Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Dianna Deeney Leave a Comment

QDD 065 Prioritizing Technical Requirements with a House of Quality

Prioritizing Technical Requirements with a House of Quality

As a design engineer, you’re tasked with translating vague customer statements into something technical and measurable. And you also need to identify what requirements are important: filtering the “must meet” requirements against the “should have” requirements. And, finally, you need to do this with your cross-functional team.

What if you miss something important?

It’s difficult. There is a method that we can use. Let’s talk about the House of Quality and how you can use it no matter where you work.

 

View the Episode Transcript

QFD (Quality Function Deployment) is a system that uses several matrices that follow a waterfall application, where the top-level matrix feeds into the next-level matrix. It starts with a House of Quality: customer needs against requirements.

If your company isn’t using QFD, then you’re probably not being supported to be able to do QFD for your project. That doesn’t mean that we can’t use elements of QFD. Especially the first matrix: the House of Quality.

Today’s insight to action is this: Sometimes it’s too much to start building a mansion. It’s okay not to build out the complicated House of Quality to start. We can start with the main house and the roof, and that will begin to give us insight into our concept development.

Citations:

House of Quality example

  • Cask05 at English Wikipedia, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

See this resource from ASQ that shows different types of QFD matrices:

  • “How to Build a House of Quality with Technical and Competitive Benchmarking.” ASQ, https://asq.org/quality-resources/house-of-quality. Accessed 7 June 2022.

“The house of quality alone does not make QFD.” – Dr. Akao

  • Tague, Nancy R. The Quality Toolbox, 2nd ed. ASQ Quality Press, 2005, pp. 310.

History of QFD from:

  • Evans, James R. and William M. Lindsay. Managing for Quality and Performance Excellence, 11th ed. Cengage, 2020, pp. 313.

Episode Transcript

As a design engineer, you’re tasked with translating vague customer statements into something technical and measurable. Like a customer says, “I have to pull too hard on this,” may translate to “The pull force of the device should be less than 45 N when loaded with 700 N of weight.” And you also need to identify what requirements are important. Filtering the “must meet” requirements against the “should have” requirements. And finally, you need to do this with your cross functional team. What if you miss something important? It’s difficult. There is a method that we can use. Let’s talk about the House of Quality and how you can use it no matter where you work, after this brief introduction.

Hello, and welcome to Quality during Design the place to use quality thinking to create products others love for less. My name is Dianna. I’m a senior level quality professional and engineer with over 20 years of experience in manufacturing and design. Listen in and then join the conversation at qualityduringdesign.com.

QFD is Quality Function Deployment. It’s a planning method that shows the relationships between the customers and product development information. It’s based on a series of matrix diagrams. The goal of the matrix diagram is to ensure that our customer requirements are carried through the product development process through design, manufacturing, and quality control.

How did this method come to be? QFD originated in Japan in the 1970s with Mitsubishi and Toyota. Toyota, less than two years into using it, saw a 20% reduction in startup costs on the launch of a new vehicle. With time and iterations, they saw a 61% reduction in startup costs, development fell by one third, and quality improved. Xerox and Ford started using QFD in the mid 1980s, and now lots of industries and different companies use QFD, Quality Function Deployment.

QFD is a system that uses several matrices that follow a waterfall application where the top level matrix feeds into the next level matrix. It starts with a House of Quality: customer requirements against technical requirements. Then that feeds into technical requirements against component characteristics. That then feeds into another matrix of component characteristics against process operations. And finally, those process operations are mapped out in a matrix against a quality control plan. If you are working in a company that uses QFD, then you’re likely working with four to five matrices that are linked, that are built to ensure that customer needs are reflected in the requirements, components, manufacturing process, and the overall quality control. If your company isn’t using QFD in this way, then you’re probably not being supported to be able to do QFD for your project. It can be large and confusing. So you need to evaluate the benefits you’ll get from it against what your company is currently doing.

