Quality function deployment in construction

Transcription

1 Construction Management and Economics (June 2007) 25, Quality function deployment in construction DAVID JOAQUIN DELGADO-HERNANDEZ, KATHERINE ELIZABETH BAMPTON and ELAINE ASPINWALL* Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Department, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Received 6 July 2006; accepted 27 November 2006 Quality function deployment (QFD) is a system for translating customer requirements (government regulations, operating conditions and buyer expectations) into suitable technical characteristics and ensuring that important ones are prioritized in the design. The method has been successfully applied in the manufacturing sector; however, its benefits have not yet been fully realized in construction. The House of Quality (HoQ), the most common tool in QFD, has been used to identify and analyse customer requirements for a new children s nursery. A focus group was formed to gather these and a comparison made between an existing nursery and two competitors to ensure that the new build was designed to be at least as good as its competition. The results showed that QFD could be applied in construction projects as a tool for considering the most important customer requirements from the outset, with favourable indicators of project success (ontime delivery and customer satisfaction). In addition, the case study company considered it to be an innovative approach and has used the results in its designs. Keywords: Case study, quality function deployment, total quality management Introduction Similarities between the manufacturing new product development (NPD) process and the construction process have been recognized in the literature (Formoso et al., 2002). Within manufacturing, a number of methods to develop new products have been proposed, one of which is quality function deployment (QFD), a technique with the specific purpose of helping to identify and prioritize customers needs and transforming them into product characteristics. Over the past three decades, it has gained some recognition as an NPD method (Nijssen and Frambach, 2000), mainly in the manufacturing sector, where it has been applied in the development of products such as wires, car components and printed circuit boards. Chan and Wu (2002) carried out a literature review of QFD and reported its application in 22 countries worldwide. In fact, they found references in other sectors such as telecommunications, transport, services, electronics and construction. However, the proportion of manufacturing to construction documents *Author for correspondence. e.aspinwall@bham.ac.uk was 10 to 1, so until 2002, its application in the construction industry had been limited. QFD methodology QFD was first used in the Kobe shipyards during the 1960s by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries because ships needed early design freezes as a result of the large capital investment and the long lead times involved in their development. In the 1970s it was used by Toyota to investigate rust prevention in vehicles and has been introduced by car manufacturers worldwide to help increase customer satisfaction levels. Cohen (1995) defined it as a method for structured product planning and development that enables a development team to specify clearly the customer s wants and needs, and then to evaluate each proposed product or service capability systematically in terms of its impact on meeting those needs. The methodology comprises building one or more matrices known as quality tables. The House of Quality (HoQ), the first matrix used in the process, displays the voice of the customer (VoC) or the customer needs against the technical responses to meet Construction Management and Economics ISSN print/issn X online # 2007 Taylor & Francis DOI: /

2 598 Delgado-Hernandez et al. them. Figure 1 illustrates the sections/rooms of the HoQ, each of which holds information specific to a part of the QFD procedure. The order suggested by the letters A to F is normally followed during the process. Room A contains a list of customer wants, each of which are assessed against competitors and the results put into B. Room C has the information necessary to transform the customer expectations into technical terms and the correlation between each customer want and each technical response is put into D. The roof, E, considers the extent to which the technical responses support each other. The prioritization of the technical characteristics, information on the competition and technical targets all go into F. As stated earlier, the HoQ is the first of several matrices, which result in more detailed decisions during the product development exercise. In practice the other matrices are rarely used (Cohen, 1995) because the work involved in their construction can consume as much as 80% of a company s employees. With regard to benefits, the utilization of QFD has, according to Hales and Staley (1995), resulted in the development of better products at a price that the customer is willing to pay. Fernandez et al. (1994) reported its use in the design stage of the Chrysler Neon, which resulted in increased customer satisfaction. Hauser and Clausing (1988) argued that its application could help to reduce product lead times because it enabled designers to identify customer requirements early on, thus avoiding rework in later stages of the product development process. According to Kamara et al. (2000), QFD encourages communication in the construction process, an important aspect to ensure project and business success. Oakland and Marosszeky (2006) maintain that communication in construction project management should involve customers, shareholders, financial communities and the general public, and QFD can help to involve all Figure 1 The House of Quality. Source: Cohen (1995). these parties from the outset. For instance, Griffin and Hauser (1992) formed two teams; the first used the traditional product development approach and the other applied QFD to the same project. The conclusion of the study was that the latter improved communications through teamwork. In addition to the qualitative benefits reported so far, Bicknell and Bicknell (in Chan and Wu, 2002) reported a 30 50% reduction in engineering changes, 30 