We would like to thank all the companies and their staff who have contri-

buted to this workgroup:

AUDI AG, Ingolstadt

BMW AG, Munich
Robert Bosch GmbH, Stuttgart
Continental AG, Hannover
DGQ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Qualität), Frankfurt
Fichtel & Sachs AG, Schweinfurt
Ford-Werke AG, Cologne
GETRAG Getriebe- und Zahnradfabrik Hermann Hagenmeyer GmbH
& Cie, Ludwigsburg
Kolbenschmidt AG, Neckarsulm
Mercedes Benz AG, Stuttgart
Adam Opel AG, Rüsselsheim
Dr. Ing. h. c. F. Porsche AG, Stuttgart
Siemens AG, Regensburg
Steyer-Daimler-Puch AG, Steyer
ITT Automotive Europe GmbH, Bietigheim
VDO Adolf Schindling AG, Babenhausen
Wabco Fahrzeugbremsen, Hannover
Volkswagen AG, Wolfsburg
Zahnradfabrik Friedrichshafen AG, Friedrichshafen
Our thanks also go out to all our readers who have submitted improvement
suggestions.

Frankfurt/Main, May 1996

VERBAND DER AUTOMOBILINDUSTRIE E. V. (VDA)

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 1

Contents Page

1 Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 3

1.1 Description of the Methods 3

1.2 Case Example (to the end of QT-I) 7
1.3 Quality Table II (QT II) 17
1.4 Quality Table III (QT III) 18
1.5 Quality Table IV (QT IV) 18

2 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

1 Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

1.1 Description of the Methods

Over time, the tasks in quality assurance have moved away from using
testing activities for troubleshooting during production, and shifted towards
risk minimization for failure prevention during development and planning. As
a result of this development's consistent movement towards the origin of
the product creation process, quality assurance must already start during
the search for a concept (Figure 1).

Product origin

Concept

prevention
Failure
Development
Product Quality
creation assurance
Production
planning

Failure
control
Production

END

Figure 1 Product Creation and Quality Assurance

The Quality Function Deployment (QFD) method is a comprehensive

planning and communication system used for coordinating all of a com-
pany's resources, in order to develop, manufacture and market the products
and services that the customers expect, so that improvements in the
business performance can be brought about by enhancing competitive
strength.

QFD uses quality tables as its tools, which consist of several matrix fields.
These are called Houses of Quality due to their external shape.

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 3

 Internal
Customer competitive

Critical customer requirement

characteristics (HOW)
assessment

Complaints, guarantee
cases, selling points

Competitor
Current
Line numbers

Target
Priority
Customer requirements
(WHAT)

1 2 3 4 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
Custo
mer 7
8
9
Difficulties in reaching the
target (1=easy, 5=hard)
Test methods and current and
future specification
Competitive analysis

Current 5
characteristics

Target 4
of internal

Competitor 3
2
1

Critical in-house characteristics

ROOF MATRIX Weighting

Very positive Strong 9
Positive Medium 3
Negative X Weak 1
X
Very negative XX

Figure 2 House of Quality

Source: American Supplier Institute, N.Y.

4 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

With the help of these quality tables, the "Voice of the Customer'" is trans-
lated into the company's language, and the answers to the questions
"WHAT" and "HOW" are put in relationship with one another (Figure 3).
This is done in four phases (Figure 4).

HOW?
Company
WHAT
?
Customer

Figure 3 Voice of the Customer and the Company's Language

Product

Custom
Parts

Products Process

Work instructions
Parts

Process

Figure 4 Consistency from the Customer to the Production Building

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 5

The first quality table (QT-l) is drawn up during the concept phase; it
transfers the customer requirements into in-house characteristics and
technical terms. In the development phase, these in-house characteristics
are implemented as part characteristics with the help of a second quality
table (QT-ll); during the production planning phase, these part
characteristics then form the basis for defining the process parameters
using a third quality table (QT-lll). In the standardization phase, the fourth
quality table (QT-lV) is subsequently drawn up and derives standards for
the separate work steps, maintenance instructions and necessary training
measures from the process parameters.

QFD can be used for services and products, namely during the concept
phase for new developments, when deciding on new product generations
and for ongoing development of existing products based on the market
requirements.

The time expenditure for QFD pays off in the long term due to the
advantages of

- Customer orientation,
- Transparency and
- Team work.

To apply the QFD method, each department and each employee in the
company must be simultaneously viewed as an "Internal customer" and
"Internal supplier". As a "customer", an employee is delivered an input; he
or she produces results in his or her work process and then, as a "supplier",
passes the output on to his or her "customers". In the context of this value-
added chain, there is not only a final customer - each organizational unit
within the company is also a customer.

