Contemporary Quality Function Deployment for Product and Process Innovation

The following sections are included:

• Dedication
• Preface
• About the Author
• Acknowledgements
• Contents

In this first part of the book, you will be briefly introduced to the philosophy, general theory, and methodological use of QFD. You will then be familiarized with QFD’s matrices, individual rooms and commonly used symbols, as well as alternative QFD systems. An introduction and a background to the illustrative case of beer development and manufacturing are then presented, and finally the general industrial use of facilitating methodologies and tools will be discussed.

In today’s world, the extensive internal and external collaborations, sophisticated product specifications and shorter product development cycles of the company make developmental work very demanding on the R&D department. It is no longer sufficient to develop a product that pleases the customer; it must also be better than the competing products in the global marketplace and must be produced using cost-efficient production processes. The QFD methodology can address all these aspects of today’s product innovation; moreover, it also serves as a tool for “knowledge creation and utilization”, which is a major theme and message of this book.

Throughout this book, the “development and manufacturing of beer” has been selected as the illustrative case for how to use the QFD methodology in product innovation. The criteria for the case selection were:

• A product and a related production process that a reader easily can identify as a process-industrial product and production process.
• A product that is the final outcome of a long supply/value chain that starts with a number of primary (first-tier) raw materials.
• A case that well illustrates how the mpQFD system can be used in progressing Customer Requirements into the production system.
• A product and process about which the reader not only may be familiar with but also may be interested to learn more about.

In times of tight company resources and a continual need to improve company performance in all areas, including R&D, the use of effective and efficient tools and development methodologies for R&D is one avenue to follow. But is the price a company pays to learn, introduce and use a methodology worth the benefits it will share in various forms (e.g., product improvements, better work processes, etc.)? Sometimes new methodologies have hardly been introduced in a company before new tools are presented and advocated by academics, consultants or pioneering industry professionals. It is thus important not only to have a clear company strategy for the selection and implementation of methodologies and tools for innovation but also to secure organizational solutions to make company methodology use sustainable. There are certainly pros and cons for the use of development methodologies, but the frequent industrial use of different types of methodologies and the associated company resources they demand make assuring the productivity of development methodologies a growing company concern for R&D.

You have now become familiarized with the QFD product innovation methodology, one of the most widely used methodologies in product innovation. You have further been acquainted with the Voice of the Customer and the House of Quality as the common denominators of all QFD systems. You have learned that Product Design Requirements must be progressed as requirements on production system capabilities, in order to secure a cost-efficient product manufacturing process. However, it has also been pointed out that the process-industrial innovation environment requires adapted methodologies, which will be further discussed in the next part of the book…

Writing a book about management of product innovation and QFD use, and the use of the QFD in the process industries in particular, requires careful consideration of the environment for process-industrial product innovation. The reason for this is that one must recognize the characteristic features of different kinds of industries that will influence not only innovation and innovation-related activities but also the proper use of development methodologies. In all industrial undertakings today, it is necessary to use supporting methodologies and tools in order to facilitate and improve the performance and quality of a spectrum of company activities, including R&D and product innovation. There are fortunately today an abundant number of such methodologies available, so the question is not really whether they should be deployed or not, but rather WHICH methodologies should be used and WHY, WHEN and HOW they should be deployed.

The cluster of industries generally called the “process industries” spans multiple industrial sectors, constitutes a substantial part of the entire manufacturing industry and is generally considered to include petrochemicals and chemicals, food and beverages, mining and metals, mineral and materials, generic pharmaceuticals, pulp and paper, steel and utilities.

The following sections are included:

• Introducing the formal work processes for innovation
• The formal product innovation work process — lessons from past
• The process-industrial experimental innovation environment
• Current process-industrial innovation work processes

The subject of the QFD methodology’s application in the process industries is sparsely and unfairly treated in the reference literature. In the presentation of the Four Phases of Matrices system by Day (1993), the use of QFD for process industry application is treated in five pages and is mainly a reference to ASI QFD models (American Supplier Institute, 1989). In the extensive textbook on QFD by Cohen (1995), the subject of the process-industrial use of QFD is not discussed at all. The best presentation of the Four Phases of Matrices system for the process industries is to be found in the ASI workshop manuals (American Supplier Institute, 1989), where the methodology’s adaptation for use in the process industries is presented on only a few pages, using the frequently cited case of the manufacturing of chocolate cake…

In the management of R&D, methodologies and tools to facilitate and improve the performance of various R&D activities come and go. Sometimes methodologies disappear because they were not good enough to withstand the tough industrial environment and its high demands on industrial usability. Sometimes methodologies are introduced in companies with good results but do receive further attention or a “company champion” to keep them alive when new promising tools emerge and are promoted by company R&D management. However, Quality Function Deployment is now, after about 30 years of industrial use, a well proven and mature development methodology…

