품질의 이원론을 이용한 개선의 우선순위 결정 = Determination of Priority for Improvement Using the Theory of Two-dimensional Quality

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The theory of two-dimensional quality, in particular, the Kano model that is developed by the analogy with the M-H theory,has been applied in various industry fields for more than three decades. Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) assumes that the degree of physical fulfilment of quality attributes and the satisfaction of that attribute is linear, and therefore, it is applicable to the traditional one-dimensional attribute, not other quality types defined in the Kano’s model such as attractive or must-be attribute. To solve this problem, the current study suggests a new importance-satisfaction analysis using a modified IPA in accordance with the three quality types and a diagonal method introduced by Slack (1999) to determine improvement priority. For this, I investigated 19 smartphone’s quality attributes and conducted a survey of 334 university students for the results of Kano’s model,which adopted from Song and Park (2012)’s study, and the importance/satisfaction of the quality attributes and the results of the priority for improvement of the 19 quality attributes. The results show that the proposed I-S priority model is better than the conventional IPA based on the comparison results of determination coefficient from the regression analysis of the two models.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김태운, "수정된 Kano 모델을 이용한 스마트 폰의 품질특성 평가" 한국산업경영시스템학회 35 (35): 57-65, 2012

2 Fong D., "Using the self-stated importance questionnaire to interpret Kano questionnaire results" 5 (5): 21-23, 1996

3 Löfgren, M., "Two decades of using Kano’s theory of attractive quality : a literature review" 15 (15): 59-75, 2008

4 Högström, C., "The theory of attractive quality and experience offerings" 23 (23): 111-127, 2011

5 Herzberg, F., "The motivation to work" John Wiley and Sons 1959

6 Matzler, K., "The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satis faction : a reconsideration of the importance-performance analysis" 33 (33): 271-277, 2004

7 Sampson, S.E., "The Performance- Importance Response Function : Observations and Implications" 19 (19): 1-25, 1999

8 Levitt, T., "The Marketing Imagination" The Free Press 1986

9 Slack, N., "The Importance-Performance Matrix as a Determinant of Improvement Priority" 14 (14): 59-75, 1994

10 Anderson, E.W., "Strengthening the satisfaction- profit chain" 3 (3): 107-120, 2000

11 Vargo, S. L., "Satisfiers, Dissatisfiers, Criticals, and Neutrals : A Review of Their Relative Effects on Customer (Dis) Satisfaction" 11 (11): 1-13, 2007

12 Swan, J.E., "Product Performance and Consumer Satisfaction : A New Concept" 40 (40): 25-33, 1976

13 Herzberg, F., "One more time-How do you motivate employees?" 65 (65): 109-120, 1987

14 Kano, N., "Life cycle and creation of attractive quality" 18-36, 2001

15 Berger, C., "Kano’s methods for understanding customer-defined quality" 2 (2): 2-36, 1993

16 송해근, "Kano 모델의 설문 워딩에 관한 연구" 한국품질경영학회 40 (40): 453-466, 2012

17 Shahin, A., "Integration of FMEA and the Kano model : An exploratory examination" 21 (21): 731-746, 2004

18 Tan, K.C., "Integrating SERVQUAL and Kano’s model into QFD for service excellence development" 11 (11): 418-430, 2001

19 Matilla, J.A., "Importance-performance analysis" 41 : 77-79, 1977

20 Tontini, G., "Identification of satisfaction attributes using competitive analysis of the improvement gap" 27 (27): 482-500, 2007

21 Kuo, Y. -F., "IPA–Kano model : A new tool for categorising and diagnosing service quality attributes" 23 (23): 731-748, 2012

22 Matzler, K., "How to delight your customer" 5 (5): 6-18, 1996

23 Yang, C. -C., "Establishment and applications of the integrated model of service quality measurement" 13 (13): 310-324, 2003

24 Eskidsen, J.K., "Enhancing importance performance analysis" 55 (55): 40-60, 2006

25 Matzler, K., "Employee satisfaction : does Kano’s model apply?" 15 (15): 1179-1198, 2004

26 Nilsson-Witell, L., "Dynamics of service attributes : A test of Kano’s theory of attractive quality" 16 (16): 152-168, 2005

27 Cadotte, E.R., "Dissatisfiers and Satisfiers : Suggestions from Consumer Complaints and Compliments" 1 : 74-79, 1988

28 Khalifa, A. S., "Customer value : a review of recent literature and an integrative configuration" 42 (42): 645-666, 2004

29 Oliver, R. L., "Attribute Need Fulfillment in Product Usage Satisfaction" 12 (12): 1-17, 1995

30 Kano, N., "Attractive quality and must-be quality" 14 (14): 147-156, 1984

31 장흥엽, "ASC를 이용한 품질특성의 중요도 결정" 한국품질경영학회 40 (40): 589-598, 2012

32 Mikulic, J., "A critical review of techniques for classifying quality attributes in the Kano model" 21 (21): 46-66, 2011

33 Bacon, D. R., "A comparison of approaches to importanceperformance analysis" 45 (45): 55-71, 2003