QFD promises success when the objective throughout the company is to

fulfill the requirements of all customers. Correspondingly, the interests of
the following internal and external customers must be represented in the
QFD team:

- Automobile manufacturers (internal and external)

- Suppliers (external and internal)
- End consumer (external)
- Authorities (external)

6 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

- Company employees (internal) in the areas:
- Sales
- Service
- Development
- Value analysis
- Resource scheduling
- Work scheduling
- Logistics
- Production
- Controlling.

An independent company section takes over the moderation; for example,

this could be a quality improvement employee.

While each team member has a contribution to make during the QT-l
phase, the representatives of the external customers, Sales and the Service
department can be left out starting with the QT-ll phase. In the QT-lll and
QT-lV phases, development also no longer needs to be represented.

1.2 Case Example (to the end of QT-I)

The following sections develop the concept for an ice scraper using the
QFD method. This example will attempt to clarify the separate phases and
steps in the method. It does not claim to be complete.

To draw up the quality table QT-l, the following steps are followed
10
5

1 5a 2,3,4

6,7,8 9

Figure 5):

1) Determine and weight the "Voice of the Customer" (customer

requirements)
2) Competitive assessment of the "Voice of the Customer" from the

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 7

 customer's point of view
3) Definition of complaints, guarantee cases and selling points
4) Establish the critical customer requirements
5) Determine the in-house characteristics and ...
5 a) ... their interactions with the customer requirements
6) Competitive assessment of the in-house characteristics from the
company's point of view
7) Compilation of test methods and current and future specifications
8) Assessment of the difficulties in reaching the target

8 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

9) In-house test for working out the critical in-house characteristics
10) Correlations of the critical in-house characteristics with all others.

10
5

1 5a 2,3,4

6,7,8 9

Figure 5 Steps in the House of Quality

Step 1: Determine and weight the "Voice of the Customer"

(customer requirements)

In the first, step, the QFD team puts together the wishes, requirements and
needs of all external and internal customers. In this process, expressed and
unexpressed (tacitly required) customer expectations and unexpected
positive characteristics (innovations) are considered, and then weighted in
three levels: (9: very important, 3: important, 1: less important).

The aspects of functionality, reliability, producibility, environmental condi-

tions and environmental protection are treated in the House of Quality. In
contrast, low costs and high profits are requirements that are generally
applicable and that should be considered separately; here, the finished
House of Quality - drawn up without financial criteria - is useful when it
comes to making decisions, because it makes transparent the possibilities
and effects of cost savings and reductions.

Step 2: Competitive assessment of the "Voice of the Customer"

from the customer's point of view

The second step is an evaluation, from the customer's point of view, of the
degree to which the customer requirements worked out in the first step are
met in comparison to the competition. A grade of from 1 (very inadequate)
to 5 (very good) is assigned to each separate requirement for both this
company and for the best competitor. On the basis of this analysis of the
competition, the objective for this company is defined for each requirement

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 9

in the same grading system. This results in three profiles, line by line, in the
corresponding column in the House of Quality: this company's actual status,
best competitor, and this company's objective.

Step 3: Definition of the complaints, guarantee cases and selling

points

The third step involves gathering information on existing complaints,

guarantee cases and selling points for each of the customer requirements.
Where applicable, a letter (C = complaint, G = Guarantee case, S = Selling
point) and the row number are entered into the column provided in the
House of Quality. The complaints, guarantee cases and selling points are
then listed in a separate table under the respective letters and line num-
bers. For example, "C7" would be a complaint that refers to the customer
requirement in line 7 of the House of Quality (cf. Figure 6).

Step 4: Establish the critical customer requirements

In the fourth step, the critical customer requirements are marked with stars,
on the basis of the assessments worked out from the customer's point of
view.

Figure 6 shows the first four steps.

Step 5: Determine the in-house characteristics and their inter-

actions with the customer requirements

In the fifth step, at least one in-house characteristic is set for the fulfillment
of each customer requirement. Fishbone diagrams and fault tree structures
can be helpful for finding ideas and a logical structure. The in-house
characteristics that are established are assigned to the columns in the
House of Quality. The result is a matrix with the customer requirements in
the rows and the in-house characteristics in the columns. The fields in the
matrix are filled in on the basis of the question: "Can the customer
requirement in the particular line be fulfilled by the in-house characteristic of
the associated column 3?”