But that doesn’t mean that we can’t use elements of QFD, especially the first matrix, the House of Quality. The House of Quality maps that voice of the customer against the technical requirements that we’re trying to define. The House of Quality also lets us evaluate the technical requirements against each other because design decisions usually affect more than one technical requirement. We’ll have the main structure of the house and its roof, and that’s as far as we really need to take it, if we want. And if our company doesn’t use QFD, just out of this we’ll get a prioritized list of technical requirements. We’ll know the “must haves”, the “should haves”, and the ones that may not be a priority for our project. It’ll be based on what our customers are telling us. And we’ll have a map of what technical requirements may be linked to the same design decisions.

How do you build a House of Quality matrix?

First, like most quality tools, gather your team. You want people that know the customer, their space and people that can develop technical requirements.

Second, define the customer. If your customer base is broad, you might have voice of the customer data that contradicts itself. So consider a House of Quality for each customer base or prioritize one type of customer over another. Another option is to average out the importance of any one customer requirement over all of your different customer bases. Just figure out what the scope of your house is going to be to start and then move on to the next step. Don’t let analysis paralysis stop you from trying to build a house.

Third, list out the customer needs, or the voice of the customer in rows. List technical requirements in columns. If you get into 25 customer requirements and 25 technical requirements, this house may turn into a mansion and too big! Make sure requirements aren’t duplicated for customers. Check that we’re not listing trivial ones, things that a very small proportion of our customers happen to mention.

Our fourth step in building a basic House of Quality is to define a three level relationship legend: low, medium, and high relationships. It could be colors, shapes, or emojis! Choose whatever makes you happy. Just make sure you can differentiate between them at a glance. The typical symbols are a square, circle, and triangle.

The fifth step is where you want to show the interrelationships between the customer requirements and the technical requirements in the main structure of the house. Quality practitioners sometimes call this the relationship matrix. For each customer requirement and technical requirement relationship, you’re going to list one of your low, medium or high symbols in that square, or your square may be blank.

The sixth step is to make the roof. The triangle roof sits on top of the technical requirements, and there’s a box where any two requirements intersect. Quality practitioners sometimes call this the correlation matrix. Use your low, medium, and high relationship symbols to show how the technical requirements fit together.

Now let’s stop building and let’s just use what we have right now. Examine the main structure of our house, the relationship matrix: customer requirements in rows on the left – technical requirements and columns on the top – and low, medium high symbols or blanks in the matrix that’s between the requirements.

Do we have an empty row? Uh, oh, we have a customer requirement that doesn’t have a technical requirement. We should fix that.

Do we have an empty column? Now we have a technical requirement with no associated customer requirement. Did we miss something or do we need to remove a technical requirement?

Do we have a row or column that has no high relationship correlations? There should be at least one high correlation between a customer requirement and a technical requirement. Otherwise it’s going to be hard to make something our customer needs. We may need to rethink our technical requirements.

Are there rows that look identical? If so, that could indicate a problem with our customer requirements. Their level of detail may be different from one another. So we’re not evaluating customer requirements in a consistent manner. Or we may have a customer requirement listed that’s really a child requirement of another one that’s already in our matrix. We should reevaluate our customer requirements.

Is there a row or column with a lot of relationship? Then it might be an issue for reliability, for safety or for cost. We want to investigate this requirement more thoroughly to understand what’s happening here.

Overall in the matrix, which technical requirements have a strong relationship to a customer requirement? These are requirements that we should think of as a high priority because they’re strongly associated with our customer requirements. And we would also want to follow through and make sure that we follow through on those requirements through the rest of the product development process.

Now let’s look at the roof: the correlation matrix. Here, we’ll see tradeoffs between design options, because it shows the relationship between pairs of technical requirements. Which ones are similar? Which are opposite? Are there effects and consequences between requirements that we hadn’t thought about? Understanding the relationship between the technical requirements can help us ensure that customer requirements are met; that the quality is at least maintained, if not made better; and the cost is taken into account.

