APPLICATION OF QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD) IN

AVIATION INDUSTRY

Muhammad Asim

Student of Master in Engineering Management CASE, Islamabad, Pakistan

a007pk@yahoo.com

Asim Rehman

Master in Engineering Management CASE, Islamabad, Pakistan

acemrehman@yahoo.com

Khalid Rafique

Student of Master in Engineering Management CASE, Islamabad, Pakistan

Khalidrafique@me.com

Abstract
A major problem with the traditional product development process is that customers and engineers speak
different languages. Especially in products like aircraft manufacturing, which require combination of intricate
and complex processes involving various functions, the voice of the customer is lost in the translation and
subsequent interpretation by design or production personnel. This led to the introduction of the concept called
as QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD) first employed by Japanese Mitsubishi Shipyard. This
concept outlines a method to translate the customer requirements in to the technical specifications of a product
so that they can be embedded throughout the design process and also on the design of production systems. QFD
benefits companies through improved communication and teamwork between all constituencies in the
production process, such as between marketing and design, between design and manufacturing, and between
purchasing and suppliers. Studies have revealed that the use of QFD has significantly reduced the causes of
customer dissatisfaction, thereby increasing the productivity and quality levels of the product. Aviation
Industry, especially the military aircraft production, operational and maintenance setups relies heavily on the
fulfillment of the requirement of its customers. Many projects have failed simply because of the fact they were
unable to meet the demand of the market despite producing extremely efficient and innovative products. This
study analyzes the result of the application of QFD in aircraft maintenance setup. A comprehensive HOUSE
OF QUALILTY MATRIX was formed keeping in view the expected and latent requirements of the potential
customers.

Keywords: Customer, House of Quality

1. Introduction

The concept of QFD gained world wide fame 30 years ago in Japan and emerged as a comprehensive
quality system focusing on satisfying the customer needs. The core principle of this concept is that in
order to deliver value to the customer, it is necessary to listen and implement the voice of the
customer in all the steps of the product development process. Traditionally speaking, QFD is different
from the other prevalent quality systems which aim at minimizing negative quality. NOTHING
WRONG not always ensures growth and expansion. For sustenance, we need to maximize positive
quality and one of the means to achieve that is QFD. Further QFD helps in prioritizing the customer
requirements, so that we can get a picture at the end as to where we stand in the eyes of the customer.

YOJI AKAO, the man who developed QFD with Katsuyo Ishihara of Mitsubishi Electric defined it as
“a method for developing a design quality system aimed at satisfying the consumer and then
translating the consumer demands in to design targets and major quality assurance points to be used
throughout the production stage” [Akao, 1990]. The name QFD expresses its true purpose, which is
satisfying customers by translating their wants in to design process and then subsequently ensuring
that all the organizational units work coherently to systematically break down their activities into finer
and finer details that can be quantified and controlled.

2. The Dynamics of Aviation Industry

Aviation Industry is perhaps the most interesting and important segment of the manufacturing
enterprise; interesting because it has many unique features like massive entry costs, dynamically
increased returns, and imperfect competition and for this very fact many countries considers it –
strategic- . But still being an industry, it has all the elemental processes for design, development,
operations, maintenance and most importantly customer, the ultimate users of the finished product.
Identifying and understanding customer needs is perhaps the most important and elemental step in
aviation industry because any deviation from the wants of the customer could result in complete
dumping of the product. One of the prime aspects of Aviation Industry is provisioning of services like
Maintenance of Aircraft Systems and the chief customer being the Defense Forces or Civil Airliners
of any country. Unfortunately this important aspect of service provision is often dealt with the
traditional aspect of quality as reducing negative quality. The concept of enhancing positive quality is
missing in most of the systems. The underline effort was initiated with a view to effectively see and
understand the result of dealing the Aircraft Maintenance System as any other service provisioning
system and utilizing the QFD tool to improve the overall system.

3. House of Quality Development

QFD was initially applied at one of the intermediate level maintenance setup responsible for
maintenance management of fighter Aircrafts. Following approach was followed:

(f) Identification of Target Customers: This initial step seemed very easy and at first
provided us with a simple answer, Pilots, Simply because they are the end users of the
serviced aircrafts. But once the situation was analyzed in detail, a long list of
potential customers emerged out. This list was then further divided in to two broad
categories. One for the aircrew and the other for the ground crew. After careful
selection following clientele were targeted as true users of the product.

