Dr. Surej P John
Kano’s model of Customer
Satisfaction
Origin of the Kano Model
Noriaki Kano
Professor at Tokyo Rika University
International Consultant
Received individual Demming Prize in 1997
Introduction
• Product/service quality is main
antecedent of customer satisfaction
(Cronin & Taylor 1992; Anderson & Sullivan 1993; Brady et al. 2002)
• Important to find out how each
attribute performance impacts on
satisfaction
• Prof. Kano pointed out that not all
product/service attributes have same
role in satisfying customer needs
Origin of the Kano Model
• Developed foundation for an approach on
“Attractive Quality Creation” commonly
referred to as the “Kano Model”
• Challenged traditional Customer
Satisfaction Models that More is better,
i.e. the more you perform on each service
attribute the more satisfied the
customers will be
Origin of the Kano Model
Proposed new Customer Satisfaction
model (Kano Model)
Performance on product and service
attributes is not equal in the eyes of
the customers
Performance on certain categories
attributes produces higher levels of
satisfaction than others
Introduction
• Separate among satisfaction, dissatisfaction
and delight since factors that dissatisfy and
that delight are often different (Rust, Zahorik &
Keiningham 1994)
• Ex. If a customer approaches an ATM then
finds it to be out of cash, the customer will
likely be dissatisfied, but it is unlikely that
finding an ATM stocked with cash would
satisfy or delight the customer
Kano’s Model of Satisfaction
Technique used to determine the
influence of attributes of products
and/or services have on customer
satisfaction (Kano et al. 1984)
Kano’s Model of Satisfaction
• Which products and services can be used
to obtain a high level of customer
satisfaction?
• Which product features have a more than
proportional influence on satisfaction
• Which attributes are an absolute must in
the eyes of the customer?
Kano’s Model of Satisfaction
Product/service attributes can be classified
into Five groups
1. Attractive Quality Attributes
2. One dimensional Quality Attributes
3. Must have Quality Attributes
4. Indifference Quality Attributes
5. Reverse Quality Attributes
Attractive Quality Attributes
• Produce satisfaction when delivered but
cause no dissatisfaction if not delivered
• These attributes are not normally
expected and often unintentionally
surprise and delight customers.
• High performance on these has a greater
impact on overall satisfaction rather than
low performance
• ex. (unexpected) promotional offers
Performance/One-dimensional Attributes
• Produce both satisfaction dissatisfaction
depending on performance levels
• Satisfaction is proportional to the level of
fulfillment of these attributes.
• These are the most visible attributes and with
which companies compete.
• ex. Gasoline consumption of a car; lower
consumption leads to higher customer
satisfaction
Must-be Attributes
• An attribute whose absence will result in
customer dissatisfaction, but whose
presence does not significantly contribute
to customer satisfaction.
• Minimum required features that
customer naturally expect from a
product/service
• Considered as basic attributes of a
product or a service.
• ex. Punctuality and safety of airline
Indifference Quality Attributes
• Indifferent attributes are those that customers
perceive as not contributing to their
satisfaction.
• Hence their presence or absence has no
effect on satisfaction.
Ex: A doorman at the hotels or Malls
Reverse Quality Attributes
• Reverse quality elements are those
attributes, which, if present, would lead to
customer dissatisfaction,
And if absent, would lead to customer
satisfaction.
Ex: Too many complex and extra features of
High tech products.
Three-Factor Theory
Typical Research Framework
Kano’s Model Process
• Identify the Voice of the Customer
• Translate Voice of the Customer into
Critical to Quality Characteristics (CTQs)
• Rank the CTQs into three categories:
– Dissatisfier - Must be’s – Cost of Entry
– Satisfier – More is better – Competitive
– Delighter – Latent Need – Differentiator
• Evaluate Current Performance
Kano Model
“Didn’t know I
wanted it but I
like it.”
Satisfaction
Satisfier
One Dimensional
Desired Quality
Delighters
Excited Quality
Service
Performance
Service
Performance
Dissatisfier
Must-be
Expected Quality
Dissatisfaction
“Cannot increase
my satisfaction, but
can decrease.”
Kano model process
• Analyze data from available sources
• Brainstorm list of features and functionality
• Determine type of requirements:
– Output Requirements
– Service Requirements
• Kano Model Requirements Survey
– User Survey
• “Functional form” vs. “Dysfunctional Form”
– “How would you feel if the product had feature X?”
– “How would you feel if the product didn’t have feature X?”
– Kano Questionnaire Answers:
• I like it.
• I expect it.
• I’m neutral.
• I can tolerate it.
• I dislike it.
