Chapter 3 Research Methodology
3.5 QFD
3.5.2 Technical Descriptors (Voice of the Engineer)
Many quality improvement strategies have been proposed in management research.
However, not every quality improvement strategy can improve all quality demand attributes of customers. Each new quality improvement strategy has its focus and limitations. Moreover, a large number of quality improvement strategies lead to difficulty in evaluating the best
56
technique. Hence, managers should formulate quality improvement strategies that are closely related to customer quality demand attributes according to the content of quality demand of customer. Therefore, after generating the generic customer quality demand attributes for C-bike, discussions were conducted with experts to generate quality improvement strategy that could focus on enhancing customer quality attributes. This study also made reference to bike sharing system of related literature.
Table 3-3: The List of In depth Interview
Company Name Interviewer Interview Day
Environmental Protection Bureau Kaohsiung City Government
Mr. Chou
(Associate Technical Specialist) 2nd of Feb., 2010 VSprite tech Co.,Ltd Mr. Liao (Engineer) 4th of Mar., 2010 LAW-CHAIN Company Mr. Qiu (Sales Engineer) 4th of Mar., 2010 Tung Li Development Company Miss. Wang
(Project Management Professional) 4th of Mar., 2010
3.5.3 Relation matrix (RM)
A relation matrix represents the relation among the quality demand attributes of customers and the quality improvement strategies. The data are obtained from questionnaires for experts. Extremely Strong relations are scored for 9, extremely weak relations have a score of 1 and a score of 0 indicates no relationship.
3.5.4 Factor Weights
This study selected “quality attribute ranking” to calculate the weight of importance and satisfaction, Quality Attribute Ranking was accomplished through the questionnaires and converted into data. The following is the algorithm.
1. Attraction Attitude
Attraction Attitude (AA) represents the attraction to the customer of the quality demand
57
attributes. AA implies that service quality attributes satisfaction multiplied by importance, to be the satisfaction of weighted value. AA is derived as in Equation (1).
AAi = (CIi －3) × (CSi－3)for each i ( i denotes customer quality demand item i ) (1)
2. Difference Index
The Difference Index (DI) represents the difference between the real level of quality demand attributes provided by C-bike and the level required by the customer. DI signifies the gap between service quality and customer requirements in Kaohsiung’s bike sharing system. The DI is derived as follows.
RCIi = Rank (CIi − 3) (Note: highest value is ranked 1) (2) RCSi = Rank (CSi − 3) (Note: highest one value ranked 1) (3) DIi = RCIi − RCSi for each i (4) 3. Original Weight of Customer Demand Attribute
The Original Weight of Customer (OWC) demand attribute represents the priority of each customer demand attribute. ‘Quality Attribute Ranking’ proposed by Wasserman (1993) is adopted to generate OWC demand attributes. The rule of ‘Quality Attribute Ranking’ is described as follows.
z
Step 1: The smaller the DI i in customer demand attributes, the higher priority the customer demand attribute should be given (Note: the largest priority is 1).z
Step 2: If two or more customer demand attributes have the same DI, then the customer demand attribute with the smaller AA should be given the larger priority (Note: the largest priority is 1).z
Step 3: Reverse the priority rank of each customer demand attribute to generate the original weight of each customer demand attribute (OWCi).4. Normalised Weight of Customer demand
Equation (5) presents the formula for deriving the Normalised Weight of Customer (NWC) demand attributes.
58
NWC = i (5)
5. Original Weight of Quality Improvement Strategies
ting the original weight of quality improvement strategy (OWT) is derived as in Equation (6).
OWT
Original Weight of quality improvement strategy (OWT) is the priority of each quality improvement strategy. The Utility Function Ranking proposed by Wasserman (1993) is adopted to determine the original weights of quality improvement strategies. The Quality Attribute Ranking for calcula
j (NWC i RM ) for all i, j (j is the quality improvement strategy) (6)
could help managers effectively allocate resource in quality prove
. The Normalised weight of quality improvement strategies is derived as in Equation (7).
W
ij
Utility Function Ranking can be utilized to differentiate the effect of each quality improvement strategies on customer demand satisfaction based on the opinions gathered from customers. This result
im ment strategies.
6. Normalised Weight of quality improvement strategy
The Normalised Weight of each quality improvement strategy (NWT) represents the priority for executing each quality improvement strategy
N Tj (7)
59
3.5.
ensional grid (Oh, 2000), that is Im
with examples taken from each of the four mes, 1977).
