Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1108/14635771011022307
Title: Dynamic benchmarking methodology for quality function deployment
Authors: Raharjo, H.
Chai, K.H. 
Brombacher, A.C.
Keywords: Analytical hierarchy process
Benchmarking
Competitors
Quality function deployment
SWOT analysis
Issue Date: 2010
Source: Raharjo, H.,Chai, K.H.,Brombacher, A.C. (2010). Dynamic benchmarking methodology for quality function deployment. Benchmarking 17 (1) : 27-43. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635771011022307
Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to provide a methodology to integrate both the dynamics of competitors' performance and the dynamics of customer preference, along with their interaction, into a quality function deployment (QFD) analysis. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic dynamic benchmarking methodology is proposed with an illustrative example. Findings: The analytic hierarchy process's (AHP's) relative measurement might serve as a better way to elicit the customer's judgment over time in the QFD, not only in the importance rating part, but also in the competitive benchmarking part. It is also possible to quantitatively model the AHP priorities' change over time, and incorporate it in the QFD decision-making process. Research limitations/implications: It might take a certain amount of time and efforts to collect the necessary data over time. However, it might be justified considering the improved accuracy of the QFD results. It is also important that the data collection should be carried out in a specific customer segment. Practical implications: QFD practitioners may find a more systematic method to continually evaluate the current performance, identify areas for improvement, and eventually set goals for the future. Originality/value: There are two novel approaches used in the methodology. First, it is the use of an exponential smoothing-based forecasting technique to model the trend of the AHP-based importance rating values and the competitive benchmarking information. Second, it is a strengthweakness-opportunity-threat-based competitive weighting scheme, which serves as a more systematic way to substitute the traditional QFD customer competitive target setting and sales point value determination. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Source Title: Benchmarking
URI: http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/63101
ISSN: 14635771
DOI: 10.1108/14635771011022307
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

14
checked on Dec 4, 2017

Page view(s)

35
checked on Dec 8, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.