50% shorter design cycles, 20 60% lower start-up costs, and 20 50% fewer warranty claims as tangible benefits. Conversely there are some limitations and implementation problems. Martins and Aspinwall (2001) carried out a UK survey and identified working in teams, maintaining a commitment to the methodology and an unsuitable organizational culture as the three main obstacles to implementing QFD in the west. Govers (1996) stated that application problems were related to organizational circumstances like project definition and project management as well as team selection and team building. He also mentioned the need for a good facilitator, who knows the method very well and has the social skills to build and to manage a team. QFD and the HoQ in construction A recent survey conducted in the UK (Delgado- Hernandez and Aspinwall, 2007) revealed that QFD was still little known in the construction sector: only 18% of the 72 respondents were aware of its existence. This result was a slight improvement over that reported by Pheng and Yeap (2001) five years earlier in which only 7% of their survey s respondents knew the tool. Maybe the fact that the literature is scarce with regard to QFD applications in construction has restricted its application. In Japan, Shino and Nishihara (1990) examined the application of QFD in the sector for the first time and concluded that it could be used in construction. Two years later in the US, Oswald and Burati (1992) found that the methodology improved both the project definition process and the identification of customer requirements while reducing cycle time and enhancing cross-functional communication. Also in the US, Mallon and Mulligan (1993) demonstrated the applicability of the HoQ in a hypothetical renovation project. Huovila et al. (1997) implemented the QFD methodology in a flat, a restaurant and an industrial building and showed that, in spite of the extra work involved, even its partial implementation could bring about benefits (e.g. better designs, better communication with customers) to companies in the sector. Likewise, Serpell and

3 Quality function deployment 599 Wagner (1997) successfully applied the HoQ to determining the technical characteristics of the internal layout of flats in Chile. In the same country, Alarcon and Mardones (1998) utilized it for identifying improvement tools that could help to alleviate design defects in construction projects. Meanwhile, in Malaysia, Abdul-Rahman et al. (1999) partially applied the HoQ to determine the perceived importance and the level of customer satisfaction associated with the condition of low-cost flats. The exercise led to the identification of the most important characteristics for satisfying customers, which could be included in an improvement plan for future projects. In the UK, Kamara et al. (2000) proposed the use of the HoQ for processing customer requirements during the early stages of a project and reported a hypothetical example, to show how the tool could be applied in the construction of a family house. Later on, they developed a software package called ClientPro (Kamara and Anumba, 2001) with the main purpose of encouraging practitioners to apply QFD. The potential benefits of applying their approach were: helping clients to state their vision of the facility, enhancing communication between clients and those collecting their requirements, encouraging design creativity because client needs are clearly defined and providing a structure for requirements management during the construction process. Gargione (1999) reported the use of the HoQ in the Brazilian construction industry to improve the design of a middle-class flat with positive results and Eldin and Hikle (2003) applied QFD in the US to design a modern university large-size classroom that would be used as a model for developing classrooms in the future. In this case the benefits reported were: critical decisions made on time, the elimination of rework and design flaws, and the provision of steps to clearly define customer needs. Ahmed et al. (2003) used QFD in a sewage treatment works project in Hong Kong, to help identify trade-offs that would enable the consideration of new requirements while not sacrificing current important ones (e.g. capacity of the sewage works). The main benefits of the exercise were summarized as: always keeping track of customer needs, breaking down communication barriers among project participants (e.g. client, designer), providing a means for evaluating project alternatives and establishing quantifiable performance targets for the project. In addition to its application in construction projects, there have been a number of modifications to the traditional methodology aimed at increasing its comprehensiveness. For instance, Furusaka et al. (2000) developed R-QFD, a revised version for simplifying inspection activities in the Japanese construction industry environment, and generated a guide for practitioners to carry out surveillance tasks. The main advantage of this approach is the simplification of supervision activities. Ahmed et al. (2003) developed a template, based on the HoQ, to support the design and planning stages of civil engineering projects in Hong Kong. Practitioners could benefit from its use because it offers designers and planners a robust tool to carry out their tasks. A multinational team led by Yang (Yang et al., 2003) combined QFD with knowledge management to generate a system able to support the creation of constructable designs, which included the fuzzy theory to manage the vagueness of the design inputs. The advantage of this approach is that it may facilitate the development of an intelligent system, based on QFD, which professionals could use to improve designs. In the US, Arditi and Lee (2003) proposed the use of the HoQ for clients to assess service quality performance prior to setting up a working relationship with a construction company. The main benefit of their system is that it enables clients to choose contractors on the basis of quality rather than price. Finally, Dikmen et al. (2005) used the HoQ as a strategic decision-making tool to design marketing plans within the Turkish housebuilding sector. The results satisfied the company professionals that took part in the exercise because it helped them to consider