We will never tire of stressing the importance of listening to customers to understand them and give them the best experience. Without a doubt, it is something basic that any company that aspires to be successful must have among its obsessions, listening to the customer.

Of course, there are many ways to listen to a customer; as in any conversational context, questions define the background of answers.

The customer and what he says to us is basic, and this must be translated in some way. In our CEM Framework, we accompany the customer with the three pillars that support the experience and towards which we direct our five management elements, all included in the strategy. However, this time we are going to discriminate and focus exclusively on one of the pieces, one of these basic pillars: The product.

Thus, the Kano Model provides us with the ideal questions and a simple and effective methodology to understand and apply customer responses in the development of our product.

What does the Kano Model consist of?

If you don't know the Kano model, I invite you to read our previous article: What is the Kano model? If you know him, just add, very briefly, that this theory connects product development with customer satisfaction, which allows us to know the impact of the attributes of the product or service on that satisfaction. In addition, it does so considering that the factors that influence satisfaction have a non-linear behavior, that is, those factors that produce satisfaction may not be the same factors that produce dissatisfaction.

Kano classifies quality attributes into five categories. Perhaps we are used to classifying attributes into three (basic, performance and experiential) due to model modifications, but really when we apply the methodology we can find five different behaviors:

• Unidimensional quality attributes (performance or performance): these are those that produce satisfaction when they are met and dissatisfaction when they are not met. They are linearly and positively related to customer satisfaction.
• Attractive quality attributes (deligther or experiential): their absence does not generate dissatisfaction, but their presence does satisfy the customer.
• Required quality attributes (basic or hygienic): their presence does not generate satisfaction, but their absence does generate dissatisfaction.
• Indifferent quality attributes: the presence or absence of this does not cause any customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
• Inverse quality attributes: their presence causes customer dissatisfaction and their lack of satisfaction.

One of the strengths of this method is undoubtedly the dynamic cycle of these attributes. The attributes that we now consider to be of attractive quality may eventually become unidimensional or even of required quality.

How to Put the Kano Model into Practice?

For the application of the model, we used an attribute classification method based on a questionnaire structured on a couple of questions, one that we will call functional, and the other, dysfunctional.

• The functional question seeks consumer feedback if the attribute is present in the product or service. It would be, how do you feel if the product incorporates this feature?
• The dysfunctional question, on the other hand, is evaluated when the attribute is not present in the product or service. How do you feel if the product doesn't incorporate this feature?

Thus, in our questionnaire, for each of the attributes we want to investigate, we must have these two kinds of questions. The consumer can choose between five possible answers for both:

1. I like it.
2. I hope that's the case.
3. I am neutral.
4. I can accept that it is that way.
5. I'm disgusted that's the case.

Then, once we have obtained the answers, for the analysis, we use a specific evaluation table. This will include the five quality categories presented by the model: attractive (A), unidimensional (one-dimensional, O), basic (must-be, M), indifferent (indifferent, I) or inverse (reverse, R). In addition, an additional element is added, which is not a quality category, but a classification element: questionable (Q) useful for representing an error in the interpretation of the questions; then, looking at the evaluation table, we will understand it clearly.

With this table, for each attribute, we can quickly interpret the answers we get to our pair of questions. For example, to the question: how do you feel if your vehicle incorporates assisted parking? The consumer tells us that, in the presence of functionality, they like it. However, to the dysfunctional question, that is, the absence of assisted parking, he answers that he can accept it that way. Therefore, our answer is placed, in the table above, in row one (like) and column four (I accept), so for this customer, assisted parking is an attractive quality attribute. He is satisfied to have it, but not to have it does not mean dissatisfaction.

Once we have obtained all the answers from consumers, we consolidate them by each of the attributes, allowing us to establish which category is the predominant in each case. We see it below:

At this point, we will have been able to determine the quality category of each of our attributes and we will be able to prioritize those that are fundamental to the customer, without which the product or service would be unsatisfactory and enhance those that generate greater satisfaction.

In addition, with the answers consolidated in the last table, we can prioritize even between the attributes of the same category, since let's suppose a case in which we have a limited budget for product development, and we have to rule out the inclusion of an attractive attribute of the two that we have evaluated. In both, category is A, but attribute 1 has obtained 60% of responses that rate it as attractive and 40% as indifferent.

On the other hand, the second one obtains 60% of responses that qualify it as attractive and 40% as one-dimensional. In other words, for the former, 60% of people would be satisfied to have it included in their product and 40% would not care. On the other hand, with the second attribute, 100% of customers would be satisfied to have it (only here we could conclude), and, in addition, 40% would be dissatisfied not to have it in their product. Looking at it this way, the focus of investment will clearly favor the second attribute. I leave you the visualization of the example:

If this percentage dance and its conclusion have become clear, it is that we have already mastered the interpretation of the Kano model, I can only encourage you to put it into practice, but not before concluding.

Advantages of the Kano Model

1. The needs of the product or service are better understood since we can identify the elements of the product with the greatest influence on customer satisfaction.

2. The classification of the attributes of the product or service as required, unidimensional and attractive allows us to set priorities for the development of the product or service.

3. If, for reasons of financial resources or technical limitations, we cannot fully meet customer needs, Kano allows us to identify the criteria with the greatest influence on customer satisfaction.

4. If we ask different archetypes or segments, the qualification of the attributes can determine specific needs for each archetype.

5. Knowing and strengthening attractive quality attributes makes it possible to create a differentiating product or service.

6. The Kano model can be combined with the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) methodology.

Limitations of the Kano Model

1. The Kano model is an approach to customer satisfaction in relation to the level of performance of the product or service, since it is based on an approach to qualitative evaluation of attributes.

2. Kano allows us to better understand customer needs, which is basic for designing a product, but it is not definitive for making concrete decisions. The model doesn't allow us to differentiate the impact between attributes of the same category, do all attractive quality attributes have an equal impact on customer satisfaction? No, we only know that they impact, but it doesn't tell us which one generates the highest peak of satisfaction when being present. In our example of assisted parking, we don't know if it's an extremely attractive attribute or something attractive.

If you need our Customer Experience team to help you with your challenges, write to us at this form and we will be happy to hear from you