You have now been acquainted with the unique process-industrial environment for product innovation and with the fact that a QFD system must be adapted in order to succeed under such process-industrial conditions. A general product innovation work process and a simplified process-industrial product innovation work process have been outlined. You have gained a fundamental understanding of the structural parts of the product innovation work process, which is most important for a proper use of the QFD methodology in general. The overall theme of this book is how the QFD methodology should support such a work process in order to make product innovation more efficient…

The following sections are included:

• In search of a holistic perspective in product innovation
• An operational QFD definition selected for this book
• The overall work process for the total Multiple Progression QFD system
• Using the Voice of the Customer for customer interaction and customer understanding
• Using the House of Quality to move from a “customer dimension” to a “product technical dimension”
• Matrix analysis and provisional target setting for a new or improved product — merging the total product information

The following sections are included:

• Identify the customers for the product and build a Stakeholder Structure
• Collect customer requirements from selected stakeholders
• Build a hierarchic structure of all Customer Requirements
• Return to selected customers for further importance ratings and customer benchmarking
• Develop and design supplementary rooms of interest
• Putting it all together in the “Voice of the Customer”
• The illustrative case of development and manufacturing of beer — The “Voice of the Customer”

The Burgundy Wine Castle in Fig. 11.1 is a proper metaphor for a House of Quality in the QFD methodology. This castle was built many centuries ago but is still a usable and functional building. Similarly, a House of Quality is an important company asset that should be developed, refined, updated and used for many years to come in product innovation. No two castles look exactly the same; likewise, each House of Quality, if properly constructed, will contain a number of standard rooms as well as rooms particularly developed and designed in order to capture specific knowledge related to individual products.

The above quote from top scholars in social sciences underscores the unique capability of the QFD matrices as instruments for collection and analysis of a huge amounts of information in product innovation. In one’s development of the QFD matrices, one must thus observe the importance of designing the rooms using different fonts, different colours and selected symbols facilitating the display and analysis of important information.

In this part of the book, you have learned the rationale for the often-used mantra of “listen to the voice of the customers”, and you have been presented with a methodology that can assist you in this endeavour. Some complementary ways to interact with customers have been presented, and it is argued that sometimes several of them can be successfully deployed simultaneously in one project. The most important message, however, is not how to do it but simply the importance of doing it…

In the previous review of the process-industrial use of the QFD methodology in Part II of the book, and in the further acknowledgement of the QFD methodology as a knowledge-building instrument in the following Part V, it will be noted that, unfortunately, the industrial use of the QFD upstream or downstream matrices is scarce. One likely cause for this state of affairs is that after the development of a House of Quality, a QFD team will sometimes experience fatigue and thus prefer to take a pause before proceeding with further methodology implementation and use. Surveying phase progression in the literature, including other manufacturing industries, the development of the customer-oriented House of Quality is often in focus, possibly related to QFD users’ lesser knowledge of industrial production systems and process technologies. However, it is argued in this book that in neglecting the opportunity of phase progression in product innovation, an important advantage in the industrial use of the QFD methodology is overlooked…

In a recent study of an improved packaging innovation work process at Nestlé, and in reference to the above quotation, the use of the QFD methodology as an integrating tool between company products and its production system emerged as an interesting instrument to further explore. While seeking technical solutions is the major concern in product design, it is at the production stage that product costs are actually committed, product quality is finally determined, and lead times for product launch are set. This implies that the rationale of cost-efficient and successful product innovation can only be fulfilled at the production stage (Jianxin et al., 2007)…

In other manufacturing industries, the integration of component suppliers in the development of new or improved products is crucial; consequently, it is currently common product innovation best practice. However, in process-industrial product innovation, the integration of raw material and ingredient suppliers in product innovation is unfortunately still often in its infancy. This chapter will discuss how Raw material Matrices can be developed, designed and used to lend overall support to company product innovation in the process industries…

It has already been mentioned that the largely homogenous products produced in the process industries appear “low tech” for the superficial onlooker but in reality often have a high inherent material complexity. It was thus before pointed out in Chapter 8 that a QFD system that is well adapted to process-industrial product innovation must have an ability to relate Product Design Requirements to such inherent product characteristics. In other words, the system must facilitate an understanding of how internal product characteristics cause improved product functionalities in a customer’s use of a product. In this book, such product characteristics have been denominated Explanatory Product Characteristics; in Fig. 16.1, this concept is further discussed…

In Chapter 8, the above issue was identified as an important problem that a QFD system must address in process-industrial product innovation of excellence. If the company products are intended for consumers and B2C customers, the House of Quality is the final interface between the company and its end-users. However, there is usually also a chain of upstream suppliers of raw materials and ingredients to whom a progression of such Product Design Requirements from the House of Quality should be further progressed; this is referred to as a upstream multiple progression…