customer requirements and competitors performance in a structured way. As can be seen, the applications of the methodology in the construction industry, while international, have been limited to either hypothetical examples or, mainly, housing developments. The application in this paper formed part of a research project aimed at proposing suitable methods to support improvements throughout the construction process. It was carried out in a UK construction company and centred on the design of a children s nursery in the Birmingham area. Project background Based in the Midlands, the company employs about 400 people. It has a well-developed TQM system and has a quality manager in each of its three main divisions (construction, civil engineering and design and build). The company is certified to ISO 9001:2000, emphasizes employee involvement activities and implements customer satisfaction schemes. In view of its past quality performance, the company was awarded a contract for 20 nurseries in January 2006, two of which were new-build, as part of the Sure Start programme (Sure Start, 2005). The client required the Royal Institute of British Architects plan of work (SFA, 1999) to be used as a guide to support the construction

4 600 Delgado-Hernandez et al. process. The first stage, appraisal, comprises the feasibility analysis and cost of alternative designs to satisfy the customer requirements. The strategic brief prepared by the client is next delivered to the construction company. The third stage deals with both the preparation and client approval of an outline proposal that includes an estimation of construction costs. Finally, the construction company develops the outline proposal in detail, prepares a cost estimate, consults statutory authorities and gains client approval for the spatial arrangements, material and appearance of the facility. The company was given two months for preparing all the relevant documents up to this latter stage for each project. A new-build project (worth 1.3 million) therefore provided an excellent opportunity for applying the HoQ, since it offers a systematic approach to translate the VoC into technical specifications, can determine the most relevant technical features to satisfy customer requirements and identify any gaps between internal practices and theory. Data collection The first activity to be carried out was to form an implementation team. In order to be effective, each member must have a good understanding of the methodology to be implemented, so in this case the team comprised two university students. It was agreed that they would perform the study in parallel with the design team, the composition of which together with the main features of the project and potential users of the nursery are shown in Table 1. The implementation team attended a number of briefing and progress meetings at the company s premises. This helped the students to gain a detailed understanding of each element of the project. In order to initiate data collection it was necessary to first identify the users of the nursery. Using Juran s (1992) proposals, the members of the design team were categorized as internal customers and both clients and potential users as external. While there are other customers that should be included e.g. suppliers, service providers and local authorities, they were not considered because the implementation team did not have access to their specific requirements. The main objective of the exercise was to increase the satisfaction of end customers i.e. the clients (classified as the vital few) and nursery staff, parents and children (the useful many) (Juran, 1992). The former group is crucial and must be catered for on an individual basis while the latter should be considered as experts who can offer helpful information to enhance the product. Planning for the latter is performed collectively (Juran, 1992). As a first step to gathering needs, a building handbook for nursery schools (DE, 1992), 1 the National Standards for under-8s full day care (DFES, 2003) and the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999 (SI, 1999) were perused. In terms of accommodation, the building handbook (DE, 1992) recommended that nursery buildings should include an entrance, a playroom (including quiet room), children s toilets, storage, a utility room, a cleaner s store, a staff/ parents room and a staff/visitors toilet (and in some cases a kitchen). These, together with their minimum requirements, were compiled in a list along with those determined from the earlier search. This resulted in more than 180 elements in total. In order to reduce the number, a focus group was run in an established nursery (that was part of the Sure Start programme). The group comprised its general, staff and facilities managers, a receptionist, a teacher, a cook and a mother, to ensure that all customer groups were represented. Participants were asked to state those requirements that they considered the most important when designing an ideal nursery. Having brainstormed many ideas, participants were given the list compiled by the implementation team, in case there were others that they had not considered. This exercise resulted in 20 elements, which were organized using affinity and tree diagrams. They are listed in Table 2. In addition, participants were asked to rate them with regard to Table 1 Main features of the construction project Project features Name Client(s) Location Time span Budget Procurement approach Potential users Design team Details Sure Start Project (children s nursery) Birmingham City Council and NHS Birmingham 2 Years (1/Feb/06 31/Mar/08) 1.3 million Design build General manager, staff manager, facilities manager, secretaries, receptionists, cook, teachers, cleaning staff, parents and children Architects, project managers, quantity surveyors, structural, electrical and mechanical design engineers, commercial and design managers and consultants (planning authority)

