Innovative Product Design Based on Comprehensive Customer Requirements of Different Cognitive Levels

To improve customer satisfaction in innovative product design, a topology structure of customer requirements is established and an innovative product approach is proposed. The topology structure provides designers with reasonable guidance to capture the customer requirements comprehensively. With the aid of analytic hierarchy process (AHP), the importance of the customer requirements is evaluated. Quality function deployment (QFD) is used to translate customer requirements into product and process design demands and pick out the technical requirements which need urgent improvement. In this way, the product is developed in a more targeted way to satisfy the customers. the theory of innovative problems solving (TRIZ) is used to help designers to produce innovative solutions. Finally, a case study of automobile steering system is used to illustrate the application of the proposed approach.

[1]  G. S. Alʹtshuller,et al.  The Innovation Algorithm:TRIZ, systematic innovation and technical creativity , 1999 .

[2]  Ming-Lang Tseng,et al.  Using QFD and ANP to analyze the environmental production requirements in linguistic preferences , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[3]  Min Xie,et al.  Ranking of customer requirements in a competitive environment , 2008, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[4]  Min Xie,et al.  An integrated approach to innovative product development using Kano’s model and QFD , 2000 .

[5]  Yanbin Du,et al.  Reuse-oriented redesign method of used products based on axiomatic design theory and QFD , 2013 .

[6]  E. Hippel,et al.  Lead users: a source of novel product concepts , 1986 .

[7]  Ming-Lu Wu,et al.  Quality function deployment: A literature review , 2002, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[8]  Yoji Akao,et al.  Quality Function Deployment : Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design , 1990 .

[9]  P. Desmet,et al.  Framework of product experience , 2007 .

[10]  Pieter M. A. Desmet,et al.  Emotional Design; Application of a Research-Based Design Approach , 2007 .

[11]  C. H. Yeh,et al.  Integration of four-phase QFD and TRIZ in product R&D: a notebook case study , 2011 .

[12]  Nam P. Suh,et al.  Axiomatic Design: Advances and Applications , 2001 .

[13]  Yang Xu-chang.  Modifying the Importance Ratings of Customer Requirements Based on DEMATEL and Entropy , 2012 .

[14]  A. Herrmann,et al.  Market-driven product and service design: Bridging the gap between customer needs, quality management, and customer satisfaction , 2000 .

[15]  Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel,et al.  Axiomatic design application for minimising the difficulties of QFD usage , 2010 .

[16]  Mitsuo Nagamachi,et al.  Kansei Engineering: A new ergonomic consumer-oriented technology for product development , 1995 .

[17]  Halimahtun M. Khalid,et al.  A Framework for Affective Customer Needs in Product Design , 2002 .

[18]  T. Love,et al.  Path-dependent Foundation of Global Design-driven Outdoor Trade in the Northwest of England , 2007 .

[19]  T. L. Saaty.  Modeling unstructured decision problems — the theory of analytical hierarchies , 1978 .

[20]  Xinggang Luo,et al.  Determining the final priority ratings of customer requirements in product planning by MDBM and BSC , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[21]  D. McDonagh,et al.  Visual product evaluation: exploring users' emotional relationships with products. , 2002, Applied ergonomics.

[22]  W. Green,et al.  Pleasure with Products: Human Factors for Body, Mind and Soul , 1999 .

[23]  Yan Li,et al.  Design creativity in product innovation , 2007 .

[24]  D. Norman.  Emotional design : why we love (or hate) everyday things , 2004 .

[25]  Cherie Lebbon,et al.  The Emotional Domain in Product Design , 2000 .

[26]  Du He-min.  Application of QFD and information entropy in improved design for the tank truck , 2011 .

[27]  Kwai-Sang Chin,et al.  Technical importance ratings in fuzzy QFD by integrating fuzzy normalization and fuzzy weighted average , 2011, Comput. Math. Appl..

[28]  Amy L. Parsons,et al.  Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things , 2006 .

[29]  Jennifer Blackhurst,et al.  A four-phase AHP–QFD approach for supplier assessment: a sustainability perspective , 2012 .

[30]  Jie Xu,et al.  An integrated method of rough set, Kano's model and AHP for rating customer requirements' final importance , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[31]  Jeffrey Davidson,et al.  Providing Clarity and A Common Language to the “Fuzzy Front End” , 2001 .

[32]  C. C. Tseng,et al.  Prioritization of product design tasks using QFD, TRIZ and DSM , 2010, 2010 IEEE 17Th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.