Kano Model

Diagram of the Kano Model showing five customer satisfaction curvesβ€”Excitement, Performance, Indifferent, Must-Be, and Reverseβ€”plotted against feature implementation on the horizontal axis and customer satisfaction on the vertical axis. Each curve illustrates how different types of product features influence user satisfaction.
The Kano Model primarily addresses customer-facing delivery by focusing on understanding and classifying customer preferences for product features. This helps prioritize features that will lead to customer satisfaction and improved user experience, directly impacting the execution of product development.

The Kano Model is a theory of product development and customer satisfaction developed in the 1980s by Professor Noriaki Kano. It categorizes customer preferences into five categories: Must-be, One-dimensional, Attractive, Indifferent, and Reverse. This framework helps product developers to prioritize features based on how they are perceived by customers and their potential impact on customer satisfaction. The Kano Model is particularly useful for identifying features that can significantly enhance customer satisfaction without proportionally increasing costs.

Steps / Detailed Description

Identify customer needs and expectations through surveys or interviews. | Categorize the features into the Kano categories: Must-be, One-dimensional, Attractive, Indifferent, and Reverse. | Analyze how each feature affects customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction. | Prioritize the development of features based on their potential impact on satisfaction and their feasibility. | Continuously update the categories as customer expectations change and new data is gathered.

Best Practices

Regularly update customer data to reflect changing preferences. | Combine with other frameworks like SWOT or Porter's Five Forces for comprehensive analysis. | Use visual tools like the Kano Model diagram for better stakeholder communication.

Pros

Helps prioritize features based on customer satisfaction impact. | Enhances understanding of customer needs and expectations. | Facilitates strategic product development with focused investments.

Cons

Requires accurate and often extensive customer data. | May lead to overlooking the importance of less exciting but necessary features. | Dynamic market conditions can quickly alter the relevance of categorized features.

When to Use

When developing new products or features. | When prioritizing features during product updates.

When Not to Use

In markets with extremely fast-changing customer preferences. | When there is insufficient data on customer preferences.

Related Frameworks

Scope

Scope not defined

Maturity Level

Maturity level not specified

Time to Implement

2–4 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
2–4 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months

Copyright Information

Autor:
Noriaki Kano
1984
Publication:
Unknown