More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Multi-issue negotiation in quality function deployment

Authors:

Max von Zedtwitz,

Türkay DereliAuthors Info & Claims

Computers and Industrial Engineering, Volume 92, Issue C

Pages 31 - 49

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2015.11.017

Published: 01 February 2016 Publication History

Abstract

A multi-issue negotiation based QFD methodology is proposed.Complicated design trade-offs can be handled.Customer requirements are included in real-time.A mode for negotiation of decentralized NPD teams is provided.Customers play a more active role in NPD. Quality function deployment (QFD) is one of the most powerful methodologies in new product development (NPD) because of its systematic support of knowledge creation and sharing. However, greater product complexity, increasing dynamic customer requirements and further decentralization of innovation teams undermine applicability of QFD in modern NPD. Modifying QFD methodology with a multi-issue negotiation mechanism promises to overcome these obstacles because this negotiation-based structure (i) enables QFD to define a large number of interdependent decision parameters while handling complicated design trade-offs, (ii) includes changing customer requirements in real-time rather than a cycle-time determined by length of the product development process, (iii) allows decentralized NPD teams to negotiate with each other and customers concurrently. This study presents a multi-issue negotiation based QFD methodology by using a recently developed mechanism for multi-issue negotiation (namely, Modified Even-Swaps) and illustrates strengths and weaknesses along with practical insights with a case study of the development of a washing machine. The QFD methodology proposed in this study provides new options to assess new product alternatives by allowing customer co-creation which is essential in complex and often tacit-knowledge dependent comparisons and also intrinsically helpful for fine-tuning dynamically evolving customer requirements. Moreover, it supports competition-based interactions of decentralized NPD teams.

References

[1]

M. Abdolshah, M. Moradi, Fuzzy quality function deployment: An analytical literature review, Journal of Industrial Engineering (2013).

[2]

M.A. Allocca, E.H. Kessler, Innovation speed in small and medium-sized enterprises, Creativity and Innovation Management, 15 (2006) 279-295.

[3]

K. Altun, T. Dereli, Even easier multi-issue negotiation through Modified Even-Swaps considering practically dominated alternatives, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 76 (2014) 307-317.

Digital Library

[4]

K. Altun, T. Dereli, A. Baykasoglu, Development of a framework for customer co-creation in NPD through multi-issue negotiation with issue trade-offs, Expert Systems with Applications, 40 (2013) 873-880.

Digital Library

[5]

Z. Ayag, R.G. Ozdemir, Evaluating machine tool alternatives through modified TOPSIS and alpha-cut based fuzzy ANP, International Journal of Production Economics, 140 (2012) 630-636.

[6]

Balachandran, B. M. (2012). Developing a multi-issue e-negotiation system for e-commerce with JADE. In H. Xu (Ed.), Practical applications of agent-based technology. ISBN: 978-953-51-0276-2.

[7]

B.M. Balachandran, R. Gobbin, D. Sharma, Development of a multi-issue negotiation system for e-commerce, Intelligent Decision Technologies, SIST, 10 (2011) 429-438.

[8]

R. Belecheanu, J. Riedel, K.S. Pawar, A conceptualisation of design context to explain design trade-offs in the automotive industry, R&D Management, 36 (2006) 517-529.

[9]

A. Bhattacharya, B. Sarkar, S.K. Mukherjee, Integrating AHP with QFD for robot selection under requirement perspective, International Journal of Production Research, 43 (2005) 3671-3685.

[10]

R. Boutellier, O. Gassmann, H. Macho, M. Roux, Management of dispersed product development teams: The role of information technologies, R&D Management, 28 (1998) 13-25.

[11]

G. Büyüközkan, T. Ertay, C. Kahraman, D. Ruan, Determining the importance weights in the house of quality using the fuzzy analytic approach, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 19 (2004) 443-461.

Digital Library

[12]

J. Chen, F. Damanpour, R.R. Reilly, Understanding antecedents of new product development speed: A meta-analysis, Journal of Operations Management, 28 (2010) 17-33.

[13]

L.H. Chen, W.C. Ko, A fuzzy nonlinear model for quality function deployment considering Kano's concept, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 48 (2008) 581-593.

Digital Library

[14]

L.H. Chen, W.C. Ko, Fuzzy approaches to quality function deployment for new product design, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 160 (2009) 2620-2639.