5 Quality function deployment 601 Table 2 Simplified nursery requirements Product quality Requirements Detailed requirements dimension Performance Environment Temperature in rooms Ventilation Daylight Acoustics (noiseless) Size Space in quiet room Space for storage Room s flexibility of use Staff offices Breastfeeding room Changing facilities Space in outdoor play area Car park Features Security Controlled access Monitoring visitors arrivals Safety Design for children Supervision of children Fittings Outdoor shelter Sink for children Lift Public telephone importance and satisfaction performance (see Table 3, columns I and II). As can be seen, temperature, ventilation, daylight and acoustics were highlighted as the most important environmental characteristics for the nursery rooms. Temperature control and ventilation were deemed to be crucial especially during the summer. Since external windows cannot be fully opened for security reasons (they impede intruders access to the building), alternative forms of ventilation were imperative. In terms of acoustics, its importance becomes apparent when say a group of children has music sessions in a playroom while another group is sleeping in an adjacent room. Various concerns were expressed about size and space. For example, space for storage was mentioned as one important characteristic of the nursery, so that toys and equipment that were not being used could be tidied away. Flexibility of use was also highlighted, particularly the possibility of say connecting two playrooms to generate a bigger space for group activities. Staff offices were also considered important especially for administrative personnel. A breastfeeding room, changing facilities and space in outdoor area were pointed out Table 3 Planning matrix Detailed requirements Importance to customer (I) Customer satisfaction performance Sure Start (II) Performance of competitor A (III) Performance of Competitor B (IV) Goal (V) Improvement ratio (VI) 5 (V) / (II) Absolute weight (VII) 5 (I)*(VI) Relative weight (VIII) 5 (VII i )/ S (VIIi) Rank Temperature in rooms % 7 Ventilation % 9 Daylight % 5 Acoustics (noiseless) % 16 Space in quiet room % 5 Space for storage % 11 Rooms flexibility of use % 11 Staff offices % 11 Breastfeeding room % 19 Changing facilities % 11 Space in outdoor play area % 3 Car park % 2 Controlled access % 7 Monitoring visitors arrivals % 4 Design for children % 16 Supervision of children % 1 Outdoor shelter % 10 Sink for children % 11 Lift % 20 Public telephone % 16

6 602 Delgado-Hernandez et al. as necessary characteristics and a car park, at least for staff, was also required. With reference to security, the main customers anxieties were related to controlled access within the nursery and monitoring visitors arrivals. The first refers to both the children who can move around within the nursery and to visitors, who are not allowed in restricted areas such as playrooms. Monitoring who enters the nursery was also considered an important issue. Nursery staff are responsible for the children s security, so they have to ensure that only authorized visitors gain access to the building. In terms of safety, design for children and supervision of children were mentioned. Customers were concerned about sharp edges, corners or projections in the building that may harm children. In addition, teachers wanted to be able to supervise the children at all times from anywhere in the nursery. Parents also wished to see their children even though their access to playrooms was restricted. Finally, within the fittings group, four requirements were acknowledged: outdoor shelter, sink for children, lift and public telephone. Since the outdoor play area can be exposed to sunshine during the summer, some shading was necessary; this was also required on wet days. A sink at low level was also requested for the children to use after they have finished say painting activities. While not all nurseries have two or more floors, the existence of a lift was suggested as ideal for moving children and people with disabilities or equipment. Finally the presence of a public telephone in the entrance area was considered important. The construction of the HoQ Rooms A and B All the customer requirements summarized in Table 2 were put into room A of the HoQ. In order to carry out the competitive analysis, the Combined Inspection Reports generated by the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED, 2006) were employed to identify the best children s nurseries in the vicinity of the new one. From the 14 National Standards (ranging from care, learning and play through to food and drinks issues), only standard 4, physical environment, was considered relevant to this study. This standard states: The premises are safe, secure and suitable for their purpose. They provide adequate space in an appropriate location, are welcoming to children and offer access to the necessary facilities for a range of activities which promote their development (DFES, 2003). In order to gain a means for comparison, the best two competitors in the location of the new-build site, with regard to standard 4, were approached and they agreed to help. An interview between their respective managers and one of the members of the implementation team was arranged. The managers were asked to express the level of importance they attached to the requirements stated in Table 2, using a five-point Likert scale in which 1 was not important at all through to 5 which was very important. They were also asked to rank how they felt their nursery was performing against each using a similar scale. These data together with the set gathered by the focus group was put into room B of the matrix, in order to determine the most important customer needs. While the importance to the customer was taken as the average of the three, each nursery was individually rated to identify the level of satisfaction that their customers had with the requirements. The maximum value for each was established as a goal for the expected level of satisfaction in the new nursery (the rationale for selecting this particular value was that competitors have reached a particular level of customer satisfaction and the new building should provide at least the same level). Each selected goal was then divided by its corresponding customer satisfaction performance score to give an improvement ratio. Finally, the absolute and relative weight for each customer requirement was calculated. Table 3 presents the results of the planning matrix. As can be seen in column I, the four most important customer needs were: space in outdoor play area, controlled