10 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

 Competitive assess-

Critical customer requirements

In-House characteristics ment of the customer
requirements

guarantee cases,
(HOW)

Competitor
selling points
Line number

Complaints,

Target
Today
Priority
Customer requirements
(WHAT
1 2 3 4 5
Not permitted to demage vehicle 1 3
Easy to manufacture 2 3
Easy to stow (get out) 3 3
Matches car harmoniously 4 1
Many functions 5 9

No risk of injury during manufacturing 6 1

during use 7 9
Functions at every temerature 8 3

Convenient Fingers should not freeze 9 9 C9, S9

to use No exertion 10 3
Must clear the glass 11 9 G11, S11

Weighting

Strong 5
Medium 3
Weak 1

Figure 6 Steps 1 to 4

Table of complaints, guarantee cases and selling points:

C9: Ice that has been scraped off always falls on hands
S9: Ice that has been scraped off cannot fall on the hands
G11: Ice scraper does not scrape across the entire wide, glass
fogs again immediately
S11: Pieces of ice are removed immediately from the surface that
has been freed of ice (possibly by means of a wiping edge).

A matrix that has been filled out in this way makes it easy to see the signi-
ficance that the separate in-house characteristics have for the fulfillment of
the customer requirements (Figure 7).
very good =
good =
not as good =
not at all = no entry.

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 11

Figure 7 Step 5

12 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

Step 6: Competitive assessment of the in-house characteristics
from the company's point of view

In the sixth step, the in-house characteristics are evaluated in the compe-
titive comparison in a procedure similar to the one used in the second step.
The result is again three profiles with grades from 1 (very inadequate) to 5
(very good): this company today, best competitor, objective.

Step 7: Compilation of test methods and current and future specifi-

cations

In the seventh step, test methods and current and future specifications are
compiled for all in-house characteristics. This is done by entering the
following in the line provided in the House of Quality: T1, T2, T3, etc., for
test methods, C1, C2, C3, etc., for current specifications and F1, F2, F3,
etc., for future specifications, each in the appropriate column. On a sepa-
rate sheet, the separate definitions are described in greater detail under the
corresponding identification (cf. Figure 8).

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 13

List of the test methods and current and future specifications:
T1: Hardness test C1: Plastic indentation hardness 84 N/mm² rubber
hardness Shore A70, Z1: =C1, etc.

Figure 8 Steps 6 to 8

14 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

Step 8: Assessment of the difficulties in reaching the target

In the eighth step, the difficulty in reaching the objective is ranked for each
in-house characteristic, in steps from 1 (easy) to 5 (difficult). Steps 6 to 8
are shown in Figure 8.

Step 9: In-house test for working out the critical in-house charac-
teristics

In the ninth step (Figure 9) it is time to "read" from the House of Quality,
which is now completely filled in. This checks whether the assessments
made from the customer point of view in the horizontal harmonize with the
weighting from the company point of view in the vertical. If this is not the
case, the corresponding corrections must be made in the House of Quality.
Then the critical in-house characteristics are marked with stars.

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 15

Figure 9 Step 9

16 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

Step 10: Correlations of the critical in-house characteristics with
all others

Figure 10 Step 10, House of Quality, Completely Filled In.

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 17

In the tenth and last step (Figure 10) in the QT-I phase, the roof is added to
the House of Quality. Appropriate symbols are used to identify how the
critical in-house characteristics correlate with the other in-house charac-
teristics.

This completes the QT-I phase. Parallel to the processing of the other QFD
phases, the knowledge gained in the QT-I phase is already used for other
activities, such as risk analyses (FMEA, FTA), experiment design (DoE)
and SPC preparation (Figure 11).

QFD

Critical Unclear Characteristics

characteristics correlations relevant to customer

Risk SPC
analyses
DoE

Figure 11 QFD as the foundation for further methods

1.3 Quality Table II (QT II)

Assemblies and part planning (Phase 2)

The critical in-house product characteristics worked out in quality table I

(QT 1) are the basis for the additional procedures in phase 2.

The product characteristics are now the "WHAT" requirements, and the
"HOW" constructions (design solutions) must be worked out for them.

This "What - How" quality table is evaluated as described in step 5 of phase 1.

Critical characteristics that are detected here undergo further treatment in

phase 3.

18 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

1.4 Quality Table III (QT III)

Process planning (phase 3)

The critical assemblies and part characteristics are included again as "What"
requirements and the "How" constructions (process solutions) are worked
out in the quality tables.

This "What - How" quality table is evaluated as described in step 5 of phase 1.

Critical processes that are detected here undergo further treatment in

phase 4.

1.5 Quality Table IV (QT IV)

Work instruction planning (phase 4)

The last quality table to be drawn up in this chain has the critical processes
as its "What" requirements. The "How" constructions (work instructions) are
worked out here. This quality table is evaluated as described in step 5 of
phase 1.

VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 19

Bibliography

|1| Rolf Blank: Qualitätsdenken fängt bei Kunden an!

(Presentation manuscript, Kodak AG)

|2| Jürgen Ebeling: Qualität auf neuen Wegen (BMW brochure)

20 VDA-Volume 4: Quality Function Deployment (QFD)