Digital Library

[15]

L.H. Chen, W.C. Ko, Fuzzy linear programming models for NPD using four-phase QFD activity process based on the means-end chain concept, European Journal of Operational Research, 201 (2010) 619-632.

[16]

C.H. Chen-Ritzo, T.P. Harrison, A.M. Kwasnica, D.J. Thomas, Better, faster, cheaper: An experimental analysis of a multiattribute reverse auction mechanism with restricted information feedback, Management Science, 51 (2005) 1753-1762.

Digital Library

[17]

V. Chiesa, F. Frattini, V. Lazzarotti, R. Manzini, Measuring performance in new product development projects: A case study in the aerospace industry, Project Management Journal, 38 (2007) 45-59.

[18]

D. Das, K. Mukherjee, Development of an AHP-QFD framework for designing a tourism product, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 4 (2007) 321-344.

[19]

E.K. Delice, Z. Gungor, A new mixed integer linear programming model for product development using quality function deployment, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 57 (2009) 906-912.

Digital Library

[20]

T. Dereli, K. Altun, Modified Even-Swaps: A novel, clear, rational and an easy-to-use mechanism for multi-issue negotiation, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 63 (2012) 1013-1029.

[21]

G. Elahi, E. Yu, Comparing alternatives for analyzing requirements trade-offs - In the absence of numerical data, Information and Software Technology, 54 (2012) 517-530.

Digital Library

[22]

E. Enkel, C. Kausch, O. Gassmann, Managing the risk of customer integration, European Management Journal, 23 (2005) 203-213.

[23]

H. Ernst, Success factors of new product development: A review of the empirical literature, International Journal of Management Reviews, 4 (2002) 1-40.

[24]

I. Erol, W.G. Ferrell, A methodology for selection problems with multiple, conflicting objectives and both qualitative and quantitative criteria, International Journal of Production Economics, 86 (2003) 187-199.

[25]

L. Feick, L. Price, The market maven: A diffuser of marketplace information, Journal of Marketing, 51 (1987) 83-97.

[26]

F.D. Felice, A. Petrillo, A multiple choice decision analysis: An integrated QFD-AHP model for the assessment of customer needs, International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, 2 (2010) 25-38.

[27]

M. Formentini, P. Romano, Using value analysis to support knowledge transfer in the multi-project setting, International Journal of Production Economics, 131 (2011) 545-560.

[28]

N. Franke, E. von Hippel, M. Schreier, Finding commercially attractive user innovations: A test of lead user theory, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23 (2006) 301-315.

[29]

K. Fujita, T. Ito, M. Klein, An approach to scalable multi-issue negotiation: Decomposing the contract space, Computation Intelligence, 30 (2014) 30-47.

Digital Library

[30]

Gourova, E., & Toteva, K. (2011). Raising creativity and participation in innovation and knowledge management activities. In Proceedings of the ICE 2011: 17th international conference on concurrent enterprising (pp. 1-14).

[31]

A. Griffin, Drivers of NPD success: The 1997 PDMA report, Product Development and Management Association, Chicago, 1997.

[32]

Z. Gungor, E.K. Delice, S.E. Kesen, New product design using FDMS and FANP under fuzzy environment, Applied Soft Computing, 11 (2011) 3347-3356.

Digital Library

[33]

M. Guo, J.B. Yang, K.S. Chin, H.W. Wang, X.B. Liu, Evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under both fuzzy and interval uncertainty, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 17 (2009) 683-697.

[34]

J.S. Hammond, R.L. Keeney, H. Raiffa, EVEN SWAPS: A rational method for making trade-offs, Harvard Business Review, 76 (1998) 137-150.

[35]

N. Hanumaiah, B. Ravi, N.P. Mukherjee, Rapid hard tooling process selection using QFD-AHP methodology, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 17 (2006) 332-350.

[36]

A. Hari, J.E. Kasser, M.P. Weiss, How lessons learned from using QFD led to the evolution of a process for creating quality requirements for complex systems, Systems Engineering, 10 (2007) 45-63.

Digital Library

[37]

C. Herstatt, E. von Hippel, From experience: Developing new product concepts via the lead user method: A case study in a low tech field, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9 (1992) 213-221.

[38]

D.L. Hoffman, K.K. Praveen, T.P. Novak, The right consumers for better concepts: Identifying consumers high in emergent nature to develop new product concepts, Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (2010) 854-865.