1.
rices are very important but indicate low satisfaction .
2.
ice and are pleased with the company’s
3.
rceive this feature to be very important.
4.
providing services, but customers attach only slight importance to them.
5 Importance Performance Analysis (IPA)
Martilla and James (1977) proposed a tool for corporate strategy development that has withstood the test of time. IPA link performance and importance to the two-dim
portance-Performance chart (as shown in Figure 3-2).
This analysis of the implementation of the method to the study, 34 individual attributes mean of importance and satisfaction calculated, and then calculates all the elements of importance and satisfaction of the overall average. Interpretation of the importance-performance grid may be illustrated
quadrants (Martilla and Ja Concentrate here
Customers feel that low service p with the company’s performance Keep up with the good work
Customers value courteous and friendly serv performance.
Low priority
The company is rated low in terms of providing public bike and good service, but customers do not pe
Possible overkill
The company is judged to be doing a good job of
Extremely Important
Fair Excellent
Performance Performance
Figure
Source: Martilla and James, 1977
Slightly Important
3-2: Importance-Performance Grid
60
61
Chapter 4 Findings and Results
This chapter describes data from the valid questionnaires. The test will be carried out to ascertain the relationships between service performance of Kaohsiung public bike and service quality customer satisfaction.
4.1 Description of Demography
Demographics of the sample are provided in Table 4-1. Most of the respondents are female (51.5%), participants who are 20-39 years old (78.8%), with sample occupation category ‘student’ constitutes the majority (30.6%), with service industry next (20.2%).
Approximately 86.9% of the participants rent public bikes for travel, others regard tourism as the main reason for riding and the remaining participants are relatively distributed across shopping (5.7%), work (4.4%), school (2.4%), and others (0.7%). Most of the users are from Southern Taiwan (66.7%) primarily because of geographical proximity; and fewer than three weekly riding (87.5%) means that repurchase intention may be low. About 72.1% of the participants rent public bikes on holidays; payment by credit card accounted for 61.6% since the effectiveness of the promotion of membership card is not high.
Table 4-1: Descriptive Statistics of Respondents (N=297)
Demographics Classification Sample Percentage (%)
Male 144 48.5
Gender
Female 153 51.5
under 20 years old 26 8.8
20-29 167 56.2
30-39 67 22.6
Age
40-49 28 9.4
62
over 50 years old 9 3
Student 91 30.6
Public Servant 46 15.5
Industry and Commerce 35 11.8
IT 31 10.4
4.2 Results of Reliability and Validity
The present study used cronbach’s alpha, a method for measuring internal consistency to evaluate whether the scale had reliability; when cronbach’s alpha is higher, it means the internal consistency of attributes on the scale is higher. A total of 297 valid samples were collected. The scale had 34 attributes. The result of reliability and validity are reported in
63
Table 4-2. Most of them are acceptable based on the criteria suggested by PZB SERVQUAL and the literature research, so they could achieve the required validity. The instrument for the study was construct validity.
Table 4-2: Reliability Statistics – Variance Analysis
Reliability Statistics Cronbach’sα
Overall Service Quality 0.973
Equipment Quality 0.931
Use of Quality 0.939
The Quality of Service Personnel 0.971
Customer Satisfaction 0.960
Source: This study
4.3 Importance Performance Analysis
The 34 attributes of public bikes were explored in regard to importance and satisfaction to verify if there are any gaps reflecting differences between consumer expectations and perceptions. This study used paired samples T-test, to check whether or not there were differences between customer satisfaction and importance, Table 4-3 shows the results of the paired Samples T test.
Table 4-3: Paired Samples T Test
Importance Satisfaction Attribute
Mean Rank Mean Rank t
1. I can rent or return the bike (C-bike) to
the rental station any time. 4.35 4 4.05 2 5.644**
2. The bike sharing system clearly
explains how to rent or return bikes. 4.34 6 3.77 7 8.755**
3. The charge method is clear and easy to
understand. 4.33 8 3.8 6 8.732**
4. The bike sharing system will clearly explain the content of service items (c.f., neighboring station locations and route indicators).
4.31 13 3.65 12 10.082**
5. Usage information regarding public 4.21 26 3.71 8 8.064**
64
bikes is clear and easy to understand.