access, monitoring visitors arrivals and supervision of children. Surprisingly, a breastfeeding room and a sink for children were only assigned a value of 2, i.e. minor importance, while a lift was felt to be the least important. The Sure Start nursery within which the focus group was run performs well with regard to staff offices, breastfeeding room, changing facilities, controlled access, design for children and lift. However, it was rated low for car park, supervision of children, outdoor shelter and sink for children. When this performance was compared against that of the competitors, the requirements that should be given more attention (reflected in the improvement ratio) were: daylight, space in quiet room, space in outdoor play area, supervision of children and outdoor shelter. This means that competitors are performing better than the Sure Start nursery in these aspects. Having considered both the importance and the competitors performance for each requirement, supervision of children, car park, space in outdoor play area, monitoring visitors arrivals, daylight and space in quiet room were ranked as the most important to consider. It is worth noting at this stage how using the competitors data has changed the priority of the requirements. For instance, the Sure Start nursery has a low performance

7 Quality function deployment 603 rating for car park while its two competitors have relatively satisfied customers for this aspect. Hence, car park is an issue that has the potential for improvement and its rank reflects this. Room C The next step was to propose the technical characteristics necessary to satisfy the customer requirements. The members of the implementation team suggested these based on experience, the recommendations of the building handbook (DE, 1992) and the visits to the participant nurseries. The characteristics were put into room C (see Table 4), together with their units of measurement. In addition, each was assigned one of three possible directions of goodness: (+) the more the better the implied target is infinity; (2) the less the better the implied target is normally zero; and (T) target is best the target is as close as possible to a nominal value. Room D The relationships room of the HoQ is the largest section. Its purpose is to prioritize the technical characteristic s contributions to achieving customer satisfaction, i.e. it maps technical features and customer needs in which each cell represents a judgment (made by the implementation team) of the strength of the relation linking each. Cohen (1995) proposed the use of the following scale: 9 strongly linked, 3 moderately linked and 1 possibly linked. Since the majority of QFD applications adopt this, it was felt to be the appropriate scale to use. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 5. If the table is analysed column-wise, the contribution of each technical characteristic to satisfy customer needs can be seen. For instance, the area of external windows has a direct influence on the temperature in rooms, the ventilation and the daylight. A row-wise analysis gives the contribution of each of the technical characteristics to satisfy a particular customer need. For example, controlled access can be satisfied by installing swipe card readers in doors, CCTV cameras and a manned reception desk at the main entrance. Rooms E and F The roof of the HoQ (shown in Table 6) considers the extent to which the technical characteristics support each other in order to identify potential design bottlenecks during the planning process. Sometimes the impact between two technical characteristics is negative so a six-point scale in which +9 implies strong positive correlation through to 29 strong negative correlation is used. The intersection between storage area and quiet room space, for example, has a score of 29, indicating Table 4 Technical characteristics Technical characteristics Units Direction of goodness Number of radiators Number + Number of air conditioning units Number + Area of external windows m 2 + Finishes (floor, walls, ceiling) m 2 T Quiet room area m 2 + Storage area m 2 + Length of folding screens between rooms m + Offices area m 2 + Breastfeeding room area m 2 + Changing facilities area m 2 + Outdoor play area m 2 + Car park spaces Number + Number of doors with swipe cards Number T CCTV Number of cameras T Area of reception desk at main entrance m 2 T Number of sharp edges and projections Number 2 Area of internal observation windows m 2 + Outdoor covered area m 2 + Sink at children level in playroom Number T Number of lifts Number T Number of public telephones Number T

8 604 Delgado-Hernandez et al. Table 5 Relationship matrix Customer requirements Number of radiators Number of air conditioning units Area of external windows Finishes (floor, walls, ceiling) Quiet room area Storage area Length of folding screens between rooms Offices area Breastfeeding room area Changing facilities area Outdoor play area Car park spaces Number of doors with swipe cards CCTV Area of reception desk at main entrance Number of sharp edges and projections Area of internal observation windows Outdoor covered area Sink at children level in playroom Number of lifts Number of public telephones Temperature in rooms Ventilation Daylight Acoustics (noiseless) Space in quiet room 9 9 Space for storage 9 Rooms flexibility of use Staff offices 9 Breastfeeding room 9 Changing facilities 9 Space in outdoor play area 9 Car park 9 Controlled access Monitoring visitors arrivals 9 9 Design for children Supervision of children Outdoor shelter 9 Sink for children 9 Lift 9 Public telephone 3 9 that a trade-off may be necessary between the two characteristics (i.e. maximizing storage space could result in minimizing quiet room space). Unlike the traditional HoQ, cost issues were included in the technical matrix, to ensure that it did not merely comprise a wish list. The approach suggested by Wasserman (1993) was used for the analysis. The scores given in Table 5 for each customer requirement were multiplied by their respective relative weights (column VIII of Table 3) then summed to obtain the absolute weights shown in the first column of Table 7 (column IX). The relative weights were then calculated. As can be seen, the five most important technical characteristics (column X) at this stage were: outdoor play area, CCTV, quiet room area, outdoor covered area and area of external windows. The costs per unit (websites were employed to get meaningful data for this purpose) for each of the technical characteristics were then taken into account, which resulted in the quiet room area and outdoor play area losing their priority, while owing to their relatively low cost, finishes and internal observation windows gained priority. The final step in the analysis was to compare the most important customer requirements (supervision of children, car park, space in outdoor play area, monitoring visitors arrivals, daylight and space in quiet room) against the most relevant technical characteristics (CCTV, finishes, area of external windows, area of internal observation windows and outdoor play area) to determine whether the latter could satisfy the former. The first requirement, supervision of children, can be

9 Quality function deployment 605 Table 6 The roof of the HoQ Technical characteristics Number of radiators Number of air conditioning units Area of external windows Finishes (floor, walls, ceiling) Quiet room area Storage area Length of folding screens between rooms Offices area Breastfeeding room area Changing facilities area Outdoor play area Car park spaces Number of doors with swipe cards CCTV Area of reception desk at main entrance Number of radiators Number of air conditioning units Area of external windows Finishes (floor, walls, ceiling) Quiet room area Storage area Length of folding screens between rooms 3 Offices area Breastfeeding room area Changing facilities area Outdoor play area Car park spaces 29 Number of doors with swipe cards 3 1 CCTV 1 29 Area of reception desk at main entrance Number of sharp edges and projections Area of internal observation windows Outdoor covered area Sink at children level in playroom Number of lifts Number of public telephones Number of sharp edges and projections Area of internal observation windows Outdoor covered area Sink at children level in playroom Number of lifts Number of public telephones satisfied by internal observation windows and CCTV cameras. The second, car park, now has a low priority mainly because of its associated costs so this requirement may not be fulfilled. The third requirement was space in outdoor play area, which can be satisfied with a larger outdoor play area, if space permits (see Table 6 for trade-offs), than that currently in the local Sure Start nurseries. Monitoring visitors arrivals can be realized with the installation of CCTV cameras and daylight with an increase in the area of external windows. Finally, space in the quiet room can be satisfied by more area in the quiet room, the characteristic that was ranked 6 in the technical matrix. In short, apart from the car park, all the important customer requirements can reasonably be met even after the consideration of costs. Main findings of the study The exercise not only allowed the identification of the customers, their most important needs and the most relevant technical characteristics for satisfying them but it also enabled a competitive analysis to be performed which highlighted potential improvement areas. A better understanding and knowledge of customer requirements for the nursery was therefore gained. Communication between customers and the design team was enhanced by means of the focus group results. If, at the end of the construction process, customers (clients and users) are very happy with the nursery, there is a greater chance of increasing the company s reputation, repeating business and attracting more

10 606 Delgado-Hernandez et al. Table 7 Technical matrix Technical characteristics Absolute weight (IX)5S Ci * VIIIi Relative weight (X)5IXi/S IXi Cost ( s per unit) (XI) Cost factor (XII)5(XI)i/Max (XI) Importance/cost (XIII)5(X)/(XII) Rank Targets Number of radiators % Number of air conditioning units % Area of external windows % Finishes (floor, walls, ceiling) % T Quiet room area % Storage area % Length of folding screens between % rooms Offices area % Breastfeeding room area % Changing facilities area % Outdoor play area % Car park spaces % Number of doors with swipe cards % T CCTV % T Area of reception desk at main % T entrance Number of sharp edges and % projections Area of internal observation % windows Outdoor covered area % Sink at children level in playroom % T Number of lifts % T Number of public telephones % T customers. In addition, since the new nursery will include the most valued customer requirements and will be designed to provide satisfaction levels as high as the best of its competitors, the likelihood of attracting customers to use the facility is also increased. Both the company and its clients could therefore directly benefit from the use of the HoQ approach. In fact, the benefits were apparent from the outset since the client s representative could see that throughout the exercise the company was giving his interests a great deal of consideration. The results were presented to the company s design team. At the time of writing, the first detailed design activities were being performed. It was envisaged that the results could be used not only in the new project but also, where appropriate, in other projects. A value engineering meeting concluded that finishes, mechanical and electrical components would be standardized across projects to minimize costs and provide value for money. Although satisfied with the results obtained, the client prepared a document outlining the general requirements for the specification of mechanical engineering systems to ensure that the design team will follow not only Sure Start design recommendations but also sustainability guidelines, British standards, codes of practice and statutory and local authorities regulations. The document specifies in detail the mechanical requirements that the new building should satisfy at the end of its construction, so the members of the design team do not overlook any of them. While the document highlights temperature in rooms, ventilation and acoustics as important requirements, the results of the HoQ identified, in addition, daylight. The latter should be considered by the architects because it was one of the most important needs recognized during the exercise.

