In recent years, many U.S. and Japanese firms have adopted Quality Function Deployment (QFD). QFD is a total-quality-management process in which the “voice of the customer” is deployed throughout the R&D, engineering, and manufacturing stages of product development. For example, in the first “house” of QFD, customer needs are linked to design attributes thus encouraging the joint consideration of marketing issues and engineering issues. This paper focuses on the “Voice-of-the-Customer” component of QFD, that is, the tasks of identifying customer needs, structuring customer needs, and providing priorities for customer needs. In the identification stage, we address the questions of (1) how many customers need be interviewed, (2) how many analysts need to read the transcripts, (3) how many customer needs do we miss, and (4) are focus groups or one-on-one interviews superior? In the structuring stage the customer needs are arrayed into a hierarchy of primary, secondary, and tertiary needs. We compare group consensus (affinity) charts, a technique which accounts for most industry applications, with a technique based on customer-sort data. In the stage which provides priorities we present new data in which product concepts were created by product-development experts such that each concept stressed the fulfillment of one primary customer need. Customer interest in and preference for these concepts are compared to measured and estimated importances. We also address the question of whether frequency of mention can be used as a surrogate for importance. Finally, we examine the stated goal of QFD, customer satisfaction. Our data demonstrate a self-selection bias in satisfaction measures that are used commonly for QFD and for corporate incentive programs. We close with a brief application to illustrate how a product-development team used the voice of the customer to create a successful new product.

Models and scientific evidence suggest that firms are more successful at new-product development if there is greater communication among marketing, engineering, and manufacturing. This paper examines communication patterns for two matched product-development teams where the key difference between the groups is that one used a phase-review development process and the other used Quality Function Deployment (QFD), a product-development process adopted recently at over 100 United States and Japanese firms. To our knowledge, this is the first head-to-head comparison of traditional U.S. product development processes with QFD. Our data suggest that QFD enhances communication levels within the core team (marketing, engineering, manufacturing). QFD changes communication patterns from “up-over-down” flows through management to more horizontal routes where core team members communicate directly with one another. On the other hand, the QFD team communicates less on planning information and less with members of the firm external to the team. If this paucity of external communication means that the team has the information it needs for product development, and the QFD process has provided an effective means for moving the information through the team, it is a positive impact of QFD. If the result means that QFD induces team insularity, even when the team needs to reach out to external information sources, it is a cause for concern.