중요도-만족도 격차분석을 이용한 품질 속성의 우선순위 결정
Prioritizing quality attributes using I-S Gap analysis
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: To obtain the area for improvement, the Importance-Performance analysis(IPA) uses relatively simple questions, that is, satisfaction and importance at attribute level. However, no attempt has been made to consider the gap between own company's performance and those of competitors in IPA, in the field of quality management. This study is aimed to suggest a new prioritizing method for improvement and to test for validity of the proposed technique. Methods: This study used data collected from Song and Lim(2015), which is satisfaction of employees, customers and competitors as well as importance data for 7 quality attributes of K animal hospital. A correlation comparison with other priority methods such as Bacon(2003)'s model and Matzler and Hinterhuber(1998)'s QI index is conducted. Results: The priority results by the proposed method shows better in correlation coefficient with customer perceived priority for improvement than other methods. Conclusion: From the result of the current study, it can be concluded that the result of the proposed method is valid, while it is relatively easy to understand and analyze, and therefore no additional survey is necessary for improvement priority.
Abstract
Purpose: To obtain the area for improvement, the Importance-Performance analysis(IPA) uses relatively simple questions, that is, satisfaction and importance at attribute level. However, no attempt has been made to consider the gap between own company's performance and those of competitors in IPA, in the field of quality management. This study is aimed to suggest a new prioritizing method for improvement and to test for validity of the proposed technique. Methods: This study used data collected from Song and Lim(2015), which is satisfaction of employees, customers and competitors as well as importance data for 7 quality attributes of K animal hospital. A correlation comparison with other priority methods such as Bacon(2003)'s model and Matzler and Hinterhuber(1998)'s QI index is conducted. Results: The priority results by the proposed method shows better in correlation coefficient with customer perceived priority for improvement than other methods. Conclusion: From the result of the current study, it can be concluded that the result of the proposed method is valid, while it is relatively easy to understand and analyze, and therefore no additional survey is necessary for improvement priority.
참고문헌 (24)
- Bacon, D. R, "A comparison of approaches to importance-performance analysis", International Journal of Market Research, 45, pp.55~71 (2003)
- Bayraktaroglu, G., "Integrating the Kano model, AHP and planning matrix : QFD application in library services", Library Management, 29, pp.327~351 (2008)
- Doyle, J. R., "Judging relative importance : direct rating and point allocation are not equivalent", Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 70, pp.65~72 (1997)
- Fitzsimmons, J. A., "Service Management: Operations, Strategy, and Information Technology" (2006), McGraw-Hill
- Garver, M. S, "Best practices in identifying customer-driven improvement opportunities", Industrial Marketing Management, 32, pp.455~466 (2003)
- Heskett, J. L., "Putting the service-profit chain to work", Harvard Business Review, 72, pp.164~174 (1994)
- Heskett, J. L., "The Service-Profit Chain" (1997), Free Press
- Högström, C., "How to create attractive and unique customer experiences : an application of Kano's theory of attractive quality to recreational tourism", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 28, pp.385~402 (2010)
- 장흥엽, "ASC를 이용한 품질특성의 중요도 결정", 품질경영학회지, 40(4), pp.589~598 (2012), 한국품질경영학회[DOI]
- Jones, T. O., "Why satisfied customers defect", Harvard Business Review, 73, pp.88~98 (1995)
- 임성욱, "Kano 모델을 기반으로 한 잠재적 고객만족 개선지수", 품질경영학회지, 38(2), pp.248~260 (2010), 한국품질경영학회
- Martilla, J. A., "Importance-performance analysis", Journal of Marketing, 41, pp.77~79 (1977)
- Matzler, K., "The factor structure of customer satisfaction : an empirical test of the importance grid and the penalty-reward-contrast analysis", International Journal of Service Industry Management, 13, pp.314~332 (2002)
- Matzler, K., "How to make product development projects more successful by integrating Kano’s model of customer satisfaction into quality function development", Technovation, 18, pp.25~38 (1998)
- Parasuraman, A., "A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research", Journal of Marketing, 49, pp.41~50 (1985)
- Park Y. T., "A Study on Quality Innovation of Graniterock Company", Journal of Korean Society of Quality Management, pp.18~25 (1999)
- Slack, N, "The Importance-Performance Matrix as a Determinant of Improvement Priority", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 14, pp.59~75 (1994)
- Song, H. G., "Assessing pet industry in Korea using service quality improvement gap model", Policy and Management, 15, pp.2~20 (2015)
- 송해근, "Kano 모델의 설문 워딩에 관한 연구", 품질경영학회지, 40(4), pp.453~466 (2012), 한국품질경영학회[DOI]
- Song, H. G., "A B-W model for managing quality attributes", PhD, pp.2013
- 송해근, "품질의 이원론을 이용한 개선의 우선순위 결정", 산업경영시스템학회지, 36(1), pp.70~77 (2013), 한국산업경영시스템학회[DOI]
- Tontini, G., "Identification of satisfaction attributes using competitive analysis of the improvement gap", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27, pp.482~500 (2007)
- Yang, C-C, "Establishment and applications of the integrated model of service quality measurement", Managing Service Quality, 13, pp.310~324 (2003)
- Yang, C. C, "I dentification o f customer delight f or quality attributes and i ts applications", Total Quality Management, 22, pp.83~98 (2011)