If you like this, then take it a step further. Add another room to the house. Compare our product to competitive products. For these we’re looking for areas of competitive advantage. Our competitive products don’t do well at meeting this customer requirement. So, if we build it into ours, we’ll have a competitive advantage. And that gets into key selling points and marketing strategies.

And there are many other ways you can correlate, compare, and rank relationships of design requirements to each other and to other product design decisions. We can get into building a basement and more rooms and levels to our house. We can make it a mansion, if we want. When we look up QFD or House of Quality, you’ll find many examples of how the house can be built out to include other aspects of product design.

Today’s insight to action is this. Sometimes it’s too much to start building a mansion. It’s okay to not build out the complicated House of Quality to start. We can start with the main house and the roof, and that will begin to give us insight into our concept development. Dr. Akao is the founder of QFD, and he’s quoted as saying, “The House of Quality alone does not make QFD.” And I cannot disagree! But we can try to build a house if it helps us better understand how we’re going to meet our customer requirements.

If you like the content in this episode, visit Quality during Design.com, where you can subscribe to the weekly newsletter to keep in touch. This has been a production of Deeney enterprises. Thanks for listening!

 

Filed Under: Quality during Design

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quality during Design podcast logo

Tips for using quality tools and methods to help you design products others love, for less.


by Dianna Deeney
Quality during Design,
Hosted on Buzzsprout.com
Subscribe and enjoy every episode
Google
Apple
Spotify

Recent Episodes

QDD 102 Get Design Inputs with Flowcharts

QDD 101 Quality Tools are Legos of Development (and Their 7 Uses)

QDD 100 Lessons Learned from Coffee Pod Stories

QDD 099 Crucial Conversations in Engineering, with Shere Tuckey (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 098 Challenges Getting Team Input in Concept Development

QDD 097 Brainstorming within Design Sprints

QDD 096 After the ‘Storm: Compare and Prioritize Ideas

QDD 095 After the ‘Storm: Pareto Voting and Screening Methods

QDD 094 After the ‘Storm: Group and Explore Ideas

QDD 093 Product Design with Brainstorming, with Emily Haidemenos (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 092 Ways to Gather Ideas with a Team

QDD 091 The Spirits of Technical Writing Past, Present, and Future

QDD 090 The Gifts Others Bring

QDD 089 Next Steps after Surprising Test Results

QDD 088 Choose Reliability Goals for Modules

QDD 087 Start a System Architecture Diagram Early

QDD 086 Why Yield Quality in the Front-End of Product Development

QDD 085 Book Cast

QDD 084 Engineering in the Color Economy

QDD 083 Getting to Great Designs

QDD 082 Get Clarity on Goals with a Continuum

QDD 081 Variable Relationships: Correlation and Causation

QDD 080 Use Meetings to Add Productivity

QDD 079 Ways to Partner with Test Engineers

QDD 078 What do We do with FMEA Early in Design Concept?

QDD 077 A Severity Scale based on Quality Dimensions

QDD 076 Use Force Field Analysis to Understand Nuances

QDD 075 Getting Use Information without a Prototype

QDD 074 Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Supplements Test

QDD 073 2 Lessons about Remote Work for Design Engineers

QDD 072 Always Plot the Data

QDD 071 Supplier Control Plans and Design Specs

QDD 070 Use FMEA to Design for In-Process Testing

QDD 069 Use FMEA to Choose Critical Design Features

QDD 068 Get Unstuck: Expand and Contract Our Problem

QDD 067 Get Unstuck: Reframe our Problem

QDD 066 5 Options to Manage Risks during Product Engineering

QDD 065 Prioritizing Technical Requirements with a House of Quality

QDD 064 Gemba for Product Design Engineering

QDD 063 Product Design from a Data Professional Viewpoint, with Gabor Szabo (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 062 How Does Reliability Engineering Affect (Not Just Assess) Design?