In this part of the book, you have become acquainted with the upstream and downstream matrices in the Multiple Progression QFD system especially adapted to process-industrial product innovation. It is argued that future company product innovation of excellence must have a stronger focus on “cost innovation” in an overall price/performance product development perspective. Since in the process industries product costs are totally dependent on production process efficiency and the use of selected, adapted and optimized raw materials, the use of phase progression in the QFD methodology is strongly advised…

The following sections are included:

• Expected company outcomes from the use of QFD
• QFD in a company knowledge management perspective
• Integrated Knowledge Platforms (IKPs) by mpQFD

A common mistake in too many QFD textbooks and other publications has been to advertise the industrial use of the QFD methodology as an instrument for the improvement of all aspects of product innovation. In the seminal article, “The Manager’s Job: Folklore and Fact”, Professor Henry Mintzberg (1990) revealed some myths about general management. In the light of today’s scientific evidence, it is now time to reveal some myths about the expected benefits from company use of the Quality Function Deployment development methodology!…

In Chapter 19, the results showed — somewhat surprisingly, but very convincingly — that one of the most important overall benefits from the use of the QFD methodology relates to its outstanding ability as an “organizational learning” and “knowledge creating” instrument in product innovation. In light of these results, the insightful statement quoted above from a representative from one of the pioneering industrial users of the methodology (Toyota Auto Body) acknowledged very early this important and outstanding methodological capability in a knowledge management perspective (American Supplier Institute, 1989)…

Part III of this book introduced the QFD matrix House of Quality, and Part IV introduced the theory and use of the upstream and downstream matrices for the process industries. In the use of the QFD methodology in other manufacturing industries, the matrices can naturally also be used; however, for this part of the book, the process-industrial environment has been selected. Nonetheless, the above definition of an Integrated Knowledge Platform is generally applicable to all manufacturing industries…

The following sections are included:

• Expected company outcomes from company use of QFD
• QFD as a system for knowledge management in product innovation
• Integrated Knowledge Platforms by mpQFD

The following sections are included:

• Success factors for company use of QFD
• Implementation of the mpQFD system and IKP in the R&D organization
• Inter- and intra-organizational integration by QFD
• Putting the QFD methodology “on trial”

The user-friendliness of a methodology is related to how easy it is to learn and to apply in practice. It is influenced by the complexity of the methodology as well as how well it is explained, introduced, and supported by associated software. However, to reap the fruits of a methodology, it is also necessary to use it properly. Behaving in a way that has previously proved to give good results is usually called a “best practice,” which usually can be formulated and condensed into a number of “success factors”…

The resources required to implement a new methodology in a company and, later on, to use it in the first development project will vary according to methodological complexity and user-friendliness. In this perspective, the QFD methodology must be considered as a rather complex methodology; however, given proper guidance and supportive tools, it can be regarded as a fairly user-friendly development tool. Nonetheless, it is advisable to initially assess the company usability of the methodology in a diagnostic/pilot project (DPP) and afterward, depending on the results, to adapt, apply and roll out the methodology in company R&D according to Fig. 24.1…

The complexity of today’s product development and the necessary adaption of a holistic perspective on company work processes for innovation is well articulated by Säfsten et al. (2014) above. The creation of successful new products is thus fundamentally a multidisciplinary, multi-functionality process. Establishing a common “thought world” by bridging intra- and inter-organizational interfaces is generally considered a necessity for excellence in product innovation. From an open innovation perspective, bridging a company’s external organizational interfaces and securing customer and consumer collaboration in a co-development approach are activities of foremost importance in product development today (Chesbrough and Appleyard, 2007; Chesbrough, 2007). Since traditional industrial borders have been obliterated, traditional organizations and work processes for product innovation and innovation of manufacturing technology must be reviewed and reconsidered (Lager and Rennard, 2014): Because the development of new products often requires a corresponding development of the company’s manufacturing system, more interactive innovation work processes are needed, from product design to manufacturing to delivery, bridging the R&D-manufacturing interface and integrating product and process development work processes. …

This part of the book has presented a number of success factors that suggest advice on how to behave in order to achieve a successful outcome of the use of the QFD methodology. The importance of selecting “committed team members” and “providing them with training” is highlighted, and the recommended route to follow is “learning by doing.” It is then suggested that the methodology, like all methodologies, should be pilot tested and adapted to company innovation environment in advance of a full company roll-out. The opportunity to continue a DPP project as a full-scale product innovation project is advised…

The following sections are included:

• Appendix A
• Appendix B
• Appendix C
• Appendix D

The following sections are included:

• References
• Index