Example: Requirements Survey
Example: Requirements Questionnaire
Functional vs. Dysfunctional Comparison
Functional vs. Dysfunctional Comparison
Basic Attribute
Functional vs. Dysfunctional Comparison
Performance
Attribute
Functional vs. Dysfunctional Comparison
Exciting
Attribute
Evaluation Customer Requirements
C.R.
1
A
3
E
6
O
14
2
5
6
11
3
6
1
4
13
10
1
2
4
5
11
R
1
Q
I
Total Grade
23
O
1
23
O
11
23
I
23
E
23
A
9
Customer Requirement is:
A: Attractive R: Reverse
Q: Questionable Result
E: Expected O: One Dimensional
I: Indifferent
3. Plot & Diagram
Satisfaction
Satisfier
One Dimensional
Desired Quality
Delighters
Attractive
Excited Quality
Service
Performance
Service
Performance
Dissatisfier
Must Be
Expected Quality
Dissatisfaction
Advantages
• Aids in understanding the
importance attributes that influence
customer satisfaction
• Helping the management in tradeoff situations in the attribute
implementation stage.
• Determining and satisfying
attractive attribute requirements of
Questions?
References
• Walder, D., (1993). Kano’s model for understanding customer-defined
quality. Center For Quality of Management Journal, 39, 65 – 69.
• Jacobs, R., (1997). Evaluating customer satisfaction with media
products and services. European Media Management Journal, 32, 11 –
18.
• Ungvari, S., (1999). Adding the third dimension to auqlity. Triz Journal,
40, 31 – 35.
• Sauerwein, E., Bailom, F., Matzler, K., & Hinterhuber, H. (1996). The
kano model: How to delight your customers. International Working
Seminar on Production Economics, 19, 313 - 327
• Zultner, R.E. & Mazur, G. H. ( 2006). The Kano Model: Recent
Developments. The eighteenth symposium on Quality Function
Deployment.
Dimensions of Quality
• Performance
• Reliability
• Convenience and
Accessibility
• Features
• Empathy
• Conformance to
Standards
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Serviceability
Durability
Aesthetics
Consistency
Assurance
Responsiveness
Perceived
Quality
32
Dimensions of Quality ( 1 of 6)
• PERFORMANCE: How well the output
does what it is supposed to do.
• RELIABILITY: probability of operating for
specific time and conditions of use
33
Dimensions of Quality (2 of 6)
• CONVENIENCE and ACCESSIBILITY: How
easy it is for a customer to use the product or
service.
• FEATURES: The characteristics of the output
that exceed the output’s basic functions.
34
Dimensions of Quality (3 of 6)
• EMPATHY: The demonstration of caring and
individual attention to customers.
• CONFORMANCE: The degree to which an
output meets specifications or requirements.
35
Dimensions of Quality (4 of 6)
• SERVICEABILITY: How easy it is for you or
the customer to fix the output with
minimum downtime or cost.
• DURABILITY: How long the output lasts.
• AESTHETICS: How a product looks, feels,
tastes, etc.
36
Dimensions of Quality (5 of 6)
• CONSISTENCY: The degree to which the
performance changes over time.
• ASSURANCE: The knowledge and courtesy of
the employees and their ability to elicit trust
and confidence; The ability of the output (and
its provider) to function as promised
37
Dimensions of Quality (6 of 6)
• RESPONSIVENESS: Willingness and ability
of employees to help customers and
provide proper services.
• PERCEIVED QUALITY: The relative quality
level of the output in the eyes of the
customers.
38
When is there too much Quality
• The cost of quality erodes the profit
• The quality is too far exceeding
customer expectations
• Rational turns to Irrational
39
Importance of Customer
Satisfaction and Loyalty
• “Satisfaction is an attitude; loyalty is a
behavior”
• Loyal customers spend more, are willing to
pay higher prices, refer new clients, and
are less costly to do business with.
• It costs five times more to find a new
customer than to keep an existing one happy
40
Measuring Customer Satisfaction
• Discover customer perceptions of
business effectiveness
• Compare company’s performance
relative to competitors
• Identify areas for improvement
• Track trends to determine if changes
result in improvements
41
Difficulties with Customer
Satisfaction Measurement
• Poor measurement schemes
• Failure to identify appropriate quality
dimensions
• Failure to weight dimensions appropriately
• Lack of comparison with leading
competitors
• Failure to measure potential and former
customers
• Confusing loyalty with satisfaction
42
Creative Problem Solving
• Mess Finding – identify symptoms
• Fact Finding – gather data; operational
definitions
• Problem Finding – find the root cause
• Idea Finding – brainstorming
• Solution Finding – evaluate ideas and
proposals
• Implementation – make the solution work
43