[39]

W.D. Hoyer, R. Chandy, M. Dorotic, M. Krafft, S.S. Singh, Consumer co-creation in new product development, Journal of Service Research, 13 (2010) 283-296.

[40]

S.W. Hsiao, Concurrent design method for developing a new product, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 29 (2002) 41-55.

[41]

S.W. Hsiao, E. Liu, A neurofuzzy-evolutionary approach for product design, Integrated Computer-Aided Engineering, 11 (2004) 323-338.

Digital Library

[42]

Huang, L., & Li, X. (2009). Research on determining the key technology of new product plan and design. In Proceedings of ROBIO'08 - The IEEE international conference on robotics and biomimetics (pp. 1532-1537). Bangkok, Thailand.

[43]

C. Kahraman, T. Ertay, G. Büyüközkan, A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach, European Journal of Operational Research, 171 (2006) 390-411.

[44]

E.E. Karsak, Fuzzy multiple objective decision making approach to prioritize design requirements in quality function deployment, International Journal of Production Research, 42 (2004) 3957-3974.

[45]

E.E. Karsak, C.O. Ozogul, An integrated decision making approach for ERP system selection, Expert Systems with Applications, 36 (2009) 660-667.

[46]

E.E. Karsak, S. Sozer, S.E. Alptekin, Product planning in quality function deployment using a combined analytic network process and goal programming approach, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 44 (2003) 171-190.

Digital Library

[47]

E.H. Kessler, P.E. Bierly, Is faster really better? An empirical test of the implications of innovation speed, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49 (2002) 1-11.

[48]

E.H. Kessler, A.K. Chakrabarti, Innovation speed: A conceptual model of context, antecedents, and outcomes, Academy of Management Review, 21 (1996) 1143-1191.

[49]

K.J. Kim, H. Moskowitz, A. Dhingra, G. Evans, Fuzzy multicriteria models for quality function deployment, European Journal of Operational Research, 121 (2000) 504-518.

[50]

P. Kristensson, P.R. Magnusson, J. Matthing, Users as a hidden resource for creativity: Findings from an experimental study on user involvement, Creativity and Innovation Management, 11 (2002) 55-61.

[51]

C.K. Kwong, H. Bai, A fuzzy AHP approach to the determination of importance weights of customer requirements in quality function deployment, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 13 (2002) 367-377.

[52]

C.K. Kwong, H. Bai, Determining the importance weights for the customer requirements in QFD using a fuzzy AHP with an extent analysis approach, IIE Transactions, 35 (2003) 619-626.

[53]

F. Lai, D. Li, Q. Wang, X. Zhao, The information technology capability of third-party logistics providers: A resource-based view and empirical evidence from China, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 44 (2008) 22-38.

[54]

H.I. Lee, H.Y. Kang, C.Y. Yang, C.Y. Lin, An evaluation framework for product planning using FANP, QFD and multi-choice goal programming, International Journal of Production Research, 48 (2010) 3977-3997.

[55]

A.H.I. Lee, C.Y. Lin, An integrated fuzzy QFD framework for new product development, Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 23 (2011) 26-47.

[56]

H.L. Li, L.C. Ma, Visualizing decision process on spheres based on the even swap concept, Decision Support Systems, 45 (2008) 354-367.

Digital Library

[57]

G. Lilien, P.D. Morrison, K. Searls, M. Sonnack, E. von Hippel, Performance assessment of the lead user generation process for new product development, Management Science, 48 (2002) 1042-1059.

Digital Library

[58]

Y.H. Lin, H.P. Cheng, M.L. Tseng, C.C. Tsai, Using QFD and ANP to analyze the environmental production requirements in linguistic preferences, Expert Systems with Applications, 37 (2010) 2186-2196.

Digital Library

[59]

L.Z. Lin, L.C. Huang, H.R. Yeh, Fuzzy group decision-making for service innovations in quality function deployment, Group Decision and Negotiation, 21 (2011) 495-517.

[60]

M.C. Lin, C.C. Wang, M.S. Chen, A.C. Chang, Using AHP and TOPSIS approaches in customer-driven product design process, Computers in Industry, 59 (2008) 17-31.

Digital Library

[61]

U. Lindemann, M. Maurer, T. Braun, Structural complexity management - An approach for the field of product design, Springer, Berlin, 2009.