6. The bicycle sharing system offers personalized service to customers. (c.f.,
bicycle height) 4.2 27 3.41 26 10.491**
7. The bike sharing system has
multi-lingual operating instructions. 3.87 33 3.58 16 4.676**
8. The rental station locations are
appropriate. 4.27 19 3.63 14 9.966**
9. The distance between stations is
appropriate. 4.13 29 3.69 10 7.374**
10. The website offers related information. 3.95 31 3.44 24 7.834**
11. The public bike (C-bike) failure rate is
low. 4.41 2 3.57 17 13.191**
12. The public bike operating system
failure rate is low. 4.44 1 3.33 31 15.722**
13. The public bike design is artistic,
attracting customers to use it. 3.84 34 3.54 18 4.370**
14. It is easy to apply for a membership
card. 3.94 32 3.05 34 11.778**
15. Customers can choose the form of payment by membership card or credit card.
4 30 3.4 29 8.134**
16. The payment (using the membership
card or credit card) is secure. 4.23 23 3.49 21 11.963**
17. The process speed of renting or
returning a bike is very easy and fast. 4.34 6 3.69 10 10.078**
18. The public bicycle brake system design
is easy to use. 4.38 3 3.71 8 10.914**
19. The public bicycle light
(dynamo-powered lamp) design is convenient.
4.24 22 3.62 15 9.102**
20. The public bike with speed change
control device is easy-speed. 4.17 28 3.86 4 4.750**
21. The public bike handle is easy to use. 4.22 25 3.81 5 6.367**
22. The public bike with a lock is secure. 4.35 4 3.89 3 7.429**
23. The public bike with a basket is
convenient. 4.32 11 4.1 1 3.985**
24. People feel comfortable when riding
the bikes. 4.32 11 3.23 33 13.671**
65
25. The rental price of public bikes is
reasonable. 4.33 8 3.33 31 12.395**
26. Maintenance personnel on the
processing speed of system failure are adequate.
4.23 23 3.35 30 13.308**
27. Customer service staff can answer
customer questions in detail. 4.3 15 3.52 19 12.458**
28. Customer service in emergency
situations (Ex. bike failure) is good. 4.3 15 3.41 26 14.281**
29. Customer service staff members are
proactive in helping customers 4.25 21 3.44 24 12.446**
30. Public bike services offer a full
pipeline for complaints or feedback. 4.33 8 3.47 23 13.970**
31. Customer service staff can deal with
customer complaints immediately. 4.31 13 3.41 26 14.339**
32. Customer service staff members have
the necessary expertise and ability. 4.3 15 3.48 22 13.730**
33. Customer service staff members can
provide the promised services. 4.26 20 3.5 20 12.235**
34. Customer service staff members are
polite. 4.29 18 3.65 12 10.162**
Note: **P<.001.
Source: This study
The results reflected in Table 4-3 indicate significant differences regarding importance and satisfaction in the 34 attributes (all p <0.01). In terms of the PZB service quality model, customer cognition of service exhibits a gap between expected service and perceived service.
When (Expected service; ES) > (Perceived service; PS), customer cognition of service quality rates as less than satisfactory; When ES < PS, it means that customer cognition service quality rates as satisfactory; When ES = PS, it implies that customer cognition of service quality rates as satisfactory. In this study, the 34 attributes of customers show significant differences between expected service and perceived service; T values are all positive, which means that average importance is greater than average satisfaction. In conclusion, customer demands, in
66
regard to the Tung Li Company, still require improvement; however, this conclusion needs to be treated with caution.
The top ten T values by ranking:
1. The public bike operating system failure rate is low. (t=15.722)
2. Customer service staff can deal with customer complaints immediately. (t=14.339)
3. Customer service in emergency situations (Ex. bike failure) is good. (t=14.281)
4. Public bike services offer a full pipeline for complaints or feedback. (t=13.97)
5. Customer service staff members have the necessary expertise and ability. (t=13.73)
6. People feel comfortable when riding the bikes. (t=13.671)
7. Maintenance personnel on the processing speed of system failure are adequate.
(t=13.308)
8. The public bike (C-bike) failure rate is low. (t=13.191)
9. Customer service staff can answer customer questions in detail. (t=12.458)
10. Customer service staffs are proactive in helping customers. (t=12.446).
The data summarized indicate that expected service > perceived service, signifying that the satisfaction rate is lower. Therefore, there is still room for improvement in regard to C-bike; this study uses the IPA and QFD to determine priorities for improvement.
The means of importance and satisfaction are also presented graphically in Table 4-3.