QDD 061 How to use FMEA for Complaint Investigation

QDD 060 3 Tips for Planning Design Reviews

QDD 059 Product Design from a Marketing Viewpoint, with Laura Krick (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 058 UFMEA vs. DFMEA

QDD 057 Design Input & Specs vs. Test & Measure Capability

QDD 056 ALT vs. HALT

QDD 055 Quality as a Strategic Asset vs. Quality as a Control

QDD 054 Design Specs vs. Process Control, Capability, and SPC

QDD 053 Internal Customers vs. External Customers

QDD 052 Discrete Data vs. Continuous Data

QDD 051 Prevention Controls vs. Detection Controls

QDD 050 Try this Method to Help with Complex Decisions (DMRCS)

QDD 049 Overlapping Ideas: Quality, Reliability, and Safety

QDD 048 Using SIPOC to Get Started

QDD 047 Risk Barriers as Swiss Cheese?

QDD 046 Environmental Stress Testing for Robust Designs

QDD 045 Choosing a Confidence Level for Test using FMEA

QDD 044 Getting Started with FMEA – It All Begins with a Plan

QDD 043 How can 8D help Solve my Recurring Problem?

QDD 042 Mistake-Proofing – The Poka-Yoke of Usability

QDD 041 Getting Comfortable with using Reliability Results

QDD 040 How to Self-Advocate for More Customer Face Time (and why it’s important)

QDD 039 Choosing Quality Tools (Mind Map vs. Flowchart vs. Spaghetti Diagram)

QDD 038 The DFE Part of DFX (Design For Environment and eXcellence)

QDD 037 Results-Driven Decisions, Faster: Accelerated Stress Testing as a Reliability Life Test

QDD 036 When to use DOE (Design of Experiments)?

QDD 035 Design for User Tasks using an Urgent/Important Matrix

QDD 034 Statistical vs. Practical Significance

QDD 033 How Many Do We Need To Test?

QDD 032 Life Cycle Costing for Product Design Choices

QDD 031 5 Aspects of Good Reliability Goals and Requirements

QDD 030 Using Failure Rate Functions to Drive Early Design Decisions

QDD 029 Types of Design Analyses possible with User Process Flowcharts

QDD 028 Design Tolerances Based on Economics (Using the Taguchi Loss Function)

QDD 027 How Many Controls do we Need to Reduce Risk?

QDD 026 Solving Symptoms Instead of Causes?

QDD 025 Do you have SMART ACORN objectives?

QDD 024 Why Look to Standards

QDD 023 Getting the Voice of the Customer

QDD 022 The Way We Test Matters

QDD 021 Designing Specs for QA

QDD 020 Every Failure is a Gift

QDD 019 Understanding the Purposes behind Kaizen

QDD 018 Fishbone Diagram: A Supertool to Understand Problems, Potential Solutions, and Goals

QDD 017 What is ‘Production Equivalent’ and Why Does it Matter?

QDD 016 About Visual Quality Standards

QDD 015 Using the Pareto Principle and Avoiding Common Pitfalls

QDD 014 The Who’s Who of your Quality Team

QDD 013 When it’s Not Normal: How to Choose from a Library of Distributions

QDD 012 What are TQM, QFD, Six Sigma, and Lean?

QDD 011 The Designer’s Important Influence on Monitoring After Launch

QDD 010 How to Handle Competing Failure Modes

QDD 009 About Using Slide Decks for Technical Design Reviews

QDD 008 Remaking Risk-Based Decisions: Allowing Ourselves to Change our Minds.

QDD 007 Need to innovate? Stop brainstorming and try a systematic approach.

QDD 006 HALT! Watch out for that weakest link

QDD 005 The Designer’s Risk Analysis affects Business, Projects, and Suppliers

QDD 004 A big failure and too many causes? Try this analysis.

QDD 003 Why Your Design Inputs Need to Include Quality & Reliability

QDD 002 My product works. Why don’t they want it?

QDD 001 How to Choose the Right Improvement Model

© 2023 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.