[62]

H.T. Liu, Product design and selection using fuzzy QFD and fuzzy MCDM approaches, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 35 (2010) 482-496.

[63]

Y. Liu, J. Zhou, Y. Chen, Using fuzzy nonlinear regression to identify the degree of compensation among customer requirements in QFD, Neurocomputing, 142 (2014) 115-124.

Digital Library

[64]

C.M. Luo, B.W. Cheng, Applying Even-Swaps method to structurally enhance the process of intuition decision making, Systemic Practice and Action Research, 19 (2006) 45-59.

[65]

X.G. Luo, J.F. Tang, D.W. Wang, An optimization method for components selection using quality function deployment, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 39 (2008) 158-167.

[66]

L.C. Ma, H.L. Li, Using Gower plots and decision balls to rank alternatives involving inconsistent preferences, Decision Support Systems, 51 (2011) 712-719.

Digital Library

[67]

D. Mahr, A. Lievens, V. Blazevic, The value of customer co-created knowledge during the innovation process, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31 (2014) 599-615.

[68]

E. Mehdizadeh, Ranking of customer requirements using the fuzzy centroid-based method, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 27 (2010) 201-216.

[69]

G. Moore, Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling high-tech products to mainstream customers, Harper Business Essentials, New York, 1991.

[70]

T. Mu, A.K. Nandi, R.M. Rangayyan, Classification of breast masses via nonlinear transformation of features based on a kernel matrix, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing, 45 (2007) 769-780.

[71]

J. Mustajoki, R.P. Hamalainen, A preference programming approach to make the even swaps method even easier, Decision Analysis, 2 (2005) 110-123.

Digital Library

[72]

J. Mustajoki, R.P. Hamalainen, Smart-Swaps - A decision support system for multi-criteria decision analysis with the even swaps method, Decision Support Systems, 44 (2007) 313-325.

Digital Library

[73]

S. Nambisan, Designing virtual customer environments for new product development: Toward a theory, Academy of Management Review, 27 (2002) 392-413.

[74]

I. Nonaka, H. Takeuchi, The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.

[75]

W. Pedrycz, Why triangular membership functions?, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 64 (1994) 21-30.

Digital Library

[76]

D.X. Peng, G.R. Heim, D.N. Mallick, Collaborative product development: The effect of project complexity on the use of information technology tools and new product development practices, Production and Operations Management, 23 (2014) 1421-1438.

[77]

C.K. Prahalad, V. Ramaswamy, Co-opting customer competence, Harvard Business Review, 78 (2000) 79-87.

[78]

C.K. Prahalad, V. Ramaswamy, Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18 (2004) 5-14.

[79]

C. Prange, T.Y. Eng, J. Li, Collaborative new product alliances: A review of the literature and research perspectives, Strategic Change, 24 (2015) 351-371.

[80]

M.E. Pullman, W.L. Moore, D.G. Wardell, A comparison of quality function deployment and conjoint analysis in new product design, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19 (2002) 354-364.

[81]

H. Raharjo, M. Xie, A.C. Brombacher, A systematic methodology to deal with the dynamics of customer needs in quality function deployment, Expert Systems with Applications, 38 (2011) 3653-3662.

Digital Library

[82]

R. Ramanathan, J. Yunfeng, Incorporating cost and environmental factors in quality function deployment using data envelopment analysis, Omega, 37 (2009) 711-723.

[83]

J. Roth, Enabling knowledge creation: Learning from an R&D organization, Journal of Knowledge Management, 7 (2003) 32-48.

[84]

A. Sanayei, S.F. Mousavi, A. Yazdankhah, Group decision making process for supplier selection with VIKOR under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications, 37 (2010) 24-30.

Digital Library

[85]

P. Sandmeier, P.D. Morrison, O. Gassmann, Integrating customers in product innovation: Lessons from industrial development contractors and in-house contractors in rapidly changing customer markets, Creativity and Innovation Management, 19 (2010) 89-106.

[86]

F. Schweitzer, O. Gassmann, C. Rau, Lessons from ideation: Where does user involvement lead us?, Creativity and Innovation Management, 23 (2014) 155-167.

[87]

Z. Sener, E.E. Karsak, A decision model for setting target levels in quality function deployment using nonlinear programming-based fuzzy regression and optimization, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 48 (2010) 1173-1184.