11 Quality function deployment 607 A similar document, now incorporating the electrical requirements, states that, for example, a CCTV system should be installed in the new building. This recommendation is in line with the technical characteristic that the implementation team suggested. The same is true for controlled access via cards or codes. Unlike the results of the HoQ, the document considers the installation of audible and visual alarms to alert security staff of the presence of intruders, the installation of a fire alarm system and emergency lighting. These will certainly help to satisfy the original customer requirement of security. There are other needs, not included in any of the two documents described, that will be analysed in subsequent design activities such as the final size and distribution of rooms within the new building. These will have to be discussed in detail with the final users. At the time of writing this paper, the design team were perusing the requirements identified in the HoQ exercise. It is important to note that, in addition to the aspects presented, QFD can also deal with the management of innovative ideas, for instance the use of IT to enable parents to watch and monitor their children through the internet. The novelty and implementation of the technical specifications such as this will depend on both the designers creativity and the budget that is available. An article describing the methodology used during this study will be published in the company s newsletter to disseminate the results obtained. With reference to the methodology s performance, the evidence from this study suggests that, during its early stages, QFD represents a practical approach that can be used in construction. Two of the parameters of project success reported by Storm and Jansen (2004), i.e. on-time delivery and client satisfaction, were partially fulfilled qualitatively speaking, although no measurements of these were made, by using the HoQ in the project. Nevertheless, further research is needed to explore the subsequent stages of the methodology and the fulfilment of these and other success indicators. approach. However, when introducing new tools/ techniques into a company for the first time, it is always better to start with a less complex application to demonstrate its potential. Once familiarity with the tool is improved more complex problems can be tackled. In this case, the company had not been exposed to the QFD technique. As is the case in the industry (Koskela, 2000), the construction project undertaken had a major time constraint. This impeded carrying out a more detailed analysis of customer needs to increase the reliability of the results. Focus groups may not be very representative of the population and can be expensive. A complementary survey could be used to cover a wider sample of customers. The availability of the building handbook (DE, 1992) for nurseries helped to save time during the data collection stage, but such information may not be available for other types of projects, thereby prolonging this activity. Agreeing the characteristics necessary to satisfy customer needs and determining the values in the relationship matrix tend to be time-consuming activities (Dikmen et al., 2005). Since the project undertaken was more research oriented, it was relatively easy to run a focus group and to carry out the competitive analysis. Confidentiality was stressed throughout, so organizations were happy to provide the required information. This may not always be the case and it may be difficult for companies to gain access to competitors information. The study was made easier by the fact that the company was quite advanced in its quality journey, and so could appreciate the value of the QFD methodology. If this were not the case then more time and training (and inevitably cost) may be required when performing a similar study. These limitations should be considered when applying any stages of the QFD methodology to other projects, as this will help to facilitate the process and so increase its reliability and validity. Conclusions Limitations In addition to the benefits of this study, there were some limitations. In the first place, the case selection was restricted to projects in which the company was active at the time. A study involving multiple users (customers) and a greater level of complexity in the definition of the technical specifications would have offered a better opportunity to determine the benefits of the HoQ QFD research to date has been centred largely on applications in the manufacturing industry. Construction has been slow in adopting the methodology as shown by the low number of applications reported in the literature, most of them related to the design of flats and houses. The project reported on here involved the design of a new children s nursery in the Birmingham area, as part of the NHS Sure Start programme to build 2,500 such centres by the end of

12 608 Delgado-Hernandez et al. March Only the HoQ matrix was constructed and used to prioritize both customer needs and technical characteristics. A literature review revealed more than 180 requirements for the new building. A focus group was run in a Sure Start nursery located near to the new site, to reduce these to a more manageable number. This resulted in a list of 20, which were ranked by importance at the Sure Start and two best nurseries close to the one to be built (the priority of the customer requirements changed as a result of the inclusion of competitors ratings). A set of technical characteristics was proposed to satisfy the needs, and their relationship with each of the customer requirements agreed. Costs were then added to prioritize them. The five most important technical characteristics to design into the nursery were supervision of children, car park, space in outdoor play area, monitoring visitors arrivals, daylight and space in quiet room. In summary, the first stages of the QFD methodology were successful in identifying customers and their needs, determining technical characteristics and enhancing communication with customers. At the time of writing, two documents had been issued to the members of the design team, one including mechanical requirements and the other electrical systems. The recommendations were in line with some of the customer needs and technical characteristics recognized during the HoQ exercise. There were, however, some limitations associated with the research. These have been outlined in an earlier section. Despite them, the empirical study presented in this paper has demonstrated that not only can the HoQ be used in the sector during the early stages of the construction process but also the benefits from using QFD far outweigh the limitations. Notes 1. The Handbook contains recommendations for designing children s nurseries in Northern Ireland and was used only for guidance purposes. This was because no English equivalent document could be found. References Abdul-Rahman, H., Kwan, C.L. and Woods, P.C. (1999) Quality function deployment in construction design: application in low-cost housing design. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 16(6), Ahmed, S.M., Pui Sang, L. and Torbica, Z.M. (2003) Use of quality function deployment in civil engineering capital project planning. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(4), Alarcon, L. and Mardones, D. (1998) Improving the design construction interface. Paper presented at the 6th Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Guaruja, Brazil, August, available at (accessed 29 January 2006). Arditi, D. and Lee, D. (2003) Assessing the corporate service quality performance of design-build contractors using quality function deployment. Construction Management and Economics, 21(2), Chan, L.K. and Wu, M.L. (2002) Quality function deployment: a literature review. European Journal of Operations Research, 143(3), Cohen, L. (1995) Quality Function Deployment: How to Make QFD Work for You, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA. DE (1992) Building Handbook: Nursery Schools, Department of Education, Bangor, Northern Ireland. Delgado-Hernandez, D.J. and Aspinwall, E.M. (2007) Quality planning improvement methods in the UK and Mexican construction industries. Quality and Reliability Engineering International (forthcoming). DFES (2003) Full Day Care: National Standards for Under 8s Day Care and Childminding, Department for Education and Skills, London. Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T. and Kiziltas, S. (2005) Strategic use of quality function deployment (QFD) in the construction industry. Building and Environment, 40(2), Eldin, N. and Hikle, V. (2003) Pilot study of quality function deployment in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(3), Fernandez, J.E., Chamberlin, J.L., Kramer, E.G., Broomall, J.H., Rori, H.A. and Begley, R.L. (1994) Making the neon fun to drive, in The 6th Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, Novi, Michigan, June, ASI Press, Dearborn, pp Formoso, C., Tzortzopoulos, P. and Liedtke, R. (2002) A model for managing the product development process in house building. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 9(5/6), Furusaka, S., Taira, T. and Aoki, Y. (2000) Application of revised quality function deployment to building construction projects. Paper presented at the CIB W78 Workshop, Reykjavik, Iceland, June, available at civil.auc.dk/ (accessed 1 February 2006). Gargione, L.A. (1999) Using quality function deployment in the design phase of an apartment construction project. Paper presented at the 7th Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Berkeley, CA, US, July, available at 7 (accessed 22 March 2006). Govers, C.P.M. (1996) What and how about quality function deployment (QFD). International Journal of Production Economics, 46 47(3),

13 Quality function deployment 609 Griffin, A. and Hauser, J. (1992) Patterns of communication among marketing, engineering and manufacturing: a comparison between two new product teams. Management Science, 38(3), Hales, R. and Staley, D. (1995) Mix target costing, QFD for successful new products. Marketing News, 29(1), 18. Hauser, J. and Clausing, D. (1988) The House of Quality. Harvard Business Review, 66(3), Huovila, P., Lakka, A., Laurikka, P. and Vainio, M. (1997) Involvement of customer requirements in building design, in Alarcon, L. (ed.) Lean Construction, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp Juran, J.M. (1992) Quality by Design: The New Steps for Planning Quality into Goods and Services, The Free Press, New York. Kamara, J.M. and Anumba, C.J. (2001) ClientPro: a prototype software for client requirements processing in construction. Advances in Engineering Software, 32(2), Kamara, J.M., Anumba, C.J. and Evbuomwan, N.F.O. (2000) Establishing and processing client requirements: a key aspect of concurrent engineering in construction. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 7(1), Koskela, L. (2000) An Exploration towards a Production Theory and Its Application to Construction, VTT Building Technology, Espoo, Finland, available at pdf/publications/2000/p408.pdf (accessed 20 October 2005). Mallon, J.C. and Mulligan, D.E. (1993) Quality function deployment: a system for meeting customers needs. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(3), Martins, A. and Aspinwall, E.M. (2001) Quality function deployment: an empirical study in the UK. Total Quality Management, 12(5), Nijssen, E.J. and Frambach, R.T. (2000) Determinants of the adoption of new product development tools by industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(2), Oakland, J. and Marosszeky, M. (2006) Total Quality in the Construction Supply Chain, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. OFSTED (2006) Combined Inspection Reports, available at (accessed 29 March 2006). Oswald, T.H. and Burati, J. (1992) Identifying Customer Requirements through Quality Function Deployment: Phase I: Feasibility Study, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX. Pheng, L.S. and Yeap, L. (2001) Quality function deployment in design/build projects. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 7(2), Serpell, A. and Wagner, R. (1997) Application of quality function deployment (QFD) to the determination of design characteristics of building apartments, in Alarcon, L. (ed.) Lean Construction, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp SFA (1999) Services Supplement: Design and Management, in Standard Form of Agreement for the Appointment of an Architect, Royal Institute of British Architects, London. Shino, J. and Nishihara, R. (1990) Quality development in the construction industry, in Akao, Y. (ed.) Quality Function Deployment (QFD): Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design, Productivity Press, Portland, OR, pp SI (1999) The Education (School Premises) Regulations, Queen s Printer of Acts of Parliament, London, available at (accessed 8 March 2006). Storm, P.M. and Janssen, R.E. (2004) High performance projects: a speculative model for measuring and predicting project success. Paper presented at the 6th Conference of the International Research Network on Organising by Projects, Turku, Finland, August, available at www. ou.nl/docs/faculteiten/mw/mw%20working%20papers/ gr% %20storm%20en%20janssen.pdf (accessed 17 November 2006). Sure Start (2005) Sure Start Programme, available at (accessed 16 December 2005). Wasserman, G.S. (1993) On how to prioritise design requirements during the QFD planning process. IIE Transactions, 25(3), Yang, Y., Wang, S., Dulaimi, M. and Low, S. (2003) A fuzzy quality function deployment system for buildable design decision-makings. Automation in Construction, 12(4),