The average importance and satisfaction are 4.24 and 3.58, respectively. An Importance-Performance grid was established based on data obtained through a consumer survey on importance of service quality and satisfaction with the mean average of the procedures to standardize the calculation, such as formula (8) and formula (9) below. For the
sake of providing a visual picture of the distinction, consider the graphic representation in
where is the standard deviation of the sample importance in the i attribute, and is the standard deviation of the sample performance in the
i
attribute.s
xis
yiThe Z-score obtained will put it in the two-dimensional matrix, which is the satisfaction degree in the X axis, with the degree of importance in the Y axis, to establish the Importance-Performance Grid. Among them, the author derives the importance average of 4.2370 and standard deviation of 0.1500, satisfaction level average of 3.5759 and the standard deviation of 0.2240.
67
Figure 4-1: Importance-Performance Grid (C-bike) Source: This study
1. Quadrant Ⅰ: Keep up with the good work (high importance, high performance)
Attributes are perceived to be very important to respondents, and at the same time, the organization seems to have high levels of performance regarding these activities. The message here is: Keep up the good work. C-bike in these projects should continue to maintain its quality level, and make even more effort so that consumers are satisfied with the attributes. Because this area is where the consumers are most likely to feel unsatisfied, these attributes for the C-bike need to be improved first. The C-bike services of the first quadrant area are given in Table 4-4.
68
69
Table 4-4: C-Bike Services of the 1st Quadrant Area
Public Bike Service Attributes Dimensions 1. I can rent or return the bike (C-bike) to the rental station
anytime.
2. The bike sharing system clearly explains how to rent or return bikes.
3. The charge method is clear and easy to understand.
4. The bike sharing system will clearly explain the content of service items (c.f., neighboring station locations and route indicators).
8. The rental station locations are appropriate.
Equipment Quality
17. The process speed of renting or returning a bike is very easy and fast.
18. The public bicycle brake system design is easy to use.
19. The public bicycle light (dynamo-powered lamp) design is convenient.
22. The public bike with a basket is convenient.
23. People feel comfortable when riding the bikes.
Use of Quality
34. Customer service staff members are polite. The Quality of Service Staff Source: This Study
2. Quadrant Ⅱ: Concentrate here (high importance, low performance)
These attributes are perceived to be very important to customers, but performance levels are fairly low. This sends a direct message that improvement efforts should be concentrated here. C-bike must pay more attention to these projects, giving priority to improve their quality; otherwise, consumers will generally not be satisfied with its services, compared to other means of transportation. Many improvement attributes can be found for the quality of service staff, meaning that Tung Li Company should focus on staff training. Table 4-5 lists the C-bike services in the second area.
Table 4-5: C-Bike Services of the 2nd Quadrant Area
Public Bike Service Attributes Dimensions 12. The public bike operating system failure rate is low. Equipment Quality 24. People feel comfortable when riding the bikes.
25. The rental price of public bikes is reasonable. Use of Quality 27. Customer service staff can answer customer questions in detail.
28. Customer service in emergency situations (Ex. bike failure) is
The Quality of Service Staff
70
good.
29. Customer service staff members are proactive in helping customers 30. Public bike services offer a full pipeline for complaints or
feedback.
31. Customer service staff can deal with customer complaints immediately.
32. Customer service staff members have the necessary expertise and ability.
33. Customer service staff members can provide the promised services.
Source: This Study
3. Quadrant Ⅲ: Low priority (low importance, low performance)
These attributes are low importance and low performance. Although performance levels may be low in this cell, managers should not be overly concerned since the attributes in this cell are not perceived to be very important. Limited resources should be expended on this low priority cell. Although consumers will not feel greatly dissatisfied when these projects have lower satisfaction, but if the business owner has the time and capacity, efforts should still be made to improve their quality. The C-bike services in third quadrant area are presented in Table 4-6.
Table 4-6: C-Bike Services of the 3rd Quadrant Area
Public Bike Service Attributes Dimensions 6. The bicycle sharing system offers personalized service to
customers. (c.f., bicycle height).
10. The website offers related information.
13. The public bike design is artistic, attracting customers to use it.
Equipment Quality
14. It is easy to apply for a membership card.
15. Customers can choose the form of payment by membership card or credit card.
16. The payment (using the membership card or credit card) is secure.
Use of Quality
26. Maintenance personnel on the processing speed of system failure are adequate.
The Quality of Service Staff Source: This Study
71
4. Quadrant Ⅳ: Possible overkill (low importance, high performance)
This cell contains attributes of low importance, but relatively high performance.
Respondents are satisfied with the performance of the organizations, but managers should consider present efforts on the attributes of this cell as being over-utilized. Table 4-7 presents the C-bike services in the fourth quadrant area.
Table 4-7: C-Bike Services of the 4th Quadrant Area
Public Bike Service Attributes Dimensions 5. Usage information regarding public bikes is clear and easy to
understand.
7. The bike sharing system has multi-lingual operating instructions.
9. The distance between stations is appropriate.
Equipment Quality
20. The public bike with speed change control device is easy-speed.
21. The public bike handle is easy to use. Use of Quality Source: This Study
72
4.4 House of Quality
(2) Technical Requirement (Voice to Engineer)
(1) Customer Attr ibutes (Voice to Customer)
(9) Relationship Requirement
(3) Customer Importa n ce (CI) (4) Customer Satisfaction (CS) (5) Attra ction Attitude (AA) (6) Differen ce Index (DI) (7) Or igina l Weight of Customer Demand (OWC) (8) Normalised Weight of Customer Demand (NWC)
(10) Original Weight of
Quality Improvement Strategies(OWT) (11) Normalised Weight of Quality Improvement Strategies(NWT)
Figure 4-2: The QFD Model Source: This study
4.4.1 Customer Attributes (Voice to Customer)
In this study, Bartlett's Test to detect C-bike service quality factors of the project was carried out. Shown in Table 4-8 service quality attributes, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measurement of sampling adequacy (KMO) coefficient is larger than 0.7, a high standard and p-values are significant, so items are suitable for factor analysis.
73
Table 4-8: KMO and Bartlett’s Test
KMO 0.957 Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, Sig. 0.000
Source: This study
In this study, 34 assessment projects were surveyed through factor analysis to establish bike rental system service quality assessment and dimensions; then based on the composition of the various dimensions, the given dimensions are named. The first dimension: “Service Quality of staff”, includes 9 attributes; second dimension: “Quality of Public Bikes”, contains the 8 attributes; third dimension: “Quality of Bike Sharing System Equipment”, includes 8 attributes; fourth dimensions: “Convenience”, contains 5 attributes; and the fifth dimension:
“Easy to Use”, includes 4 attributes. Table 4-9 presents the public bike service quality of factor analysis.
Table 4-9: The Factor Analysis of C-Bike
Dimensions Attribute Factor
Loading 26. Maintenance personnel on the
processing speed of system failure are adequate.
0.751
27. Customer service staff can answer customer questions in detail.
0.751 28. Customer service in emergency
situations (Ex. bike failure) is good.
0.799
29. Customer service staff members are proactive in helping
customers
0.791 Service
Quality of Staff
30. Public bike services offer a full 0.765
7.503 22.068
74
pipeline for complaints or feedback.
31. Customer service staff can deal with customer complaints immediately.
0.815 32. Customer service staff members
have the necessary expertise and ability.
0.769
33. Customer service staff members can provide the promised services.
0.801
34. Customer service staff members
are polite. 0.783
18. The public bicycle brake system
design is easy to use. 0.628 19. The public bicycle light
(dynamo-powered lamp) design is convenient.
0.702 20. The public bike with speed
change control device is easy-speed.
24. People feel comfortable when
riding the bikes. 0.542
Quality of Public Bike
25. The rental price of public bikes is
reasonable. 0.572
5.245 37.495
1. I can rent or return the bike (C-bike) to the rental station any time.
0.547 2. The bike sharing system clearly
explains how to rent or return bikes.
0.768 3. The charge method is clear and
easy to understand. 0.756
Quality of
75
clearly explain the content of service items (c.f., neighboring station locations and route indicators).
5. Usage information regarding public bikes is clear and easy to understand.
0.654 6. The bicycle sharing system offers
personalized service to
customers. (c.f., bicycle height) 0.497 11. The public bike (C-bike) failure
rate is low. 0.631
12. The public bike operating system
failure rate is low. 0.642 7. The bike sharing system has
multi-lingual operating instructions.
0.708 8. The rental station locations are
appropriate. 0.450
9. The distance between stations is
appropriate. 0.595
10. The website offers related
information. 0.607
Convenience
13. The public bike design is artistic,
attracting customers to use it. 0.685
attracting customers to use it. 0.685