Table 1

Air Crew (External Customers)

– Pilots
– Co-pilots
– Flight Engineers

Ground Crew (Internal Customers)

– Maintenance Engineers
 – Aircraft Technicians

(b) Defining Customer Attributes: Once our target customers were selected, the next
step was to identify WHAT they want. This was the trickiest and intricate task as usually
customers are not aware of what they actually want. Comprehensive brain storming sessions
were carried out and specific Quality tools such as Affinity Diagrams and Questionnaires
were distributed among the selected population of selected Customers. Marked attributed
were then subsequently given the importance index and were fit in the HOQ as follows:

Aircraft Availability as per flight plan

Aircraft Configuration Management (Documentation)

Aircraft System Reliability

Aircraft Timely Readiness

System ease of Operations

Conducive Operating Environment & Facilities

Figure 1: Customer Attributes

(c) Defining Engineering Characteristics: The next Step was to isolate the HOWs of
the HOQ. Defining Engineering or Maintenance Characteristics was again a cumbersome
activity as Maintenance People are often not involved in the Planning Phase. Engineering
Characteristics were first isolated and then subsequently placed in the order of priority in
HOQ as follows:
 Maintenance schedule

Spares Support System

Maintenance Staff Availability

Maintenance Facilities
Technical Expertise of the
Maintenance Staff
Supporting Systems e.g,
Maintenance Tools Availability
Maintenance Supervision

Figure 2: Engineering Characteristics

(d) Correlating WHO with HOW: Correlating the Customer Attributes with the
Engineering Specifications is perhaps the most important task as it defines the realistic
implementation and effectiveness of QFD within any system. This was carefully done on the
basis of experience and historical perspective. A scale of 1 – 5 was selected while
symbolizing a strong, moderate and weak relationship. This helped in prioritizing the
Technical Characteristics. HOQ took the shape as follows:
 Figure 3: Correlating Customer Attributes with Engineering Characteristics

(e) Developing the Planning Matrix: Planning Matrix performs two fold functions:
assign priorities to the customer attributes and provide competitors evaluation of the customer
attributes. Being one of the internal setup there are no real time competitors of the concerned
section, but still other facilities do exist at distinct bases that can pose a strong competition to
the section under scrutiny. Three such sections were marked and were contacted to confirm to
the customer attributes already pointed (for security purpose these sections have been marked
as C1, C2 & C3). Then the order of the customer attributes was assigned according to the
competitor sections. HOQ was further refined as follows:

Figure 4: Planning Matrix

 (f) The all important Technical Matrix: The last nail in the coffin, the technical
matrix, was formulated which provided the technical evaluation of the competitors, targets,
real time technical difficulties and Importance Rating. Targets were set as per the importance
and the Technical Difficulties were given the rating of 1- 5 as per the availability of resources
and targets. The importance rating helped in identifying the weak links in the chain.

Figure 5: Complete Matrix

4. Target Areas: The Crux of QFD

According the target values, following measures were initiated to realistically see the impact
of introducing the voice of the customer inside the processes of maintenance management.

a) Maintenance Schedule Forecasting was carried out by allocating specific maintenance

days to the assigned tasks.

b) The logistic staff was given comprehensive training on the modern Supply chain
management techniques. A small Log Support setup was created within the
maintenance facility to bridge the gap between the Logistic Squadron and the
Maintenance Squadron. This step significantly reduced the Supply delays.

c) Experienced and Trained staff was brought in from other existing facilities to pool in
the existing manpower.
 d) The overall working and operating environment was improved with the establishment
of facilities like rest rooms, a sophisticated and distinct tea bar for the technicians and
technical library.

e) A Defect Trend Analysis system was devised in which all the maintenance related
discrepancies of a specific month were analyzed and prioritized according to the
aircraft systems and technicians trades. This effort appreciably helped in restricting
the aircraft downtime due to minor discrepancies.

f) Supporting systems to the maintenance activities were given their due share of
importance. A superior Central Tool Store (CTS) was established where adequate and
fresh tools were available. A separate Training Section was also established to impart
regular training to all the concerned technical staff based on the defect trend analysis.

5. Conclusion

The results were overwhelmingly encouraging. Perhaps for the first time, systems were molded
according to the real voice of the customer and this move really helped in providing a conducive
environment in which both the teams of operators and maintenance staff gelled up together to enhance
the overall effectiveness of their mission objectives. One fact which emerged with shear distinction
was the lack of involvement of technical staff at the planning phase. This exercise convinced the top
level managers to include the maintenance managers in the planning phase.

6. References

Akao, Yoji [1994]. "Development History of Quality Function Deployment", The

Customer Driven Approach to Quality Planning and Deployment. Minato, Tokyo
107 Japan

www.qfdonline.com

www.qfdi.org