[88]

M.F. Shakun, Multi-bilateral multi-issue e-negotiation in e-commerce with tit-for-tat computer agent, Group Decision and Negotiation, 14 (2005) 383-392.

[89]

E. Tolga, S.E. Alptekin, Product evaluation and development process using a fuzzy compromise-based goal programming approach, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 19 (2008) 285-301.

Digital Library

[90]

E. von Hippel, Lead-users: A source of novel product concepts, Management Science, 32 (1986) 791-805.

Digital Library

[91]

E. von Hippel, The sources of innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, 1988.

[92]

E. von Hippel, S. Ogawa, J.P.J. De Jong, The age of the consumer-innovator, MIT Sloan Management Review, 53 (2011) 27-35.

[93]

M. von Zedtwitz, O. Gassmann, Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: Four different patterns of managing research and development, Research Policy, 31 (2002) 569-588.

[94]

J. Wallenius, J.S. Dyer, P.C. Fishburn, R.E. Steuer, S. Zionts, K. Deb, Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead, Management Science, 54 (2008) 1336-1349.

Digital Library

[95]

C.H. Wang, J.N. Chen, Using quality function deployment for collaborative product design and optimal selection of module mix, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 63 (2012) 1030-1037.

[96]

Y.M. Wang, K.S. Chin, A linear goal programming priority method for fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its applications in new product screening, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 49 (2008) 451-465.

Digital Library

[97]

X.T. Wang, W. Xiong, An integrated linguistic-based group decision making approach for quality function deployment, Expert Systems with Applications, 38 (2011) 14428-14438.

Digital Library

[98]

H. Yamashina, T. Ito, H. Kawada, Innovative product development process by integrating QFD and TRIZ, International Journal of Production Research, 40 (2002) 1031-1050.

[99]

C.H. Yu, C.K. Chen, W.H. Chen, H.C. Chang, Developing a revised QFD technique to meet the needs of multiple-customer groups: A case of public policy analysis, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23 (2012) 1413-1431.

[100]

S.T. Yuan, J. Tsao, An incentive mechanism for ad-hoc wireless content service: Contextualized micro pricing, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 9 (2010) 81-113.

[101]

S. Zaim, M. Sevkli, H. Camgoz-Akdag, O.F. Demirel, A.Y. Yayla, D. Delen, Use of ANP weighted crisp and fuzzy QFD for product development, Expert Systems with Applications, 41 (2014) 4464-4474.

Digital Library

[102]

S. Zhong, J. Zhou, Y. Chen, Determination of target values of engineering characteristics in QFD using a fuzzy chance-constrained modelling approach, Neurocomputing, 142 (2014) 125-135.

Digital Library

Cited By

He LSong WWu ZXu ZZheng MMing X(2017)Quantification and integration of an improved Kano model into QFD based on multi-population adaptive genetic algorithmComputers and Industrial Engineering10.1016/j.cie.2017.10.009114:C(183-194)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.cie.2017.10.009

Multi-issue negotiation in quality function deployment

Recommendations

Development of a framework for customer co-creation in NPD through multi-issue negotiation with issue trade-offs

In complex product design environments, new product development (NPD) becomes all about trade-offs and therefore trade-off management gets an important responsibility for designers. Correspondingly, in these environments, customer co-creation in NPD ...
Bayesian-based preference prediction in bilateral multi-issue negotiation between intelligent agents

Agent negotiation is a form of decision making where two or more agents jointly search for a mutually agreed solution to a certain problem. In multi-issue negotiation, with information available about the agents' preferences, a negotiation may result in ...
Automated formal analysis of human multi-issue negotiation processes

This paper reports on experiments in (human) multi-issue negotiation and their analysis, and presents a generic software environment supporting such an analysis. First, the paper presents a System for Analysis of Multi-Issue Negotiation (SAMIN). SAMIN ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers and Industrial Engineering

Computers and Industrial Engineering Volume 92, Issue C

February 2016

116 pages

ISSN:0360-8352

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © Elsevier Ltd.

Publisher

Pergamon Press, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 February 2016

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 29 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

He LSong WWu ZXu ZZheng MMing X(2017)Quantification and integration of an improved Kano model into QFD based on multi-population adaptive genetic algorithmComputers and Industrial Engineering10.1016/j.cie.2017.10.009114:C(183-194)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.cie.2017.10.009

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents