performance attributes: they continue to increase customer satisfaction as their performance increases. There is no saturation in the eyes of the customer. These attributes offer brands the opportunity to stand out as they serve as a comparison between competing offers. | |||
Example: As I use my bike to go to work, and I have to carry it up and down the stairs. I prefer my bike to be lighter. The lighter it is, the more satisfied I am. | |||
➔ Proportional increase in satisfaction. | |||
*Excitement attributes: They are the attributes that, when present, the customers say | |||
Example: | |||
➔ More than proportional increase in satisfaction. | |||
'''Caution''': Competitors will follow the trend and excitement attributes will become performance attributes and then eventually core performance attributes, and eventually core attributes. Buyers will only choose only exceptional attributes. The attributes that stand out will potentially be The attributes that stand out will be potentially decisive in the choice process. It is therefore necessary to find the right balance between performance and satisfaction. | |||
==Kano’s derivative; Type IV== | |||
With Kano’s diagram, we describe the three most commonly used modifications of the Kano model and systematically analyze the most important effects of these modifications. A new approach, type IV, is then proposed. Type IV eliminates the failing identified in the existing approaches described above: exactitude for the manufacturer and [[method]] difficulty for the customer. The proposed approach is based on a modification of the requirements [[classification]] process aimed at minimizing the mismatch zone between the calculated and actual positions of specific requirements <ref> Peter Madzík (2018), p.405 </ref>. | |||
==Footnotes== | |||
<references/> | |||
[[ | {{infobox5|list1={{i5link|a=[[Perceived quality]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Brand equity measure]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[RATER model]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Sampling]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Quality loss function]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Quality Function Deployment]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[SERVQUAL]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Designed quality]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Fitness for use]]}} }} | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Conway management (2020), | * Conway management (2020), [https://conwaymgmt.com/pdfs/KanoModel.pdf ''Kano Model''], Conway Management [[Company]], Nashua. | ||
* Lambin J-J., de Moerloose C. (2021),[https://books.google.pl/books/about/Marketing_strat%C3%A9gique_et_op%C3%A9rationnel.html?id=Ob9ZzgEACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y ''Marketing stratégique et opérationnel: La démarche marketing dans une perspective responsable''] , Dunod, Paris. | |||
* Madzík P. (2018), [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14783363.2016.1194197 ''Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Volume 29''], Routledge, Milton Park. | |||
[[Category:Marketing]] | |||
{{a|MATHIEU Amaury}} | {{a|MATHIEU Amaury}} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:30, 17 November 2023
The man behind this model is a Japanese instructor named Noriaki Kano. The Kano model is a complex approach to understand customer needs and desires and their value to various attributes of products and services [1].
Introduction of the model
This tool aims to help answer the following questions [2]:
- What do customers appreciate?
- What do customers expect?
- What excites customers?
Customers often don't identify these needs, but they are impressed when some unexpected attributes are delivered.
Multi-attribute product model
The multi-attribute product model (MAP) is the conceptual basis that is used to measure attitude. A product from the customer's perspective can be described as a specific basket of attributes that provides the basic functionality of the product category under consideration and a set of necessary or added peripheral features, which constitute distinctive elements (attributes) of a product and whose importance and degree of presence may be perceived differently by potential customers and thus influence their choice [3].
Kano’s idea
Kano's basic idea will be explained now. By "attribute" we mean the benefit sought by the customer: it is the attribute that generates service, satisfaction and is used as a criterion for choice. Attributes can be functional, intangible, perceptual or affective. An attribute is in fact a variable; it may take on different values reflecting the degree of presence of the attribute in the brand being evaluated. The higher the performance of the attribute, the higher the satisfaction but not proportionally. Attributes can be ranked according to the impact they have on customer satisfaction [4].
Kano’s diagram
The Kano diagram expresses customer satisfaction as a function of the attribute. The vertical axis represents the level of satisfaction: bottom = dissatisfied and top = satisfied. The horizontal axis represents the extent to which expectations were met: left = Need not fulfilled and right = Need well fullfilled. More and more peripheral attributes are being added [5]. These attributes can be classified according to the impact they have on customer satisfaction. We can thus distinguish 3 types of attributes [6]:
- Basic attributes: indispensable in the eyes of customers. They rarely notice them, but their absence will lead to complaints. These basic attributes are called "basic" because an increase in their performance beyond the minimum required will not increase customer satisfaction.
Example: I buy a bicycle at the sports shop. I hope to use it on the road and to protect myself from accidents, I need it to have brakes. ➔ Less than proportional increase in satisfaction.
- Performance attributes: they continue to increase customer satisfaction as their performance increases. There is no saturation in the eyes of the customer. These attributes offer brands the opportunity to stand out as they serve as a comparison between competing offers.
Example: As I use my bike to go to work, and I have to carry it up and down the stairs. I prefer my bike to be lighter. The lighter it is, the more satisfied I am. ➔ Proportional increase in satisfaction.
- Excitement attributes: They are the attributes that, when present, the customers say "wow". These are unexpected and highly valued benefits. Their absence does not cause dissatisfaction, but their presence inspires satisfaction more than proportional to their performance. It can be a determining factor in choice.
Example: The small detail that will change the game. In my case, I prefer a clean design and a sober colour. So I would choose a black bike without accessories rather than a coloured bike with lots of accessories. ➔ More than proportional increase in satisfaction. Caution: Competitors will follow the trend and excitement attributes will become performance attributes and then eventually core performance attributes, and eventually core attributes. Buyers will only choose only exceptional attributes. The attributes that stand out will potentially be The attributes that stand out will be potentially decisive in the choice process. It is therefore necessary to find the right balance between performance and satisfaction [7].
Kano’s derivative; Type IV
With Kano’s diagram, we describe the three most commonly used modifications of the Kano model and systematically analyze the most important effects of these modifications. A new approach, type IV, is then proposed. Type IV eliminates the failing identified in the existing approaches described above: exactitude for the manufacturer and method difficulty for the customer. The proposed approach is based on a modification of the requirements classification process aimed at minimizing the mismatch zone between the calculated and actual positions of specific requirements [8].
Footnotes
- ↑ Conway management (2020), p.1
- ↑ Conway management (2020), p.1
- ↑ Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.107
- ↑ Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.111
- ↑ Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.111
- ↑ Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.112
- ↑ Jean-Jacques Lambin, Chantal de Moerloose (2021), p.114
- ↑ Peter Madzík (2018), p.405
| Kano model — recommended articles |
| Perceived quality — Brand equity measure — RATER model — Sampling — Quality loss function — Quality Function Deployment — SERVQUAL — Designed quality — Fitness for use |
References
- Conway management (2020), Kano Model, Conway Management Company, Nashua.
- Lambin J-J., de Moerloose C. (2021),Marketing stratégique et opérationnel: La démarche marketing dans une perspective responsable , Dunod, Paris.
- Madzík P. (2018), Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Volume 29, Routledge, Milton Park.
Author: MATHIEU Amaury
